Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism 9780761852421, 9780761852414

Citation preview

Jacob Neusner

Studies in Judaism University Press of ~merica,@ Inc. Lanham Boulder New York Toronto Plymouth, UK

Copyright O 2010 by University Press of ~ r n e r i c aInc. ,~ 4501 Forbes Boulevard Suite 200 Lanham, Maryland 20706 UPA Acquisitions Department (301) 459-3366 Estover Road Plymouth PL6 7PY United Kingdom All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America British Library Cataloging in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Control Number: 2010928530 ISBN: 978-0-761 8-5241-4 (paperback : alk. paper) eISBN: 978-0-76 18-5242-1

he

paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI 239.48- 1992

Studies in Judaism EDITOR Jacob Neusner Bard College EDITORIAL BOARD Alan J. Avery-Peck College of the Holy Cross Herbert Basser Queens University Bruce D. Chilton Bard College JosC Faur Bar Ilan University William Scott Green University of Miami Mayer Gruber Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Giinter Stemberger University of Vienna James F. Strange University of South Florida

i.

Formal Criteria for Differentiating Documents and their Compositions .......................................................................................... 1 ii . The Norms of the Mishnah ..................................................................... 2 iii Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah: An Overview ......................7 iv. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah [ l ] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage .......................8 v Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics ............... 9 vi . Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah [3] Composites of compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular sage ....................................................................................................... 10 vii . Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah [4] Narratives .................... 19 viii . Anomalous Mishnah-tractates: Eduyyot, Tamid, Middot and . . Qinnim .................................................................................................. 20 ix . The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated by the Mishnah ................................................................................................22 x . The Norms of Abot ...............................................................................23 xi . The Norms of the Tosefia ..................................................................... 24 xii Anomalous Compositions in the Tosefta ......................................... 26 xiii . Anomalous Compositions in the Tosefta [I] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage .....................26 xiv. Anomalous Compositions in the Tosefta [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics ............... 28 xv. Anomalous Compositions in the Tosefta [3] Composites of compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular sage .......................................................................................................31 xvi . Anomalous Compositions in the Tosefta [4] Narratives .......................37 xvii.Anomalous Tosefta-tractates: Tamid, Middot and Qinnim ..................44 xviii.The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated by the Tosefta .................................................................................................. 44 xix . Lost Documents? ................................................................................. 44

47 i. The Norms of Sifra. An Overview .................................................... ii. Anomalous Compositions in the Sifra [ l ] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage ............................................48 iii. Anomalous Compositions in the Sifra [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics ...............48 iv. Anomalous Compositions in the Sifra [3] Composites of compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition 48 or topic or the name in common of a particular sage ........................... v. Anomalous Compositions in the Sifra [4] Narratives .......................... 48 vi. The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated by Sifra ........49 vii. The Norms of Sifre to Numbers ....................................................... 49 viii. Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Numbers [ l ] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage .....................49 ix. Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Numbers [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse 49 topics .................................... . ............................................................ Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Numbers [3] Composites of x. compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular sage ............................................. ................................... ..... . ... ..... ... 52 xi. Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Numbers [4] Narratives ............. 52 xii. The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated by Sifre to Numbers .......... ........................... ............. ..... .......... .............................. 53 xiii. Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Deuteronomy .............................57 xiv. Anomalous Compositions in SifrC to Deuteronomy [I] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage ..................... 58 xv. Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Deuteronomy [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics ........................................................................................... ......... 58 xvi. Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Deuteronomy [3] Composites of compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular 72 sage .................................................................................................... xvii.Anomalous Compositions in Sifre to Deuteronomy [4] Narratives ..... 73 xviii.The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated by Sifre to 77 Deuteronomy ........................................................................................ xix. Lost Documents ....................................................................................77

i. The Norms of Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael .................................. 79 ii. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael ........... 79

iii. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael [I] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage ......................................................................................................80 iv. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics .......................................................................... 80 v. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael [3] Composites of compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular sage ...................................................................................... 86 vi. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael [4] Narratives ............................................................................................. 96 vii. The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated by Mekhilta Attributed to R Ishmael ........................................................................ 98 . .. viii. Lost Documents? ................................................................................. 98

i. The Norms of Genesis Rabbah .............................................................99 ii. Anomalous Compositions in Genesis Rabbah [l] Composites of Miscellaneous Sayings in the Name of a Particular Sage ................... 101 ... 111. Anomalous Compositions in Genesis Rabbah [2] Composites of Sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics .................................................................................................. 104 iv. Anomalous Compositions in Genesis Rabbah [3] Composites of compositions joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular sage ................... ...................... . . .. .. . . . ......... . . . . . . 1 15 v. Anomalous Compositions in Genesis Rabbah [4] Narratives ............ 115 vi. The Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Adumbrated in Genesis Rabbah ............................................................................................... 120

The Norms of the Bavli: A Probe ....................................................... 12 1 Visual Signals of Anomalous Compositions .......................................122 Recurrent Traits of the Bavli ..............................................................123 The Primary and Secondary Constituents of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One. Folios 2a- 1l a ......................................... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 126 v. The Construction of the Bavli and the Documentary Hypothesis ...... 198 vi. Does the Bavli Contain Evidence of Lost Canonical Documents? ... 199 20 1 vii. The Canonical Question in Conclusion ............................................ i. ii. iii. iv.

Preface The canonical documents of Rabbinic Judaism impose upon most of their components fixed patterns of rhetoric, recurrent logic of coherent discourse, and a well-defined topic or program, for example, a commentary on a biblical book or on a legal topic. We know that these norms pertain because the compositions by which the document's composites are comprised conform to a particular, uniform set of rules. They furthermore contain few anomalies. These patterns in combination uniquely characterize a particular document but rarely impart form upon any other. Therefore if we are given a fully articulated composition in context bearing no reference to the document that contains the blind selection, we ordinarily are able to identifj, without explicit markers or references the document in which the selection originated. A blind passage of Sifra can never be confused with a blind passage of Leviticus Rabbah, and so throughout, The various authors of the document's compositions, their compilers and the editors who assembled the compositions into composites - all parties followed the normative rules of composition characteristic of a given document and adhered to its prevailing rhetorical pattern. But some few compositions and composites of the Rabbinic canon of late antiquity diverge from the formal norms ofthe compilations in which they occur. In these pages I assemble anomalous compositions that occur in the Mishnah, Tosefia, four Tannaite Midrashim, and Genesis Rabbah, and 1 hrther test the uniformity of the forms that govern in a familiar chapter of the Bavli. My surveys show for the documents probed here that some small segment ofthe composites and compositions of the surveyed documents does not conform to the indicative rules of rhetoric, topic and logic. Consequently we face the challenge of constructing models of lost documents of the Rabbinic canon, conforming to the models governing anomalous compositions. These follow other topical and rhetorical norms and therefore belong in other, different types of documents from those in which they now are located. These anomalous writings in topic, logic, or rhetoric (or all three) in theory reveal indicative characteristics other than the ones defining the compositions and composites of the documents in which they are now located. We may have examples -samples - of lost documents or we may have nothing that conforms to the theory of the lost document. One way or the other we can easily reconstruct the norms of the no-longer-extant (or never-was extant) documents in which these anomalous compositions do fit. This we do by paying close attention to the norms of logic, topic, and rhetoric that govern the anomalous components of the extant remnant of the lost document. The upshot of my survey

x

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

of the anomalous compositions and composites of the selected documents of the Rabbinic canon proves trivial. The proportion of the canonical writings comprised by anomalous compositions is negligible. The documents surveyed here, including the Bavli, conform to the blatant documentary program that governs, and the selection of anomalous writings is inconsequential, The outcome of these negative findings reinforces the documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon: the smallest whole building blocks of that canon are the documents. Documents define formal rules of admission to their pages, but they also contain anomalous compositions that do not belong. The anomalous compositions that I show here violate the lines of order of the documents in which they occur however do not point to the existence of missing documentary composites, only writing that is pre- documentary or non- documentary. The anomalous composition or composite is not shaped by the redactional rules or process that governed the documentary compilations of the canonical components. The anomalous composition points toward the existence of now-lost documents of the Rabbinic canon and defines the indicative traits of those lost documents, That is what I prove in this monograph.

I appreciate the on-going support of my work accorded by Bard College. My research professorship allows ample time for study, research and writing. JACOB NEUSNER DISTINGUISHED SERVICE PROFESSOR OF THE HISTORY AND THEOLOGY OF JUDAISM AND

SENIOR FELLOW OF THE INSTITUTE

OF ADVANCED THEOLOGY

BARDCOLLEGE ANNANDALE-ON-HUDSON, NEWYORK12504 E-MAIL:[email protected]

Introduction The Rabbinic canon accords a cold reception to idiosyncratic writing. Normative rules of writing define the rhetoric, logic of cogent discourse, and topical program particular to a given compilation. Nearly all the writing of that document will conform. But canonical documents of late antique Rabbinic Judaism also contain anomalies. I refer to compositions and composites that do not conform to the rules of writing otherwise prevalent in the documents in which they occur. Do they signal the presence of remnants of otherwise lost collections- documents that survived only in bits and pieces and where they did not belong? In these pages we concentrate attention on the anomalous compositions of a selection of canonical documents and identify formally alien composites that survive in the canonical documents. I ask whether these surviving anomalies attest to the existence of whole documents governed by rules different fiom those realized in existing documents - the "lost documents" of my title. How do I propose to identify these anomalous writings? Through an inductive survey of selections of the canon I frst of all shape a theory of the indicative traits defining the norm. That theory further marks as exceptional the non-conforming segments. These identify candidates for designating other writing as constituting my "lost documents." That is how we define writing that is formally out of place in its present documentary location, that is, in the matter oftopic, writing that belonged in a commentary on Psalms or Proverbs or Job and not on Leviticus or Genesis where it is located, for example. I point here and there to anomalous compositions and form a theory of the traits of the kind of composite for which the alien writing was formed. So, theoretically, I can recover missing documents and build on the documentary hypothesis to identify, in anomalous compositions that survive in existing documents, the remnants of these otherwise-lost documents - writing now-embedded but still formally-alien. That is the theory of this monograph. The project, accordingly, extends to a fresh venue my documentary hypothesis ofthe Rabbinic canon in late antiquity. It identifies the presence, in canonical documents, of remnants of Rabbinic compilations of the late antique age that have not survived intact but only in shards. But the ultimate outcome of the inquiry proves jarring.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

How in fact does the documentary hypothesis figure here? The hypothesis holds that collections of Rabbinic writings are not miscellaneous but are shaped in accord with distinctive policies that govern the rhetoric, logic of coherent discourse, and topical program. The alternative to the documentary hypothesis regards the completed sense unit -a statement (sentence, paragraph, story) that fully expresses its meaning -as the smallest whole building block of the Rabbinic discourse. The documentary hypothesis regards the document as the smallest whole building block of Rabbinic discourse. We are able to define the models,, the governing rules of each document and to identify what marks them as distinctive. My prior surveys have already shown that the Rabbinic compilations of late antiquity are not miscellaneous but conform to indicative rules. Now it is time to explore the null-hypothesis: what do we not find in the canonical collections? The documentary hypothesis therefore maintains that a given canonical document exhibits distinguishing and characteristic traits that facilitate differentiation of that sizable piece of writing from other, comparable canonical compilations. Particular rules govern the composition of the components of a given document, and we know what those rules required in the rhetoric, topic, and logic of coherent discourse of that document. Therefore components of a given document can be distinguished from components of other documents of the canon by indicative formal and substantive traits. What about the lost documents? The argument that animates the exercise performed here is simply stated. For each document subject to examination I lay out in detail evidence that establishes these facts: [ I ] Canonical documents contain anomalous components. [2] These anomalous remnants exhibit indicative traits that differ from those that define the document in which they are embedded. [3] In some cases we can identify the extant Rabbinic document to which the anomalous composition belongs, in which it conforms to the documentary program - logic, topic, rhetoric. [4] In most cases of anomalous writing, e.g., writing in accord with documentary rules that do not govern in any extant Rabbinic document, we do not possess documents that conform to the particular formal program adumbrated by the remnant in hand. We are able guided by the indicative traits of the surviving shards and remnants to invent in imagination the lost document(s). So in the surviving anomalous writings of the late antique canon we find shards and remnants of the otherwise lost canonical documents of late antiquity.

Introduction

The lost documents fall into two classes. First come documents that conform to existing models but do not find a position in an existing document, so the rhetoric and logic of cogent discourse fit in but the topic is alien. Second comes writing that differs in topic, rhetoric, and logic of coherent discourse - that has been written in accord with no known and evident norms of composition. Examining the extant components of the canon book by book, I identify these anomalous writings document by document, from the ones embedded in the Mishnah through those buried in the Bavli. I further define the indicative traits of Rabbinic documents that do not conform to any pattern we now possess. In theory I reconstruct the indicative traits of the documents to which these anomalous writings were originally dedicated. Accordingly, 1 rely on established formal and logical definitions of existing canonical documents for evidence of what does not belong to those documents but does conform to the form and program of lost documents: documents that exhibited the traits embodied in [I] an anomalous composition located in [2] an extant document. These remnants attest to writing in accord with formal conventions that differ from those governing the documents in which anomalous writing now occurs. They point toward a documentary plan that has not been carried out in a large-scale conglomerate but that has left the marks of its presence early on. One obvious example of a lost document is the sage-story, the independent narrative of the activities of a Rabbinic sage.' We find a sizable corpus of sage-stories but not a single document devoted to the collection of sage-stories. Another example is a systematic exegesis of sequential verses of a book of Scripture that in the canon as we know it is otherwise not subjected to an exegetical program, Job or Proverbs in place of Leviticus (Sifra) or Lamentations (Lamentations Rabbah). A third example is the systematic and continuous exposition of a principle of theology or morality. This third type invites speculation on the formation of canonical documents devoted to the amplification of theology alongside the existence of canonical documents that expound legal principles through topical exposition of concrete examples, a theological counterpart to the Mishnah for instance. Thus the same rhetorical, logical and topical traits that guide us in identifying canonical documents point toward the presence of composites that survive only in remnants in the existing conglomerates. These contain the outcome of editorial work of an indeterminate period. Editorial work contains the yield of two processes, [I] composition of a coherent piece of ti-ee-standing writing and [2] conglomeration of ten or twenty or fifty compositions in a composite. The two distinct processes thus involve the writing of compositions and the formation of finished compositions into composites, formal collections - ultimately complete composites or "books." Now we shall see in rich detail a simple fact. [I] Conglomerations or collections exhibit govern-

xiv

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

ing formal traits, and writing intended for those composites conformed to the governing traits. But we shall see abundant evidence that [2] the canonical documents contained also writing that was destined for documents that differed in formal traits from the documents in which they now occur. We do not possess those documents but by noting the adherence to a distinctive formal program we can identify shards and remnants that are embedded in the canonical documents that we do possess.

It remains to define the indicative trait of all components of the entire canon of Rabbinic Judaism in late antiquity. This is easily done. What characteristics do we require for inclusion of a piece of writing in a canonical document, whatever its other traits? We may regard as certain that our theoretical author would expect to match his composition to other, prior compositions bearing two definitive traits: [ l ] ample citation of authorities called rabbis and [2] citation of proof texts of Scripture by those rabbis. The presence of these two characteristics would distinguish as part of a single canon all the documents produced and preserved by Rabbinic Judaic consensus from the beginning to the present. It furthermore excludes from the Rabbinic canon all documents that lack these traits. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Elephantine papyri exemplify excluded documents, those that do not belong to the Rabbinic canon. The canonical corpus comes into view, so we must ask, why did a Rabbinic sage compose an anomalous composition - one that did not conform to the indicative traits of the document in which it is preserved? For whom did he write and what finished composition and composite did he expect would result from his writing? Scripture supplied no model. Writings produced by other-than-liabbinicsages -the Dead Sea library, Enoch or Maccabees for example -bear no formal or rhetorical traits in common with the Rabbinic documents or the compositions of which they are constructed. The extant canonical composites bear the burden of the anomalous writing. When we define the rules of composition and agglutination that governed the entire extant document, we can find the plan and the theoretical definition of lost documents ofthe Rabbinic canon. That program emerges in the contrast with the norm that shaped the imagination of the writers of the anomalous compositions for that document in which they are preserved: lost on the very surface. In this exercise, accordingly, I ask about the traits of the documents for which these anomalous compositions and composites were written - the lost documents of Rabbinic Judaism. I further look into the probability that such documents actually circulated: do the extant documentary anomalies point to the existence of missing writings? I ask where the writer of an anomalous composition or composite imagined that his composition would find its final destination. Was it in a sizable and fully realized

xv

Introduction

document -a new tractate of the Mishnah for the Mishnah, like the minor tractates Semahot or Kallah for instance? We know the answer for the extant canonical writings. The Mishnah or Sifra or the Bavli all implicitly define the indicative traits of compositions that were prepared for inclusion in their pages. What is written with the Mishnah in mind is readily distinguished from what is written with Sifra in mind. Now we do not know when writing for the Mishnah or Sifia or the Bavli got underway (attributions do not settle the matter), but we think we know when writing for the Mishnah or Sifra or the Bavli came to closure: when those documents could be cited as complete statements and were implicitly deemed finished but for the episodic improvements and the random polishing that went on for centuries.

IV. The question I answer in this project therefore is best framed in this way: what kind of a composition and what kind of composite did an author in the Rabbinic circles have in mind when he sat down to write a composition and put it together with other compositions into large-scale coherent composites? I further ask what evidence we have for the preparation of compositions for documents other than those we now possess in the classical canon of Rabbinic Judaism from the Mishnah through the Bavli. It is one thing to identify anomalies in episodic appearance in familiar documents, it is quite another to reconstruct components into entire documents. That is why in the final chapter I reiterate my findings for the Bavli, the most rhetorically and logically and topically diverse of canonical composites. My survey shows that the extant evidence of lost documents in circulation is comprised by trivial remnants. The sample probed here points to a surprising but fm conclusion: there were no documents other than thosepresently in hand. Based on the sample of anomalies gathered here, whether in the Bavli or the Mishnah or Genesis Rabbah, I conclude that there were in the process of writing canonical records no hidden documents. True, people wrote compositions and composites that would fit into a document different form, and other than, the one in which they presently occur. It is equally clear that people wrote compositions for documents of a type other than any presently located in the canon. While these anomalous compositions point to the existence of Rabbinic documents different from any extant compilation, the body of evidence constituted by these anomalies is insignificant and does not point to many - or any large - documents comparable in size and articulation to the extant canonical writings. I appeal to the norm defined for size and articulation by the extant compositions that point to a now-lost document. When the Mishnah came to closure, contemporary compositions that ended up in the Tosefta or in Sifra or in Genesis Rabbah were still in process of formation. What if our theoretical sage did his work in the time of the Mishnah and was not

xvi

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

following the formal model of the Mishnah or conforming to its topical program? What if he adopted the model of a writing that conformed to other rules than the Mishnah's? Where then did the writer of (or the textual community behind) a composition that ignored the indicative traits of Mishnah-compositionexpect his composition to end up? To answerthese questions I extrapolate from the known traits ofthe anomalous compositions to the theoretical traits of the allegedly lost composite. I test this component ofthe documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon. I produce an odd result: I call into question the theory that very much extra-documentarywriting was under way and produced weighty results. That result reinforces the documentary hypothesis. It shows that anomalies were rare and casual, law-abiding compositions were commonplace. That brings us to the concluding chapter, on the Bavli. I ask when I examine the Bavli what proportion of compositions ignore the rues of composition and topical and rhetorical expression that otherwise prevail? I find in the Bavli a trivial component of anomalous writings. That strikingly reinforces the results of the prior chapters and validates an element of the documentary hypothesis. The outcome calls into question the theory that documents were being prepared but did not come to exposure in the classical canon. The extant canon and its components constitute the full and final statement of their authors, the canon is complete. The document by which the canon is comprised form the smallest whole unit of the Rabbinic composite.

Accordingly, I compare, first with the traits of the document in which it has survived and second with the traits of other documents of the same canonical stratum, the formal traits of the formally anomalous composition that has survived. I build a theory of a lost document on the outcome of the accumulation of cases. In making these comparisons 1 take for granted that the writers of coherent compositions were familiar with the results of work on finished composites - collections of compositions that assembled quantities of completed compositions -and formed them into coherent composites. These collections comprise the lost documents of the formative canon of Judaism. The results of this probe define the ne3t problem to be investigated. At the end of the Epilogue I explain what must follow.

ENDNOTES

' Narrative and Document in the Rabbinic Canon. I. From the Mishnah to the Talmuds Narrative and Document in the Rabbinic Canon. 11. The two Talmuds. Lanharn 2009. University Press of America.

Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot and the Tosefta

The correct form-analytical translation of a Rabbinic document makes possible the identification of the distinguishing traits, those that differentiate one document of the Rabbinic canon from all others of corresponding ambience: [ I ] the rhetoric or formal preferences of a piece of writing, which dictate, without respect to meaning, how sentences will be composed, that is, the forms; [2] the logic of coherent discourse, which determines how one sentence will be joined to others in context; and how groups of sentences will cohere and form completed units of thought, and, finally, how said units of thought agglutinate or are otherwise held together in large-scale components of complete documents; [3] the topical program of the writing, which indicates the subject and may also indicate the problematic -what we wish to know about the subject -of that same writing. By invoking these three criteria, which are entirely familiar in the analysis of literature in antiquity, we may distinguish each document from all others and establish a clear definition for every piece ofwriting in the literature. The reason is simple. A received discipline of thought and expression governed all writing that has survived in Rabbinic literature. Let me amplify the distinguishing criteria of the canonical opponents: [ l ] RHETORIC: Writers followed formal conventions, making choices never particular to a given author or a given topic but always set forth, to begin with, by

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

2

a repertoire of commonly-understood fixed arrangements of words. These fixed arrangements,transcending particular meanings, signaled the purpose and even the context of a given set of sentences; following one form, rather than another, therefore dictated to the reader of a passage the character and intent of that passage: its classification. Correct translation will underscore the regularities of form and formulation. [2] LOGIC OF COHERENT DISCOURSE: Since the Rabbinic writings ordinarily set forth not discrete sentences - aphorisms that stand, each in lapidary splendor - but cogent sets of sentences forming whole units of coherent thought ("'paragraphs"') in our language, we also have to identify the principles of logic that connect one sentence to another. That logic of coherent discourse has the power to make of a group of sentences a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts. Proper translation will point up the distinct small whole units of thought ("'sentences"') and fiu-ther show how these units of thought coalesce in completed units of thought (paragraphs), and how sets of paragraphs hold together to make coherent statements ("'chapters"' or major parts thereof). [3] Topic, P ~ o ~ o s r ~Every i o ~ :document treats a specific topic. Moreover, many documents set forth sustained exercises in the analysis of a concrete problem pertinent to a given topic. Some entire documents, early and late in the formation of the literature, are so set forth as to demonstrate propositions we are able to identify and define. Few books in Rabbinic literature aim merely at collecting and arranging information. Nearly all documents, on the contrary, take up not a topic in general but a specific problem concerning that topic, that is, a problematic. Most of the documents set forth propositions that emerge out of masses of detail and may come to concrete expression through diverse details. The governing protocols served because no entire document in Rabbinic literature comprehensively accommodated idiosyncratic preference. Not a single canonical composite comes to us from an individual writer or author (e.g., Paul, Josephus, Philo); none collects the sayings or composites which can be shown on the basis of solid evidence to have been formulated in a single school. All documents enjoy the sponsorship of sages as a group, whether we call the group an authorship or redactors or compilers or editors. Not only so, but the compositions of which the composites are comprised themselves follow rigid rules of formulation and expression. When, therefore, we identify those rules, we can classify documents by differentiating among a limited repertoire of available choices. 11.

THENORMS OF THE MISHNAH

The Mishnah is a philosophical law code, covering topics of both a theoretical and practical character. Seen all together, its topical expositions provide a theory of the restoration of the Israelite social order. It was produced at about 200 C.E. under the sponsorship of Judah, Patriarch (nasi) or ethnic ruler of the Jews of

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefra

3

the Land of Israel. It comprises sixty-two tractates, divided by topics among six divisions, as follows: 1. AGRICULTURE (Zeraim): Berakhot (Blessings); Peah (the comer of the field); Demai (doubtfully tithed produce); Kilayim (mixed seeds); Shebiit (the seventh year); Terumot (heave offering or priestly rations); Maaserot (tithes); Maaser Sheni (second tithe); Hallah (dough offering); Orlah (produce of trees in the first three years after planting, which is prohibited); and Bikkurim (first fruits). 2. APPOINTED TIMES(Moed): Shabbat (the Sabbath); Erubin (the fictive fusion meal or boundary); Pesahim (Passover); Sheqalim (the Temple tax); Yoma (the Day of Atonement); Sukkah (the festival of Tabernacles); Besah (the preparation of food on the festivals and Sabbath); Rosh Hashanah (the New Year); Taanit (fast days); Megillah (Purim); Moed Qatan (the intermediate days of the festivals of Passover and Tabernacles); Hagigah (the festal offering). 3. WOMEN(Nashim): Yebamot (the levirate widow); Ketubot (the marriage contract); Nedarim (vows); Nazir (the special vow of the Nazirite); Sotah (the wife accused of adultery); Gittin (writs of divorce); Qiddushin (betrothal). 4. DAMAGES or civil law (Neziqin): Baba Qamma, Baba Mesia, Baba Batra (civil law, covering damages and torts, then correct conduct of business, labor, and real estate transactions); Sanhedrin (institutions of government; criminal penalties); Makkot (flogging); Shabuot (oaths); Eduyyot (a collection arranged on other than topical lines); Horayot (rules governing improper conduct of civil authorities); 5. HOLYTHINGS(Qodoshim): Zebahim (every day animal offerings); Menahot (meal offerings); Hullin (animals slaughtered for secular purposes); Bekhorot (firstlings); Arakhin (vows of valuation); Temurah (vows of exchange of a beast for an already consecrated beast); Keritot (penalty of extirpation or premature death); Meilah (sacrilege); Tamid (the daily whole offering); Middot (the layout of the Temple building); Qinnim (how to deal with bird offerings designated for a given purpose and then mixed up); 6. PURITY (Tohorot): Kelim (susceptibility of utensils to uncleanness); Ohalot (transmission of corpse-uncleanness in the tent of a corpse); Negaim (the uncleanness described at Lev. 13-14); Parah (the preparation of purification-water); Tohorot (problems of doubt in connection with matters of cleanness); Miqvaot (immersion-pools); Niddah (menstrual uncleanness); Makhshirin (rendering susceptible to uncleanness produce that is dry and so not susceptible); Zabim (the uncleanness covered at Lev. 15); Tebul-Yom (the uncleanness of one who has immersed on that self-same day and awaits sunset for completion of the purification rites); Yadayim (the uncleanness of hands); Uqsin (the uncleanness transmitted through what is connected to unclean produce). In volume, the sixth division covers approximately a quarter of the entire document. Topics of interest to the priesthood and the Temple, such as priestly fees, conduct of the cult on holy days, conduct of the cult on ordinary days and

4

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

management and upkeep of the Temple, and the rules of cultic cleanness, predominate in the first, second, fifth, and sixth divisions. Rules governing the social order form the bulk of the third and fourth. Of these tractates, only Eduyyot is organized along other than topical lines, rather collecting sayings on diverse subjects attributed to particular authorities. The Mishnah as printed today always includes Abot (sayings of the sages), but that document reached closure about a generation later than the Mishnah. While it serves as the Mishnah's initial apologetic, it does not conform to the formal, rhetorical, or logical traits characteristic of the Mishnah overall. It is free-standing compilation of wise sayings. THETOPICAL ORGANIZATION OF THE MISHNAH: we commence with the simple question of how the document is organized. The answer is through themes, spelled out along the lines of the logic embedded in those themes. The Mishnah is divided up into six principal divisions, each expounding a single, immense topic. The topical expositions or tractates of each division take up sub-topics of the principal theme. The subdivisions of the topical expositions or chapters of tractates chapters then unfold along the lines of the (to the framers) logic of the necessary dissection of the division. That the themes unfold in accord with an inner logic we can identify is proved very simply. Once we identify the topical units of a tractate, we may ask why one unit comes before or after some other; in nearly all cases, we can answer that question in a simple way: any other ordering of the units of the tractate will have yielded an unintelligible document, e.g., one question has to be taken up before another can be asked at all. That trait marks tractates, not the divisions, which are ordered by size. THEINTERNAL EVIDENCE ON THE TOPICAL DIVISION OF THE MISHNAH: In antiquity paragraphing and punctuation were not commonly used. Long columns of words would contain a text -as in the Torah today -and the student of the text had the task of breaking up those columns into tractates, chapters, sentences, large and small sense-units. Now if we had the entire Mishnah in a single immense scroll and spread the scroll out on the ground -perhaps the length of a football field! -we should have no difficulty at all discovering the point, on the five yard line, at which the first tractate ends and the second begins, and so on down the field to the opposite goal. For from Berakhot at the beginning to Uqsin at the end, the breaking points of topical exposition practically jump up from the ground like white lines of lime: change of the principal topic. So, the criterion of division, internal to the document and not merely imposed by copyists and printers, is thematic. That is, the tractates are readily distinguishable from one another since each treats a distinct topic. So if, the Mishnah were to be copied out in a long scroll without the significance of lines of demarcation among the several tractates, the opening pericope of each tractate would leave no doubt that one topic had been completed and a new one undertaken. The same presence of internal evidence as to the principal parts of the writing is so within the tractates. Intermediate divisions of these same principal

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta

5

divisions are to be discerned on the basis of internal evidence, through the confluence of theme and form. That is to say, a given intermediate division of a principal one (a chapter of a tractate) will be marked by a particular, recurrent, formal pattern in accord with which sentences are constructed, and also by a particular and distinct theme, to which these sentences are addressed. When a new theme commences, a fresh formal pattern will be used. Within the intermediate divisions, we are able to recognize the components, or smallest whole units of thought (hereinafter, cognitive units), because there will be a recurrent pattern of sentence-structure repeated time and again within the unit and a shifting at the commencement of the next theme. Each point at which the recurrent pattern commences marks the beginning of a new cognitive unit. In general, an intermediate division will contain a carefully enumerated sequence of exempla of cognitive units, in the established formal pattern, commonly in groups of three or five or multiples of three or five (pairs for the first division). THERHETORICAL REPERTOIRE OF THE MISHNAH: This brings us to the matter of rhetorical forms. The cognitive units - "'paragraphs"' or "'completed statements of thought"' - resort to a remarkably limited repertoire of formulary patterns. Mishnah manages to say whatever it wants in one of the following ways: 1. the simple declarative sentence, in which the subject, verb, and predicate are syntactically tightly joined to one another, e.g., he who does so and so is such and such; 2. the duplicated subject, in which the subject of the sentence is stated twice, e.g., He who does so and so, lo, he is such and such; 3. mild apocopation, in which the subject of the sentence is cut off fi-om the verb, which refers to its own subject, and not the one with which the sentence commences, e.g., He who does so and so..., it [the thing he has done] is such and such; 4. extreme apocopation, in which a series of clauses is presented, none of them tightly joined to what precedes or follows, and all of them cut off from the predicate of the sentence, e.g., He who does so and so..., it [the thing he has done] is such and such ..., it is a matter of doubt whether... or whether... lo, it [referring to nothing in the antecedent, apocopated clauses of the subject of the sentence] is so and so... 5. In addition to these formulary patterns, in which the distinctive formulary traits are effected through variations in the relationship between the subject and the predicate of the sentence, or in which the subject itself is given a distinctive development, there is yet a fifth. In this last one we have a contrastive complex predicate, in which case we may have two sentences, independent of one another, yet clearly formulated so as to stand in acute balance with one another in the predicate, thus, He who does... is unclean, and he who does not ... is clean. It will be objected: is it possible that a simple declarative sentence may be asked to serve as a formulary pattern, alongside the rather distinctive and unusual

6

Losr Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

constructions which follow? True, by itself, a tightly constructed sentence consisting of subject, verb, and complement, in which the verb refers to the subject, and the complement to the verb, hardly exhibits traits of particular formal interest. Yet a sequence of such sentences, built along the same gross grammatical lines, may well exhibit a clear-cut and distinctive pattern. When we see that three or five "'simple declarative sentences"' take up one principle or problem, and then, when the principle or problem shifts, a quite distinctive formal pattern will be utilized, we realize that the "'simple declarative sentence"' has served the formulator of the unit of thought as aptly as did apocopation, a dispute, or another more obviously distinctive form or formal pattern. The contrastive predicate is one example: the Mishnah contains many more. The dominant stylistic trait of the Mishnah is the acute formalization of its syntactical structure, and its carefully framed sequences of formalized language, specifically, its intermediate divisions, so organized that the limits of a theme correspond to those of a formulary pattern. The balance and order of the Mishnah are particular to the Mishnah. There is no reason to doubt that if we asked the authorities behind the Mishnah the immediate purpose of their systematic use of formalized language, their answer would be to facilitate memorization. For that is the proximate effect of the acute formalization of their document. Much in its character can be seen as mnemonic. Since we seek to discern the boundary-lines within the principal divisions of the Mishnah for which the redactors of the Mishnah bear responsibility, we revert to our examination of the internal evidence about the aggregation of materials into intermediate divisions. What internal evidence permits us to differentiate the intermediate divisions, or sizable aggregations of completed cognitive units? What criteria, specifically, will emerge out of the fundamental character itself? Answers to these questions solve the problem of the mnemonics of the protasis in mnemonically-formulated Rabbinic documents. [I ] TOPIC:The first of two criteria derives from the nature of the principal divisions themselves: theme. We know that it is along thematic lines that the redactors organized vast corpora of materials into principal divisions, tractates. These hndamental themes themselves were subdivided into smaller conceptual units. The principal divisions treat their themes in units indicated by the sequential unfolding of their inner logical structure. Accordingly, one established criterion for distinguishing one aggregate of materials from some other, fore or aft, will be a shift in the theme, or predominant and characteristic concern, of a sequence of materials. [2] RHETORIC: Normally, when the topic changes, the mode of expression -the formal or formulary character, the patterning of language -will change as well. These two matters, theme and form, therefore must be asked to delineate for us the main lines of the intermediate segments or subdivisions of the Mishnah's principal divisions, the "'chapters."' The stress ofthe Mishnah throughout on the priestly caste and the Temple cult point to the document's principal concern, which centered upon sanctification,

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Toseja

7

understood as the correct arrangement of all things, each in its proper category, each called by its rightful name, just as at the creation as portrayed in the Priestly document, and just as with the cult itself as set forth in Leviticus. Further, the thousands of rules and cases (with sages' disputes thereon) that comprise the document upon close reading turn out to express in concrete language abstract principles of hierarchical classification. These define the document's method and mark it as a work of a philosophical character. Not only so, but a variety of specific, recurrent concerns, for example, the relationship of being to becoming, actual to potential, the principles of economics, the politics, correspond point by point to comparable ones in Graeco-Roman philosophy, particularly Aristotle's tradition. This stress on proper order and right rule and the formulation of a philosophy, politics, and economics, within the principles of natural history set forth by Aristotle, explain why the Mishnah makes a statement to be classified as philosophy, concerning the order of the natural world in its correspondence with the supernatural world. The system of philosophy expressed through concrete and detailed law presented by the Mishnah, consists of a coherent logic and topic, a cogent worldview and comprehensive way of living. It is a worldview which speaks of transcendent things, a way of life in response to the supernatural meaning of what is done, a heightened and deepened perception of the sanctification of Israel in deed and in deliberation. Sanctification thus means two things, first, distinguishing Israel in all its dimensions from the world in all its ways; second, establishing the stability, order, regularity, predictability, and reliability of Israel in the world of nature and supernature in particular at moments and in contexts of danger. Danger means instability, disorder, irregularity, uncertainty, and betrayal. Each topic of the system as a whole takes up a critical and indispensable moment or context of social being. Through what is said in regard to each of the Mishnah's principal topics, what the system expressed through normative rules as a whole wishes to declare is filly expressed. Yet if the parts severally and jointly give the message of the whole, the whole cannot exist without all of the parts, so well joined and carefully crafted are they all. Ill.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE MISHNAH. AN OVERVIEW

While the topical mode of organization of the Mishnah may appear to be necessary or self-evident, we notice that three other principles of organization are found within the document. These are not utilized extensively or systematically and represent rejected options. [ l ] One way is - without regard to subject-matter - to collect diverse sayings around the name of a given authority. The whole of tractate Eduyyot is organized in that way. [2] A second way is to express a given basic principle exemplified through diverse topics, e.g., a fundamental and abstract rule cutting across many areas of

8

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

law, stated in one place, through all of the diverse types of law through which the rule or principle may be expressed. No tractate is set up in that way, but a chapter or two may find its principle of coherence in a principle of law covering diverse topics, e.g., things done by reason of maintaining the social order (Mishnah-tractate Gittin 523-9). [3] A third way is to take a striking language-pattern and collect sayings on diverse topics which conform to the given language-pattern (e.g., M. Kelim 13:2, M. Parah 8:2-7, among many). Faced with these possible ways of organizing materials, the framers of the Mishnah chose to adhere to a highly disciplined thematic-logical principle of organization. I shall not treat these three other modes of organization and selection of data as anomalous. It suffices to say that raw materials for the construction of a law code set forth on other than topical-Ological lines were available and were produced by the compositors of laws, We shall identify composites other than the topical norm. we use the three variant norms as types of anomalous composites and compositions.

In these entries compositions hold together by reason of a fixed attribution to a particular sage. The composite is topically miscellaneous. The lost documents take shape around the names and distinctive opinions ofAqiba or Gamaliel or Meir. hen the purpose of study of the law is to investigate the principles that govern the rulings of the named authority. MISHNAH SHABBAT MISHNAH SHABBAT 9:1 1 A. Said R. Aqiba, "'How do we know of an idol that it imparts uncleanness when it is carried as a menstruating woman [imparts uncleanness, when she is carried, to the one who carries her]? B. "'Since it is said, You shall cast them away like a menstrual thing, you shall say to it, Get thee hence (Is. 30:22). C. "'Just as the menstruating woman imparts ur~cleannesswhen she is carried so an idol imparts uncleanness when it is carried. MISHNAH SHABBAT 9:2 11 A. "'How do we know of a boat that it is insusceptible to uncleanness? B. "'Since it says, 'The way of a ship in the midst of the sea' (Prov. 30:19). 111 C. '"How do we know of a garden bed, six handbreadths square, that five different kinds of seed may be sown in it, four on the sides and one in the middle [M. Kil. 3:l I? D. "'Since it says, For as the earth brings forth her bud and as the garden causes seeds sown in it to spring forth (Is. 61 : I 1).

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefra

"'Its seed is not said, but Its seeds. 9:3 MISHNAH SHABBAT "'How do we know of her who emits semen on the third day [after having had sexual relations] that she is unclean? "'Since it says, And be ready against the third day, [come not near a woman] (Ex. 19:15). "'How do we know that they bathe a child on the third day after circumcision, even if this coincides with the Sabbath? "'Since it says, 'And it came to pass on the third day when they were sore' (Gen. 34:25). "'How do we know that they tie a red thread on the head of the scapegoat [which is sent forth]? "'Since it says, 'Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow' (Is. 1:18). 9:4 MISHNAH SHABBAT "'How do we know that on the Day of Atonement anointing is tantamount to drinking? "'Even though there is no direct proof of the proposition, there is a hint at "'since it says, 'And it came into his inward parts like water and like oil into his bones' (Ps. 109:18)."' This conglomerate attributes miscellaneous rulings to a single authority, Aqiba. Said R. Aqiba is not repeated all six times, as we should have anticipated. But the composite is planned for a collection of "'how do we know,"' all of them Aqiba-rulings. What is promised is an exegetical solution. A law code organized by chapters of rulings of a miscellaneous character in accord with particular named authorities is contemplated but not executed, We shall see how Mishnah-tractate Eduyyot supplies an entire tractate executed around the names of particular authorities

v. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE MISHNAH 121 COMPOSITES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

These (presently only theoretical) items hold together not through topic or through the name of a given authority but through an abstract legal principle that applies to a composite pf topical miscellanies. Mishnah Kelim Chapter TwentyFour systematically declares the position of Judah, but the topics are coherent. There are in the Mishnah no cases that I can discern of composites that illustrate a single principle through diverse examples. But the Bavli sets forth ample evidence that abstract principles could form the basis for a well constructed composite,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

10 VI.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE MISHNAH 131 COMPOSITES OF

COMPOSITIONS JOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON

PROPOSITION OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

The rhetorical pattern is, they do not ...more ...or less ..., and variations, and that pattern applies to a variety of topics. It has the advantage of setting out numerical limits in patterns, but it does not yield a coherent outcome for a law code. The Mishnah contains evidence of the presentation of formal patterns applied to diverse topics, and one of our lost documents joins together rhetorically patterned but diverse laws. That is not the only model for a collection of laws on other than topical-logical lines such as prevail in the Mishnah as we know it. The next Mishnah-anomaly recapitulates the form not less ...not more ....

In paying a Valuation one may not pay less than a sela, or more than fifty selas. In paying a Valuation, one may not pay less than a sela, or more than fifty selas. There is no [relopening for a woman who misses count [of her period] less than seven days, or more than seventeen days. In the case of [a person with] skin ailments [he must be confined] no less than one week, but no more than three weeks. MISHNAH ARAKHIN 2:2 They do not count less than four full months in the year, and [to sages] it has never appeared [appropriate to declare] more than eight. B. The two loaves of bread which are eaten: there are no less than two, and no more than three. Show-bread which is eaten [in the Temple]: there are no less than nine, and no more than eleven [loaves] [M. Men. 1 1:9A]. An infant may not be circumcised prior to the eighth day [of his life], and not beyond the twelfth. MISHNAH ARAKHIN 2:3 They do not [blow the ram's horn] less than twenty-one teqiah[blasts] in the sanctuary, and not more than forty-eight [M. Suk. 5:5A]. They do not play less than two harps, and not more than six. They do not play less than six flutes, and not count more than twelve. And on twelve days in the year the flute is played before the altar: ( 1 ) on the day of the slaughter of the first Passover-offering, (2) and on the day of the slaughtering of the second Passoveroffering; (3) and on the first festival day of Passover; (4) and on the festival day of Aseret [Weeks];

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta (5-12) on the eight days of the Festival [of Sukkot]. And one did not play on a pipe of bronze but on a pipe made of reed, because its [the reed-pipe's] sound is sweet. And one ended [the playing] with one reed only, because it ends well. ARAKHIN 2:s MISHNAH They do not use less than six inspected lambs in the chamber of the lambs, sufficient for the Sabbath and for two festival days of the New Year. But they may use more than that number without limit. They do not use less than two trumpets. [B. lacks:] But they may use more than that number without limit. They do not use less than nine harps. But they use more than that number without limit. And as to the cymbals: one alone. ARAKHIN 2:6 MISHNAH They do not have less than twelve Levites standing on the platform. But they may have more than that number without limit. "'There is n o less. ..or more than.. .."' in several variations forms the pattern that applies t o a miscellany. In the same context a formal pattern aims at the same goal. Arakhin utilizes another productive pattern: There is in respect ... [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently ... The topically determined plan for the Mishnah doe not register. Another anomalous pattern follows, also in Arakhin, and with the same formal outcome: powerful reinforcement o f mnemonic patterns at the cost o f a coherent exposition.

A.

B. C.

D.

E. F.

G

MISHNAH ARAKHIN 3: 1 [13B] There is in respect to Valuations [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently; in respect to the law of the field of possession (Lev. 27:16fF) [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently, in respect to an ox which is an attested danger which killed a slave [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently; in the case of the rapist (Deut. 22:28f.) and seducer (Ex. 22: 15f.), and the one who brings forth an evil name (Deut. 22:17f.) [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently. There is in respect to Valuations [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently: How so? The same rule applies to one who pledged the Valuation of the most beautihl among Israelites and [one who pledged that] of the ugliest among Israelites - he gives fifty selas [in either case]. [If, however,] he said, "'Lo, his [actual] value is incumbent on me,"' he gives his actual value.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism In respect to the law of the field of possession [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently: How so? The same rule applies to one who sanctifies a field in the desert of Mahoz and he who sanctifies a field among the orchards of Sebaste: [if he wants to redeem it] he pays fifty sheqels of silver [for every part of a field that suffices for] the sowing of a homer of barley (Lev. 27:16) [M. 7:10]. And in the case of a field which he has bought (Lev. 27:22), he gives its actual value. R. Eliezer says, "'The same rule applies to a field of possession and a field which he has bought. "'What is the difference between a field of possession and a field which he has bought? "'Rather in the case of a field of possession he pays an added fifth, and in the case of a field which he has bought he does not pay an added fifth'" [M. 7:2]. MISHNAH ARAKHIN 3:3 In the case of an ox which is an attested danger which killed a slave [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently: How so? The same ruling applies to one who killed the most beautiful among slaves and [one who killed] the ugliest among slaves -[the owner] pays thirty selas [Ex. 21:30-321. [Ifl it killed a free man, he pays his [actual] value. [Ifl he did injury to one and to the other, one pays restitution for the damage in full. MISHNAH ARAKHIN 3:4 In the case ofthe rapist and seducer [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently: How so? The same rule applies to one who raped or the one who seduced the greatest woman in the priesthood and the least among Israelites: He pays fifty selas [Ex. 22:15-16, Deut. 22:28-291. But as to the compensation for indignity and for blemish, all is assessed in accord with the status of the one who inflicts the indignity and the one upon whom the indignity is afflicted. MISHNAH ARAKHIN 3:s In the case of the one who is a tale bearer [i.e., one who falsely accuses a woman of premarital relations, Dt. 22:29] [the possibility] to rule leniently and to rule stringently: How so? The same rule applies to one who is a tale bearer concerning the greatest woman in the priesthood and the least among Israelites: He pays a hundred selas [Deut. 22: 191. It turns out that the one who says something with his mouth [suffers] more than the one who actually does a deed. [That is, for actually seducing a virgin one pays only fifty selas (M. 3:4B) but for gossiping one pays 100.1

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosejla D. E.

For so we find that the decree against our forefathers in the wilderness was sealed only on account of evil speech [Num. 13:32], as it is said, And they tempted me these ten times and have not hearkened to my voice (Num. 14:22).

The rhetorical pattern - the possibility to rule leniently and to rule stringently - covers a variety of distinct topics. The pattern covers a variety of topics. It is noteworthy that the striking cases of anomalous composites occur side by side in the same tractate. But the bulk of Mishnah-tractate Arakhin conforms to the paramount pattern of the Mishnah. A different theory of forming a law code governs: not for information readily accessed but for easy formalization for mnemonic purposes. The subject matter and contents of the law and the exposition of the Halakhah are uniform within both theories of rhetorical formalization. The lost law code(s) -the one that organized materials by the names of authorities and the one that organized materials by abstract legal principles - addressed the same corpus of laws, the same body of Halakhah, as the Mishnah does. Thatfact means that the contents of the law circulatedprior to theformation of the law codes, whether topically or formally. We notice that the topics covered by the anomalous, mnemonically fiamed laws go over the ground covered by the Mishnah as we know it: formalization of topical expositions topically set forth. So the body of Halakhah was formulated before the conflict over process of articulation of the law [I] by authority or [2] by topic had been resolved. The law in its contents is prior to the decisions on how the law is to be formalized and expressed. To state matters simply: the contents ofthe Halakhah are prior in formulation to the formalization and expression ofthe law in the Mishnah or in any other documentary program. We do not know how long a span of time intervened between the formation of the topical program of the laws and the formalization in fixed rhetorical patterns of the laws into formal composites. It could have taken a week, and it could have taken a century. But the corpus of laws circulated before formalization by topic or by named authority or by any other medium of composition. Work on Mishnah-tractate Arakhin shows us the model of the mnemonic Mishnah, in contradistinction to the topical Mishnah. But as to the time the work was done, we cannot form a theory of priority or posteriority of one program of formalization and organization of the law over another. The two theoretical theories of how the law is to be expressed in patterns yield not the Mishnah as a systematic exposition ofthe law but the Mishnah as a set of school-house exercises. The topics are scattered. The formal paradoxes dominate. But information on the several topics is reviewed and a handbook for disciples would do well to set a sequence of tests of patterns of knowledge,

14

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

Other examples of the imposition of a fixed rhetorical pattern upon a topical miscellany are as follows: MISHNAH MEGILLAH MISHNAH MEGILLAH 1:4 [If] they read the Scroll in the first Adar, and then the year was intercalated, they read it [again] in the second Adar. There is no difference between [the fourteenth or fifteenth of] the first Adar and [the same dates in] the second Adar except for the reading of the Scroll and giving gifts to the poor [which must be done in the second Adar, not in the first Adar, but in both Adars on the fourteenth or fifteenth, lamentations and fasts are prohibited]. MISHNAH MEGILLAH 1:s There is no difference between a festival day and the Sabbath day except for preparing food alone [M. Bes. 5:2 1. There is no difference between the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement except that deliberately violating this one is punishable at the hands of an earthly court, while deliberately violating that one is punishable through extirpation. MISHNAH MECILLAH 1:6 There is no difference between one who is prohibited by vow from deriving [general] benefit from his fellow, and one who is prohibited by vow from deriving food from his fellow, except for setting foot in his house and using utensils of his which are not for preparing food [permitted in the former case]. There is no difference between vows and freewill offerings, except that for animals designated in fulfillment of vows one is responsible, while for animals set aside in fulfillment of freewill offerings one is not responsible [should the animal be lost]. MISHNAH MEGILLAH 1:7 V1 A. There is no difference between a Zab who suffers two appearances of flux and one who suffers three except for the requirement of an offering [for the latter]. VII B. There is no difference between a mesora who is shut up and one who has been certified except for the requirement to mess up the hair and tear the clothing. Vlll C. There is no difference between [a mesora] declared clean having been shut up and one declared clean having been certified [unclean] except for the requirement of shaving and of bringing a bird offering. 1:8 MISHNAH MECILLAH There is no difference between sacred scrolls and phylacteries and mezuzot except that sacred scrolls may be written in any alphabet ["'language'"], while phylacteries and mezuzot are written only in square ["'Assyrian"'] letters. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says, '"Also: in the case of sacred scrolls: they have been permitted to be written only in Greek."'

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta X

A.

XI B.

XI1 A. B.

C.

15

There is no difference between a priest who is anointed with anointing oil and one who wears many garments except in the bullock which is offered for unwitting transgression of any of the commandments [required only of the former]. There is no difference between a [high] priest presently in service and [high] priest [who served) in times past except for the bullock which is offered on the Day of Atonement and the tenth of the ephah [cf. M. Hot 3:4]. MISHNAH MEGILLAH 1:10 There is no difference between a major high place and a minor high place except for Passover offerings. This is the governing principle: Whatever is offered in fulfillment of a vow or as a freewill offering may be offered on a high place, And whatever is not offered in fulfillment of a vow or as a freewill offering may not be offered on a high place. MEGILLAH 1: 11 MISHNAH A. There is no difference between Shilo and Jerusalem except that in Shilo they eat Lesser Holy Things and second tithe in any place within sight [of the place], while in Jerusalem [they eat the same things only] within the wall.

The pattern There is no difference between ... and ... exceptfor .. . recapitulates the pattern at M. Arakhin. The goal is not to analyze the law but to rehearse its details in accord with a pattern that organizes the details into a clear pattern. As before we notice that the topical program belongs to the Mishnah and does not venture into issues not attested in the conventional formulation of the Mishnah. MISHNAH NIDDAH MISHNAH NIDDAH 6: 1 [If] the token [of puberty] below appeared before that above, [the girl] either carries out the rite of halisah or enters levirate marriage. [If] the upper token appeared before the lower one, even though it is not possible [for the upper to appear before the lower]R. Meir says, "'She does not carry out the rite of halisah and she does not enter into levirate marriage."' And sages say, "'She either carries out the rite of halisah or enters into levirate marriage."' Because they have said, "'It is possible forthe lower token to appear before the upper one appears, but it is not possible for the upper one to appear before the lower one appears."' MISHNAH NIDDAH 6:2 Similarly: Any clay utensil that will let in a liquid will let it out. But there is one which lets out a liquid and does not let it in.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Every limb which has aclaw on it has a bone on it, but there is that which has a bone on it and does not have a claw on it. 6:3 MISHNAH NIDDAH Whatever is susceptible to midras uncleanness is susceptible to corpse uncleanness, but there is that which is susceptible to corpse uncleanness and is not susceptible to midras uncleanness. MISHNAH NIDDAH 6:4 Whoever is worthy to judge capital cases is worthy to judge property cases and there is one who is worthy to judge property cases and is not worthy to judge capital cases. Whoever is suitable tojudge is suitable to give testimony, but there is one who is suitable to give testimony but is not suitable to judge. 6:s MISHNAH NIDDAH Whatever is liable for tithes is susceptible to the uncleanness pertaining to foods, but there is that which is susceptible to the uncleanness pertaining to foods and is not liable for tithes. MISHNAH NIDDAH 6:6 Whatever is liable for peah is liable for tithes, but there is that which is liable for tithes and is not liable for peah. 6:7 MISHNAH NIDDAH Whatever is liable for the law of the first of the fleece is liable for the priestly gifts, but there is that which is liable for the priestly gifts and is not liable for the first of the fleece. NIDDAH 6:8 MISHNAH Whatever is subject to the requirement of removal is subject to the law of the Seventh Year and there is that which is subject to the law of the Seventh Year and is not subject to the requirement of removal. MISHNAH NIDDAH 6:9 Whatever has scales has fins, but there is that which has fins and does not have scales. Whatever has horns has hooves, and there is that which has hooves and does not have horns, MISHNAH NIDDAH 6:10 Whatever requires a blessing after it requires a blessing before it, but there is that which requires a blessing before it and does not require a blessing after it. T h e organizing principle again stresses the congruity o f facts covering diverse topics, with a stress on the anomalous quality of the law that characterizes parallel cases. T h e laws that are covered are standard and d o not invoke a program other than that which is familiar in the Mishnah as we know it. T h e Mishnah contains a pattern o f ironic formulations t o join diverse rulings , Those things which made you [clothing] unclean could not have made m e unclean, but you made m e unclean:

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosejia MISHNAH PARAH MISHNAH PARAH8:2 He who mixes purification water should not wear the sandal, for if the liquid fell on the sandal, it [the sandal] is made unclean, and they [the sandals] make him [the man himself] unclean, Lo, he [the man) says, Those things which made you [clothing] unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean. [If] the liquids fell on his skin, he is clean. [If] they fell on his garment, it is made unclean and makes him unclean. Lo, this one [man] says [to the clothing], Those things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean. PARAH8:3 MISHNAH He who bums the red cow, and [he who bums] bullocks, and the one who sends the goat away render clothing unclean [which they touch at the time of the rite. But they do not render men and clay utensils unclean]. A red cow and bullocks and the goat which is sent away themselves do not render clothing unclean. Lo, this one [ = clothing] says [to the man], The things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean. MISHNAH PARAH8:4 He who eats from the carrion of the clean bird, and it [that which he ate] is in his gullet, renders clothing unclean. The carrion itself does not render clothing unclean. Lo, this one [ = clothing] says [to the man], The things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean. PARAH 8:5 MISHNAH No Offspring of Uncleanness renders utensils unclean, but [it does render] liquid [unclean]. [If] liquid [which is on a utensil] is made unclean, it makes them [utensils] unclean. Lo, this one [utensil] says [to the liquid], The things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean. MISHNAH PARAH8:6 A clay utensil does not make its fellow [clay utensil] unclean, but [it does make] liquid [unclean]. [If] the liquid is made unclean, it makes it [a clay utensil] unclean. Lo, this one says, The things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you have made me unclean. PARAH8:7 MISHNAH Whatever spoils heave offering renders the liquid unclean, to be in the first [remove], to render something unclean at one [further]

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

remove and to render [heave offering] unfit at one [still further, namely, a third] remove. B. (except for a tebul-yom.) C. Lo, this one [food] says [to liquid], The things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean.

"'The things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean'" cites a paradox to make possible the analysis of the law. Here the purpose is to underscore the paradox of the law and to highlight its principles. The content ofthe law that yields the anomaly is shared in the Mishnah. MISHNAH SOTAH MISHNAH SOTAH 5:2 On that day did R. Aqiba expound as follows: "'And every earthen vessel whereunto any of them falls, whatsoever is in it conveys uncleanness (Lev. 11:33). "'It does not say, . . . will be unclean but will convey uncleanness -that is, to impart uncleanness to other things. "'Thus has Scripture taught concerning a loaf of bread unclean in the second remove, that it imparts uncleanness in the third remove [to a loaf of bread with which it comes into contact] .,, Said R. Joshua, "'Who will remove the dirt from your eyes, Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai? For you used to say, 'Another generation is going to come to declare clean a loaf of bread in the third remove [from the original source of uncleanness]. ""For there is no Scripture in the Torah which indicates that it is unclean.' "'But now has not Aqiba, your disciple, brought Scriptural proof from the Torah that it is indeed unclean, "'since it is said, And whatsoever is in it shall impart uncleanness (Lev. 11 :33)?'" MISHNAH SOTAH 5:3 On that day did R. Aqiba expound as follows: "'And you shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits. . . (Num . 35:5). And another Scripture says, From the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about (Num. 35:4). "'It is not possible to state that the required measure is a thousand amahs, for two thousand amahs already have been specified. "'But it is not possible to state that the required measure is two thousand amahs, for one thousand amahs already have been specified. "'So how shall we rule? "'A thousand amahs form the outskirts, while two thousand amahs form the Sabbath limit.. .. R. Eliezer the son of R. Yose the Galilean says, "'A thousand amahs form the outskirts, and two thousand amahs cover the surrounding fields and vineyards."'

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta

19

MISHNAH SOTAH5:4 111 A. On that day did R. Aqiba expound as follows: "'Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the Lord and spoke saying, (Ex. 15:l). B. "'Now Scripture hardly needs to add, Saying. C. "'And why does Scripture state, Saying? D. "'It thereby teaches that the Israelites responded word by word after Moses, E. "'as they do when they read the Hallel psalms. F. "'Therefore Saying is stated in this context."' G R. Nehemiah says, "'[They did so] as they do when they read the Shema, not as when they read the Hallel.'" MISHNAH SOTAH5:s A. On that day did R. Joshua b. Hurqanos expound as follows: "'Job served the Holy One, blessed be He, only out of love, B. "'since it is said, Though he slay me, yet will 1 wait for him (Job 13:15). C. "'But still the matter is in doubt [as to whether it means], 'I will wait for him,' or 'I will not wait for him.' D. "'Scripture states, Until I die I will not put away mine integrity from me (Job. 27:5). E. "'This teaches that he did what he did out of love."' F. Said R. Joshua, "'Who will remove the dirt from your eyes, Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai? For you used to expound for your entire life that Job served the Omnipresent only out of awe, G "'since it is said, The man was perfect and upright and one who feared God and avoided evil (Job. 19). H. "'And now has not Joshua, the disciple of your disciple, taught that he did what he did out of love."' "'On that day Aqiba expounded"' points to a collection o f expositions by Aqiba o n a determinate occasion. The propositions are anomalous. Here is a composite that offers its own topical program and does not recapitulate the Halakhah alongside the recapitulation of the Mishnah - a picture o f the Mishnah that might have been.

I list only narratives that follow the pattern o f a thesis, antithesis, synthesis o r movement to a climax. I d o not list as formally anomalous legal precedents the narrative settings for sayings, for I regard those formulations as integral to the Mishnah's formal program o f Halakhic exposition and analysis.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism MISHNAH TAANIT MISHNAH TAANIT 3:s On account of every sort of public trouble (may it not happen) do they sound the shofar, except for an excess of rain. M'SH S: They said to Honi, the circle drawer, "'Pray for rain."' He said to them, "'Go and take in the clay ovens used for Passover, so that they not soften [in the rain which is coming."' He prayed, but it did not rain. What did he do? He drew a circle and stood in the middle of it and said before Him, "'Lord of the world! Your children have turned to me, for before you I am like a member of the family. I swear by your great name - I'm simply not moving from here until you take pity on your children!'" It began to rain drop by drop. He said, "'This is not what 1wanted, but rain for filling up cisterns, pits, and caverns."' It began to rain violently. He said, "'This is not what 1wanted, but rain of good will, blessing, and graciousness. "' Now it rained the right way, until Israelites had to flee from Jerusalem up to the Temple Mount because of the rain. Now they came and said to him, "'Just as you prayed for it to rain, now pray for it to go away."' He said to them, "'Go, see whether the stone of the strayers is disappeared. "' Simeon b. Shatah said to him, "'If you were not Honi, I should decree a ban of excommunication against you. But what am I going to do to you? For you importune before the Omnipresent, so he does what you want, like a son who importunes his father, so he does what he wants. "'Concerning you Scripture says, Let your father and your mother be glad, and let her that bore you rejoice (Prov. 23:25)."'

A singleton such as this hardly points to a narrative program, let alone the preparation o f collections o f narratives. VIll.

ANOMALOUS MISHNAH-TRACTATES: EDUYYOT,TAMID, MIDDOTAND QINNIM

Mishnah-Tractate Eduyyot is the only Halakhic tractate that systematically ignores the topical-logical principle o f organization. It sets forth topical miscellanies collected in the name o f particular authorities, Shammai and the House o f Shammai and Hillel and the House o f Hillel, for example. The individual compositions are assembled in accord with the sages to whom they are attributed and the characteristics of rulings o f said sayings.

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefra MISHNAH EDUYYOT MISHNAH EDUYYOT 1:12 These are subjects in which the House of Hillel reverted and accepted the teaching of the House of Shammai: The woman who came back from overseas and said, "'My husband has died,"' may remarry. [If she said], "'My husband has died,"' she may enter into levirate marriage. And the House of Hillel say, "'We heard this rule only in the case of a woman who comes back from the grain harvest alone [in which case the husband is assumed to have died of sunstroke."' The House of Shammai said to them, "'The same rule applies to the woman who comes back from the grain harvest, from the olive cutting, or from abroad. They spoke of the grain harvest only because of the case in hand."' The House of Hillel reverted and accepted the teaching of the House of Shammai. The House of Shammai say, "'She may remarry and collect her marriage settlement."' And the House of Hillel say, "'She may remarry, but she may not collect her marriage settlement."' Said to them the House of Shammai, "'You have permitted the matter involving sexual relations, which is subject to a severe rule. Will you not now permit the matter involving property, which is subject to a much more lenient rule?"' Said to them the House of Hillel, "'But we find that the brothers do not take over the estate [of the deceased] on the basis of her testimony. "' Said to them the House of Shammai, "'But do we not learn the following from the contract covering her marriage settlement: 'If you marry another person, you will collect what is written over to you [in this document].' The House of Hillel reverted and accepted the teaching of the House of Shammai.

Other groups that cohere not by topic alone but by the fixed attributions to named sages are Hananiah prefect of the priests, 2: 1-3, Ishmael, 2:4-5, Three things did they say before R. Aqiba, two in the name of R. Eliezer and one in the name of R. Joshua, 2:7, Three rulings did R. Aqiba state. Concerning two of them they concurred with him, and concerning one of them they did not concur with him 2:8, Four matters of doubt does R. Joshua declare unclean, and do sages declare clean 3:7, Four matters does Rabban Gamaliel declare unclean, and do sages declare clean, 3:9. In these things the House of Shammai adopted the more lenient, and the House of Hillel the more stringent ruling 4: 1. The entire tractate assembles compositions in accord with principles of composition that derive fro attributions and the traits of statements assembled in a given name,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

22

Presenting narratives as the medium for laws, Tamid and Middot work out problems and themes in connection with the Temple and its offerings. Qinnim lays out theoretical problems in the same context. The tractates devoted to Temple law differ from the larger number of Mishnah-tractates in the same general area because they present few if any disputes, but they remain within the analyticaltopical framework of the Mishnah-tractates.

Up to this point I have treated the conventional Mishnah as the model for the corpus of lost documents adumbrated by the Mishnah. But the Mishnah contains work of other-than-Halakhic exegesis of Scripture. Laws sponsored by a particular sage, moreover, form only one theoretical, missing document hinted at by the extant Mishnah. There is another model for a document that is now lost to us but toward which compositions of the Mishnah point: collections of exegetical proofs for narrative and theological propositions. I define the lost compilation in the general category of Midrash Aggadah. That is the outcome of M. Sotah 5:2ff, which joins Halakhic proofs to Aggadic ones: SOTAH 5:2 MISHNAH I.

A.

B.

11. A.

111 A.

D.

On that day did R. Aqiba expound as follows: "'And every earthen vessel whereunto any of them falls, whatsoever is in it conveys uncleanness (Lev. 11:33). It does not say, ... will be unclean but will convey uncleanness -that is, to impart uncleanness to other things. "'Thus has Scripture taught concerning a loaf of bread unclean in the second remove, that it imparts uncleanness in the third remove [to a loaf of bread with which it comes into contact] .,, MISHNAH SOTAH 5:3 On that day did R. Aqiba expound as follows: "'And you shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits . . . (Num . 35:s). And another Scripture says, From the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about (Num. 35:4). MISHNAH SOTAH 5:4 On that day did R. Aqiba expound as follows: "'Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the Lord and spoke saying, (Ex. 15:l). "'It thereby teaches that the Israelites responded word by word after Moses,

MISHNAH SOTAH 5:s A.

B.

On that day did R. Joshua b. Hurqanos expound as follows: "'Job served the Holy One, blessed be He, only out of love, "'since it is said, Though he slay me, yet will I wait for him (Job

13:15).

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefla

23

Invoking the formula "'On that day,"' Aqiba has two legal rulings and one theological proposition, with the balance of two and two attained with the addition of Joshua. The composite of Halakhic and theological propositions shows us an unconventional mode of collecting compositions and forming them into composites. What theory of cogency makes this set cohere is the fixed formula "'on that day,"' and we can posit the theory that events of a single occasion, however diverse, form a memory-unit. So a register of diverse events on a given day - both Halakhic and Aggadic or theological -can sustain a documentary construction. A writer who sat down to compose a collection of expositions would enjoy a wide range of possibilities for topics and rhetorical models. The lost documents of Rabbinic Judaism adumbrated by the Mishnah encompass composites like the Mishnah but not wholly like the Mishnah as well as composites wholly not like the Mishnah. The Mishnah's rhetorical formalization encompasses Aggadic propositions as well as the Mishnah's normative Halakhic ones. It also encompasses exegetical exercises as well as topical expositions. So the Mishnah as we know it points toward anomalous law codes, shaped in three possible ways. They may be formed around [I] rhetorical patterns, [2] abstract principles, and [3] the names of particular sages - and all three rhetorical forms define possibilities for the construction of Mishnah-like composites.

Always published along with the Mishnah but autonomous of that document in all differentiating formal and programmatic attributes, tractate Abot does not respond to the Mishnah. Tractate Abot is a handbook of wise sayings for disciples of sages, especially those involved in administration of the law. These sayings, miscellaneous in character, are assigned to named authorities. The rhetoric of The Fathers is dictated by aphoristic style, producing wise sayings presented as lists. The topic concerns right conduct with God, society, and self. The list holds together because everything on it is part of a chain of formulation and transmission - tradition - beginning with Moses on Sinai. So one sentence joins the next because all the sentences enjoy the same status, that imparted by the Torah. Tractate Abot bears no formal, or substantive, relationship to the Mishnah. Its rhetoric, logic of coherent discourse, and topic mark the document as utterly anomalous in Rabbinic literature; it has no parallel. A catalogue ofthe forms ofThe Fathers produces only two rhetorical patterns, name+attributive ("'says'")+apophthegm, and the list. The document as a whole is formally simple and repetitive, which is one striking way of producing a uniform and cogent message. There is no anomalous composition in tractate Abot. It does not hint at the presence of an unrealized program.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

I examine the Tosefta's anomalous compositions in the same categorical fiamework as the Mishnah's. Let me explain why. A huge supplement to the Mishnah, 1 estimate it at four times larger than the document it amplifies, the Tosefta, ca. 300, exhibits none of the documentary traits that mark as autonomous the other Rabbinic writings. The Tosefta contains three kinds of writings. [I] The first consists of verbatim citations and then glosses of sentences of the Mishnah. [2] The second is made up of freestanding statements that complement the sense of the Mishnah but do not cite a Mishnah-paragraph verbatim. These statements can be filly understood only in dialogue with the Mishnah's counterpart. [3] The third comprises freestanding, autonomous statements, formulated in the manner of the Mishnah but filly comprehensible on their own. The indicative traits of the document are these: Rhetoric: Replicating the forms of the Mishnah, the Tosefta exhibits no rhetorical program distinctive to itself. The close adherence to the Mishnah's formal protocol is shown by a simple fact. Except for passages in which the Mishnah is briefly cited, so the character of what follows as a gloss is clear, differentiating a passage that occurs only in the Tosefta from a corresponding one in the Mishnah is not readily accomplished. Logic of Coherent Discourse: The Tosefta depends upon the Mishnah in yet another way. Its whole redactional framework, tractates and subdivisions alike, depends upon the Mishnah's. Nonetheless, the Tosefta's compilers do introduce a second principle of organization, which, in conversation with the Mishnah, yields a coherent pattern that governs the sequence of statements. As noted earlier, first, they follow the general outline of the Mishnah's treatment of a topic. Accordingly, if we set up a block of materials in the Tosefta side-by-side with a corresponding block of those of the Mishnah, we should discern roughly the same order of discourse. But, second, the Tosefla's arrangers also lay out their materials in accord with their own types. That is to say, they will tend (1) to keep as a group passages that cite and then comment upon the actual words of the Mishnah's base-passage, then (2) to present passages that amplify in the Tosefta's own words opinions filly spelled out only in response to the Mishnah's statements, and, finally, (3) to give at the end, and as a group, wholly independent and autonomous sayings and constructions of such sayings. That redactional pattern may be shown only to be a tendency, a set of notuncommon policies and preferences, not a fixed rule. But when we ask how the Tosefia's editors arranged their materials, it is not wholly accurate to answer that they follow the plan of the Mishnah's counterparts. There will be some attention,

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta

25

also, to the taxonomic traits of the units of discourse of which the Tosefta itself is constructed. That is why two distinct editorial principles come into play in explaining the arrangement of the whole. Topical Program The Tosefta, as is already clear, stands nearly entirely within the circle of the Mishnah's interests, rarely asking questions about topics omitted altogether by the Mishnah's authors, always following the topical decisions on what to discuss as laid down by the founders of the whole. One cannot write about the Tosefta's theology or law, as though these constituted a system susceptible of description and interpretation independent of the Mishnah's system. At the same time, the exegetes ofthe Mishnah, in the Tosefta, and in the two Talmuds, stand apart from, and later than, the authors of the Mishnah itself. Accordingly, the exegetes systematically say whatever they wish to say by attaching their ideas to a document earlier than their own, and by making the principal document say what they wish to contribute. Wholly depending upon the Mishnah for its rhetoric, topical program, and logic of coherent discourse, the Tosefta is like a vine on the Mishnah's trellis. It has no structure of its own but cites and glosses a passage of the Mishnah, not differentiating its forms from those of the cited passage. Only seldom -for somewhat under a sixth of the whole of its volume - does the Tosefta present a statement that may be interpreted entirely independent of the Mishnah's counterpart (if any). The Tosefia covers nearly the whole of the Mishnah's program but has none of its own. That is, there is no tractate of the Tosefla that is devoted to a topic not set forth also by the Mishnah. We shall treat the Tosefla as we did the Mishnah, identifying anomalous writings as models for lost documents of Rabbinic Judaism. The editors or compilers of the Tosefta arranged their materials in accord with two principles, and these govern the order ofthe Tosefta's statements in correspondence to the Mishnah's. First come statements that cite what the Mishnah's sentences say, and this ordinarily will occur in the topical expository order of the Mishnah's statements. Second, in general Mishnah-citation and gloss will be succeeded by Mishnah-amplification, which is to say, sentences that do not cite the Mishnah's corresponding ones, but that cannot be understood without reference to the Mishnah's rule or sense. The first two kinds of statements are the ones that cannot be fully understood without knowledge of the Mishnah, which defines their context. Third in sequence, commonly, will be the small number of freestanding statements, which can be wholly understood on their own and without appeal to the sense or principle of the corresponding Mishnah-passage; and in some few cases, these compositions and even composites will have no parallel in the Mishnah at all. Autonomous statements require attention in their own right. These comprise paragraphs that make their own point and can be fully understood in their own terms. These freestanding materials are of two kinds. First, some autonomous materials work on topics important to a passage in the Mishnah and are placed by Tosefta's fiamers in a position corresponding to the thematic parallel in the Mishnah.

26

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

What marks these materials as autonomous is that, while they intersect with the Mishnah's topic, their interest in that topic bears no point in common with the Mishnah's treatment of the same topic. A second criterion, which is complementary, is that we can understand what follows without referring to the Mishnah for any purpose. The second type of autonomous materials addresses topics omitted in the Mishnah, and that type is included only because, in the Mishnah, there may be a tangential reference to the topic treated by Tosefta's composition. The criterion of classification, then, is even simpler than that governing the tirst type. The Tosefta's authorship has collected this kind of material we know not where. It can have been composed in the same period as the writing of the Mishnah.

To attain the simplest possible results I treat the Tosefta as a continuation of the Mishnah. I rely upon the criteria established for t he norm of the Mishnah to identify what in the Tosefta points to a lost document. That uniform criterion for anomalies pointing to lost compilations permits us to sidestep a range of problems only marginally relevant to our inquiry.

The Tosefta complements the Mishnah's corpus of anomalous compositions and composites that point to a lost document. It does also presents a new type of anomalous composition. We continue our survey of anomalous compositions that point to lost documents, TOSEITA EDUYYOT 1:1 When sages came together in the vineyard at Yabneh, they said, "'The time is coming at which a person will go looking for a teaching of Torah and will not find it, B. "'a teaching of scribes and will not find it, C. "'since it is said, Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord God, when I will send afamine on the land; not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water: but ofhearing the words of the Lord. They shall wander from sea to sea and from north to east, they shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the Lord, but they shall not find it (Amos 8: 12). D. 'The word of the Lord refers to prophecy. E. ' "The word of the Lord refers to [knowledge ofl the end. F. ' "The word ofthe Lord means that not one word of the Torah is the same as another word of the Torah."' G They said, "'Let us begin from Hillel and from Shammai.'" A.

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta Shammai says, '"Dough made from a qab offlour is liablefor a dough offering. "' 1. And Hillel says, '/Dough made from two qabs. "' J. And sages say, "'It is not in accord with the opinion of this party nor in accord with the opinion of that party, but Dough madefiom a qab and a halfofjlour is liable to the dough-offering "' [ M . Ed. 1 :2A-Dl, K. as it is said, Thefirst ofyour kneading (Num. 15:20). H.

The first instance presents a proposition sustained by an exegesis of a first of Scripture. The connection between Amos 8: 12 and the dispute in Hullin is not explicit. What kind of document is contemplated is not obvious. The citation of the law derives from the Mishnah and so we must assume that the contemplated document is the Mishnah. G is the key that links the opening composition to the articulated statement of the law, Six matters does R. 'Aqiba declare unclean and do sages declare clean: a dead creeping thing and a frog in the public way, and so too an olive's bulk of a corpse and an olive's bulk of carrion, a bonefiom a corpse and a bone from carrion, a clump of dirt of clean ground, a clump of dirtfrom a grave-area, a clump of dirt of clean ground, a clump of dirt of the land of the gentiles, two paths, one unclean and one clean - [and one does not know which one of them he touched, moved, or in which he walked] R. 'Aqiba declares the man unclean, and sages declare the man clean [ M . Toh. 5:1]. Six matters of doubt does R. 'Aqiba declare unclean, and do sages declare clean: a mixture of materials from a backbone and skull deriving from two different corpses, a quarter-log of blood deriving from two different corpses, a quarter-qab of bones from two different corpses, limbs cut from two different corpses R. 'Aqiba declares unclean. And sages declare clean.

The composite cites the Mishnah and then imitates its formal program. A.

B. C.

TOSEFTA EDUYYOT 2:l Four things does R. Eliezer declare clean and do sages declare unclean: The comb of the cooler R. Eliezer says, "'It is not made unclean through its contained airspace as is the case with a clay utensil-. "'

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

28

D. And sages say, "lt is made unclean through its contained E. F. G H. I. J. K. L. M. N.

A. B. C.

airspace "' [M, Kel. 2:8]. The shelfof bakers which theyfied with a nail, orjoined with a joist or a beam R. Eliezer declares clean. And sages declare unclean [M. Kel. 15:2]. A shoe on the last R. Eliezer declares clean. And sages declare unclean [M. Kel. 26:4]. If one sliced into rings -an oven andput sand between each ringR. Eliezer declares clean. And sages declare unclean [M. Kel. 5:10]. Now this was called the 'oven of 'Akhenai,' on account of which disputes became many in Israel. TOSEFTA EDUYYOT 2:2 Twenty -four rulings of the lenient ones of the House of Shammai and the strict ones of the House of Hillel. The House of Shammai say, "'A man does not impose a vow of a Nazirite upon his son."' And the House of Hillel say, "'A man does impose the vow of a Nazirite upon his son"' [T. Nez. 3: 171.

The Tosefta presents nothing new. xlv. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE TOSEFTA 121 COMPOSITES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

The Tosefta does not innovate in types of anomalous composites but presents firther examples of what might belong in the sort of composite indicated here. These compositions follow the pattern of the Mishnah's program and were written for the Tosefta in the context of the Tosefta's Mishnah-commentary in mind. They do not point to the preparation of a document independent of the existing canonical composites but fit well into the existing composites, A.

B. C. D. E.

A.

TOSEFTA BABAQAMMA 7:3 Five matters did Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai say in the manner of a homer: "'Why was Israel exiled to Babylonia, rather than to any other country? Because the house of Abraham came from there. "'To what may the matter be likened? To a woman who cuckolded her husband. "'Now where does he send her? "'He sends her back to her father's house."' TOSEFTA BABA QAMMA 7:4 "'Of the first tablets it is said, And the tablets were the work of God

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefia "'But as to the second, the tablets were the work of Moses, as it is said, And the writing was the writing of God (Ex. 32: 16). "'To what may the matter be likened? To a mortal king who betroths a certain woman. He brings the scribe, ink, quill, document, and witnesses. "'But pfl she cuckolded him, she has to supply everything [needed for the writing of the writ of divorce]. "'It is enough for her if the king merely supplies his signature for recognition [and validation]."' TOSEFTA BABAQAMMA 7:s "'Behold, [Scripture] says, "'When the prince sins (Lev. 4:22) happy is the generation whose prince brings a sin-offering [even] for his unwitting sin! "'And it says, And his master willpierce his ear with an awl (Ex. 21:6). '"On what account is the ear among all the limbs designated to be pierced? "'Because it heard from Mount Sinai, For unto me are the children of Israel slaves, they are my slaves (Lev. 25:55). "'Yet [the ear] broke off itself the yoke of Heaven and took upon itself the rule of the yoke of mortal man. "'Therefore Scripture says, 'Let the ear come and be pierced, for it has not observed [the commandment which] it heard."" TOSEFTA BABAQAMMA 7:6 "'Another matter: He did not wish to be enslaved to his [true] master. Therefore let him come and be enslaved [even] to his daughters. "'And it says, An altar of stones, you shall not lip up iron over them (Deut. 275). "'On what account is iron, of all metals, selected to be declared invalid [for use in the building of the altar]? "'Because the sword is suitable to be made from it. "'The sword is a sign of punishment, and the altar is a sign of atonement. "'Something which is a sign of punishment do they keep away from something which is a sign of atonement. "'And lol this matter yields an argument a fortiori: "'Stones, which do not see, hear, or speak - because they bring atonement between Israel and their Father in Heaven, Scripture says, You shall not lift up iron over them "'sons of Torah, who are an atonement for the world -how much the more should any one of all those forces of injury [which are in the world] not come near unto them! "' TOSEFTA BABAQAMMA 7-7 '"Lo, it says, Whole stones shouldyou use to build the altar of the Lord your God (Deut. 27:6) - 'Stones which make whole [the

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism bond] between Israel and their Father in heaven,' the Omnipresent has said, 'should be whole before me.' "'Sons of Torah, which are whole for all time - all the more so that they should be deemed whole [and not wanting] before the Omnipresent. "' TOSEFTA BABAQAMMA 7:s There are seven kinds of thieves. The first among all of them is the one who deceives people. He who presses his fellow to come as his guest but does not intend to receive him properly. He who overwhelms him with gifts and knows concerning him that he will not accept them. He who opens for someone jars of wine which already had been sold to a storekeeper. He who falsifies measures. He who pads the scales. He who mixes up seeds of St. John's bread in seeds of fenugreek, and vinegar m oil, even though they have said, oil does not mix with anything; therefore they use it for anointing kings. And not only so, but they hold him culpable as if he [supposed he] were able to deceive the Most High and fool [Him]. He who deceives people is called a thief, and it is said, So Absalom stole the hearts of the men of lsrael(I1 Sam. 15:6). Who is the greater? The thief or the one who is the victim? One must say it is the one who is the victim, who was well aware that he was the victim of thievery but who kept silent.

The expositions oftopics in the manner of the Homer explains the facts of Scripture's narrative, mixing Halakhic with Aggadic topics. The compositionshave joined together a common approach to the interpretation of Scripture with diverse topics. The mixing of Halakhic with Aggadic problems is not uncommon, but the formal program that governs does not follow a distinctive pattern. The program involves a statement of a fact that forms a paradox, and invites a simile or a metaphor. The collection of a set of parables for a composite-document of parabolic lessons forms a strong candidate for a place on t he list of lost documents. TOSEFTA BERAKHOT 4: 16 M'SH B: R. Tarfon was sitting in the shade of a dovecote on a Sabbath afternoon. B. They [attendants] brought before him a pail of cool water. C. He said to his students, "'One who drinks water to quench his thirst - what benediction does he recite?"' [cf. M. Ber. 6:8] D. They said to him, "'Teach us, our master."' E. He said to them, "'[Praised be Thou, 0 Lord,] Creator of creatures and their needs."' A.

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta He said to them, "'May 1 inquire [into the meaning of Scripture]?"' They said to him, "'Teach us, our master."' He said to them, "'Behold Scripture states, Then they [Joseph's brothers] saw a caravan oflshmaelites coming From Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt (Gen. 37:25). Now it is customary for Arabs to carry only foul-smelling skins with resin. "'But [God saw to it that] they put that righteous man [Joseph] among [sweet-smelling and] desirable things. "'And may we not reason a fortiori: if, when God is angry at the righteous, he has mercy on them, when he is disposed to be merciful, how much more so [does he have mercy on them]! TOSEFTA BERAKHOT 4: 17 "'Similarly, They drew near and they carried them [the corpses of Nadab and Abihu] in their coats out of the camp (Lev. 10:5). "'And may we not reason a fortiori: if, when God is angry at the righteous, [their treatment is] such, when he is disposed to be merciful, how much more so [is he mindful of their honor]! "'Similarly, The lion had not eaten the body [of the disobedient man of God from Judah] or torn the ass (I Kings 13:28). "'And may we not reason a fortiori: if, when God is angry at the righteous, and he has mercy on them, when he is disposed to be merciful, how much more so [does he have mercy on them]!"' He [Tarfon] said, "'May 1 inquire [into the meaning of Scripture]?"' They [his students] said to him, "'Teach us, our master."' He said to them, "'Why did Judah merit [that] the kingship [be assigned by God to his tribe]?"' [Lieberman supplies: They said to him,] "'Because he confessed [in the incident] concerning Tamar"' [cf. Gen 34:26]. Here is another anomalous composition, joining Halakhic with Aggadic problems. What blessing is recited is a Halakhic issue and the explanation of Judah's priority an Aggadic one. But the form is not uniform, s o a sage writing compositions for the contemplated document - Halakhic and Aggadic pairs - will have found slight guidance in the conventions established for the missing composite, and w e cannot describe the plan that governed. The one rule that w e can posit is this: a collection ofAggadic and Halakhic expositions was planned but the plan did not cover the formal traits o f the collection. XV.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE TOSEFTA 131 COMPOSITES OF COMPOSITIONS

JOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON PROPOSITION OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

The Tosefta contains a number of composites formed by the repetition o f a pattern but not by reference to a common topic. A collection o f Halakhic propo-

32

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

sitions on a variety of subjects but sharing patterned language represents no innovation in the context of the Mishnah. TOSEFTA MEGILLAH 1:11 There is no difference between an olive's bulk of corpse-matter and a [whole] corpse, except for an olive's bulk of corpse-matter, an opening of a handbreadth [suffices to permit the exit of the corpse-uncleanness], while for a corpse, an opening of four handbreadths [is required for the exit of corpse-uncleanness] [cf. M. Oh. 3:6]. TOSEFTA MEGILLAH 1: 12 There is no difference between an olive's bulk of corpse-matter and a bone the size of a barley-seed, except in regard to [the former's capacity to impart] uncleanness in a Tent [which the latter does not have]. TOSEFTA MEGILLAH 1: 13 There is no difference between a limb of a corpse and a limb of a living being, except that in the case of a limb of a corpse, flesh which is separated from it is unclean, while in the case of a limb of a living being, flesh which is separated from it is clean. TOSEFTA MEGILLAH 1:14 There is no difference between a Zab who suffers two appearances offlux and one who suffers three, except [ M . Meg. 1 :7A]. There is no difference between a male Zab and a female Zab, except that the male Zab requires entry into spring water [for his purification], [while] a female Zab does not require entry into spring water [for her purification]. TOSEFTA MEGILLAH: 15 There is no difference between a female Zab and a woman in her menstrual period, except for an offering [which is required of the former but not the latter as part of the process of purification]. There is no difference between a female Zab and a woman who has given birth except for the bringing of an offering [in which case, the female Zab who is poor fulfills her obligation with a bird-offering, but the rich woman after childbirth may not suffice with a mere bird]. There is no difference between a menstruating woman and a woman awaiting day against day for the counting of seven days alone [required of the former]. TOSEFTA MEGILLAH 1: 16 There is no difference between a house which has been shut up [for examination for signs of Sara ' at] and one which has been certified [as suffering Sara 'at],

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosejia B.

except that a house which has been shut up imparts uncleanness [only] on its inside, while one which has been certified imparts uncleanness both on its inside and on its outside. E. There is no difference between vows and freewill-offerings [M. Meg. 1 :6B], F. except that he who sanctifies [objects] by vow for the upkeep of the temple -house which were lost is liable for their replacement, G [while if he does so] as freewill-offerings, he repays only the value of deriving benefit from them alone [that is, how much a person is willing to pay for the privilege of bringing an offering which he is not obliged to bring and that sum does he hand over for the upkeep of the Temple-house]. T. MECILLAH 1:17 A. There is no difference between a high place belonging to an individual and a high place belonging to the community, B. except that whatever is offered infulfillment of a vow or afreewill offering may be offered on a high place of an individual, C. while whatever not is offered in fulfillment of a vow or as a freewill offering may be offered on a high place of the community. D. There is no difference between Shilo and Jerusalem [M. Meg. 1: 1 fA1, E. except that in Shilo the building was made of stone at the foundation, but of veils above, while in Jerusalem, it was made of stone at the foundations, and of beams above. 1:18 T. MECILLAH A. There is no difference between a priest who is anointed with anointingoil who presently is in service and a priest who is anointed who [served] in the past, B. except for the requirement [applying solely to the former to bring] a bullock on the Day of Atonement and the tenth-ephah [of fine flour]. C. There is no difference between a priest consecrated by many garments who presently is in service and a priestly consecrated by many garments who [served] in the past, D. except for the bullock on the Day of Atonement and the tenthephah [of fine floud [applying solely to the former] [cf. M. Meg. 1:9B]. T. MEGILLAH 1:19 A. There is no difference between a priest who is anointed, who is presently in service, and one who wears many garments, who is presently in service, except in the bullock which is offered for unwitting transgression ofan)- of the commandments [M Meg. 1 :9A]. B. There is no difference between a priest who is anointed who served in the past and one who wears many garments who served in the past,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

except for the bullock on the Day of Atonement and the tenthephah [of fine flour]. T. MEGILLAH 1:20 A. There is no difference between a priest who wears many garments, who is in service, and a priest who is anointed, who [sewed] in the Past, B. except for the bullock of the Day of Atonement and the tenthephah [of fine flour]. T. MEGILLAH I:L A. There is no difference between a priest who is anointed, who is presently in service, and a priest who wears many garments, who [served] in the past, B. except for the bullock of the Day of Atonement, the tenth-ephah [of fine flour], and the bullock which is offered for the unwitting transgression of any of the commandments. C.

"'There is no difference except"' forms a fine mnemonic and provides a pattern for a diverse collection of laws on a variety of topics that were to be memorized without regard to the logic that inheres in the law. The Mishnah afforded a place for the model, and writing for mnemonic purposes was underway for the Mishnah as much as for the Tosefta. TOSEFTA ARAKHIN 1:6 The bullocks of the Festival are not less than seven nor more than fourteen. There is no opening for a woman who misses count of her period less than seven or more than seventeen days. There is no less time a time of shutting up in the case ofnegaim than one week or more than three week... TOSEFTA ARAKHIN 1:7 They do not count less thanfour full months in the year. I To sages it never appeared necessary to add la day to more than eight [ M . Ar. 2:2A]. At no time did more than six full months appear in one year after another. TOSEFTA ARAKHIN 1:s In a locale in which they do not know the [correct] time of a month, they follow the custom of treating one as full and one as not full [sequentially]. And so in the communities of the Exiles they follow the custom of treating one as full and one not as full. They treated Tarnmuz in its time and Ab as full. But afterward it became known to them that Ab [had appeared] in its proper time. They left off and counted from then onward one as full and one as not full.

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefra A.

TOSEFTA ARAKHIN 1:9 'Aseret sometimes coincides with the fifth, sometimes with the sixth, and sometimes with the seven [of Sivan], neither less nor more.

The never less than or more than pattern covers diverse topics and does not invoke a distinctive logic. I see n o generative logic contained within the formalized language, comparable to the paradox captured in Mishnah and Tosefta Parah. The planning o f a document that built its collection on formal patterns still demanded a substantive and not merely a formal pattern. TOSEFTA PARAH 8: 1 There is thus that which says, "'Those things which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you [delete: did not] made me unclean .'" How so? A defective vessel which is full of clean liquid, with an unclean defective vessel overturned on its mouth -the liquid flowed from the lower one and was made unclean in the airspace of the upper one and went back, rendering the lower one unclean. Lo, this one says, "'That which made you unclean did not make me unclean, but you made me unclean."S3 TOSEFTA PARAH 8:2 A Zab who sat on an immovable stone - the food and liquid which are under it are clean. Something on which to lie or on which to sit which is under it is unclean . Lo, this [food, liquid] says, "'That which made you [something for Lying etc.] unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean."' R. Judah says, "'There is thus that which says, 'The things which make the things unclean which make you unclean cannot make me unclean, but you made me unclean.' "'How so? "'A bowl which is full ofclean liquid, and its outer side is unclean. And it is placed on top of a table, and a loaf of [bread of] heaveoffering, wrapped up, is on top of the table. [If] -he liquid flowed from inside it [the bowl] and touched its outer part, it [the liquid] is made unclean and renders the table unclean, and the table goes and renders the loaf unclean. "'Lo, this says, 'That which could make the things unclean which made you unclean could not have made me unclean, but you made me unclean."" TOSEFTA PARAH 8:3 There is thus that which says, "'He made me unclean, and I made him unclean."'

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism How so? A tebul yom who had in his hand flour of heave-offering and unconsecrated liquid which is clean, and he mixed this with thatthey are unclean. Lo, this one says, "'He made me unclean, and 1made him unclean."' A pot which is full of clean liquid, and unclean lupines of a size smaller than an egg are placed inside it. [If] they swell up and so are made into the size of an egg, they are unclean. Lo, this one says, "'He made me unclean, and t made him unclean.'" A clean person on the head and greater part of whom fell three logs of drawn water, even if he is clean, and they are clean, is made unclean and makes them unclean. Lo, this one says, "'He made me unclean, and I made him unclean."' TOSEFTA PARAH 8:4 There is thus that which says, "'He made me unclean, and I made him clean."' How so? An [unclean] patch which one patched on the basket renders unclean at one remove and renders unfit at one remove. [If one separated it from the basket, the basket renders unclean at one remove and renders unfit at one remove, and the patch is clean. Lo, this one says, "'He made me unclean, and 1made him clean."' TOSEFTA PARAH 8:s There is thus that which says, "'1 made him clean, and 1 made him unclean"' [Better: he made me . . . 1. How so? A pool which contains exactly forty se 'ahs of water - one went down and immersed in it- he is clean. And the pool is unclean [= unfit]. Lo, this one says, "'I made him clean, and he made me unclean."' TOSEFTA PARAH8:6 There is thus a case in which he says, "'He made me clean, and I made him clean."' How so? A box which is unclean with corpse uncleanness, and one brought a nail which is unclean and fastened it [the box] with it [the nail, onto a wall] The box is clean, and the nail is clean. Lo, this one says, "'He made me clean, and 1 made him clean."' A clean person who sprinkled the unclean person - the one who sprinkles is clean, and the unclean person is clean. Lo, this one says, "'He made me clean, and 1 made him clean."' Three pools - in this one are twenty [se 'ahs of water], and in this one are twenty [of valid water], and in this one are twenty se 'ahs of drawn water- and that holding drawn water was at the side [ifl three people went down and immersed in them, and they [the three pools] were mixed together -

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta J. K.

the pools are clean, and those that immerse in them are clean. Lo, this one says, "'I purified him, and he purified me."'

The composite is a fine example of a single principle expressed through a variety of miscellaneous topical cases, here a recurrent paradox that is embedded in the facts of the law. The Halakhah is expounded in terms of its governing principle - the indicated anomaly - and covers a broad range of particular topics. This is a familiar model for documentary writing. XVI.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE TOSEFTA 141 NARRATIVES

An awkward narrative omits the centerpiece of the story but does show us the character of a biographical tale. T. HACICAH 2:l They do not expound upon the laws of prohibited relationships [Lev. 181 before three persons, but they do expound them before two; or about the Works of Creation before two but they do expound them before one; or about the Chariot [Ez. I] before one, unless he was a sage land understands ofhis own knowledge [ M . Hag. 2:IA-B]. M'SH B: Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai was riding on an ass, and R. Eleazar b. 'Arakh was driving the ass from behind He [Eleazar] said to him, "'Rabbi, repeat for me a chapter of the works of the Chariot."' He said to him, "'Have I not ruled for you to begin with that they do not repeat [the tradition] concerning the Chariot for an individual, unless he was a sage and understands of his own knowledge. ' " He said to him, "'Now may I lay matters out before you?"' He said to him, "'Say on."' R. Eleazar b. 'Arakh commenced and expounded concerning the works of the Chariot. Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai got off his ass, wrapped himself in his cloak, and the two of them sat down on a rock under an olive tree: and [Eleazar] laid matters out before him. [Yohanan] got up and kissed him on his head and said to him "'Blessed be the Lord, God of Israel, who gave to Abraham, our father, a son who knows how to understand and expound upon the glory of his father who is in heaven. "'Some preach nicely but do not practice nicely, or practice nicely but do not preach nicely. "'Eleazar b. 'Arakh preaches nicely and practices nicely. "'Happy are you, 0 Abraham, our father, for Eleazar b. 'Arakh has gone forth from your loins,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Q.

"'who knows how to understand and expound upon the glory of his Father who is in heaven."'

A collection of narratives hides the substance of what was said and yields a narrative setting for a topical exposition.

TOSEFTA HORAYOT 2:s M'SH S: R. Joshua went [to Rome], and they told him, "'There is here a child from Jerusalem with beautiful eyes and a handsome face, and he is in danger of shame. R. Joshua went to look into the matter. When he came to the door, he recited this verse: Who gave up Jacob to the spoiler, and Israel to the robbers (Is. 42:24)?'" 2:6 A. That child answered and said, '"Was it not the Lord against whom we have sinned, in whose ways they would not walk, and whose law they would not obey (Is. 42:24)? "' B. At that instant said R. Joshua, "'1 call to testify against me the heaven and the earth, that I shall not move from this spot until 1 shall redeem this child!'" C. He redeemed him for a huge sum of money and sent him to the Land of Israel. D. And concerning him Scripture has said, Theprecious sons ofZion, worth their weight infine gold, how they are reckoned as earthen pots, the work of a potter k hands (Lam. 4:2). L.

This is a singleton story, lacking a pattern easily recapitulated. It points to no type of document other than a collection of unformed stories about rabbis, and it fits naturally into its present context, TOSEFTA HULLIN 2:24 M'SH B: R. Eliezer was arrested on account of minut. They brought him to court for judgment. B. That hegemon said to him, "'Should an elder of your standing get involved in such things?"' C. He said to him, "'The Judge is reliable in my view"' [I rely upon the Judge]. D. That hegemon supposed that he referred only to him, but he referred only to his Father in heaven. E. He [the hegemon] said to him, "'Since you have deemed me reliable for yourself, so thus I have ruled: Is it possible that these grey hairs should err in such matters? [Obviously not, therefore.] [you are] Dimissus [pardoned]. Lo, you are free of liability.'" F. And when he left court, he was distressed to have been arrested on account of matters of minut. G His disciples came to comfort him, but he did not accept their words of comfort. H. R. 'Aqiba came and said to him, "'Rabbi, May I say something to you so that you will not be distressed?"'

A.

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta 1. J.

K.

L.

39

He said to him, "'Go ahead."' He said to him, "'Perhaps some one of the minim told you something of minut which pleased you."' He said to him, "'By Heaven! You remind me. Once I was strolling in the camp of Sepphoris. I bumped into Jacob of Kefar Sikhnin, and he told me a teaching of minut in the name of Jesus ben Pantiri, and it pleased me. "'So I was arrested on account of matters of minut, for I transgressed the teachings of Torah: Keep your wayfarfrom her and do not go near the door of her house. . . [Prov. 5:8]. "'

What I said about Joshua's story applies to Eliezer's. We recall that the Tosefia is the earliest document to collect stories about sages in particular, the Mishnah's stories focusing on the patriarch and the miracle worker. TOSEFTA KIPPURIM 1:4 Said R. YosC, "'M'sh B: Joseph b. Elim of Sepphoris served in the place of the high priest for one hour. I. "'And from that time onward he was not valid either as a high priest or as an ordinary priest. J. "'When he went forth [from his high priesthood of one hour], he said to the king, 'The bullock and ram which were offered today, to whom do they belong? Are they mine, or are they our high priest's?' K. "'The king knew what to answer him. L. "'He said to him 'Now what's going on, Son of Elim! It is not enough for you that you have served in the place of the high priest for one hour before Him who spoke and brought the world into being. But do you also want to take over the high priesthood for yourself?' M. "'At that moment Ben Elim realized that he had been separated from the priesthood."' H.

The story concerns the priesthood of the Temple, not the life of sages. The next story follows suit and we may wonder whether work was under way on a narrative of the priesthood and the Temple. We note that Temple rites are portrayed in narrative form, as at Mishnah-tractate Parah, Negaim, Menahot, Yoma, and elsewhere. This is the first signal of a program and pattern of a lost document of Rabbinic Judaism. I shall now show that we can define the proposition and the formal program of this lost document. A.

TOSEFTA KIPPURIM 1:12 Ma'aseh B: There were two who got there at the same time, running up the ramp. One shoved the other [M. Yoma 2:2A-B], within four cubits [of the altar]. The other then took out a knife [that had been meant for the rite of sacrifice] and stabbed him in the heart.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism R. Sadoq came and stood on the steps of the porch and said, "'Hear me, 0 brethren of the house of Israel! Lo, Scripture says, 'If in the land which the Lord your God gives you to possess, any one is found slain, lying in the open country, and it is not known who killed him, then your elders and your judges shall come forth, and they shall measure the distance to the cities which are around him that is slain' (Deut. 2 1:1-2). D. "'Come so let us measure to find out for what area it is appropriate to bring the calf, for the sanctuary, or for the courts!'" E. All of them moaned after his speech. F. And afterward the father of the youngster came to them, saying, "'0 brethren of ours! May I be your atonement. His [my] son is still writhing, so the knife has not yet been made unclean."' G This teaches you that the uncleanness of a knife is more grievous to Israelites than murder. And so it says, 'Moreover Manasseh shed very much innocent blood, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to the other' (I 1 Kings 2 1:16). H. On this basis they have said, "'Because of the sin of murder the Presence of God was raised up, and thc: sanctuary was made unclean. "'

B.

C.

The narrative articulates its proposition. It belongs in the collection of narratives of the cult. The pattern of the narratives is clear: identification of a named priestly family, characterized by a particular skill. The family is summoned to share its particular skills and decline. The sages accept the situation and justify it. TOSEFTA~ P P U R I M2:5 The members of the household of Garmu were experts in making Show Bread and they did not want to teach others [how to make it] [cf. M. Yoma 3:11 B]. B. Sages sent and brought experts from Alexandria, in Egypt, who were expert in similar matters, but were not experts in removing it from the oven. C. The members of the house of Garmu would heat the oven on the outside, and it [the loaf of bread] would be removed [on its own] on the inside. D. The experts from Alexandria did not do so. E. And some say this made it get moldy. F. And when the sages learned of the matter, they said, "'The Holy One, blessed be he, created the world only for his own glory, as it is said, 'Everyone that is called by my name and whom I have created for my glory' (Is. 43: 7), [so we might as well pay the tariff].'" G They sent for them, and they did not come until they doubled their former salary.

A.

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta TOSEFTA KIPPURIM 2:6 The members of the house of Abtinas were experts in preparing the incense for producing smoke [cf. M. Yoma 3:l C], and they did not want to teach others how to do so. Sages sent and brought experts from Alexandria, in Egypt, who knew how to concoct spices in much the same way. But they were not experts in making the smoke ascend [as well as the others]. The smoke coming from the incense of the house ofAbtinas would ascend straight as a stick up to the beams, and afterward it scattered in all directions as it came down. That of the Alexandrians would scatter as it came down forthwith [not rising properly]. Now when the sages realized this, they said, "'The Omnipresent has created the world only for his own glory, as it is said, 'The Lord has made everything for his own purpose' (Prov. 16:4).'" Sages sent to them [the members of the house of Abtinas], but they declined to come until the sages doubled their wages. TOSEFTA KIPPURIM 2:7 Said R. 'Aqiba, "'Simeon b. Luga told me, 'A certain child of the sons of their sons and 1 were gathering grass in the field. Then I saw him laugh and cry. ""1 said to him, 'Why did you cry?' ""He said to me, 'Because of the glory of father's house, which has gone into exile.' ""I said to him, 'Then why did you laugh?' ""He said, 'At the end of it all, in time to come, the Holy One, blessed be He, is going to make his descendants rejoice.' ""I said to him, 'Why?' [What did you see to make you think of this?] ""He said to me, 'Asmoke-raiser' in front of me [made me laugh].' ""I said to him, 'Show it to me.' ""He said to me, 'We are subject to an oath not to show it to anyone at all"" Said R. Yohanan b. Nuri, "'One time I was going along the way and an old man came across me and said to me, 'I am a member of the house of Abtinas. ""At the beginning, when the house of father was discreet, they would give their scrolls [containing the prescriptions for frankincense only] to one another. ""Now take it, but be careful about it, since it is a scroll containing a recipe for spices.' "'And when I came and reported the matter before R. 'Aqiba, he said to me, 'From now on it is forbidden to speak ill of these people again."" On the basis of this story, Ben 'Azzai said, "'Yours will they give YOU,

41

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

A.

B. C.

"'by your own name will they call you, "'in your place will they seat you. "'There is no forgetfulness before the Omnipresent. "'No man can touch what is designated for his fellow."' TOSEFTA KIPPURIM 2:s Agdis b. Levi knew a certain mode of singing, and he did not want to teach it to others [M. Yoma 3: 1ID]. Sages said to him, "'Why did you not want to teach it to others?"' He said to them, "'The members of father's house knew that the Temple was destined for destruction, and they did not want to teach their mode of singing to others, so that they should not sing before an idol the way in which they say [song] before the Omnipresent."'

The collection of stories about the Temple underscores the tension between morality and cult, right and rite,. The ritual specialists were experts in preparing the show bread, the incense, and the song. They register a single point, which is that the Temple experts protected their monopoly o f knowledge of cultic procedure. These stories belong in a special collection. They show us the model that governs writings in a document of stories about the virtues of the priesthood. Massekhet kohanim however has been lost,

A.

B. C.

D.

E. F. G

TOSEFTA TA'ANIYOT 2:13 M'SH B: To a certain pious man did they say, "'Pray, so it will rain."' He prayed and it rained. They said to him, "'Just as you have prayed so it would rain, now pray so the rain will B0 away."' He said to them, "'Go and see if a man is standing on Keren Ofel [a high rock] and splashing his foot in the Qidron Brook. [Then] we shall pray that the rain will stop [cf. M. Ta. 3:8]. "'Truly it is certain that the Omnipresent will never again bring a flood to the world, "'for it is said, There will never again be a flood (Gen. 9:ll). "'And it says, For this is like the days of Noah to me: as 1 swore that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth, so I have sworn that 1 will not be angry with you and will not rebuke you (Is. 54:9)."*

T h e Tosefta's version o f the story o f Honi the Circle Drawer is remarkably truncated, a mere allusion to the full version o f the Mishnah. We come to a collection of stories about the heroism o f the pilgrims to Jerusalem.

A.

TOSEFTA TA'ANIYOT 3:7 What was the matter having to do with the families of the PestleSmugglers and the Fig-Pressers [M. Ta. 4:5H]?

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefra

43

Now when the Greek kings set up border-guards on the roads, so that people should not go up to Jerusalem, just as Jeroboam the son of Nebat did, then, whoever was a suitable person and sinfearing of that generation - what did he do? He would take up his first fruits and make a kind of basket and cover them with dried figs, and take the basket with the first-fruits and cover them with a kind of dried figs, and he would put them in a basket and take the basket and a pestle on his shoulder and go up. Now when he would come to that guard, [the guard] would say to him, "'Where are you going?"' He said to him, "'To make these two rings of dried figs into cakes of pressed figs in that press over there, with this pestle which is on my shoulder."' Once he got by that guard, he would prepare a wreath for them and bring them up to Jerusalem. TOSEFTA TA'ANIYOT 3:8 What is the matter having to do with the family of Salmai the Netophathites [cf. I Chron. 2:54: The sons of Salma: Bethlehem, the Netophathites ... ? Now when the Greek kings set up guards on the roads so that the people should not go up to Jerusalem, just as Jeroboam the son of Nebat did, then whoever was a suitable and sin-fearing person of that generation would take two pieces of wood and make them into a kind of ladder and put it on his shoulder and go up. When he came to that guard, [the guard] said to him, "'Where are you going?"' "'To fetch two pigeons from that dovecot over there, with this ladder on my shoulder."' Once he got by that guard, he would dismantle [the pieces of wood of the ladder] and bring them up to Jerusalem. Now because they were prepared to give up their lives for the Torah and for the commandments, therefore they found for themselves a good name and a good memorial forever. And concerning them Scripture says, The memory of a righteous person is for a blessing (Prov. 10:17). But concerning Jeroboam son of Nebat and his allies, Scripture says But the name of the wicked will rot (Prov. 10: 17).

Temple pilgrimage defines the subject of these stories, which register the virtuous wisdom of the pilgrims in times of oppression. These stories fit well into the theoretical composite -a tractate of the conduct of the Temple. I cannot think of an extant document that assembles narratives so effectively or that forms a model for narratives on this or any other topic.

44

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

The Tosefia does not treat Mishnah-tractatesTamid, Middot and Qinnim.

The narratives of the Temple that we have identified share a common topic and manifestly maintain that the priesthood contained righteous men amid corruption. All the Temple stories we find assembled in the Tosefia without regard to the Tosefia's (or the Mishnah's) documentary program fall into the single proposition and definition. The set of narratives of the Temple in general possess no counterpart in the Mishnah. Except for the Honi story they do not comment on or respond to Mishnah-counterparts. These stories for a missing document are not responsive to the Mishnah's formal program. They represent a kind of writing that is independent of the Mishnah both formally and programmatically. But they adhere to a topical program of their own, even to the extent of proving the single point that priestly virtue is rewarded and to be celebrated. Collections of exegeses of Scripture that take up Aggadic as well as Halakhic topics form yet another new type of composite. These encompass the set in the manner ofthe homer (parable) as well as the Teach us, our master collection. It is difficult to adduce these miscellanies as evidence for the preparation of freestanding canonical documents in line with a formal plan.

We have uncovered rules defining documents that did not survive but that nonetheless left their marks here and there in the extant writing. These patterns point to a free-standing collection of stories about the virtues of the Temple and the priesthood. The argument concerning the lost documents is in four parts, Let me summarize the stated allegations as to fact, setting in italics the findings of this chapter: [I] Canonical documents contain anomalous components. We have surveyed the anomalous writings of the Mishnah and Tosefla, allowing the Mishnah to govern the definition of patterns of the Tosefia. [2] These anomalous remnants exhibit indicative traits that differ from those that define the document in which they are embedded. The indicative traits of the lost document hinted at in the Tosefta involve the particular proposition about the virtues of the priesthood portrayed in simple narratives. [3] In some cases we can identify the extant Rabbinic document to which the anomalous composition belongs, in which it conforms to the documentary program - logic, topic, rhetoric. No extant Rabbinic document systematically - as part of its documentary program - portrays the virtues of the Temple and the priesthood

I. Anomalous Compositions in the Mishnah, Abot, and the Tosefta

45

[4] In most cases of anomalous writing, e.g., writing in accord with documentary rules that do not govern in any exant Rabbinic document, we do not possess documents that conform to the particular formal program adumbrated by the remnant in hand. These documentary rules pertain to the topic and proposition of the document and in lesser measure also to the formal or rhetorical program of the missing document. Can we outline the documentary traits of this lost Rabbinic writing? The form is a simple narrative involving narrative of things said and done, he said to them they said to him. The proposition is that the priesthood exhibited corrupt traits but these traits were repudiated by virtuous priests. The stories join together around a common theme andproposition toform an autonomous and coherent statement. No extant Rabbinic writing conforms to this pattern. The sage who sat down to make the case for the virtue of the Temple and its rites planned to circulate free-standing narratives, some of them quite elaborate. But he had no model for the kind of composite of these compositions that would emerge. There was no established Rabbinic pattern for forming composites -whole documents, huge documents. So the stories were told but not then formed into coherent collections. The Rabbinic canon made no provision for collections of stories, only for topical exhibitions or for sequential exegeses of verses of Scripture or whole biblical books. Stories could be told and preserved, but not in the same manner as expositions of propositions of law or systematic exegeses of biblical stories.

Anomalous Compositions in Sifra and the Two Sifr6s

Sifia, a compilation of Midrash-exegeses on the book of Leviticus, forms a massive and systematic statement concerning the definition of the Mishnah in relationship to Scripture. Unlike the other Midrash-compilations that concern the Pentateuch, the two Sifres and Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael, Sifra is cogent, beginning to end. Cogency was achieved not merely formally by provision of proof texts from Scripture for statements of the Mishnah -as in the two Talmuds -but through a profound analysis of the interior structure of thought. It was by means of the critique of practical logic and the rehabilitation of the probative logic of hierarchical classification (accomplished through the form ofListenwissenschaft) in particular that the authorship of Sifra accomplished this remarkable feat of intellect. Three forms dictate the entire rhetorical repertoire of this document. The first, the dialectical, is the demonstration that if we wish to classify things, we must follow the taxa dictated by Scripture rather than relying solely upon the traits of the things we wish to classify. The second, the citation-form, invokes the citation of passages of the Mishnah or the Tosefta in the setting of Scripture. The third is commentary form, in which a phrase of Scripture is followed by an amplificatory clause of some sort. The forms of the document admirably expressed the polemical purpose of the authorship at hand. What they wished to prove was that a taxonomy resting on the traits of things without reference to Scripture 's classifications cannot serve. They further wished to restate the oral Torah in the setting of the written Torah. And, finally, they wished to accomplish the whole by rewriting the written

48

Lost Documents ofRabbinic Judaism

Torah. The dialectical form accomplishes the first purpose, the citation-form the second, and the commentary form the third. I follow the outcome and procedures of Chapter One to identify the indication in Sifra of a selection of lost documents.

Sifra contains no composites of topically miscellaneous statements that are collected in the name of a particular authority. 111.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE SIFRA121 COMPOS~TES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

Sifra contains no composites of sayings on a given principle or theme worked out through diverse topics IV.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE SIFRA131 COMPOSITES OF COMPOSITIONS

JOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON PROPOSITION OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

Sifra contains no composites joined by a common rhetorical pattern but not by a common proposition or topic or the name in common of a particular sage. Sifra is remarkably consistent in its formal program. V.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN THE SIFRA[4] NARRATIVES

I find a single candidate for inclusion here. SIFRA XC1X:VI 6.

"'...and offered unholy fire before the Lord, such as he had not commanded them"': F. R. Eliezer says, '"Nadab and Abihu became liable for punishment only because they taught law in the presence of Moses, their master, for whoever teaches law in the presence of his master is liable to death. "' G And it happened concerning a certain student who gave instruction in the presence of Eliezer [without permission]. He said to Imma Shalom, his wife, "'He will not finish out this week."' And he died [that week]. H. After the Sabbath, sages came to him and said to him, "'My lord, are you a prophet?"' He said to them, "'I am not a prophet nor the disciple of a prophet, but thus have I received as a tradition from my masters: 'whoever teaches law in his master 's presence is liable to death. "" A.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sifra and the Two SifrCs

49

Not all narratives violate the documentary program of a composite. Here is an example of a narrative that fits well into its documentary setting.

By the criterion set forth in this exercise Sifra offers no evidence of documents outside of the canonical collection.

Sifre to Numbers sets forth a systematic exegesis of the book ofNumbers, so by definition all comments on verses of Numbers are aimed at the needs of this document. There are no evidences of non-documentary writing. As with Sifra, Sifre to Numbers follows no topical program distinct from that of Scripture, which is systematically clarified.

Sifre to Numbers contains nothing relevant. IX.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN SIF& TO NUMBERS [2] COMPOSITES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

A complex composite repeatedly proves, through diverse cases, that different voices stand behind superficially coherent sequences of verses. The composite commences with its point of intersection with our document, but a long sequence of "'along these same lines"'-entries forms a topical miscellany of patterned declarations.

1.

A.

B.

C.

D.

SIFRE TO NUMBERS LXXXVII1:II "'...[but now our strength is dried up] and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at:"' Do you think that the one who made the one statement ["'...and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at..."'] made the other ["'Now the manna was like coriander seed...'"]? No, not at all, the one who made the one statement did not make the other. The Israelites said, "'...and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at."' But the Omnipresent explained to everyone in the world, telling them, "'Come and see about what these people are complaining against me: 'Now the manna was like coriander seed and its appearance like that of bdellium. ' That is in line with this verse: 'And gold of that land is good, there is bdellium ' (Gen. 2: 12).'" [There is no contradiction, since the party who complained about the manna is not the same as the party who praised it.]

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Along these same lines: "'And Judah recognized them and said, 'She is more righteous than I "" (Gen. 38:26). But the Omnipresent had written through his hand: "'And he did not again know her"' (Gen. 38:26). Since he realized that she was his daughter-in-law, he did not again have sexual relations with her. Along these same lines: "'And you were tired and worn-out''' (Deut. 25: 18). Concerning Israel, Scripture says, "'And you were tired and worn-out"' (Deut. 25: 18), but concerning Arnalek: "'But he [Amalek, not Israel] did not fear God"' (Deut. 25: 18). Along these same lines: "'Out of the window she peered, the mother of Sisera gazed through the lattice: 'Why is his chariot so long in coming? Why tarry the hoof-beats of his chariots? "" That is what the mother of Sisera said. "'Her wisest ladies make answer, nay, she gives answer to herself, 'Are they not finding and dividing the spoil? "" (Judges 5:28-30). His wife said, "'Are they not finding and dividing the spoil?"' The things that the mother of Sisera made their way to Deborah through the Holy Spirit. It said to her, "'Do not look for your son, Sisera."' On that basis: "'So perish all your enemies, 0 Lord! But your friends be like the sun as he rises in his might"' (Judges 5:31). Along these same lines: "'Woe to us! Who can deliver us from the power of these mighty gods?"' (1 Sam. 4%). Up to this point the statement is what the righteous among them said. But from here on spoke the wicked: "'These are the gods who smote the Egyptians with every sort of plague in the wilderness"' (1 Sam. 4:8). They said, "'He had ten plagues and he brought them upon the Egyptians. He has not got any more to do to us."' The Omnipresent said to them, "'You maintain that I have no more plagues to bring on you. On that account I shall bring a plague on you that has never been in the world."' For one of them would sit in the privy, and a rat would come out of the deep and snap at his guts and go back to the deep. And so it says, 'The hand of the Lord was heavy upon the people of Ashdod and he terrified and afflicted them with tumors"' (1 Sam. 5:6). Along these same lines: "'Then the princes and all the people said to the priests and the prophets, 'This man does not deserve the sentence of death, for he has spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God. ' And certain of the elders of the land arose and spoke to all the assembled people, saying, 'Micah of Moresheth prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah and said to all the people of Judah, "'Thus says the Lord of

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sijira and the Two Sijirks Hosts: Zion shall be plowed as a field, Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mountain of the house a wooded height. ' Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death?"' ""(Jer. 26: 16- 19). Up to this point the statement is what the righteous people said. As to the wicked, what did they say? "'There was another man who prophesied in the name of the Lord, Uriah the son of Shemaiah from Kiriath-jearim. He prophesied against this city and against this land in words like those of Jeremiah. And when King Jehoiakim with all his warriors and all the princes heard his words, the king sought to put him to death; but when Uriah heard of it, he was afraid and fled and escaped to Egypt ...and they fetched Uriah from Egypt and brought him to King Jehoiakim, who slew him with the sword and cast his dead body into the burial place of the common people"' (Jer. 26:20-23). So the wicked said, "'Just as Uriah was put to death, so Jeremiah is liable to be put to death."' "'But the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah so that he was not given over to the people to be put to death"' (Jer. 26:24). Along these same lines: "'Lie down until morning'" (Ruth 3: 13). It is because the impulse to do evil sat and bothered him all that night, saying to him, "'You are a free agent and you want a woman, and she is a free agent and wants a man. You have learned that a woman is acquired through an act of sexual relations, so go and have sexual relations with her, and let her be your wife."' He took an oath against his impulse to do evil and said to it, "' 'As the Lord lives, I shall not touch her, ' and to the woman he said, 'Lie down until the morning. "" Here too you interpret matters along these same lines: "'...and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at. ' [Now the manna was like coriander seed and its appearance like that of bdellium. The people went about and gathered it, and ground it in mills or beat in mortars and boiled it in pots, and made cakes of it; and the taste of it was like the taste of cakes baked with oil When the dew fell upon the camp in the night, the manna fell with it]"' (Num. 11:4-9): Do you think that the one who made the one statement made the other? No, not at all, the one who made the one statement did not make the other. The Israelites said, "'...and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at."' But the Omnipresent explained to everyone in the world, telling them, "'Come and see about what these people are complaining against me: 'Now the manna was like coriander seed and its appearance like that of bdellium. ' That is in line

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism with this verse: 'And gold of that land is good, there is bdellium ' (Gen. 2: 12).'"

Sifre to Numbers LXXXVII1:II divides the narrative and identifies the distinct speakers of various components of it. The treatment of our base-verse is part of a larger construction, assembled around its own focus and inserted here. Sifre to Deuteronomy contains a number of examples of the same program. x. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN S I FTO~ NUMBERS 131 COMPOSITES OF COMPOSITIONS JOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON PROPOSITlON OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

Sifre to Numbers contains no instances of this phenomenon.

Sifre to Numbers sets forth one elaborate story that thematically intersects with the document. 7.

A.

There is the case of a man who was meticulous about carrying out the religious duty of the fringes. He heard that there was a certain whore in one of the coastal towns, who would collect a fee of four hundred gold coins. He sent her four hundred gold coins and made a date with her. B. When his time came, he came along and took a seat at the door of her house. Her maid came and told her, "'That man with whom you made a date, lo, he is sitting at the door of the house."' C. She said to her, "'Let him come in."' D. When he came in, she spread out for him seven silver mattresses and one gold one, and she was on the top, and between each one were silver stools, and on the top, gold ones. When he came to do the deed, the four fringes fell out [of his garment] and appeared to him like four witnesses. The man slapped himself in the face and immediately withdrew and took a seat on the ground. E. The whore too withdrew and took a seat on the ground. F. She said to him, "'By the winged god of Rome! I shall not let you go until you tell me what blemish you have found in me."' G He said to her, "'By the Temple service! I did not find any blemish at all in you, for in the whole world there is none so beautiful as you. But the Lord, our God, has imposed upon me a rather small duty, but concerning [even that minor matter] he wrote, 'I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt to be your God. I am the Lord your God, ' -two times. H. "' 'I am the Lord your God, ' I am destined to pay a good reward.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sfra and the Two S f r b "' 'I am the Lord your God, ' I am destined to exact punishment."" She said to him, "'By the Temple service! I shall not let you go until you write me your name, the name of your town, and the name of your school in which you study Torah."' So he wrote for her his name, the name of his town, and the name of his master, and the name of the school in which he had studied Torah. She went and split up her entire wealth, a third to the government, a third to the poor, and a third she took with her and came and stood at the school house of R. Hiyya. She said to him, "'My lord, accept me as a proselyte."' He said to her, "'Is it possible that you have laid eyes on one of the disciples [and are converting in order to many him]?"' She took the sliv out that was in her hand. He said to [the disciple who had paid the money but not gone through with the act], "'Stand up and acquire possession of what you have purchased. Those spreads that she spread out for you in violation of a prohibition she will now spread out for you in full remission of the prohibition. "'As to this one, the recompense is paid out in this world, and as to the world to come, I do not know how much [more he will receive]! "'

This narrative fits well into the topical framework of the book of Numbers, We need not theorize about a lost document of narratives to account for the presence of the story in our collection.

In Sifre to Numbers I find a topical exposition that does not fit into a compilation of exegeses of passages in the book of Numbers. It forms a miscellany of statements on "'great is peace,'" pointing toward la particular kind of composite - a collection of topical expositions not focused on a particular Rabbinic document. 1. 3.

SIFRE TO NUMBERS XL1I:II "'...and give you peace: "' MISCELLANY ON PEACE A. Great is peace, for on that account the tale involving Sarah was revised. B. For it is said, "'And I have grown old"' (Gen. 18: 13). C. Great is peace, for the Holy One changed the tale on account of keeping the peace. D. Great is peace, for the angel changed the story on account of keeping the peace.

A.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Great is peace, for a name of God that is written in a state of consecration is blotted out by the water so as to bring peace between a man and his wife. R. Eleazar says, "'Great is peace, for the prophets planted in peoples ' mouths only the word peace. "' R. Simeon b. Halapta says, "'Great is peace, for the only utensil that holds a blessing is peace, as it is said, 'The Lord give strength to his people, the Lord bless his people with peace ' (Ps. 29: 1I).'" R. Eleazar Haqqappar says, "'Great is peace, for the seal of all blessings is only peace, as it is said, 'The Lord bless you and keep you, the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you,] the Lord lift up his countenance upon you [and give you peace. "" R. Eleazar, son of R. Eleazar Haqqappar, says, "'Great is peace, for even if the Israelites worship idols but keep the peace among them, it is as if the Omnipresent says, 'satan shall never touch them, ' as it is said, 'Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone ' (Hos. 4: 17). "'But when they are divided by dissension: 'They love shame more than their glory ' (Hos. 4: 18 [RSV]). "'Lo, great is peace and despised is dissension."' Great is peace, for even in a time ofwar people need peace, as it is said, "'When you draw near a city to do battle against it, you will offer peace terms to it"' (Deut. 20: 10). "'So I sent messengers from the wilderness of Kedemoth to Sihon the king of Heshbon with words of peace"' (Deut. 2:26). "'Then Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites and said, 'What have you against me that you have come to me to fight against my land? ' And the king of the Ammonites answered the messengers of Jephthah, 'Because Israel on coming from Egypt took away my land from the Arnon to the Jabbok and to the Jordan; now therefore restore it peaceably "" (Judges 11:12- 13). Great is peace, for even the dead need it, as it is said, "'And you shall go to your fathers in peace"' (Gen. 15;15). And it says, "'You will die in peace and with the burnings of your fathers"' (Jer. 34:s). Great is peace, for it is given to those who repent, as it is said, "'He who creates the expression of the lips: 'Peace, peace to the one who is far and the one who is near "" (Is. 57: 19). Great is peace, for it is given as the portion of the righteous, as it is said, "'May he come in peace, resting on their resting place'" (Is. 57:2). Great is peace, for it is not given as the portion of the wicked, as it is said, "'There is no peace, says the Lord, to the wicked"' (Is. 57:21). Great is peace, for it is given to those who love the Torah, as it is said, "'Great peace goes to those who love your Torah"' (Ps. 119: 165).

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sifra and the Two Sifrb Great is peace, for it is given to those who study the Torah, as it is said, "'And all your children will be learned of the Lord, and great will be the peace of your children"' (Is. 54: 13). V. Great is peace, for it is given to the humble, as it is said, "'The humble will inherit the earth and derive pleasure from the abundance of peace"' (Ps. 37: 11). W. Great is peace, for it is given to those who carry out deeds of righteousness, as it is said, "'And the work of righteousness will be peace"' (Is. 32: 17). X. Great is peace, for it is the name of the Holy One, blessed be he, as it is said, "'And he called the Lord, 'peace "" (Judges 6:24). Y. R. Hananiah, prefect of the priests, says, "'Great is peace, for it outweighs all the works of creation, as it is said, 'Who creates light and forms darkness and makes peace ' (Is. 45:7)."' Z. Great is peace, for those who dwell in the high places need peace, as it is said, "'Dominion and fear are with God, he makes peace in his high heaven"' (Job 25:2). AA. Now it is a matter of an argument a fortiori: If in a place where there are no envy, competition, and hatred and conflict, the creatures of the upper world need peace, in a place in which all of these qualities are found, all the more so [do people need peace]. BB. [Proceeding past the materials given by Horovitz in smaller type, pp. 47,l. 15 - p. 48,I. 16:] And so Scripture says, "'Be ashamed, 0 Sidon, for the sea has spoken, the stronghold of the sea, saying, I have neither travailed nor given birth, I have neither reared young men nor brought up virgins (Is. 23:4). CC. Said the sea, '"Now what am I, that I am not afraid of giving birth and producing sons and daughters. And am I going to bury bride grooms and brides? And what is said in my connection? 'Do you not fear me, says the Lord? Do you not tremble before me? I placed the sand as the bound for the sea, a perpetual barrier which it cannot pass ' (Jer. 5:23)."' DD. Said the sea, "'Now if I, who have none of these traits, carry out the will of my creator, all the more so those who are ashamed in Sidon! "'

U.

""

The insertion of the huge miscellany on peace into the repertoire of Sifre to Numbers is for the obvious reason, the reference in the priestly benediction to peace. The composite amplifies a confirmed theme of the document and therefore does not form an instance of a free-standing topical exposition lost in space, But the topical miscellany does not expound only the relevant verse(s) of the book of Numbers. It cites a rich corpus of proof texts for propositions on the announced theme. In the collection we do not possess a systematic exegesis of verses of Numbers -and incidentally one that mentions peace -but the advocacy of the greatness of the condition, peace. The compiler of the conglomerate and the author of the individual paragraphs undertook a task different from the exegetical one that

56

Lost Documents ofRabbinic Judaism

dominates in Sifre to Numbers. The priestly benediction is incidental to the project. No extant collection in the canon of formative Rabbinic Judaism accommodates collections of topical advocacy. The composite therefore points to a hidden document. The pattern is as formally disciplined as the ones we find in the Mishnah. It is made up of free-standing sayings joined by the pattern and formula, '"Greatis peace, "' + f or . . . + as it is said + a verse of Scripture. What is the centerpiece of the formulation? In the Mishnah and the Tosefta it is on the topic and the proposition concerning that topic. It is rare to find the focus centered on the sage to whom the saying is assigned. The focus is on the overriding theme, not on the person of the sage to whom a saying is attributed, and not on the sequence of verses of the book of Numbers. So the intent of the writer and compiler of the several paragraphs -individual expositions - is to expound the theme of peace, not to amplify the sequence of verses in the book of Numbers. But such elaborate thematic expositions are rare indeed in the Rabbinic documents we have examined to this point (we shall see more topical expositions in Sifrt to Deuteronomy). We cannot regard the great-is-peace conglomeration as comparable to the Mishnah's analytical exercises in hierarchical classification. So the topical exposition represents a kind of writing that presupposes the production of books of topical exposition. But we possess no such books. Who stands behind the hidden "book" of topical expositions adumbrated by great ispeace? We can imagine the origin of free-standing sayings on peace in two different social groups, [ l ] groups assembled to expound a topic or [2] groups assembled around the person of a named authority. The stories that link sayings to named authorities presuppose the social group of masters and disciples, not specialized groups devoted to particular topics or problems. The topical expositions to begin with emerge from circles of masters and disciples -so it seems -because the attributions are random and not focused. But the patterned language signals a social setting that transcends individual authorities and their disciples. Then comes the collection of such sayings into conglomerates on the general theme of peace, in highly formulaic language. At that point conventions of formalization of prose have taken over and the construction of a document has begun. The upshot is clear. The collections on stated topics represent the work of gatherings of representatives of diverse circles. That is because no proposition on peace is attempted, the sayings are miscellaneous and not intended to prove a point but do no more than iterate the general theme. What is the primary organizing principle of the Rabbinic documents, the figure of the sage or the topic and proposition concerning that topic? Primary to the presentation of teachings is the topic, and that is the case whether we address the Mishnah or the candidate for hidden document of topical exposition. But it is not the case when we come to Sifra or other exegetical composites, which are not driven by the organizing principle of exegesis of a particular collection of Scripture but by the analysis of a problematic. .

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sijira and the Two SijirLs

57

The Mishnah differs from the lost or hidden document adumbrated by great is peace is the difference between random collection of propositions and particular analysis of problems..

The survey of the topical and propositional program of Sifre to Deuteronomy dictates what is normative and truly particular to that authorship. It is its systematic mode of methodical analysis, in which it does two things. First, the document's compilers take the details of cases and carefully re-frame them into rules pertaining to all cases. The authorship therefore asks those questions of susceptibility to generalization ("'generalizability"') that first-class philosophical minds raise. And, second, it answers those questions by showing what details restrict the prevailing law to the conditions of the case, and what details exemplify the traits of the law overall. These are, after all, the two possibilities. The law is either limited to the case and to all cases that replicate this one. Or the law derives from the principles exemplified, in detail, in the case at hand but that vastly transcends the example. Essentially, as a matter of both logic and topical program, our authorship has reread the legal portions of the book of Deuteronomy and "'Mishnah-izes'" them, turning Scripture into what we now know is the orderly and encompassing code supplied by the Mishnah. We find in Sifre to Numbers no parallel to this dominant and systematic program of Sifre to Deuteronomy. But in other aspects, the document presents no surprises. In the two Sifres and Sifra we find a recurrent motif, intense here, episodic there, of how the written component of the Torah, that is, revelation in written form, serves as the sole source of final truth. Logic or reason untested against Scripture produces flawed results. The Torah alone proves paramount. Reason on its own is subordinate. There are rules and regularities, but reason alone will not show us what they are. A systematic and reasoned reading of the Torah -the written Torah -joined to a sifting of the cases of the Torah in search of the regularities and points of law and order -these are what will tell the prevailing rule. A rule of the Mishnah and its account of the here and now of everyday life rests upon the Torah, not upon (mere) logic. Arule of Israel's history, past, present, and future, likewise derives from a search for regularities and points of order identified not by logic alone, but by logic addressed to the Torah. So there are these modes of gaining truth that apply equally to the Mishnah and Scripture. There is logic, applied reason and practical wisdom, such as sages exhibit; there is the corpus of facts supplied by Scripture, read as sages read it. These two together form God 's statement upon the world today. So much for the norms of SifrC to Deuteronomy. Now to the anomalies.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

58 XIV.

ANOMALOUS COMPOS~T~ONS IN S I FTO ~ DEUTERONOMY [I] COMPOSITES OF MISCELLANEOUS SAYINGS IN THE NAMEOF A PARTICULAR SAGE

There are no compositions collected around the name of a common authority but not on a shared theme or proposition. XV. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN SlFRJk TO DEUTERONOMY [2] COMPOSITES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

Sifre to Deuteronomy contains a sizable collection of propositional compositions bearing diverse illustrations. They intersect with Deuteronomy at a prooftext that links an illustrative composition to the book of Deuteronomy, but the complex composition fits equally well -or poorly -together with other passages of Scripture that illustrate the same proposition and theme. Our first case proposes a proposition, It makes the point that when Scripture speaks of the words that one spoke, it refers in particular to the words of admonition. A variety of proof-texts is expounded. 1.

SIFRE DEUTERONOMY I:I "'These are the words that Moses spoke to all Israel inTransjordan, in the wilderness, that is to say in the Arabah, opposite Suph, between Paran on the one side and Tophel, Laban, Hazeroth, and Dizahab, on the other"' (Dt. 1:1): B. ["'These are the words that Moses spoke"' (Dt. 1:1):] Did Moses prophesy only these alone? Did he not write the entire Torah? C. For it is said, "'And Moses wrote this Torah"' (Dt. 31:9). D. Why then does Scripture say, "'These are the words that Moses spoke"' (Dt. 1 :I)? E. It teaches that [when Scripture speaks of the words that one spoke, it refers in particular to] the words of admonition. F. So it is said [by Moses], "'But Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked"' (Dt. 32: 15). 2. A. So too you may point to the following: B. "'The words ofAmos, who was among the herdsman of Tekoa, which he saw concerning Israel in the days of Uzzirah, king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam, son of Joash, king of Israel, two years before the earthquake"' (Amos 1:I): C. Did Amos prophesy only concerning these [kings] alone? Did he not prophesy more than any other [prophet]? D. Why then does Scripture say, "'These are the words ofAmos, [who was among the herdsman of Tekoa, which he saw concerning Israel in the days of Uzzirah, king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam, son of Joash, king of Israel, two years before the earthquake]'" (Amos 1 :1). E. It teaches that [when Scripture speaks of the words that one spoke, it refers in particular to] the words of admonition. A.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sifra and the Two Sifrks F.

And how d o we know that they were words of admonition? G. As it is said, "'Hear this word, you cows of Bashan, who are in the mountain of Samaria, who oppress the poor, crush the needy, and say to their husbands, 'Bring, that we may feast "" (Amos 4: I). H. ["'And say to their husbands, 'Bring, that we may feast '"'I speaks of their courts. So too you may point to the following: "'And these are the words that the Lord spoke concerning Israel and Judah'" (Jer. 30:4). Did Jeremiah prophesy only these alone? Did he not write two [complete] scrolls? For it is said, "'Thus far are the words of Jeremiah"' (Jer. 5 1:64). Why then does Scripture say, "'And these are the words [that the Lord spoke concerning Israel and Judah]'" (Jer. 30:4)? It teaches that [when the verse says, "'And these are the words that the Lord spoke concerning Israel and Judah'" (Jer. 30:4)], it speaks in particular of the words of admonition. G. And how do we know that they were words of admonition? H. In accord with this verse: "'For thus says the Lord, 'We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear and not of peace. Ask you now and see whether a man does labor with a child? Why do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in labor? and all faces turn pale? Alas, for the day is great, there is none like it, and it is a time of trouble for Jacob, but out of it he shall be saved"' (Jer. 30:s-7). So too you may point to the following: "'And these are the last words of David"' (2 Sam. 23: 1). And did David prophesy only these alone? And has it furthermore not been said, "'The spirit of the Lord spoke through me, and his word was on my tongue'" (2 Sam. 23:2)? Why then does it say, "'And these are the last words of David"' (2 Sam. 23: l)? It teaches that, [when the verse says, "'And these are the last words of David"' (2 Sam. 23:1)], it refers to words of admonition. And how do we know that they were words of admonition? In accord with this verse: "'But the ungodly are as thorns thrust away, all of them, for they cannot be taken with the hand"' (2 Sam. 23:6). So too you may point to the following: "'The words of Qohelet, son of David, king in Jerusalem"' (Qoh. 1:l).

59

Lost Documents ofRabbinic Judaism

C. Now did Solomon prophesy only these words? Did he not write three and a half scrolls of his wisdom in proverbs? D. Why then does it say, "'The words of Qohelet, son of David, king in Jerusalem"' (Qoh. 1:1)? E. It teaches that [when the verse says, "'The words of Qohelet, son of David, king in Jerusalem'" (Qoh. 1:1)], it refers to words of admonition. F. And how do we know that they were words of admonition? G. In accord with this verse: '"The sun also rises, and the sun goes down ...the wind goes toward the south and turns around to the north, it turns round continually in its circuit, and the wind returns again - that is, east and west [to its circuits]. All the rivers run into the sea"' (Qoh. 15-7). H. [Solomon] calls the wicked sun, moon, and sea, for [the wicked] have no reward [coming back to them]. This is in form a very tightly disciplined composite; the several compositions follow a single pattern. A commentary-exegesis devoted to Amos would position A m o s at the head o f the sequence, Otherwise there would b e n o acknowledgement o f the book o f Scripture subject to exegesis. The sequence o r order o f the entries is immaterial. N o cumulative result registers. In the next case w e find less interest in patterning the exposition in a single way. We begin with the proposition that one must acknowledge with thanks every single measure that G o d metes out to you, whether the measure o f good o r the measure of punishment. This gives way to other paramount proposition, which is that suffering is a gift to b e received gratefully. 1.

SIFRE TO DEUTERONOMY XXXII:V A. R. Aqiba says, "'Since it is said, 'with all your soul, ' it is an argument afortiori that we should encompass, 'with all your might.' B. "'Why then does Scripture say, 'with all your might'? C. "'It is to encompass every single measure that God metes out to you, whether the measure of good or the measure of punishment."' 2. A. So does David say, "'[How can I repay the Lord for all his bountiful dealings toward me?] I will lift up the cup of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord"' (Ps. 116:12-13). B. "'I found trouble and sorrow but I called upon the name of the Lord"' (Ps. 116:3-4). 3. A. So does Job say, "'The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord"' (Job 1:21). B. If that is the case for the measure of goodness, all the more so for the measure of punishment

2. Anomalous Compositions in S f r a and the Two S i f v b What does his wife say to him? "'Do you still hold fast your integrity? Blaspheme God and die"' (Job 2:9). And what does he say to her? "'You speak as one of the impious women speaks. Shall we receive good at the hand of God and shall we not receive evil?"' (Job 2: 10). The men of the generation of the flood were churlish as to the good, and when punishment came upon them, they took it willy nilly. And is it not an argument a fortiori if one who was churlish as to the good behaved with dignity in a time of punishment, we who behave with dignity in response to good should surely behave with dignity in a time of trouble. And so did he said to her, "'You speak as one of the impious women speaks. Shall we receive good at the hand of God and shall we not receive evil?"' (Job 2: 10). A. And, furthermore, a person should rejoice in suffering more than in good times. For if someone lives in good times his entire life, he will not be forgiven for such sin as may be in his hand. B. And how shall he attain forgiveness? Through suffering. A. R. Eliezer b. Jacob says, "'Lo, Scripture says, 'For whom the Lord loves he corrects, even as a father corrects the son in whom he delights ' (Prov. 3: 12). B. "'What made the son be pleasing to the father? You must say it was suffering [on account of correction].' A. R. Meir says, "'Lo, Scripture says, 'And you shall consider in your heart, that as a man chasten his son, so the Lord your God chastens you ' (Dt. 8:s). B. "' 'You know in your heart the deeds that you did, and also the suffering that I brought upon you, which was not in accord with the deeds that you did at all. "" A. R. Yost b. R. Judah says, "'Beloved is suffering, for the name of the Omnipresent rests upon the one upon whom suffering comes, B. "'as it is said, 'So the Lord your God chastens you ' (Dt. 8:5)."' A. R. Nathan b. R. Joseph says, "'Just as a covenant is made through the land, so a covenant is made through suffering, as it is said, 'The Lord, your God"' chastens you ' (Dt. 8:7). B. "'And it says, 'For the Lord your God brings you into a good land ' (Dt. 8:7).'"

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism R. Simeon b. Yohai says, "'Suffering is precious. For through suffering three good gifts were given to Israel, which the nations of the world desire, and these are they: the Torah, the land of Israel, and the world to come. "'How do we know that that is the case for the Torah? As it is said, 'To know wisdom and chastisement ' (Prov. 1:2). And it is said, 'Happy is the man whom you chastise 0 Lord and teach out of your Torah ' (Ps. 94:12).'" "'How do we know that that is the case for the land of Israel? 'The Lord your God chastens you ...for the Lord your God brings you into a good land ' (Dt. 8:5, 7). "'How do we know that that is the case for the world to come? 'For the commandment is a lamp and the Torah is a light, and reproofs of chastisement are the way of life ' (Prov. 6:23). What is the way that brings a person to the world to come? One must say it is suffering."' R. Nehemiah says, "'Beloved is suffering, for just as offerings appease, so does suffering appease. "'In the case of offerings, Scripture says, 'And it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him ' (Lev. 1:4). '"And in the case of suffering: 'And they shall be paid the punishment for their iniquity ' (Lev. 26:43). "'And not only so, but suffering appeases more than do offerings. For offerings are a matter of property, but suffering, of one 's own body. "'And so Scripture says, 'Skin for skin, yes, all that a man has will he give for his life ' (Job 2:4)."' A. Now when R. Eliezer was sick, R. Tarfon, R. Joshua, R. Eleazar b. Azariah, and R. Aqiba came to visit him. B. Said to him R. Tarfon, "'My lord, you are more precious to Israel than the sun 's orb. For the sun 's orb gives light to this world, but you give light to this world and the world to come."' C. Said to him R. Joshua, "'You are more precious to Israel than the gift of rain, for rain gives life in this world, but you

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sfra and the Two Sifr.6~ give life in this world and the world to ~ome.'~' D. Said to him R. Eleazar b. Azariah, "'You are more precious to Israel than a father or a mother. For a father or mother bring one into this world, but you bring one into this world and the world to come."' E. Said to him R. Aqiba, "'Suffering is precious. '" F. R. Eliezer said to his disciples, "'Lift me up. "' G. R. Eliezer went into session, saying to him, "'Speak, Aqiba. "' H. He said to him, "'Lo, Scripture says, 'Manasseh was twelve years old when he began to reign, and he reigned for fiftyfive years in Jerusalem ' (2 Chr. 33:l). And it further says, 'These are the proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah, king of Judah, copied out ' (Prov. 25: I). I. "'Now can anyone imagine that Hezekiah taught Torah to all Israel, while his son, Manasseh, he did not teach Torah? J. "'But despite all of the learning that his father taught him, and all the work that he put into him, nothing worked for him except suffering. K. "'For it is said, 'And the Lord spoke to Manasseh and to his people, but they gave no heed. Therefore the Lord brought upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh with hooks and bound him with fetters and carried him to Babylonia. And when he was in distress, he besought the Lord, his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers and prayed to him, and he was entreated of him and heard his supplication and brought him back to Jerusalem into his kingdom ' (2 Chr. 33:lO-13). L. "'That proves that suffering is precious.'"

This massive miscellany collects a variety of forms to express a single point, which is that suffering yields virtue and that one must gratehlly acknowledge whatever is meted out. Aqiba establishes the proposition, and others -David,

64

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

Job - figure in making the same point. But there is no rhetorical pattern that predominates in expounding the theme. Then the same proposition is expressed in opposite terms with the generation of the flood. T w o propositions are weighed in the balance - rejoice in suffering more than in good times. N o 6-1 1+12 restate that proposition. They form a coherent subset built on the great is suflering apophthegm. T h e several entries exhibit a variety o f patterns, but the main one, precious is sufering, governs throughout. The collection has been assembled not around the name o f an authority but around the stated proposition. A collection of composites such a s this one will have served admirably in a book of exposition of theological principles. S I FTO~ DEUTERONOMY XL:I "'It is a land which the Lord your God looks after, on which the Lord your God always keeps his eye, from year's beginning to year's end"' @t. 11:lO-12): Does God look after that land alone? DOTShe not look after all lands? For it is said, "'...to cause it to rain on a land where no man is ...to satisfy the desolate and waste ground'" (Job 38:26-27). Why then does Scripture say, "'It is a land which the Lord your God looks after, [on which the Lord your God always keeps his eye, from year 's beginning to year 's end]"' (Dt. 11:10-12)? It is - as it were - that he cares only for that land, but on account of caring about that land, he cares also for all other lands as well. A. Along these same lines: "'Behold, he who keeps Israel does not slumber or sleep"' (Ps. 121:4). B. Does God keep only Israel? Does he not keep everyone, for it is said, "'In whose hand is the soul of every living thing and the breath of all mankind"' (Job 12:lO). C. Why then does Scriptures say "'Behold, he who keeps Israel does not slumber or sleep"' (Ps. 121:4)? D. It is - as it were -that he keeps Israel alone, but on account of keeping Israel, he also keeps everyone else along with them. A. Along these same lines: "'My eyes and my heart shall be there perpetually"' (1 Kgs. 9:3). B. But is it not also said, "'The eyes of thee Lord that run to and fro through the whole earth"' (Zech. 4:10)? C. And it further says, "'The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good"' (Prov. 15:3). D. Why then does Scripture state, "'My eyes and my heart shall be there perpetually"' (1 Kgs. 9:3)? E. It is - as it were - that "'my eyes and my heart are only there. "' A. Along these same lines: "'The voice of the Lord shakes the wilderness, the Lord shakes the wilderness of Kadesh'" (Ps. 29:8).

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sifra and the Two Sifrgs B. C.

Why does Scripture say this? This [wilderness] more than the rest.

T h e pattern is as follows: Cited verse paraphrased, challenge (Does God.. .), why then does Scripture say.. ., It is - as it were - that [he cares only for that land, but on account o f caring about that land, h e cares also for all other lands as well]. T h e subsequent entries adhere to this pattern, so No. 2, It is - as it were that [he keeps Israel alone, but on account o f keeping Israel, h e also keeps everyone else along with them,] No. 3. The governing proposition is that verse of Scripture attest to G o d 's universal concern. This is a fine example of a composite that proves the same thing abut many things.

1.

A.

'"...and thus you shall eat your fill. Take care not to be lured away to serve other gods and bow to them. [For the Lord 's anger will flare up against you, and he will shut up the skies so that there be no rain and the ground will not yield its produce; and you will soon perish from the good land that the Lord is assigning to you]"' (Dt. 11:13-17): B. He said to them, "'Take care lest you rebel against the Omnipresent. For a person rebels against the Omnipresent only in prosperity."' C. For so it is said, "'Lest when you have eaten and are satisfied and have built large houses and lived in them, and when your herds and your flocks multiply, and your silver and your gold"' (Dt. 8: 1213). D. What then? "'Then your heart be lifted up and you forget the Lord your God"' (Dt. 8:14). E. Along these same lines: "'Forwhen I shall have brought them into the land which I swore to their fathers, flowing with milk and honey"' (Dt. 3 1:20). F. What then? "'And turned to other gods and served them"' (Dt. 3 1:20). G. Along these same lines: "'And the people sat down to eat and to drink"' (Ex. 32:6). H. What then? "'They have made a molten calf"' (Ex. 32:8). 2. A. Along these same lines in connection with the men of the generation of the flood, they rebelled against the Omnipresent only in prosperity. B. What is said in their regard? "'Their houses are safe, without feac..their bull genders, they send forth their little ones like a flock ...they spend their days in prosperity"' (Job. 21:9-13). C . This is what made them act as they did: "'Depart form us, we do not desire knowledge of your ways. What is the almighty that we should serve him"' (Job 21:14-15). D. They said, "'Not even for a drop of rain do we need him, for 'There goes up a mist from the earth ' (Gen. 2:6)."'

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Said to them the Omnipresent, "'In the very act of goodness which I have done for you, you take pride before me? Through that same act I shall exact a penalty from you."' "'And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights"' (Gen. 7: 12). And along these same lines, you found in connection with the men of the tower [of Babel], that they rebelled against the Omnipresent only in prosperity. What is said in their regard? "'And the whole earth was of one language and one speech, and it came to pass, as they journeyed east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there"' (Gen. 11: 1-3). And the sense of "'dwelling"' used here is solely eating and drinking, along the lines of this usage: "'And the people sat down to eat and drink and arose to play"' (Ex. 32:6). That is what made them say, "'Come let us build us a city"' (Gen. 11:4). What is said in their regard? "'So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth"' (Gen. 1118). And along these same lines, you found in connection with the men of Sodom, that they rebelled against the Omnipresent only in prosperity. What is said in their regard? "'As for the earth out of it comes bread ...the stones of it are the place of sapphires...that path no bird of prey knows ...the proud beasts have not trodden it"' (Job 285-8). The men of Sodom said, "'Lo, we have food near at hand, lo, we have silver and gold near and hand. Let us go and wipe out the law of [protecting] the wayfarer from our land."' Said to them the Omnipresent, "'On account of the act of goodness that I did for you, you want to wipe out the law of [protecting] the wayfarer from among you. I shall wipe out the memory of you yourselves from the world."' What is said in their regard? "'He breaks open a shaft away from where men sojourn"' (Job 28:4). "'A contemptible brand ...the tents of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure"' (Job. 125). That is what made them rebel, namely, "'Whatsoever God brings into their hand"' (Job 12:6). And so Scripture says, "' 'As I live, ' says the Lord God, 'Sodom your sister has not done ...as you have done ...Behold, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom...neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy, and they were haughty (Ez. 16:48-50). Along these same lines, Scripture says, "'[And Lot lifted up his eyes and behold, all the plain of the Jordan,] well-watered everywhere"' (Gen. 13: 10). ""

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sijira and the Two Sijirks B.

What is the meaning of the verse, "'And they made their father drink wine"' (Gen. 19:33)? C. Where did they get wine in the cave? D. They just happened to find it, in line with this verse: "'And it shall come to pass on that day that the mountains shall drip sweet wine"' (Joel 4: 18). E. If that is how he provides for those who anger him, all the more so for those who carry out his will.

The diverse proofs of a single proposition do not follow a governing pattern but clearly are composed to make that one point: they rebelled against the Omnipresent only in prosperity. The author of the individual entries clearly had in mind a diverse collection of proofs for one proposition and planned the demonstration to make a theological generalization. Once more we have a composite that proves the same thing about many things. S I F RTO~ DEUTERONOMY XXM1:III A. "'...to show your servant the first works of your greatness"': B. There are [I] those who called themselves servants, and the Holy One, blessed be He, called them servants, and [2] there are those who called themselves servants, and the Holy One, blessed be He, did not call them servants, and [3] there are those who did not call themselves servants, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called them servants: Abraham called himself a servant: "'Do not pass away, I ask, [I] C. from your servant"' (Gen. 18:3), and the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: '"For my servant Abrahams sake"' (Gen. 26:24). D. Jacob called himself a servant: "'I am not worthy of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which you have shown to your servant'" (Gen. 32: 1I), and God called him a servant: "'But you, Israel, my servant"' Is. 41:8). E. Moses called himself a servant: "'To show your servant...,"' and the Holy One, blessed be He, also called him a servant: "'My servant, Moses, is not so"' (Num. 12:7). F. David called himself a servant: "'I am your servant, the son of your servant-girl'" (Ps. 116:16), and the Holy One, blessed be He, also called him a servant: "'For I will defend this city to save it for my own sake and for the sake of my servant, David"' (12 Kgs. 19:34), "'And David my servant shall be their prince for ever"' (Ez. 37:25). G. Isaiah called himself a servant: "'And now says the Lord who formed me from the womb to be his servant'" (Is. 49:5), and the Holy One, blessed be He, also called him a servant: "'Like my servant Isaiah has walked naked and barefoot"' (Is. 20:3).

1.

68

Lost Documents ofRabbinic Judaism Samuel called himself a servant: "'Then Samuel said, 'Speak, for your servant is listening "" (1 Sam. 3:10), but the Holy One, blessed be He, did not call him a servant. Samson called himself a servant: "'You have given this great deliverance by the hand of your servant"' (Judges. 115: 18), but the Holy One, blessed be He, did not call him servant. Solomon called himself a servant: "'Give your servant, therefore, an understanding heart"' (1 Kgs. 3:9), but the Holy One, blessed be He, did not call him servant, but rather made him depend upon his father. David: "'For David my servant 's sake"' (1 Kgs. 11:13). Job did not call himself a servant, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: "'You have considered my servant Job?"' (Job 2:3). Joshua did not call himself a servant, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: "'Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died"' (Josh. 24:29). Caleb did not call himself a servant, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: "'But my servant, Caleb'" (Num. 14:24). Eliakim did not call himself a servant, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: "'That I will call my servant Eliakim'" (Is. 22:20). Zerubbabel did not call himself a servant, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: "'In that day, says the Lord of hosts, will I take you, 0 Zerubbabel, my servant, son of Shealtiel, and I will make you as a signet, for I have chosen you, says the Lord of hosts"' (Hag. 2:23). Daniel did not call himself a servant, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called him a servant: "'0 Daniel, servant of the living God"' (Dan. 6:21). Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah did not call themselves servants, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called them servants: "'Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, you servants of God Most High, come forth and come here"' (Dan. 3:26). The former prophets did not call themselves servants, but the Holy One, blessed be He, called them servants: "'For the Lord God will do nothing unless he tells his plan to his servants the prophets"' (Amos 3:7).

The systematization o f cases to yield well organized proofs o f a goveming proposition is elegantly illustrated in this disciplined and well composed composite. The proof - There are [ l ] those w h o called themselves servants, and the Holy One, blessed b e He, called them servants, and [2] there are those who called themselves servants, and the Holy One, blessed b e He, did not call them servants, and [3] there are those who did not call themselves servants, but the Holy One,

2. Anomalous Compositions in S i f a and the Two Sifrks blessed be He, called them servants clarified in context.

1.

A. B.

C.

D. E. F.

2.

3.

4.

- encompasses

69 diverse cases that are now

SIFRE TO DEUTERONOMY CCCXLI1:I "'This is the blessing with which Moses, the man of God, bade the Israelites farewell before he died"' (Dt. 33: 1): Since Moses had earlier said to the Israelites harsh words, for example, "'The wasting of hunger ...without shall the sword bereave"' (Dt. 32:24-5), "'Also in Horeb you made the Lord angry"' (Dt. 9:8), "'You have been rebellious against the Lord"' (Dt. 9:7), now he went and said to them words of comfort: '"This is the blessing with which Moses, the man of God, bade the Israelites farewell before he died."' A. And from him did all of the prophets learn [how to conduct themselves]. B. For they would first say to Israel harsh words and then go and say to them words of comfort. C. Now, for instance, you have among the prophets none whose words were more harsh than Hosea. D. When he began to speak, he said, "'Give them, 0 Lord, whatever you will give. Give them a miscanying womb"' (Hos. 9: 14) E. But then he spoke to them words of comfort: F. "'His branches shall spread, his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his fragrance as Lebanon. They who dwell under his shadow shall again make grain grown and shall blossom as the vine"' (Hos. 144:7-8). G "'I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely...I will be as the dew to Israel, he shall blossom as the lily'" (Hos. 14:s-6). A. So too Joel, to begin with: "'Hear this, you old men, and give ear, all you inhabitants of the land. Has this been in your days or in the days ofyour fathers? Tell your children about it ...that which the palmer-worm has left the locust has eaten"' (Joel I :2-4). B. At the end, he said these words of comfort: "'And I will return to you the years that the locust has eaten, the canker worm and the caterpillar and the palmer-worm"' (Joel 2:25). A. So too Amos, to begin with: "'Hear this word, you cows of Bashan, who are in the mountain of Samaria, who oppress the poor, crush the needy, say to their husbands, 'Bring that we may feast "" (Amos 4: 1). B. At the end, he said these words of comfort: "'Behold the days come ...when the plowman will overtake the reaper"' (Amos 9: 13).

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism 5.

A.

B.

6.

A.

B. 7.

A.

B. C.

So too Micah, to begin with: "'Who hate the good and love evil, who rob ...who also eat the meat of my people and flay their skin off from them"' (Mic. 3:2-3). At the end, he said these words of comfort: "'Who is a God like you, who pardons the iniquity and ignores the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? He does not remain angry forever, because he delights in mercy. He will again have compassion upon us, he will subdue our iniquities and you will cast their sins into the depths of the sea. You will show faithfulness to Jacob, mercy to Abraham, as you have sworn to our fathers from the days of old"' (Mic. 7: 18-20). So too Jeremiah, to begin with: "'Then I will take away from the cities of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness"' (Jer. 7:34). At the end, he said these words of comfort: "'Then will the virgin rejoice in the dance"' (Jer. 3 1:13). Might one think that once the prophets have said words of consolation, they then go and once again say words of rebuke? Scripture states, "'And you shall say, 'Thus shall Babylon sink and not rise again, because of the evil that I will bring upon her...thus far as the words of Jeremiah "" (Jer. 5 1 :64). That shows that once the prophets have said words of consolation, they do not then go and once again say words of rebuke.

The entire composite is aimed at making the point that registers beginning to end: once the prophets have said words o f consolation, they d o not then g o and again say words o f rebuke. In the next entry w e find another exercise o f systematization o f data, the discovery o f patterns in the behavior of noteworthy figures.

1.

2.

SIFRE TO DEUTERONOMY CCCXLIII:I ["'He said, 'The Lord came from Sinai; he shone upon them from Seir. He appeared from Mount Paran and approached from Ribeboth-kodesh, lightning flashing at them from his right, lover, indeed, of the people, their hallowed are all in your hand. They followed in your steps, accepting your pronouncements, when Moses charged us with the Torah as the heritage of the congregation of Jacob. Then he became King in Jeshurun, when the heads of the people assembled, the tribes of Israel together "" (Dt. 33:2-6).] B. "'He said, 'The Lord came from Sinai"': C. This indicates that, when Moses commenced, he did not commence by dealing with what Israel needed first, before commencing with words of praise for the Omnipresent. A. The matter may be compared to the case of a hired orator, who was standing on the platform in court, to speak in behalf of a client. He A.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sijira and the Two Sijirb did not commence by dealing with the needs of that man first, before he commenced by praising the king: "'Happy is the world because of his rule, happy is the world because of his judgment, on us shines the sun, on us shines the moon."' And others gave praise along with him. And then he opened up the matter of the needs of the person who had hired him, and then at the end, he concluded by praising the king once more. So too our lord, Moses did not commence by dealing with the needs of Israel, before he commenced by praising the Omnipresent: "'The Lord came from Sinai."' Then he dealt with what Israel needed: "'Then he became King in Jeshurun, when the heads of the people assembled, the tribes of Israel together."' And at the end he closed by praising the Omnipresent: "'There is none like God, 0 Jeshurun"' (Dt. 33:26). A. So too King David commenced by praising the Omnipresent: "'Hallelujah, sing to the Lord a new song"' (Ps. 149:l). B. Then he commenced praising Israel too: "'For the Lord has taken pleasure in his people"' (Ps. 149:4). C. And he concluded with praise of the Omnipresent: "'Praise God in his sanctuary"' (Ps. 150:1). A. So too Solomon his son commenced by praising the Omnipresent: "'There is no God like you in heaven or on earth, who keeps the agreement and mercy"' (2 Chr. 6: 14). B. Then he commencedpraising Israel too: """If there is famine in the land"' (2 Chr. 6:28). C. And he concluded with praise of the Omnipresent: "'Now, therefore, arise 0 Lord God, to your resting place"' (2 Chr. 6:41). A. So too the Eighteen Blessings that the former prophets ordained for Israel to pray every day did not commence by reference to the things Israel needed before commencing with praise for the Omnipresent: "'The great, mighty, fearful God, you are holy and your name is fearful.'" B. Then: "'Who frees prisoners."' C. Then: "'Who heals the sick."' D. And at the end: "'We give thanks to you."'

The proper approach is to praise and then to beseech, and that pattern is followed by noteworthy figures.

72

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

xvl. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN SIF& TO DEUTERONOMY 131 COMPOSITES OF COMPOSITIONS JOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON PROPOSITION OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

The next pattern parses statements into their individual components, the one who said one clauses did not say the other clause, No sharedproposition emerges, only a common pattern of analysis. SIFRE TO DEUTERONOMY CCCLV:XVII ["'O Jeshurun, there is none like God, riding through the heavens to help you, through the skies in his majesty. The ancient God is a refuge, a support are the arms everlasting. He drove out the enemy before you. By his command: Destroy. Thus Israel dwells in safety, untroubled is Jacob 's abode, in a land of grain and wine, under heavens dripping dew. 0 happy Israel! who is like you, a people delivered by the Lord, your protecting shield, your sword triumphant. Your enemies shall come cringing before you and you shall tread on their backs"' (Dt. 33:24-29).] "'0Jeshurun, there is none like God"': The Israelites say, "'There is none like God,"' and the Holy Spirit says, '"0 Jeshurun.'" A. The Israelites say, "'Who is like you, 0 Lord among the mighty"' (Ex. 15: 1I). B. And the Holy Spirit says, "'Happy are you, Israel, who is like you"' (Is. 33:29). A. The Israelites say, "'Hear 0 Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one"' (Dt. 56:4). B. And the Holy Spirit says, "'And who is like your people, Israel, a unique nation in the earth"' (1 Chr. 17:21). A. The Israelites say, "'As an apple tree among the trees of the wood..."' (Song 2:3). B. And the Holy Spirit says, "'As a lily among thorns"' (Song 2:2). A. The Israelites say, "'This is my God and I will glorify him"' (Ex. 15:2). B. And the Holy Spirit says, "'The people which I formed for myself"' (Is. 43:2 1). A. The Israelites say, "'For you are the glory of their strength"' (Ps. 89: 18). B. And the Holy Spirit says, "'Israel, in whom I will be glorified'" (Is. 49:3)

The voices are those of the Israelites and of the Holy Spirit, another is no cumulative proposition that emerges. The proof addresses a pattern but does not prove a proposition.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sfra and the Two Sfrrb

73

The story of Naqdimon's daughter proves in detail the proposition given at the end. TO DEUTERONOMY CCCV:II SIFRE M 'SH B: Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai was riding on an ass, and his disciples were following after him. He saw a young girl gathering barley from underneath the hooves of the oxen ofArabs. When she saw Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai, she covered herself with her hair and stood before him and said to him, "'My lord, feed me."' He said to her, "'Whose daughter are you?"' She said to him, "'The daughter of Naqdimon b. Gurion am I."' She said to him, "'My lord, do you remember when you witnessed through your signature the document of my marriage settlement?'" Said Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai to his disciples, "'I signed as witness the document of this girl 's marriage settlement, and I read in it: 'a thousand thousands of golden denars deriving from the household of her father in law. ' "'Members of this girl 's household would not go up to the Temple Mount to prostrate themselves before people spread before them felt carpets under their feet, and then they would go in and prostrate themselves and go home in rejoicing. "'My entire life I have sought the meaning of this verse of Scripture, and now I have found it: '" 'If you do not know, 0 most beautiful among women, go out in the footsteps of the flock and feed your kids beside the shepherds ' tents ' (Song 1:8). '"Now I know the meaning. Do not read 'your kids ' but 'your bodies ' [a shift in a consonant of the same word yields both senses]. "'So long as the Israelites carry out the will of the Omnipresent, no nation or kingdom can rule them. But when the Israelites do not cany out the will of the Omnipresent, he will hand them over into the power of a despicable nation, not only into the power of a despicable nation, but even beneath the hooves of the beasts of a despicable nation."'

The story is free-standing and does not require an articulated narrative context to make its point, which is spelled out at the end. It aims at illustrating that proposition and has been composed for the purpose of making a theological point for a collection devoted to the narrative of the destruction.

74

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

T h e narrator has composed a continuous and elaborate account in the following. SIFRE TO DEUTERONOMY CCCV:III In a single year three righteous persons, Moses, Aaron, and Miriam died. The Israelites never again found solace after Moses, as it is said, "'And I cut off the three shepherds in one month"' (Zech. ll:8). But was it in one month [as Zechariah says,] and not in one year that they died? For it is said, "'The great of the peoples are gathered together, the retinue ofAbraham 's God; [for the guardians of the earth belong to God; he is greatly exalted]"' (Ps. 47: 10). But when Miriam died, the well dried up, but then it returned on account of the merit of Moses and Aaron. When Aaron died, the pillar of cloud disappeared, but then both of them were restored through the merit of Moses. When Moses died, all three of them disappeared and did not come back. At that time the Israelites were scattered and bereft of the merit of all religious duties. All the Israelites gathered to Moses and said to him, "'Where is your brother, Aaron?"' He said to them, "'God has put him away in a secret place, for the life of the world to come."' But they did not believe him. They said to him, "'We know of you that you are merciless. Perhaps he said something to you that was not appropriate, and you imposed upon him the penalty of death! "' What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do at that time? He brought the bier of Aaron and held it up in the heavens of heavens, and the Holy One, blessed be He, stood in lamentation over him, and the ministering angels responded to him. What did they say [in response to God 's lamentation]? "'The Torah of truth was in his mouth, and unrighteousness was not found in his lips; he walked with me in peace anduprightness and did turn many away from iniquity"' (Ma. 2:6). At that moment the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the angel of death, '"Go, bring me the soul of Moses. "' He went and stood before him and said to him, "'Moses, give me your soul."' He said to him, "'In a place in which I am in session, you have no right to stand, and yet you say to me, 'Give me your soul '? He growled at him and the other went forth in a huff.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sfra and the Two Sfr6s D.

E. F. G H.

I. J.

K. L. M. N. 0.

4.

P. A. B. C. D.

E.

F.

75

The angel of death went and brought the tale back to the Omnipotent. Once again the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the angel of death, "'Go, bring me the soul of Moses."' He went to where he was and looked for him but did not find him. He went to the sea and said to it, "'As to Moses, have you seen him?"' The sea said to him, "'From the day on which he brought Israel through my midst, I have not seen him."' He went to the mountains and said to them, '"As to Moses, have you seen him?"' They said to him, "'From the day on which the Israelites received the Torah on Mount Sinai, we have not seen him."' He went to Gehenna and said to it, "'As to Moses, have you seen him?"' It said to him, '"I have heard his name, but him I have never seen. "' He went to the ministering angels and said to them, "'As to Moses, have you seen him?"' They said to him, "'Go to mortals."' He went to Israel and said to them, "'As to Moses, have you seen him?"' They said to him, "'God knows his way. God has hidden him away for the life of the world to come, and no creature knows where he is."' For it is said, "'And he was buried in the valley"' (Dt. 34:6). When Moses died, Joshua wept, crying out and mourning for him bitterly. He said, "'My father, my father, my lord, my lord. "'My father, for he raised me, my lord, for he taught me Torah."' And he mourned for him for many days, until the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Joshua, "'Joshua, how long are you going to continue this mourning of yours? And has Moses died only unto you alone? And has he not died, also, unto me? "'For from the moment that he died, there has been deep mourning before me, as it is said, 'And in that day did the Lord, God of hosts, call to weeping and to lamentation ' (Is. 22: 12). "'But it is certain for him that he gains the world to come, as it is said, 'And the Lord said to Moses, Behold, you are going to sleep with your fathers and ...will arise ' (Dt. 3 1: 16).'"

The death stories cover Miriam, Aaron and Moses, and the focus is on the individual events, not on proving a general proposition. It serves not for the exegesis of Deuteronomy but for the clear purpose of portraying the death of the found-

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

76

ing family. The story serves a larger composite of narratives of the holy family. Other candidates for a book of Israelite saints would be David, not to mention Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 1.

2.

SIF&TO DEUTERONOMY CCCLV:XV Another statement concerning the phrase, "'...may he be the favorite of his brothers, [may he dip his foot in oil]"': B. Among all Israelite territories there is none that so completely observes the laws of the year of release as does the territory of Asher. A. "'...may he dip his foot in oil"': B. This teaches that the territory of Asher gushes oil like a spring. 3. A. There is the story that the people of Laodicea were short of oil. They appointed a deputy and said to him, "'Go and buy oil for us for ten thousand talents. "' B. He went to Tyre and said to them, "'I need oil worth ten thousand talents."' C. They said to him, "'Go to So-and-so."' D. He went to the house of So-and-so but did not find him. They said to him, "'Lo, he is out in the field."' E. He went and found him harrowing under the olive trees. F. He said to him, "'I need oil worth ten thousand talents."' G He said to him, "'Wait 'till I finish this tree."' H. When he had finished the work on that tree, taking his utensils and going along, the deputy said, "'This man can 't have enough oil to fill my order of ten thousand talents ' worth. I guess the Jews are just kidding around with me."' I. When he came to his house, the farmer called his slave-girl and said to her, "'Come and wash our feet."' J. She filled a bowl with olive oil and washed off their feet, this showing the sense of the verse, "'...may he dip his foot in oil. "' K. He set bread before him and he ate, then drank. After he had eaten and drunk, he went and measured out for him oil to fill an order for ten thousand talents ' worth. L. He said to him, '"Do you want any more?"' M. He said to him, "'I don 't have money."' N. He said to him, "'Take more, and I come along with you and collect the money owing to me."' 0. He went and measured out for him another eighteen thousand talents ' worth. P. They say that that man did not leave behind a camel or an ass in the land of Israel, that he did not lead away with him [carrying so much oil]. Q. The people of Laodicea spied him coming and came out to receive him three mils from the city and saluted him with great dignity. A.

2. Anomalous Compositions in Sijira and the Two Sijirks

R. He said to them, "'I don 't have this salute coming to me. It belongs to this man [the Jew who was coming along]. For everything I have with me belongs to him, and not only so, but I owe him, in addition to what I brought along, an additional eighteen thousand talents."' S. This serves to illustrate the verse: "'There is one who pretends to be rich but has nothing, there is one who pretends to be poor and has much wealth"' (Prov. 13:7). The editorial purpose of including this powerful story is contradictory. We announce at the outset the connection to our document via the lands of Ashur which produce abundant olive oil, but we end with a moral purpose This serves to illustrate the verse: "'There is one who pretends to be rich but has nothing, there is one who pretends to be poor and has much wealth"' (Prov. 13:7). The narrative stands on its own but supports its concluding pronouncement.

We find ourselves able to identify in Sifre to Deuteronomy remnants of a book of virtue concerning attitudes toward Heaven. One must be grateful for whatever Heaven metes out, whether good or bad. Pride and arrogance flow from prosperity and yield rebellion. Suffering produces virtue and one must be thankful for it. No other canonical composite of late antiquity -from the Mishnah through the Bavli encompassing the Midrash compilations -is formed on propositional lines or with a thematic focus. We possess topical expositions in the Mishnah and in the Halakhic documents, the Tosefta and the Midrash- composites. The two talmuds are rich in propositional compositions but did not collect these compositions into coherent composites, So we find in the remnants of Sifre to Numbers and Sifre to Deuteronomy the materials for a topical composite, a book on a theme, but we do not have any such book. Only when we have surveyed the Midrash-compilations will we find it feasible to speculate on why we do not find what we have reason to expect to discover, tractates of virtue, collections of ethical doctrines fully exposed,

The rhetorical plan of Sifra, Sifre to Numbers and Sifre to Deuteronomy shows that the exegetes, while working verse by verse, in fact have brought a considerable program to the reading of the books of Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, respectively. The authorships of Sifra and the two Sifres share that program, when they cite a verse of Scripture and then a passage of the Mishnah. The proposition then in all three writings concerns the interplay of the Oral Torah, represented by the Mishnah, with the written Torah, represented by the book of Leviticus or Numbers or Deuteronomy. That question demanded, in their view, not

78

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

an answer comprising mere generalities. They wished to show their results through details, masses of details, and, like the rigorous philosophers that they were, they furthermore argued essentially through an inductive procedure, amassing evidence that in its accumulation made the point at hand.

Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael

A treatment of Exodus, Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael seen in the aggregate presents a composite of three kinds of materials concerning the book of Exodus. The first is a set of ad hoc and episodic exegeses of some passages of Exodus. The second is a group of propositional and argumentative essays in exegetical form, in which theological principles are set forth and demonstrated. The third consists of topical articles, some ofthem sustained, many of them well crafted, about important subjects. The document forms a sustained address to the book of Exodus, covering Ex. 12: 1-23: 19, Ex. 3 1: 12-13, and Ex. 35: 1-3. It comprises nine tractates, Pisha (Ex. 12: 1-13:16), Beshallah (Ex. 13-17, 14-3 I), Shirata (Ex, 15:l-21), Vayassa (Ex. 22- 17:7), Amalek (Ex. 17:8-18:27), Bahodesh (Ex. 19:1-20:26), Neziqin (Ex. 2 1 : 1-22:23), Kaspa (Ex. 22:24-23: 19), and Shabbata (Ex. 3 1:12-17 and 35: 1-3). There are eighty-two sections, subdivided into paragraphs. The norm of Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael is to be defined simply as an exegetical exposition of a passage ofthe book of Exodus. We shall now examine the compositions that adhere to some other norm than that.

The systematization of grammar and vocabulary involves the use of verses of Exodus as proof-texts. These philological demonstrations encompass verses of several biblical books and are not devoted to Exodus in particular, even though the

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

80

verse from Exodus is given ordinal priority. These demonstrations of generalizations define the bulk ofthe anomalies and point to work for tractates of a philological or theological character. There are no documents that pursue theological exegesis or exposition, but some sages were writing compositions as if there were.

This document does not contain miscellaneous composites made up of diverse sayings attributed to the same authority. rv. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R ISHMAEL [2] COMPOSITES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael sets forth a number of topical or thematic-propositional composites. The document also contains composites of sayings on diverse topics that severally demonstrate a principle in common. 1.

"Then [Moses and the people of Israel sang this song to the Lord, saying, 'I will sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider he has thrown into the sea]:" B. There are cases in which the word "then" refers to times past, and some in which the word "then" refers to times future: C. "Then men began to call upon the name of the L o r d (Gen. 4:26); "Then she said, A bridegroom of blood" (Ex. 4:26); "Then sang Moses" (Ex. 15:l); "Then David said" (1 Chr. 15:2); "Then Solomon spoke" (1 Kgs. 8:12) - these are cases in which the word "then" refers to times past. D. And there are cases in which the word "then" refers to times future: E. "Then you shall see and be radiant" (Is. 60:s); "Then shall your light break forth as the morning" (Is. 58:8); "Then shall the lame man leap as a hart" (Is. 35:6); "Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened" (Is. 35:5); "Then shall the virgin rejoice in the dance" (Jer. 31:12); "Then our mouth will be filled with laughter...then they will say among the nations, The Lord has done great things with these" (Ps. 126:2)- these are cases in which the word "then" refers to times future.

A.

The proposed generalization belongs in a composite of philological propositions. It is not devoted to the book of Exodus in particular. The next item points to a sequence of ironies that cohere in a common proposition.

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael 2.

81

MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL X1X:I. The mouth that had said, "And moreover I will not let Israel go" (Ex. 5:2) turns out to be the same mouth that would say, "1 will let you go" (Ex. 8:24). The reward? "You shall not abhor an Egyptian" (Dt. 23:8). B. The mouth that had said, "1 do not know the Lord" (Ex. 5:2) turns out to be the same mouth that would say, "Let us flee from before Israel, for the Lord fights for them against the Egyptians" (Ex. 14:25). The reward? "In that day there will be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt and a pillar at the border thereof to the Lord" (Is. 19: 19). C. The mouth that had said, "Who is the Lord, that I should obey him" (Ex. 5:2) turns out to be the same mouth that would say, "The Lord is righteous, and 1 and my people are wicked" (Ex. 9:27). The reward? A burial place was given to them: "You stretched out your right hand -the earth swallowed them" (Ex. 15:12).

A.

T h e pattern is uniform for the three cases. All are drawn from Exodus, but the ironic pattern can encompass other cases. The writer produced an exposition for a collection o f demonstrations that one's statement is not always reliable. Four cases point to the same conclusion that applies throughout: an act done in joy matches another such action.

Four harnessed [their beasts] in joy. Abraham harnessed his beast with joy: "And Abraham rose early in the morning, [saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac, and he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place which God had told him]" (Gen. 22:3): Balaam harnessed his beast with joy: "And Balaam rose up early in the morning and saddled his ass" (Num. 22:2 1). Joseph harnessed his beast with joy: "And Joseph made his chariot ready" (Gen. 46:29). Pharaoh harnessed his beast with joy: "And he made his chariot ready." [Let one act of saddling an ass come and counteract another act of saddling the ass.] May the act of saddling the ass done by our father Abraham, so as to go and carry out the will of his creator counteract the act of saddling that was carried out by Balaam when he went to curse Israel. [Let one act of preparing counteract another act of preparing.] Let Joseph's act of preparing his chariot so as to meet his father serve to counteract Pharaoh's act of preparing to go and pursue Israel. Another teaching: R. Simeon b. Yohai says, "Let the sword held in the hand serve to counteract the sword held in the hand.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

82

B. "Let the sword held in the hand ofAbraham, our father, so as to go and slaughter his son, as it is said, 'Then Abraham put forth his hand and took the knife to slay his son' (Gen. 22:lO) serve to counteract the sword taken by Pharaoh in hand to go and pursue Israel: '1 will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them' (Ex. 15:9)."

The proposition demonstrated in the parallel cases is measure for measure: a given action precipitates its counterpart and is balanced out. The basic principle invokes divine fairness: measure for measure. The next entry sets forth the theological proposition that when the Israelites rely on Heaven they are saved. MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL XL1II:III. "Whenever Moses held up his hand, [Israel prevailed; and whenever he lowered his hand, Arnalek prevailed]:" Now is it really so that the hands of Moses made the Israelites win or the hands of Moses broke Arnalek? But all the time that Moses raised up his hands to the heaven, the Israelites looked to him and believed in the One who had commanded Moses to do it that way, and the Omnipresent then did wonders and acts of might for them. Along these same lines: "The Lord said to Moses, 'Make yourself a fiery serpent"' (Num. 2 1 :8): Now could the snake kill or bring to life? But all the time that Moses did so, the Israelites looked to him and believed in the One who had commanded Moses to do it that way, and the Omnipresent then sent healing to them. Along these same lines: "And the blood shall be to you as a token" (Ex. 12:13): Now what value did the blood have for the angel or for the Israelites for that matter? But all the time that the Israelites did so, putting blood on their doors, the Holy One, blessed be he, had mercy on them: The Lord will pass over" (Ex. 12:23). The proposition is supported by a variety of cases. This is not an exegesis of verses in Exodus but a demonstration based on parallel cases drawn fiom here and there in Scripture. It tits into a theology formed in a systematic proposition. The point is, so long as Israel looks to heaven it prevails. That is not limited to cases drawn fiom Exodus. The next composite is included because of its theme, kindness to strangers. That shared proposition is linked to Mekhilta by an exegesis of a verse of Exodus on the stated proposition. Then fiom No. 2 on we have q topical miscellany on the stated theme. I mark the linkage with indentation.

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL LXXV:I. "You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt:" B. "You shall not wrong him" in words. C. "or oppress him" in property. D. You may not say to him, "Yesterday you worshipped Bel, Kores, and Nebo. Up to now, lo, there was pig-meat sticking out from between your teeth, and now you stand and contradict me." E. And how do we know that if you have wronged him, he may also wrong you? F. Scripture says, "You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt." G In this regard R. Nathan would say, "Don't label your fellow with your own faults." Beloved are strangers [meaning, converts]. For in every passage Scripture admonishes concerning them: "You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt." "Love you therefore the stranger" (Dt. 10: 19). "For you know the heart of a stranger" (Ex. 23:9). R. Eliezer says, "As to a stranger, because there is a bad streak in him, therefore Scripture admonishes concerning him in many passages." R. Simeon b. Yohai says, "Lo, Scripture says, 'But they who love him are as the sun when it goes forth in his might' (Judges 5:3 1). "Now who is the greater, the one who loves the king or the one whom the king loves? "One must say that it is the one whom the king loves. "And it is written, 'You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.' 'Love you therefore the stranger' (Dt. 10: 19). 'For you know the heart of a stranger' (Ex. 23:9)". Beloved are strangers. For in numerous passages Scripture calls them by the same names as it uses for Israel. Israel is called "slaves," as it is said, "For the children of Israel are to me as slaves" (Lev. 25:55), and strangers are called "slaves," as it is said, "And to love the name of the Lord, to be his slaves" (Is. 56:6). The Israelites are called "ministers:" "But you shall be named the priests of the Lord, people shall call you the ministers of our God" (Is. 61 :6), and strangers are called "ministers:" "Also the strangers, who join themselves to the Lord, to minister to him" (Is. 56:6). The Israelites are called "friends:" "But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob whom 1 'have chosen, the seed of Abraham, my friend" (Is. 41 :8), and strangers are called "friends:" "and loves the stranger" (Dt. 10:18).

A.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism E. F.

G

H.

I.

6.

A.

B. C.

D. 7.

A. B.

C. D. E.

A covenant is noted with regard to Israel: "And my covenant shall be in your flesh" (Gen. 17:13), and a covenant is noted with regard to strangers: "and holds fast by my covenant" (Is. 56:6). "Acceptance" is noted in regard to Israel: "That they may be accepted before the Lord" (Ex. 28:38), and "acceptance" is noted in regard to strangers: "Their burnt-offerings and sacrifices shall be acceptable upon my altar" (Is. 56:7). Guarding is noted in regard to Israel: "Behold, he who guards Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps" (Ps. 121:4), and guarding is noted in regard to strangers: "The Lord guards the strangers" (Ps. 146:9). Abraham called himself a stranger: "1 am a stranger and a sojourner with you" (Gen. 23:4). David called himself a stranger: "I am a stranger in the earth" (Ps. 119:19); "For we are strangers before you and sojourners, as all our fathers were; our days on the earth are as a shadow and there is no abiding" (1 Chr. 29:15); "For I am a stranger with you, a sojourner, as all my fathers were" (Ps. 39: 13). Beloved are strangers. For Abraham our father circumcised himself only at ninety-nine years of age, for had he circumcised himself at the age of twenty or thirty, no stranger could have been able to convert to Judaism unless he was under the age of thirty. Therefore the Omnipresent bore with him until he reached the age of ninety-nine years, so as not to slam the door before strangers [who wish to convert]. This was also to provide a reward in accord with the days and years, so increasing the reward for the one who does his will. That carries out the following verse of Scripture: "The Lord was pleased, for his righteousness' sake, to make the Torah great and glorious" (Is. 42:21). And so too you find [strangers/proselytes] in the four groups who respond and speak before the One who spoke and brought the world into being: "One shall say, 'I am the Lord's"' (Is. 44:5), meaning, "All of me belongs to the Lord, with no mixture of sin in me." "Another shall call himself by the name of Jacob" (Is. 44:5): this refers to righteous proselytes. "And another shall subscribe with his hand to the Lord" (Is. 445): this refers to sinners who repent. "And surname himself by the name of Israel" (Is. 44:5): this refers to those who fear heaven [proselytes].

The form is diverse, the formulation "Beloved are strangers" does not occur consistently. The collection is thematic. The composition was prepared for a thematic collection of free-standing topical expositions. A proposition on the stated topic apart from the rather general admonition to tolerate converts is given no role,

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL XV1:I. "[whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast,] is mine:" Why is this stated? Since it is said, "All the firstling males you shall sanctify to the Lord your God" (Dt. 15:19), one should sanctify the first-born only so as to receive a reward for carrying out the religious duty. Or [one might infer:] if you have sanctified the beast, it is sanctified, but if not, it is not sanctified. Scripture is explicit, "...is mine," under all circumstances. Then why does Scripture say, "All the firstling males you shall sanctify to the Lord your God" (Dt. 15:19)? It is so that you will receive a reward for carrying out the religious duty. Along these same lines: "And the priest shall kindle wood on it" (Lev. 6:5). Why is this stated? And does not Scripture say, "And Lebanon cannot provide enough fuel" (Is. 40;16)? Then why does Scripture say, "And the priest shall kindle wood on it" (Lev. 6:5)? It is so that you will receive a reward for canying out the religious duty. Along these same lines: "The one lamb you shall offer in the morning" (Ex. 29:39). Why is this stated? And does not Scripture say, "Nor the beast thereof sufficient for burnt-offerings" (Is. 40: 16). Then why does Scripture say, "The one lamb you shall offer in the morning" (Ex. 29:39)? It is so that you will receive a reward for carrying out the religious duty. Along these same lines: "And let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them" (Ex. 25:8). Why is this stated? And does not Scripture say, ""The heaven is my throne ...where is the house that you can build for me" (Is. 6: 1). Then why does Scripture say, "And let them make me a sanctuary, that 1 may dwell among them" (Ex. 25:8)? It is so that you will receive a reward for carrying out the religious duty. Diverse cases are linked together to register the same point, that is, the detail accords further merit and so is added, The rhetorical pattern conveys the message upon which these cases cohere.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

86

v. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS IN MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R ISHMAEL 131 COMPOSITES OF COMPOSITIONSJOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON PROPOSITION OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

The ommon proposition is stated in a repeated rhetorical pattern Rabbi says, '"to Moses and Aaron' "Should I then draw the conclusion that whoever is mentioned first in Scripture takes precedence indeed? "Scripture says, 'That is Aaron and Moses' (Ex. 6:26). "This indicates that the two were eclual to one another." Along these same lines: "In the beginning God created heaven and earth" (Gen. 1:l). Should I then draw the conclusion that whatever is mentioned first in Scripture takes precedence indeed? Scripture says, "In the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven" (Cen. 2:4. This indicates that the two were equal to one another IT. Ker.

4:15]. Along these same lines: "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob" (Ex. 3:6). Should Ithen draw the conclusion that whoever is mentioned first i n Scripture is more important than his fellow? Scripture says, "1 remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham" (Lev. 26:42). This teaches that all three of them are equivalent.

Along these same lines: "Honor your father and your mother" (Ex. 20: 12). Should 1 then draw the conclusion that that whoever is mentioned first in Scripture takes precedence indeed? Scripture says, "You shall fear every one his mother and his father" (Lev. 19:3). This indicates that the two of them are equivalent [M. Ker. 6:9]. Along these same lines: "And Joshua b. Nun and Caleb b. Jephunneh (Num. 14:6). Should I then draw the conclusion that that whoever is mentioned first in Scripture takes precedence indeed? Scripture says, "Except for Caleb, the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite and Joshua the son ofNunn (Num. 32:12). This indicates that the two of them are equivalent.

The recurrent rhetoric imposes a rigid pattern to prove from diverse cases that the items validate a single point about a great many themes.

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael

The same formalized rhetoric governs the following item. MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL X1I:I. "And it shall come to pass [when you come to the land which the Lord will give you, as he has promised]:" Scripture assigns this rite for the time after their entry into the land and thereafter. "[when you come to the land which the Lord will give you,] as he has promised:" Where did he so state the matter? "And I will bring you into the land" (Ex. 6%). Along these same lines: "This is that which the Lord has said, 'Tomorrow is a solemn rest, a holy Sabbath"' (Ex. 16:23). Where did he state the matter? "And it shall come to pass on the sixth day that they shall prepare" (Ex. 16:5). Along these same lines: "...which the Lord has spoken, saying, 'Through those who are near me I shall be sanctified"' (Lev. 10:3). Where did he state the matter? "And there I will meet with the children of Israel and it shall be sanctified by my glory" (Ex. 29:43). Along these same lines: "The Lord your God will lay fear and dread of you ...as he has spoken" (Dt. 11:25)? Where did he state the matter? "I will send terror of me before you and will discomfort all the people" (Ex. 23:27). Along these same lines: "When the Lord your God will enlarge your territory, as he has promised" (Dt. 12:20). Where did he state the matter? "For I will cast out nations before you and enlarge your borders" (Ex. 34:24); "And I will set your border from the Red Sea" (Ex. 23:31).

Along these same lines: "For the Lord your God will bless you as he promised you" (Dt. 15:6). Where had he stated the matter? "You shall be blessed more than all peoples" (Dt. 7:14). Along these same lines: "And the Lord has bespoken you this day to be his own treasure as he has promised you" (Dt. 265: 18). Where had he promised? "Then you shall be my own treasure" (Ex. 19:5). Along these same lines:

88

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism "And to make you high above all nations that he has made, in praise, in name, and in glory; and that you may be a holy people to the Lord your God, as he has spoken" (Dt. 26: 19). Where had he stated the matter? "And you shall be holy to me" (Lev. 20:26). Along these same lines: "Hear, 0 heaven, and give ear, 0 earth, for the Lord has spoken" (Is. 1:2). Where had he stated the matter? "Give ear, 0 heaven, and I will s p e a k (Dt. 32: 1). Along these same lines: "And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together, for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it" (Is. 40:5). Where had he stated the matter? ""See now that I, even I, am he" (Dt. 32:39). Along these same lines: "But if you refuse and rebel, you shall be devoured with the sword; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken" (Is. 1 :20). Where had he stated the matter? "And I will bring a sword upon you, which will execute vengeance" (Lev. 26:25). Along these same lines: "He will swallow up death forever ...for the Lord has spoken it" (Is. 25:8). Where had he stated the matter? "I kill and I bring alive" (Dt. 32:39). Along these same lines: "Then you shall take delight in the Lord, and I will make you ride on the high places of the earth ...for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it" (Is. 58: 14). Where had he stated the matter? "He makes him ride on the high places of the earth" (Dt. 32:13). Along these same lines: "Behold it comes and it shall be done, says the Lord, this is the day of which I have spoken" (Ez. 39:8). Where had he stated the matter? ""And 1 will make my arrows drunk with blood" (Dt. 32:42). Along these same lines: "But every man shall sit under his vine and under his fig-tree, and none shall make them afraid, for the mouth of the Lord of hosts has spoken" (Mic. 4:4). Where had he stated the matter? "And I will give peace in the land" (Lev. 26:6). Along these same lines: "And none shall remain of the house of Esau, for the Lord has spoken" (Obad. 1:18). Where had he stated the matter?

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael "And out of Jacob one shall have dominion and shall destroy the remnant from the city" (Num. 24: 19). Along these same lines: "And the Lord remembered Sarah as he had said" (Gen. 21 :10. Where had he stated the matter? "No, but Sarah your wife will bear a son for you" (Gen. 15:18). Along these same lines: "And the Lord did to Sarah as he had spoken" (Gen. 2 1 :1). Where had he stated the matter? "In that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, 'To your descendants I have given this land"' (Gen. 15: 18). Along these same lines: "And I will sell your sons and your daughters...for the Lord has spoken" (Joel 4:8). Where had he stated the matter? "And he said, 'Cursed be Canaan"' (Gen. 9:25). Along these same lines: "Since the Lord has said to you, 'You shall henceforth return no more that way"' (Dt. 17:16). Where had he stated the matter? "For since you have seen the Egyptians today, you shall see them again no more" (Ex. 14: 13). Along these same lines: "The wolf and the lamb shall feed together ...they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, says the Lord" (Is. 65:25). Where had he stated the matter? ""And I will cause evil beasts to cease out ofthe land" (Lev. 26:6). Along these same lines: "Of the nations concerning which the Lord said to the people of Israel, 'You shall not go among them, neither shall they come among you"' (1 Kgs. 11:2). Where had he stated the matter? "Neither shall you make marriages with them" (Dt. 7:3). Along these same lines: "Then Solomon said, 'The Lord said he would dwell in thick darkness"' (1 Kgs. 8: 12). Where had he stated the matter? "For I appear in the cloud upon the ark-cover" (Lev. 16:2). Along these same lines: "Then they shall be mine, says the Lord of hosts, in that day that I make, even my own treasure" (Mal. 3: 17). Where had he stated the matter? "Then you shall be my own treasure" (Ex. 195). Along these same lines: "And it shall come to pass that whoever will call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered; for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem will be those who escape as the Lord has said" (Joel 3:5).

89

90

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Where had he stated the matter? "And the peoples of the earth shall see" (Dt. 28: 10). Along these same lines: "And ofthem also I shall select priests and Levites, says the Lord" (Is. 66:2 1). Where had he stated the matter? "The secret things belong to the Lord our God" (Dt. 29:28). So too here you state matters as follows: "And it shall come to pass:" Scripture assigns this rite for the time after their entry into the land and thereafter.

This huge conglomerate follows a single pattern but makes n o point in common that transcends the pattern. A collection o f rhetorically uniform statements that do not depend for cogency upon a common proposition serves a document in theory. But it is difficult to imagine the program o f such a book. T h e next composite joins a miscellany o f statements t o explore the passages that the sages altered, a common question addressed t o diverse passages. MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL X1V:II.l "The time that the people of Israel dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years:" This is one of the passages that [the scribes altered when] they wrote out the Torah for King Ptolemy. Along these same lines they wrote it out for him, "God created in the beginning" (Gen. I : 1). "I will make man according to an image and a likeness" (Gen. 1 :26). "A male with corresponding female parts he created him" (Gen. 5:2). "He finished on the sixth day...and rested on the seventh day" (Gen. 2:2). " N ~ W I will go down there and confound their language" (Gen. I I :7). "And Sarah laughed among her relatives' (Gen. 18: 12). "For in their anger they slew an ox and in their self-will they tore up a stall" (Gen. 49:6). "And Moses took his wife and his sons and set them upon a carrier of man" (Ex. 4:20). "I have not taken any desirable thing from them" (Num. 16: 15). "Which the Lord your God has allotted to give light to all the peoples" (Dt. 4: 19). "Which I have commanded the nations not to worship" (Dt. 17:3). "And the slender footed" (Lev. 1 1 :6). So also: Now the time that the children of Israel dwelt in Egypt, in the land of Canaan, and in the land of Goshen, was four hundred thirty years."

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael

91

The composite catalogues verses that have in common a particular translation history. TO R. ISHMAEL V:I. MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED "And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, 'This is the ordinance of the passover: "' There are pericopes in Scripture in which an encompassing principle is stated first of all, then the details are given at the end, and there are pericopes in which the details are given at the outset, with the encompassing principle at the end. "You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Ex. 19:6) for example constitutes an example of the presentation of details. "These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel" (Ex. 19:6) forms an instance of an encompassing principle. "This is the statute of the torah" (Num. 19:2) forms an encompassing principle. "That they bring to you a red cow, without blemish (Num. 19:2) is a detail. "This is the ordinance of the passover" forms the encompassing principle. "No foreigner shall eat of it" is a detail. When you have an encompassing principle followed by a detail, then the encompassing principle covers only what is specified by the detail.

What holds the composite together is a shared exegetical principle, but the cases are diverse. The next entry has a common proposition expressed through several diverse cases;

5.

6.

7.

MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL XXV1I:I. R. Yose of Damascus says, "Since they set their eyes both above and below to express their lust. So the Holy One, blessed be he, opened up against them the springs above and below so as to destroy them. B. "For so it is said, 'All the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the windows of heaven were opened' (Gen. 7: 1I)." A. And along these same lines, you found in connection with the men of the tower [of Babel], that with that in which they took pride before him he exacts punishment from them. B. "Come let us build us a city" (Gen. 11:4). C. What is said in their regard? "So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth" (Gen. 11:8). A. And along these same lines, you found in connection with the men of Sodom, that with that in which they took pride before him he exacts punishment from them. A.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism "As for the earth out of it comes bread ...the stones of it are the place of sapphires...that path no bird of prey knows ...the proud beasts have not trodden it" (Job 28:5-8). The men of Sodom said, "We have no need for travelers to come our way. Lo, we have food near at hand, lo, we have silver and gold. precious stones and pearls, near at hand. [Let us go and] wipe out the law of [protecting] the wayfarer from our land." Said to them the Holy One, blessed be he,, "Total idiots! On account of the act of goodness that 1 did for you, you take pride and you want to wipe out the law of [protecting] the wayfarer from among you. 1shall wipe out the memory ofyou yourselves from the world." "He breaks open a shaft away from where men sojourn" (Job 28:4). "A contemptible brand ...the tents of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure" (Job. 12:s). That is what made them rebel, namely, "Whatsoever God brings into their hand" (Job 12:6). And so Scripture says, "And they were haughty and committed abominations before me." And what did it cause for them? "'As I live,' says the Lord God, 'Sodom your sister has not done ...as you have done...Behold, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom ...neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy, and they were haughty"' (Ez. 16:4850). "Before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah they were like a garden of the Lord in the land of Egypt" (Gen. 13: 10). Afterward: "And they made their father drink wine" (Gen. 19:33)." Where did they get wine in the cave? The Holy One, blessed be he, made wine available for them: "And it shall come to pass on that day that the mountains shall drip sweet wine" (Joel 4: 18). If that is how he provides for those who anger him, all the more so for those who carry out his will." So you find in the case of the Egyptians that with that in which they took pride before him he exacts punishment from them. "And he took six hundred chariots" (Ex. 14:7). Then: "Pharaoh's chariots and his host he cast into the sea, and his picked officers are sunk in the Red Sea." So you find in the case of Sisera that with that in which he took pride before him he exacts punishment from him. "And Sisera collected all his chariots, nine hundred chariots of iron" (Jud. 4: 13). Then: "They fought from heaven, the stars in their courses fought against Sisera" (Jud. 5:20). So you find in the case of Samson that with that in which he took pride before him he exacts punishment from him. "And Samson said to his father, 'Get her for me, for she is pleasing in my eyes"' (Jud. 14:3).

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael Then: "And the Philistines took hold of him and put out his eyes and brought him down to Gaza" (Jud. 16:32). R. Judah says, "The beginning of his corruption was in Gaza, therefore his punishment was inflicted only in Gaza." So you find in the case ofAbsalom that with that in which he took pride before him he exacts punishment from him. "Now in all Israel there was none so admired as Absalom for his beauty. and when he cut his hair..." (2 Sam. 145:25-26). R. Judah says, "He had taken the oath of a perpetual Nazirite and would cut his hair once every twelve months: 'Now it was at the end of forty years that Absalom said' (2 Sam. 15:7)." R. Yose says, "He was a Nazirite for a specified number of days, and would cut his hair every thirty days: 'Now it was after a period of days according to the days after which he cut it' (2 Sam. 14:26)." Rabbi says, "He cut his hair every Friday, for it is the way ofprinces to cut their hair once a week on Friday." Now what is written thereafter? "And Absalom happened to meet the servants of David, and Absalom was riding upon his mule, and his hair got caught in the terebinth" (2 Sam. 18:9). So you find in the case of Sennacherib that with that in which he took pride before him he exacts punishment from him. "By your messengers you have taunted the Lord ...I have dug and drunk strange water" (2 Kgs. 19:23-24). Then: "And it happened that night that the angel of the Lord went out and killed in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred eighty-five thousand" (2 Kgs. 19:25). They say that the greatest of them was commander over a hundred eighty-five thousand, and the least was in charge of no fewer than two thousand: "How then can you turn away the face of one captain, even of the least of my master's servants" (2 Kgs. 18:24). "This is the word that the Lord has spoken concerning him, The virgin daughter of Zion has despised you ...whom you have taunted ..." (2 Kgs. 19:2 1-22). "This day he shall halt at Nob" (Is. 10:32). So you find in the case of Nebuchadnezzar that with that in which he took pride before him he exacts punishment from him. "And you said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven ...l will ascend above the heights of the clouds"' (Is. 14: 13-14). Then: "You shall be brought down to the netherworld" (Is. 27:3). So you find in the case of Tyre that with that in which they took pride before him he exacts punishment from them. "You, Tyre, have said, 'I am of perfect beauty"' (Ez. 27:3). ""Behold, I am against you, Tyre, and will cause many nations to come up against you" (Ez. 26:3). So you find in the case of the prince ofTyre that with that in which he took pride before him he exacts punishment from him.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

94

"Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre, 'Thus says the Lord God, because your heart is lifted up and you have said, 1am a god"' (Ez. 28:2). C. Then: "You shall die the death of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers" (Ez. 28: lo). 17. A. Lo, with that in which the nations of the world take pride before him he exacts punishment from them: B. "for he is highly exalted." B.

The proposition common to the diverse cases is clear: with that in which the nations of the world take pride before him he exacts punishment from them. The theological proposition is that God is perfectly just. Diverse cases demonstrate that Scripture uses euphemistic language. So too: "Surely he who lays a hand on you lays a hand on the apple of his eye" (Zech. 2: 12). R. Judah says, "What is written is not, 'OII the apple of the eye,' but, 'on the apple of his eye.' "It is, as it were, against the One on high, but Scripture has used euphemistic language." Along these same lines: "Behold, what a weariness is it and you have snuffed at it" (Mal. 1: 13). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "For the iniquity, in that he knew his sons brought a curse upon themselves" (1 Sam. 3:13). Scripture has used euphemistic language. Along these same lines: "Why have you set me as a mark for you, so that 1 am a burden to myself' (Job 7:20). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "Are you not from everlasting, 0 Lord my God, my holy One? We shall not die" (Hab. 1: 12). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "Has a nation changed its gods which are not gods, but my people has changed its glory" (Jer. 2:ll). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "Thus they exchanged their glory for the likeness of an ox that eats grass" (Ps. 106:20). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "And if you deal in this way with me ...and let me not look upon my wretchedness" (Num. 11: 15). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "We have no portion in David ...every man to his tents, 0 Israel" (2 Sam. 20:l). Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "And lo, they put the branch to their nose" (Ez. 8: 17).

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael Scripture has used euphemistic language. A. Along these same lines: "When he comes out of his mother's womb" (Num. 12: 12) should read, "That came out of our mother's womb," B. but Scripture has used euphemistic language. 14. A. So too: "Surely he who lays a hand on you lays a hand on the apple of his eye" (Zech. 2: 12). B. R. Judah says, "What is written is not, 'on the apple of the eye,' but, 'on the apple of his eye.' C. "It is, as it were, against the One on high, but Scripture has used euphemistic language."

B. 13. A.

T h e composition serves the program o f a collection o f abstract exegetical principles, encompassing a sizable construction. The next entry makes the point that historical sequence does not govern the Torah's narratives. It fits together well with the preceding propositional statement. T h e form signals an exegetical composition involving proof-texts for the stated proposition.

MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL XXXI1:I. "The enemy said, ['I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil, my desire shall have its fill of them. I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them]:"' This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah. Along these same lines: "And it came to pass on the eighth day that Moses called" (Lev. 9: I). This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah. Along these same lines: ""In the year that king Uzziah died" (Is. 6:l). This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah. Along these same lines: "Son of man, stand on your feet" (Ez. 2: I). Some say, "Son of man, put forth a riddle" (Ez. 17:2). This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

96 5.

6.

7.

A. Along these same lines: "Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem" (Jer. 2:2). B. This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? C. It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah. A. Along these same lines: "Israel was a luxuriant vine" (Hos. 10:1). B. This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? C. It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah. A. Along these same lines: "1, Qoheleth, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem" (Qoh 1: 12). B. This [statement was made] at the outset of the sequence of events, and why then was it stated here? C. It is because considerations of temporal sequence play no role in the Torah.

The cases register to prove the same proposition, considerations o f temporal sequence play n o role in the Torah.

Narratives sometimes serve t o illustrate established propositional exercises and d o not point toward a documentary setting radically different from any known t o us. In the first entry w e have story about Yohanan b, Zakkai that registers the stated proposition.

1.

2.

3.

MEKHILTA ATTRIBUTED TO R. ISHMAEL XLV1I:I. "On the third new moon after the people of Israel had gone forth out of the land of Egypt:" A. They did not want to count time in accord with the building [of the sanctuary], let them count time in accord with the date of its destruction: "In the fourteenth year after the city was smitten" (Ez. 40: 1). B. They did not want to count the years in accord with their own system, let them count in accord with the system of others: "In the second year of Darius the king" (Haggai 1 :15); [supply:] "In the second year of the king Nebuchadnezzar" (Dan. 2:l). A. And so Scripture says, "If you do not know, 0 most beautifid among women, go out in the footsteps of the flock and feed your kids beside the shepherds' tents" (Song 1:8). B. And Scripture says, "Because you did not serve the Lord your God ...therefore you shall serve your enemy" (Dt. 28:47-48).

A.

3. Anomalous Compositions in Mekhilta, Attributed to R. Ishmael

97

Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai was [riding on an ass] going up to Emmaus in Judea. He saw a young girl gathering barley from underneath the hooves of the oxen of Arabs. Said Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai to his disciples, "What is her standing?" They said to him, "She is a Hebrew girl." "To whom does this horse belong??" They said to him, "To an Arab." Then said Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai to his disciples, "All my days I have been reciting this verse of Scripture, but I have never known what it means: 'If you do not know, 0 most beautiful among women, go out in the footsteps of the flock and feed your kids beside the shepherds' tents' (Song 1:8). "You did not want to be subjugated to heaven, lo, you are subjugated to the most despicable of nations, the Arabs. "You did not want to set aside the shekel-tax for heaven, 'a beka a head' (Ex. 38:26), lo, you separate fifteen shekels for the government of your enemies. "You did not want to keep the highways and roads in repair for those who came up as pilgrims to the chosen house. Lo, you keep in repair the posts and stations on the highways for those who go up to the royal cities. "And so Scripture says, 'Because you did not serve the Lord your God ...therefore you shall serve your enemy:' "Because you did not serve the Lord your God with love, therefore you shall serve your enemy with hatred. "Because you did not serve the Lord your God in a condition of abundance, therefore you shall serve your enemy in hunger and in thirst. "Because you did not serve the Lord your God when you were clothed, therefore you shall serve your enemy naked. "Because you did not serve the Lord your God 'by reason of the abundance of all things, therefore you shall serve your enemy in want of all things."' What is the meaning of the phrase, "in want of all things"? Intelligence was taken from them. Another interpretation of the phrase, "in want of all things"? That they were lacking in study of the Torah.

The narrative about the girl does not presuppose a setting other than an exegetical one.

98

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael is not limited to the topical program set forth by the book of Exodus. No surviving compositions derived fiom a specific, named authority. But we do find well-executed compositions that are devoted to theological conceptions and repetitive rhetorical patterns. As to the latter, we noted the following: [I] There are cases in which the word "then" refers to times past, and some in which the word "then" refers to times future. The proposition is rejected [2] that whoever is mentioned first in Scripture is more important than his fellow. Scripture supplies proofs [3] for its propositions: Where did he state the matter? [4] There are pericopes in Scripture in which an encompassing principle is stated first of all, then the details are given at the end, and there are pericopes in which the details are given at the outset, with the encompassing principle at the end; Scripture has used euphemistic language. As to theological propositions covering proofs deriving fiom Mekhilta, we note the following: [I] one should show kindness to strangers (converts), [2] an act done in joy matches another such action ("let one act of saddling an ass come and counteract another act of saddling the ass.") May the act of saddling the ass done by our father Abraham, so as to go and carry out the will of his creator counteract the act of saddling that was carried out by Balaam when he went to curse Israel. Further: "Since they set their eyes both above and below to express their lust. So the Holy One, blessed be he, opened up against them the springs above and below so as to destroy them. Another proposition demonstrated through a variety of cases is [3] that historical sequence does not govern the Torah's narratives. The narrative involving Yohanan ben Zakkai underscores divine justice. The conventional theology of Rabbinic Judaism emphases these points but in the theological component of the anomalous media reproportions them.

Given the volume of compositions in Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael we must dismiss as unimpressive the number and consequence of the composites prepared for a type of document not set forth in the Rabbinic canon. The collection goes over familiar ground, reiterating the dominant motif of the extant canonical documents that God practices exact justice,

Anomalous Compositions in Genesis Rabbah

Genesis Rabbah in its final statement emerges from the momentous century in which the Rome Empire passed from pagan to Christian rule, and, in which, in the aftermath of the Julian's abortive reversion to paganism, in ca. 360, which endangered the Christian character of the Roman empire, Christianity adopted that politics of repression of paganism that rapidly engulfed Judaism as well. The issue confronting Israel in the Land of Israel therefore proved immediate: the meaning of the new and ominous turn of history, the implications of Christ's worldly triumph for the other-worldly and supernatural people, Israel, whom God chooses and loves. The message of the exegete-compositors addressed the circumstance of historical crisis and generated remarkable renewal, a rebirth of intellect in the encounter with Scripture, now in quest of the rules not of sanctification -these had already been found - but of salvation. So the book of Genesis, which portrays how all things had begun, would testify to the message and the method of the end: the coming salvation of patient, hopeful, enduring Israel. Genesis Rabbah makes the same point many times over and sets forth a coherent and original account of the book of Genesis.' Generally thought to have been closed at ca. 400-450 C.E., sometime after the Talmud of the Land of Israel had been redacted, Genesis Rabbah transforms the book of Genesis from the genealogy and family history ofAbraham, Isaac, Jacob, then Joseph, into a book of the laws of history and rules of the salvation of Israel: the deeds of the founders become omens and signs for the final generations.

I00

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

The documentary program finds definition in the repetition of clear concerns. In Genesis Rabbah the entire narrative of Genesis is so formed as to point toward the sacred history of Israel, the Jewish people: its slavery and redemption; its coming Temple in Jerusalem; its exile and salvation at the end of time - the whole a paradigm of exile and return. In the rereading by the authorship of Genesis Rabbah, Genesis proclaims the prophetic message that the world's creation commenced a single, straight line of significant events, that is to say, history, leading in the end to the salvation of lsrael and, through Israel, of all humanity. The single most important proposition of Genesis Rabbah is that, in the story of the beginnings of creation we find the message of the meaning and end of the life of the Jewish people in the here and now of the fifth century. The deeds of the founders supply signals for the children about what is going to come in the future. So the biography of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob also constitutes a protracted account of the history of lsrael later on. Genesis Rabbah is a composite document. Some of the material in the compilation can be shown to have been put together before that material was used for the purposes of the compilers of Genesis Rabbah. Many times a comment entirely apposite to a verse of Genesis has been joined to a set of comments in no way pertinent to the verse at hand. Proof for a given syllogism, furthermore, will derive from a verse of Genesis as well as from numerous verses of other books of the Bible. Such a syllogistic argument therefore has not been written for exegetical purposes particular to the verse at hand. On the contrary, the particular verse subject to attention serves that other, propositional plan; it is not the focus of discourse; it has not generated the comment but merely provided a proof for a syllogism. That is what it means to say, a proposition yields an exegesis. That fundamental proposition, displayed throughout Genesis Rabbah, which yields the specific exegeses of many of the verses of the book of Genesis and even whole stories, is that the beginnings point toward the endings, and the meaning of Israel's past points toward the message that lies in Israel's future. The things that happened to the fathers and mothers of the family, Israel, provide a sign for the things that will happen to the children later on. The document undertakes two tasks. These define its norms. First comes the exegesis of clauses of verses of Genesis, read in sequence, just as we noted in Sifra and %ti-6to Numbers. Second comes a verse other than the one under analysis. That other verse intersects with the verse under discussion, and - as before, with Sifre to Numbers -the one is called the intersecting verse and the other the base verse. This formal arrangement of verses predominates from Genesis Rabbah forward. The power of this form - the juxtaposition of two verses, one derived from the document at hand, the other from some other document altogether which will dominate from the present document (ca. 400-450 C.E.) onward, is simple. On the surface, the intersecting verse expands the frame of reference of the base verse, introducing data otherwise not present. But just beneath the surface lies

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah

101

the implicit premise: both the intersecting verse and the base verse make the same point, and, in their meeting, each rises out of its narrow framework as a detail or an instance of a rule and testifies to the larger picture, the encompassing rule itself. The intersecting versebase verse construction therefore yields a proposition that transcends both verses and finds proof in the cases of each, and that powerfhl way of composing something new forms the centerpiece of the present document. I regard as integral to the intersecting versebase verse composition the exegetical exercise on the intersecting verse Topical expositions that take up themes of Genesis obviously prove integral to Genesis Rabbah. Only anomalies register. For the anomalous compositions I utilize the program that has emerged in the prior chapters. In my survey of Genesis Rabbah I treat as integral to Genesis Rabbah compositions and composites that undertake the exegesis of verses in the book of Genesis. I designate as anomalous and representative of some document other than Genesis Rabbah composition and composites that focus on a particular sage or topic (proposition), adhere to a formal construction for coherence, or insert an autonomous narrative.

The miscellany on Simeon b, Yohai is inserted casually but is made up of a sizable corpus of biographical stories. 1.

GENESIS RABBAH XXXV:II. A. "'And God said, 'This is the sign of the covenant which I make between me and you and everyliving creature that is with you for all future generations"" (Gen. 9:12): B. Said R. Yudan, "'What is written for 'generations' lacks the consonant that stands for the plural when it is fully spelled out, hence [there is an exclusion, and] what is excluded is two generations, the generation of Hezekiah and the generation of the men of the great assembly. [Those generations required no such sign, because they were righteous on their own.]"' C. R. Hezekiah deletes the generation of the men ofthe great assembly and in their place introduces the generation of R. Simeon b. Yohai. MISCELLANY ON SIMEON B. YOHAI 2. A. Elijah, of blessed memory, and R. Joshua b. Levi were in session and repeating traditions together. They came to a teaching in the name of R. Simeon b. Yohai. They said [in response to a point that was unclear,"' Let the master of the teaching come forth so that we can ask him our question.'" B. Elijah of blessed memory went to join him in session. C. [Simeon] said to him, "'Who is with you?" D. He said to him, "'One of the great men of the generation, R. Joshua b. Levi."'

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

E.

[Elijah] said to him, "'Has the rainbow ever appeared in his time? And if it has appeared, then he is not worthy of having me receive him [since he cannot be truly righteous]."' A. R. Hezekiah in the name of R. Jeremiah: "'So did R. Simeon b. Yohai say, 'Valley, valley! Be filled with golden denars!' And it filled up with golden denars."' A. R. Hezekiah in the name of R. Jeremiah: "'This is what R. Simeon b. Yohai said, "'Ifhe wants. Abraham can [Freedman:] intercede from his time to mine, and 1 can intercede from mine to the king-messiah. B. ""But if he does not want, then Ahijah the Shilonite can join with me, and we together can intercede in behalf of all generations from Abraham to the king-messiah.""' A. R. Hezekiah in the name of R., Jeremiah, "'So too did R. Simeon b. Yohai say, 'The world never lacks thirty-six righteous men in the classification of Abraham. If they are three, my son and 1 are two of them. If they are twenty, my son and I are two of them. If they are ten, my son and I are two of them. If they are five, my son and I are two of them. If they are only two, my son and 1 are they. B. ""If only one remains, it is I.""

RABBAH LXX1X:VI. GENESIS "'...and he camped before the city"' (Gen. 33:18): He paid his respects to the principal personalities of the city, the important ones, by giving them gifts. Another interpretation: "'...and he camped before the city"' (Gen. 33:lS): He began to found markets and to sell goods cheaply, which is to indicate that a person must show gratitude to a place from which he has derived benefit. A. R. Simeon b. Yohai spent thirteen years in hiding in a cave, along with his son, eating dried carobs, so that their bodies produced sores. In the end he went out and sat at the mouth of the cave. He saw a hunter trapping birds. B. When he would hear an echo say from heaven, "'Pardoned' [in Latin, dimissio, as given here], the bird escaped, but if the echo shouted, "'Death"' [in Latin: specula, as given here], the bird was trapped. C. He said, "'Without the intervention of heaven, even a bird is not trapped, all the more so the soul of a mortal."' D. He came forth and discovered that the difficulties had diminished. They went and took a bath in the hot springs at Tiberias. His son said to him, "'We have derived so much benefit from Tiberias, should we not purify it from corpseuncleanness?"'

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah E.

F.

G

H.

What did he do? He took radishes, cut them up, and [in order to locate the presence of corpse-matter and to remove it, so the town would be free of cultic uncleanness deriving from corpse-matter] threw down the pieces, and a corpse would rise and they carried the corpse outside of the town, so they thus removed all the corpse-uncleanness from Tiberias. That night one common person went, some say a man from the grain market, some say, from the sack market, and he took a corpse and hid it away [so restoring the cultic uncleanness from which the town had suffered before]. In the morning he said, "'Do you not say that the Son of Yohai has purified Tiberias? Come, see a corpse."' And he stood at it. He said, '"I make a decree that the one who is standing there should lie down [dead] and the one who is lying down should stand."' And that is just what happened. I. He went to spend the Sabbath in his own home. Passing the town of Magdala of the Dyers, he heard the sound of the voice of the scribe, Nakai: "'Do you not maintain that Ben Yohai has purified Tiberias? But they say that a corpse has turned up there. 1say, 'Let such and so happen to me, if I do not have in my hand legal statements as numerous as the numbers of hairs on my head concerning Tiberias, that it is clean, except for such and such a place."" J. [Simeon said to him,] "'Were you not with us when the vote was taken? [You had no right to make such a statement.] You have broken down the fence that the sages have erected: 'He who breaks down a fence, a serpent shall bite' (Qoh. 10:8)."' K. The man went out forthwith, and that is just what happened. L. He went through the valley of Beth Tofah. He saw someone standing there and collecting the after growth of crops that had grown in the Seventh Year [when sowing was forbidden]. He said, "'Isn't this the after-growth of produce of the seventh year? [How come you're gathering it?]"' M. The man said, "'But you yourself have declared it permitted [for use]."' N. He said to him, "'But is it not the case that my colleagues differed from my view?"' 0. Forthwith the rabbi raised up his two eyebrows and stared at the man, who became a pile of bones.

The composite on Simeon b Yohai is the only collection in Genesis Rabbah organized around a named figure. There is no indication that lives of sages were

104

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

subject to composition. But we have no reason to doubt people were interested in Rabbinic biography. 111.

ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS I N GENESIS RABBAH 121 COMPOSITES OF SAYINGS ON A GIVEN PRINCIPLE OR THEME WORKED OUT THROUGH DIVERSE TOPICS

Several propositional composites occur in Genesis Rabbah, diverse in their components but coherent in the proposition that animates the whole, These afford access to a type of canonical document that we do not possess but that could well have occurred in the canon.

1.

A.

B.

C.

D.

ALLTHINGS SERVE A PURPOSE (I) GENESIS RABBAH X:VI. Bar Sira said,."'The divinity produced medicine from the earth, with which the physician heals a wound and the pharmacist mixes his medicines."' Said R. Simon, "'There is not a single herb which is not subject to the influence of a planet in heaven, which smites it and says to it, 'Grow!' as it is written, 'Do you know the ordinances of heaven? Can you establish the dominion thereof in the earth?' (Job 38:33). 'Can you bind the chains of Pleiades or loose the bands of Orion?' (Job 38:31)."' R. Hinena bar Pappa and R. Simon say, "'Pleiades binds produce and Orion draws it out between knot and knot [Freedman], in line with the following verse of Scripture: 'Can you lead forth the constellations in their season?' (Job 38:32)."' R. Tanhum b. R. Hiyya and R. Simon: "'For it is the constellation which makes the fruit ripen."'

This composition exemplifies a propositional essay, but Genesis Rabbah does not contain a sizable portfolio of such writing.

1.

A.

B.

C. D. E. F.

ALLLOCATIONS SERVE A PURPOSE (2) GENESIS RABBAH XXX1V:XV. "'And you, be fruitful and multiply, bring forth abundantly on the earth and multiply in it"' (Gen. 9:7): Said R. Simeon b. Laqish, "'A covenant has been worked out even among diverse climates [to permit humanity to produce crops everywhere]"' R. Simeon b. Laqish was laboring over Torah-study in a little forest in Tiberias. Two women came out of there. One said to the other, "'Thank God we got out of that terrible air."' He called to them, "'Where do you come from?"' One of them said to him, "'From Mazga."' He said to them, "'I know Mazga, and that town has only two dwellings."'

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah

105

He then said, "'Blessed is he who has endowed with grace in the eyes of the locals the town in which they live."' Adisciple of R. Isi was in session before him. The master explained a matter to him, but he could not grasp it. He said to him, "'Why cannot you grasp things?" He said to him, "'I am in exile from my place."' He said to him, "'Where do you come from?" He said to him, "'From Gabat Sharnmai."' He said to him, "'And what is the climate there?"' He said to him, "'When a baby is born there, we have to crush spices and rub them on his head so that the mosquitoes will not be able to eat him alive."' He then said, "'Blessed is he who has endowed with grace in the eyes of the locals the town in which they live. "'And so in the future: 'And I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of flesh (BSR)' (Ez. 36:26), meaning, 'a heart that does not envy (BSR) his fellow's portion.""

The two stories make the same point: whatever the facts, people grow accustomed to the characteristics of a given locale. These do not represent important instances of anomalous writing. WHATIS T H E DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROPHETS OF ISRAELA N D THOSE OF T H E NATIONS? RABBAHLI1:V. GENESIS 1. A. "'But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night [and said to him, 'Behold, you are a dead man, because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man's wife']"' (Gen. 20:3): B. What is the difference between the prophets of Israel and those of the nations? C. R. Hama b. R. Haninah said, "'The Holy One, blessed be he, is revealed to the prophets of the nations of the world only in partial speech, in line with the following verse of Scripture: 'And God called [WYQR, rather than WYQR' as at Lev. 1:I] Balaam' (Num. 23: 16). [Lev. R. 1:XIII. I .C adds: On the other hand, he reveals himself to the prophets of Israel in full and complete speech, as it is said, 'And the Lord called (WYR') to Moses' (Lev. 1:I).]"' D. Said R. Issachar of Kepar Mandi, "'[Lev. R. 1:XIII. 1.Dadds: Should that prophecy, even in partial form, be paid to them as their wage? Surely not, in fact that is no form of speech to gentile prophets, who are frauds.] The connotation of the language, 'And God called to Balaam' (Num. 23: 16) is solely unclean. That is in line with the usage in the following verse of Scripture: 'That is not clean, by that which happens by night' (Deut. 23:ll). [So the root is the same, with the result that YQR at Num. 23:16 does not bear the meaning of God's calling to Balaam. God rather declares Balaam unclean.]

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism 'But the prophets of Israel are addressed in language of holiness, purity, clarity, in language used by the ministering angels to praise God. That is in line with the following verse of Scripture: 'And they called one to another and said, "'Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts"" (Is. 6:3)."' R. Yose said, ""The Lord is far from the evil, but the prayer of the righteous does he hear' (Prov. 5:29). ""The Lord is far from the wicked' refers to the prophets of the nations of the world. ""But the prayer of the righteous does he hear' refers to the prophets of Israel. R. Yose b. Bibah said, "'The Holy One, blessed be he, appears to the prophets of the nations of the world only by night, when people take leave of one another: 'Now a word was secretly brought to me. ..at the time of leave-taking, from the visions ofthe night, when deep sleep falls on men' (Job 4: 12-13)"' Said R. Eleazar b. Menahem, ""The Lord is far from the evil' (Prov. 5:29) refers to the prophets of the nations of the world. ""But the prayer of the righteous does he hear'(Prov. 5:29) speaks of the prophets of Israel. "'You furthermore find that the Holy One, blessed be he, appears to the prophets of the nations of the world only like a man who comes from some distant place. That is in line with the following verse of Scripture: 'From a distant land they have come to me, from Babylonia' (Is. 39:3). "'But in the case of the prophets of Israel, he is always near at hand: 'And he appeared [not having come from a great distance]' (Gen. 18: 1). 'And the Lord called' (Lev. 1:I).' [These usages bear the sense that he was right nearby.]"' What is the difference between the prophets of Israel and those of the nations? R. Hinena said, "'The matter may be compared to a king who, with his friend, was in a hall, with a curtain hanging down between them. When the king speaks to his friend, he turns back the curtain and speaks to his friend."' And rabbis say, "'The matter may be compared to the case of a king who had a wife and a concubine. When he walks about with his wife, he does so in full public view. When he walks about with his concubine, he does so discreetly. So too, the Holy One, blessed be he, is revealed to the prophets of the nations only at night, "'in line with that which is written:'And God came to Balaam at night' (Num. 22:20). 'And God came to Laban the Ararnean in a dream of the night' (Gen. 3 1:24).'And God came to Abimelech in a dream by night' (Gen. 19:3)."' "'[But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night and said to him,] 'Behold, you are a dead man, because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man's wife"" (Gen. 20:3):

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah

B.

On the basis of God's behavior here, we see that it is not necessary to supply an admonition [of the consequence of a violation of the law] to a gentile [who may be punished without the procedure of admonition]. [Freedman, p. 455, n. 1: The next verse says that Abimelech had not come near here, whence it follows that if he had, death would have been the penalty, even before this was told him.]

The numerous specitic points of difference between Israelite and pagan prophecy involve diverse writing but a single coherent proposition. A propositional document devoted to the contrast between Israel and the pagans will have included a collection of such demonstrations. The next entry is joined to its context by citation of a verse on the tonic of the death ofthe patriarch and collects a sizable topical composite on burying sages. 1.

A.

GENESIS RABBAH LXI1:I. "'These are the days of the years ofAbraham's life, a hundred and seventy-five years"' (Gen. 25:7):

Miscellany on the Death of Saints "'Strength and dignity are her clothing, and she laughs at the time to come"' (Prov. 3 1 :25): The whole of the reward of the righteous is readied for them in the age to come, but the Holy One, blessed be he, shows it to them while they are yet in this world. Since he shows them their full recompense in the world to come while they are yet in this world, their soul is satisfied and they go to sleep peacefully. Said R. Eleazar, "'The matter may be compared to the case of a king who called a banquet and invited guests and showed them in advance what they were going to eat and drink, so their souls were satisfied and they fell asleep. So the Holy One, blessed be he, shows the righteous while they are yet in this world the coming recompense that he is going to give to them in the age to some, and their souls are satisfied and they fall asleep. "'What scriptural verse indicates it? 'For now I should have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept, then I had been at rest' (Job 3:13). Thus when the righteous leave, the Holy One, blessed be he, shows them the recompense that is coming.'" When R. Abbahu was dying, they showed him thirteen rivers of balsam. He said to them, "'To whom do these belong?" They said to him, "'To you."' He said to them, "'These belong to Abbahu? And I had thought, 'I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for naught and vanity, yet surely my right is worth the Lord, and my recompense with my God' (Is. 44:4). [But I was wrong.]"' Zabedi b. Levi, R. Joshua b. Levi and R. Yose b. Petros: each of them recited a verse as he lay dying.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism One of them said, "'For this let every one who is godly pray to you in a time when you may be found"' (Ps. 32:6). "'For in him does our heart rejoice, because we have trusted in his holy name"' (Ps. 33:21). One of them said, "'You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies"' (Ps. 235). '"So shall all those who take refuge in you rejoice"' (Ps. 5: 12). The third said, "'For a day in your courts is better than a thousand"' (Ps. 84:l I). Rabbis said, "'Oh how abundant is your goodness, which you have laid up for those who fear you"' (Ps. 31:20). This indicates that when the righteous leave, the Holy One, blessed be he, shows them the recompense that is coming. Ben Azzai says, ""Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints' (Ps. 116:lS). When does the Holy One, blessed be he, show them the recompense that is coming? Right near their death. "'That is in line with this verse: '... is the death of his saints.' Therefore: 'She laughs at the time to come' (Prov. 3 1:25)."' What is the difference between the death of the young and the death of the old? R. Judah and R. Abbahu: R. Judah said, "'When a lamp goes out on its own, it is good for the lamp and good for the wick, but when it goes out not on its own, it is bad for it and bad for the wick."' R. Abbahu said, "'When figs are picked in season, it is good for them and good for the fig-tree, and when not picked in season, it is bad for them and bad for the fig-tree."' There is this story. R. Hiyya and his disciples, and some say, R. Aqiba and his disciples, were accustomed to get up early and to go into session under a fig tree. And the owner of the fig tree would get up early and pick off the figs. They said, "'Is it possible that he suspects us [of stealing his figs]? We should change our place."' What did they do? They changed their place. He went to them and said to them, "'My lords, the merit of one religious duty that you would study under my fig tree has accrued to me, and now you have taken it away."' They said to him, "'We wondered, Is it possible that you suspect us [of stealing his figs]? [We therefore changed our place.]"' He assured them [that that was not the case], and they went back to their original place. What did he then do? He ceased to gather his figs at dawn. The figs then began to rot [on the tree]. They said, "'The owner of the fig-tree knows when the season of each fig has come, and that is when he picks it. [That is why he picked the figs early in the morning.] So too, the Holy One, blessed be he, knows the season of the righteous, and he then gathers them.

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah What is the scriptural basis for this view? 'My beloved has gone down to his garden' (Song 6:2)."' Another version of the same story: R. Hiyya the Elder and his disciples, and some say, R. Hoshaia and his disciples, were accustomed to get up early and to study under a fig tree. And the owner of the fig tree day by day would get up early and pick off the figs. They said, "'Is it possible that he suspects us [of stealing his figs? We should change our place."' [What did they do?] They changed their place. The owner of the fig tree got up early to pick off his figs and did not find them there. He went looking for them. He said to them, "'My lords, the merit of one religious duty that you would carry out [to my benefit] you now withhold from me."' They said to him, "'God forbid!"' He said to them, "'On what account did you abandon your place and go into session somewhere else?"' They said to him, "'We said, we should change our place, for it may be that you suspect us [of stealing his figs]. [We therefore changed our place.]"' He said to them, "'God forbid. Let me tell you why 1 would get up early in the morning and go to my fig tree to collect the ripe figs. Once the sun has shown on them, they start rotting."' [He relieved their doubts, and] they went back to their original meeting place. On that day he left them alone and did not gather his figs, and the sun shown on the figs, and they split some of them and found that they had rotted. They said, "'The owner of the fig-tree knows when the season of each fig has come, and that is when he picks it. So too, the Holy One, blessed be he, knows the season of the righteous, and he then gathers them. What is the scriptural basis for this view? 'My beloved has gone down to his garden' (Song 6:2)."' "'In a good old age"' (Gen. 2523): Said R. Simeon b. Laqish, "'There are three concerning whom 'good old age' is stated, Abraham , and he had it coming, David, and he had it coming, [and Gideon,] but Cideon did not have it coming. "'Why not? Because 'Gideon made an ephod thereof' (Judges. 8:27) for idolatry."' The stories are formally and propositionally miscellaneous but share a theme in common, what happens to sages when they are dying.

1.

A.

ALLTHINGS SERVE A PURPOSE (3) GENESIS RABBAH X:VII. Rabbis say, "'Even things that you regard as completely superfluous to the creation of the world, for instance, fleas,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism gnats, and flies, also fall into the classification of things that were part of the creation of the world. "'And the Holy One, blessed be he, carries out his purposes even with a snake, scorpion, gnat, or frog. [Stories follow to illustrate this point.]"' R. Aha reported the following story: "'There was a man who was standing on the bank of a canal. He saw a frog carrying a scorpion and bringing it across the river. Once it had carried out its task, it brought it back to its place."' R. Phineas in the name of R. Hanan revorted this story: "'There was a man who was going to harvest a field. He saw a piece of grass and cut it and made it into a crown for his head. A snake came along, and the man hit it and killed it. Someone came along and was standing and looking at the snake, wondering who had killed it. The man said, 'I am the one who killed it.'The man saw the grass made into a wreath on the man's head. "'He said, 'Did you really kill it?' "'The man further said, 'Can you remove that grass from your head?' "'The other said, 'Yes.' When he had taken the grass off, he said to him, 'Can you touch the snake with your staft?' "'He said to him, 'Yes.' When he touched it, his limbs fell off. [The crown had earlier protected him from the poison of the snake.]"' R. Yannai was in session and expounding [a lesson] at the gate of his town. He saw a snake rushing along, moving from side to side. He said, "'This creature is going to carry out his duty."' Almost immediately the report circulated in town, "'So and so has been bitten by a snake and died."' R. Yannai was in session and expounding [a lesson] at the gate of his town. He saw a snake rushing along, moving from side to side. He said, "'This creature is going to carry out his duty."' Almost immediately a certain citizen came by. The snake bit him and he died. R. Eleazar was sitting and defecating in the privy. A Roman came along and made him get up and sat down himself. He said, "'This is not for nothing."' Forthwith a snake came out and bit the Roman and killed him. Eleazar recited in his own regard the verse, "'Therefore 1will give an Edomite [Roman] [RSV: a man] for you"' (Is. 43:4), [reading the word for man, Adam, as Edom, Rome]. R. Isaac bar Eleazar was walking on the sea cliffs at Caesarea. He saw a thigh bone and buried it, but it rolled about. He buried it and it rolled about. He said, "'This bone has been designated for some purpose."'

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah B.

8.

A.

B.

111

A runner jogged by and stumbled on the bone and fell and died. They went and rummaged through [the messenger's bag] and found that he was carrying harsh decrees against the Jews of Caesarea. The vile Titus, when he went into the house of the Holy of Holies, pulled down the veil, blasphemed, and cursed. When he came out, a mosquito flew up his nose and chewed at his brain. When he died, they split open his brain and found in it something like a bird, weighing two litra s. [So the mosquito served God's purpose in punishing Titus.]

A familiar theme presents itself. We have already encountered the proposition that all things serve a purpose. But these entries have been scattered and do not point toward a propositional conglomerate. All we have are bits and pieces of what can have serve as elements of a shared exposition, not formalized adumbrations of a document. 1.

A.

2.

3.

GENESIS RABBAHXXV1:VI. "'Then the Lord said, 'My spirit shall not abide [in man forever, for he is flesh, but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years]"" (Gen. 6:3): A.

Topical Miscellany on God's Relationship to Man R. Yannai and R. Simeon b. Laqish say, "'Gehenna in point

of fact is nothing other than a day which will bum up the wicked. What is the scriptural evidence? 'For lo, a day comes, it bums as a fumace' (Mal. 3:19)."' B. Rabbis say, "'In point of fact there is really such a thing, as it is said, 'Whose fire is in Zion, and his fumace in Jerusalem' [so Gehenna is in Jerusalem] (Is. 3 1:9)."' C. R. Judah b. R. Ilai: "'Gehenna is neither a day nor a real place. But it is a fire that goes forth from the body of a wicked person and consumes him. What is the scriptural evidence for that proposition? 'You conceive chaff, you shall bring forth stubble, your breath is a fire that shall devour you' (Is. 33:11)."' A. Said R. Yudan bar Ilai, "'These spirits will not be judged before me ever."' B. R. Huna in the name of R. Aha: "'When I put the spirit back in its sheath, I shall not put their spirit back in their sheaf."' C. Said R. Hiyya bar Abba, ""I shall not fill them with my spirit when I fill men with my spirit, for in the present age my spirit fills only one of the limbs, but in the age to come it will fill the entire body,' in line with this verse: 'And my spirit I shall put in your midst' (Ez. 36:27)."'

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

112 4.

.

A. R. Yudan b. Betera said, ""I shall never again enter into such a judgment as this with man' [and there will never be another flood]."' 9 . R. Huna in the name of R. Joseph: "'1 shall not again curse...1 shall not again smite' (Gen. 8:21): enough is enough."' C. Rabbis say, ""1 will not again curse' speaks ofthe children of Noah. 'I will not again smite' refers to generations to come afterward."' 5. A. '"1 said that my spirit should serve as the judge for them, but they did not want it. Lo, I shall humble them with suffering. 9 . "'I said that my spirit should serve as the judge for them, but they did not want it. Lo, 1 shall humble them through their strife with one another."' C. For R. Eleazar said, "'You find someone becomes liable for injury done only in the case of another man of his own sort."' D. R. Nathan said, "'Even if it is a dog or a wolf."' E. R. Huna bar Gurion said, "'Even if it is a staff or a strap, in line with this verse of Scripture: 'For the yoke of his burden ...y ou have broken as in the day of Midian' (Is. 9:3)."' F. R. Aha said, "'Even trees that do not produce will in the time to come have to give a full account of themselves."' G Rabbis derive proof from this verse: "'For the tree of the field is man"' (Deut. 20: 19): Just as man must provide a full account for himself, so the trees must do the same."' 6. A. Said R. Joshua bar Nehemiah, "'Their spirit does not reason on its own that they are flesh and blood [and so should not sin], so lo, I shall bring on them a diminution of their years as 1 have determined for them in this world [so Freedman], and then 1 shall humble them with suffering."' B. Said R. Aibu, "'What made them rebel against me? Was it not because 1 did not humble them in suffering? What keeps a door up right? Is it not its hinges? [Suffering brings out the best in man.]"' 7. A. R. Eleazar said, "'In any case in which there is no justice below, there is justice above."' 9 . R. Bibi son of R. Ammi in accord with the theory of R. Eleazar: ""If they have not judged, then my spirit [will judge man]."' C. Said R. Meir, "'They did not carry out the requirements of justice below, so 1 shall not carry out the requirements of justice above. D. "'That is in line with this verse: 'Is not their tent cord plucked up within them? They die, and that without wisdom' (Job 4:21), that is, because they lacked the wisdom of the Torah. E. ""Between morning and evening they are shattered, they perish for ever without regarding it' (Job 4:20). The word for 'regarding' refers only to judgment, in line with this verse:

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah

8.

A. B.

C.

9.

A.

B.

'These are the judgments which you shall set [using the same root] before them' (Ex. 2 1:I)."' Said R. Yost the Galilean, "'No longer will the attribute of judgment be held in judgment by the attribute of mercy."' Rabbi said, ""And the generation of the Flood said, "'The Lord will not judge my spirit."" [Freedman, p. 216, n. 7: Instead of, 'And the Lord said, My spirit ...,' he treats 'the Lord' as the subject of 'judge', the subject of 'said' then is 'the people', and thus: 'The people said,"' The Lord will not judge my spirit of rebellion.""]"' Said R. Aqiba, ""Wherefore do the wicked condemn God and say in his heart, You will not require' (Ps. 10:13), that is to say,'There is no judgment and there is no judge'. But there is judgment and there is a judge."' Said R. Hinena bar Pappa, "'Even Noah, who survived among them, did not survive because he was worthy, but only because the Holy One, blessed be he, foresaw that Moses was destined to arise from him. The letters of the word BShGM and the letters of the name of Moses add up to the same numerical value, namely, 345. [Freedman: He renders, My spirit will abide in man, meaning Noah, only for the same of Moses.]"' Rabbis derive proof from this verse: "'And his days shall be a hundred and twenty years"' (Gen. 6:3), [for the sake of him who is to live 120 years, namely, Moses (Freedman, p. 217, n. 2)]."'

There is n o formal pattern that governs the compositions, but the common theme, God's judgment of, and relationship with, man, This does not present a well-formed composite for a topical document but cannot b e dismissed as a mere miscellany.

2.

A.

B. C.

SAGES'DEATH-SCENES GENESIS RABBAH C:II. Our master [Judah the Patriarch] gave three commandments before he died. He said to them, "'Do not carry out a lamentation for me in the villages, and do not move my widow from my house, and whoever took care of me when I was alive should take care of me when I die."' "'Do not cany out a lamentation for me in the villages:"' on account of dissension. "'...and do not move my widow from my house:"' But is this not an explicit statement of the Mishnah-code: A widow who said, "'1 do not wish to move from the house of my husband"' -the heirs have not got the power to say to her, "'Go to the house of your father, and we shall provide food for you there. But they must provide food for her and

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

3.

4.

give her a home appropriate to the honor owing to her (M. Ket. 12:3]? [Why did Rabbi have to make the matter explicit?] D. It was because all of the property of the patriarch ordinarily is deemed to belong to the community. But this one, since he had not derived benefit from the community at all, had the right to say, "'Let my widow not move from out of my house."' E. Said R. Dosetai, "'It was so that people should not say to her, 'The house of the patriarch is subject to the possession of the patriarchate. "" F. "'...and whoever took care of me when 1 was alive should take care of me when I die:"' G Said R. Haninah of Sepphoris, "'For example, Yosk Hefyanos and YosC of Ephrath."' H. R. Hezekiah added two more: '"Do not make a great many shrouds for me, and let my coffin be open to the ground."' I. '"Do not make a great many shrouds for me:"' on account of worms. J. "'...and let my coffin be open to the ground:"' on account of secretions. K. For Rabbi [Judah the Patriarch] said, "'It is not the way in which a mortal goes that he comes back [but at the resurrection he comes back in new garments, hence there is no need to worry about the condition of the garments in which he is buried]."' L. The view of rabbis [differs,] for they say, "'As a mortal goes, so he comes back."' A. R. Yohanan gave orders, saying, "'Do not shroud me in white or black shrouds, but only in colored ones. If I am called with the righteous, the wicked will not know about me, and if I am called with the wicked, the righteous will not know about me."' B. R. Josiah gave orders, saying, '"Shroud me in white hemmed shrouds."' C. They said to him, "'Your master said this, and you say that?"' D. He said to them, "'Why should I be fearful on account of the things I have done?"' A. R. Jeremiah gave orders, saying, "'Shroud me in white hemmed garments, and put my slippers on me and place my staff in my hand, and put my sandals on my feet, and place me beside a road. So if I am summoned, 1 shall stand up ready to proceed."' B. That is in line with what R. Jonah said in the name of R. Hama, "'A person's feet are pledges, bringing him anywhere he is called."'

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah

115

This composite on the patriarch's burial takes up the familiar theme of how sages die and are attended to in burial. A systematic exposition of the topic advances the proposition that burial must be moderate and not elaborate. rv. ANOMALOUS COMPOSITIONS I N GENESIS RABBAH[3] COMPOSITES OF COMPOSITIONS JOINED BY A COMMON RHETORICAL PATTERN BUT NOT BY A COMMON PROPOSITION OR TOPIC OR THE NAME IN COMMON OF A PARTICULAR SAGE

I find no compositions that follow a common rhetorical pattern to form a unitary exposition.

Narratives that concern incidents in the lives of Rabbinic sages occur in Genesis Rabbah.

1.

A.

B.

ELIEZER B HYRCANUS STUDIES THE TORAH GENESIS RABBAHXLI1:I. "'It came to pass in the days o f h r a p h e l , [king of Shinar, Arioch, king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and Tidal, king of Goiim]"' (Gen. 14:l): R. Joshua in the name of R. Levi opened discourse [by citing the following verse]: "'The wicked have drawn out the sword"' (Ps. 37: 15). C. The illustrative case concerns R. Eliezer. His brothers were ploughing on level ground, and he was ploughing on hilly ground. His cow fell and broke its leg. But it was to his advantage that his cow had broken its leg. [For] he fled and went to R. Yohanan b. Zakkai. D. He was eating clods of dirt [having no money to buy food] until his mouth produced a bad odor. They went and told Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai, "'R. Eliezer's breath stinks."' E. He said to him, "'Just as the odor of your mouth stank on account of your studying the Torah, so may the fragrance of your learning pervade the world from one end to the other."' F. After some days his father came up to disinherit him from his property, and he found him sitting and expounding a lesson with the great figures of the realm in session before him, namely, Ben Sisit Hakkeset, Nicodemus son of Gurion, and Ben Kalba Shabua. G He was giving an exposition of this verse, as follows: ""The wicked have drawn out the sword and have bent the bow' (Ps. 37: 14) refers to Amraphael and his allies. H. ""To cast down the poor and needy' (Ps. 37:14) refers to Lot.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism ""To slay such as are upright in the way' (Ps. 37: 14) refers to Abraham. J. ""Their sword shall enter into their own heart' (Ps. 37: 15) in line with this verse: 'And he divided his forces against them by night, he and his servants, and routed them' (Gen. 14:1S)."' K. His father said to him, "'My son, I came up here only to disinherit you from my property. Now, lo, all of my property is handed over to you as a gift [and not by the law of inheritance, which would not allow me to give you everything]."' L. He said to him, "'So far as 1am, concerned, the property falls into the category of herem [and is forbidden to me]. Rather, divide them equally among my brothers."' A. Another matter: "'The wicked have drawn out the sword"' (Ps. 37:14) refers to Amraphel and his allies, as it is written, "'And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel"' (Gen. 14:l). 1.

2.

The story is independent o f the exegesis of Gen. 14; 1 . It has n o counterpart in the Rabbinic compilations, though there are other stories about how great sages originated in poverty and ignorance, a motif o f the rabbinic heritage. Rabbinic sages are not the only category o f distinguished personality that is subject t o narratives. Sages who separate from the circle o f the Rabbinic authorities are also the subject o f narratives. But the motif is now shaped t o account for the sage's departure from the Torah, not his advent to the Torah.

RABBAH VI1:II. GENESIS 2. A. Jacob of Kefar Naborayya gave a decision in Tyre that it is permitted to circumcise the son of a gentile woman on the Sabbath [even though violating the Sabbath on account of the needs of the rite of circumcision is proper only in the case of an lsraelite child. So Jacob took the view that if the child's father was an lsraelite, the child also was an Israelite and hence the circumcision of the son overrode the restrictions of the Sabbath.] B. R. Haggai heard and said to him, "'Come and accept aflogging [since lineage follows the status of the mother alone, not the father]."' C. He said to him, "'Will someone who has given a ruling in accord with the Torah be flogged?"' D. "'And how is this a ruling in accord with the Torah?"' E. [Jacob] said to him, "'It is written, 'And they declared their pedigrees after their families, by their fathers' houses' (Num. 1:18). [This indicates that the status of the child accords with that ofthe father, not the mother, and hence the son of a gentile woman and an Israelite man is regarded as an Israelite.]"' F. He said to him, "'You have not given a correct ruling."'

4. Anomalous Compositions in the Genesis Rabbah

117

G He said to him, "'And on what basis will you so instruct me?" H. He said to him, "'Lie down [in the position of a flogging,] and then 1 shall instruct you."' I. He continued, "'It is written, 'Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them' (Ezra 10:3). [Hence the children of the gentile women and the Israelite men follow the status of their mothers and are to be put away. It follows that Jacob's ruling was incorrect.]"' J. He said to him, "'On the basis of what is found in tradition [and not in the Torah of Moses] are you going to administer a flogging to me?" K. He said to him, ""But let it be done in accord with the Torah' (Ezra 10:3). [So it is explicit in Ezra's record that this was the law of the Torah.]"' L. He said to him, "'Administer the flogging, for it is a correct exposition."'

The sage concedes his error and accepts the ruling of the authorities. A collection of sage-narratives will accommodate stories of this sort. Miracles performed for sages register in fully articulated narratives. 7.

A.

B.

C.

D.

E.

F.

GENESIS RABBAH LXII1:VIII. Diocletian the king was originally a swine-herd in Tiberias. When he came near a school, the children would go out and beat him up. After some time he was made king. He came and took up residence near Paneas and he sent letters to Tiberias just before the eve of the Sabbath, giving this command: "'I command the rabbis of the Jews to appear before me on Sunday morning."' He gave orders to the messenger, telling him not to give the command to them until the last light on Friday evening. [It would not be possible for the rabbis to keep the order unless they traveled on the Sabbath day.] R. Samuel bar Nahman went down to bathe. He saw Rabbi standing before his school, and his face was white. He said to him, "'Why is your face white?" He said to him, "'Thus and so were the orders that were sent to me in letters from King Diocletian."' He said to him, "'Go and bathe, for our creator will do miracles for you."' He went in to bathe and a bath sprite came along, joking and dancing toward them. Rabbi wanted to rebuke him. Said to him R. Samuel bar Nahman, "'Leave him alone, for there are times that they appear because of miracles."' He said to the sprite, "'Your master is in distress, and you are laughing?"'

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism He said to them, "'Go, eat and celebrate a happy Sabbath, for your creator is doing miracles, and I will place you on Sunday morning where you wish to be."' At the end of the Sabbath, when the session ended, he went out and set them before the gates of Paneas. They went in and said to Diocletian, "'Lo, they are standing before the gates."' He said to them, "'Then close the gates."' He took them and set them on the rampart of the town. They went in and told Diocletian. He said to them, "'1 order that you heat the baths for three days, then let them go in and bathe and come before me."' They went and heated the baths for three days, and the sprite went and cooled off the heat for them, so the rabbis went in, bathed, and appeared before him. He said to them, "'Because you people know that your God does miracles for you, you ridicule the king!"' They said to him, "'True enough, we ridiculed Diocletian the swine-herd, but to Diocletian the King we are loyal subjects."' He said to them, "'Nonetheless, do not insult even an unimportant Roman or a soldier of the lowest rank."' The emperor recognizes the sages' supernatural advantage. The story fits into a collection o f stories about the sages' power.

9.

RABBAHXC1V:IX. GENESIS THECASEOF SHEBATHE SON OF BICHRI A. It has been taught on Tannaite authority: B. If gentiles said to a group of people, "'Give us one of you and we shall kill him, and if not we shall kill you all"' - let them all be killed and not hand over a single soul of Israel. But if they specified a single individual, as in the case of Sheba b. Bichri, they should hand him over and not permit all of them to be killed. C. Said R. Judah, "'Under what circumstances? When he is within, and the enemies are without. [Then he may not be handed over.] But if he is within and they are within, since under any circumstances he is going to be killed and they are going to be killed, let them give him over and not all of them be killed. D. "'This would be illustrated by the case as follows: 'Then cried a wise woman out of the city, ["'Hear, hear; say, 1 pray you, to Joab, 'Come near hither, that I may speak with you.' And he came near to her, and the woman said, 'Are you Joab?""]' (2 Chr. 20: 16-17). E. "'She said to them, 'Since he is going to be put to death and you are going to be put to death, hand him over to them and let not all of you be put to death.""

4. Anomalous Coimpositions in the Genesis Rabbah F.

R. Simeon says, "'This is what she said to them, 'Whoever rebels against the kingdom of the house of David is liable to the death penalty."" Ulla the revolutionary was wanted by the government. He rose up and fled to R. Joshua b. Levi in Lud. They sent agents after him. R. Joshua b. Levi argued with him and sought to persuade him [to surrender]. He said to him, "'It is better that that one man be killed [namely, you], so as not to bring punishment on the community on his account."' He was persuaded and give himself up. Elijah used to come and visit [Joshua b. Levi]. When he did this, [Elijah] stopped coming to him. He fasted on his account for thirty days and Elijah then appeared to him. [Joshua b. Levi] said to him, "'What is the reason that the master has stopped coming?" He said to him, "'And am I a friend of informers?"' He said to him, "'And is it not a teaching on Tannaite authority: 'If gentiles said to a group of people, "'Give us one of you and we shall kill him, and if not we shall kill you all"' - let them all be killed and not hand over a single soul of Israel. But if they specified a single individual, as in the case of Sheba b. Bichri, they should hand him over and not permit all of them to be killed."" He said to him, '"Is that a Tannaite teaching for really pious people? Such a thing should be done by others but not by you."' It was taught on Tannaite authority: When Nebuchadnezzar came to conquer Jehoiakim, he came up and took up residence at Daphne of Antioch. The great sanhedrin came down to greet him, and they said to him, "'Has the time for destroying this house arrived?"' He said to them, "'No, but Jehoiakim, king of Judah, has rebelled against me. Give him to me, and I shall go my way."' They went and told Jehoiakim, "'Nebuchadnezzar wants you."'

He said to them, "'And is this what people do? Do they set aside one life in favor of another? Is it not written, 'You shall not deliver a bondman to his master' (Deut. 23:16)?"' They said to him, "'Did not your forefather do exactly that to Sheba b. Bichri: 'Behold, his head shall be thrown to you over the wall'?" Since he would not listen to them, they went and seized him and threw him [over the wall, etc.]. [The rest of the story is at Lev. R. X1X:VI.l.

119

120

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

The biblical story has its counterpart in the Rabbinic narrative.

Genesis Rabbah sets forth a miscellaneous set of expositions, narratives and theological propositions and chapters in the lives and deaths of sages. But these did not hang together in groups that correspond to topical chapters of the Mishnah or the Tosefta. Genesis Rabbah contains some narratives that can have contributed to Rabbinic biographies and some fewer expositions of theological propositions that can have figured in theological composites. What are we to make of them? ENDNOTES 'For further reading and bibliography on the topic of this chapter, see the following: Bowker, pp. 72-77: the homiletic midrashim: a number of works which have made a collection of synagogue sermons; Midrash Rabbah (=Pentateuch, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther), pp. 77-78. Genesis Rabbah, pp. 780-79. Moses D. Herr, "'Genesis Rabbah,"' Encyclopaedia Judaica 7:399-401: the title, structure, language, redaction, later additions, editions; apparently edited at about the same time as the Talmud of the Land of Israel, not later than 425. Maccoby, pp. 226-229 (sample passage). Stemberger-Strack, pp. 300-308: the name, contents and structure; sources of Genesis Rabbah; redaction and date (after 400); the text: manuscripts, Genizah fragments, printed editions, translations, commentaries. This writer's introductions to the document are in Comparative Midrash: The Plan and Program of Genesis Rabbah and Leviticus Rabbah. Atlanta, 1986: Scholars Press for Brown Judaic Studies; Genesis andJudaism: The Perspective of Genesis Rabbah. An Analytical Anthology. Atlanta, 1986: Scholars Press for Brown Judaic Studies; and Confronting Creation: How Judaism Reads Genesis. An Anthology of Genesis Rabbah. Columbia, 199 1 : University of South Carolina Press.

Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One In form and program the most diverse document of the late antique Rabbinic canon, the Bavli conforms to distinct formal and topical rules. As to the topic, it is made up of the Mishnah, a law code, and a highly formalized and programmatic commentary to the Mishnah, the Gemara. Like the Mishnah the Gemara follows its own distinctive formal and analytical program. Our task is to identify compositions in the Gemara of the Bavli that serve the program of a document other than the Bavli -the candidates for inclusion in an until-now lost document of the rabbinic canon. I take up a sample chapter to find an adumbration of the answer: the Bavli's anomalous compositions and composites pointing to the answer. What we now seek to find out is whether the Bavli contains evidence of compositions written with other documents in mind than the exegesis ofthe Mishnah and associated legal composites, These are represented by episodic and Free-standing statements, facts out of any larger context. Whole paragraphs and still larger constructions of thought made out of sentences that in context and in sequence cohere. What is at stake is simply stated: What ignores the program of the Bavli in its composition and in theformation of its composites belongs in other document, different from the Bavli and we can reconstruct through an act of imagination in response to the characteristics of the secondary composites of the Bavli the traits of those other; different documents.

122

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

In fact we identified three relationships of a composition or composite to the documentary program of the Bavli, that is, the program of the exegesis of the Mishnah and the Tosefta within the analytical template that governs throughout.' First in sequence and importance come citations of the Mishnah, the Tosefta, and highly formalized expositions of the law pertaining to the topic at hand, together with clarifications of a paramount program of Mishnah- and lawexegesis. These amplifications of the Mishnah within a disciplined plan of inquiry encompass such issues as the language of the Mishnah, the scriptural foundations of the Mishnah, the apparent redundancy of the wording of the Mishnah, the authority behind an unattributed law of the Mishnah, and other issues primary to Mishnah- and law-exegesis. Important composites of the Bavli's primary components amplify the legal theory behind the concrete ruling at hand and pursue the development of that theory in all its abstraction. Then we find secondary exposition of the Mishnah and its law - the extension and amplification of details of Mishnah-exegesisin terms of legal theory. These compositions or composites often exhibit markings of response to a program independent of the Mishnah's plan but at some basic point intersect with the Mishnah. They are inserted to extend the discussion of the Mishnah and its law. They are composed in accord with an idiosyncratic rhetorical plan but intersect in a clearly articulated manner with the Mishnah. Visually these compositions and composites are differentiated through indentation from the left hand margin. But they also are underlined. That means they do not belong to the primary composition of Mishnah- or law-exegesis - yet were composed with the primary task of the Bavli in mind. Third, the Bavli encompasses compositions and composites that do not respond to the problem of the Mishnah or the law and its exegesis. That is a negative definition of the traits of free-standing compositions and composites. Some of the composites of the Bavli that do not serve the labor of exegesis in the context of Moed Qatan or Makkot, respectively, do clarify other passages of the Mishnah and constitute talmuds for other locations of the Mishnah. This is signaled through the absence of indentation and of underlining. But most of the autonomous compositions and composites do not engage with the Mishnah and its law. They are formulated on other bases altogether.

I present in visual signals the results of a survey of an entire chapter of the Bavli (as I shall explain in a moment). What problem do I solve through the messages contained in these visual signals? The answer emerges not only because of the regularities discovered by contemporary form-analytical learning. It comes to the surface also because the Bavli in manuscripts and in the earliest printed versions in the original Hebrew and Aramaic lacks the conventional guides to mean-

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

123

ing. These are supplied in modern printing by paragraphing and other modes of articulating propositions. Footnotes supply information without disrupting the main lines of exposition. The absence of signals conventional in European printing is shown in translations modeled after the received and conventional text with their long columns of undifferentiated sentences. These statements are not situated in any coherent context by internal signals. There are in the received model no markings of where expositions begin and where they end, no signals of sentences and logically constructed paragraphs, no heads or subheads. A further obstacle to a grasp of the whole is the discontinuity of exposition, the rapid changes of a subject and changes back to that subject later on. The Talmud meanders here and there, abruptly changing the subject and rendering it difficult to follow the line of thought. That is because there is no apparatus of footnotes and bibliography and appendices to sort out what is the line of thought from what is supplementary information. Information we should place in a footnote is dumped into the Talmud's main text, disrupting the chain of thought and argument and yielding incoherence. Yet the Bavli serves as a script for its audience, a chorus of voice^.^ It has its rhythm and its melody. It is meant to be sung, and when the music is supplied by an experienced disciple it attains clarity and coherence, The Bavli like other ancient writings is to be declaimed aloud, actively, not read silently, passively. Just as musicians expect to turn the signs of written-down music into the sounds called for by those signs, so the Talmud serves like a musical score. But the instruments for which the sounds are indicated are voices singing propositions, ideas and allegations. These are to be mastered and transformed the way the musician masters the notes and yields sound. That explains my quest for visual signs for the meanings of the Bavli. In these pages through my visual signals I set forth the counterpart of singing, indicating by patterning the language the way in which two of the Talmud's thirty-seven tractates present coherent constructions of thought, extensive expositions of cogent propositions of the exegesis of the Mishnah and the law.

I only describe recurrent patterns, for these provide demonstrable facts concerning norms. An inductive examination of the recurrent traits of the Bavli yields firm results. The Talmud is comprised by [ I ] the Mishnah, a compilation of laws arranged by topics, and [2] an elaborate exposition of the Mishnah and its law, together with [3] the episodic insertion of compositions on theological and scriptural topics and illustrative narratives. These are often set forth in composites, aggregates of formally comparable compositions. Why insist on the priority accorded to Mishnah-exegesis? Every single chapter of the Bavli whether in manuscript or early printed presentation

124

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

rests on a chapter of the Mishnah, but not every chapter encompasses compositions external to Mishnah-exegesis. That fact defines for us what is essential or primary to the Bavli and what is secondary and superficially superfluous, One of the tasks of contemporary Talmudic exegesis is to explain the insertion of these topically superfluous compositions: why here? Why now? These questions dictate the program of my commentary to the Bavli. To summarize: by "primary" to the Talmud I mean the basic compositions of which the Talmud is comprised -the components essential to the accomplishment of the manifest tasks of the document -the presentation of the Mishnah and the law and the systematic exegesis thereof. The Bavli's systematic citation and commentary to the Mishnah are primary. I mark the vriman, components with underlining, to provide a visual signal as to the status of the writing that is before us. In addition amplification and extension ofthe law ofthe Mishnah and theoretical problems pertinent to it belong to the class of primary writing. By "secondary" I mean compositions or composites that are not written with the exegetical program of the Mishnah and the exposition of the law in mind but that are inserted nonetheless. Our task is to account for the formation of topical composites and to explain the rationality that accounts for their inclusion in the Talmud. A secondary composition or even composite is not generated in response to a problem of Mishnah- or law- commentary but rather by considerations external to the exegetical problems posed by the Mishnah. We can try to explain the agglutination and the inclusion of autonomous exegetical writing such as this. It intersects with the Mishnah or concerns some tangential interest connected to the exposition of the law of the Mishnah. It may be formulated around the name of a particular authority, with numerous otherwise-unrelatedcompositions attributed to the same chain of tradition, Rabbi X in the name of Rabbi Y, and included because one of the compositions in the name of that authority X-Y intersects with a detail of the exposition of the Mishnah or the law that is before us. By an inductive process we thus distinguish what is fundamental from what is gloss or secondary accretion. The Talmud thus is shown to contain writing that is not provoked by the documentary program but is free-standing, and our task is to explain if we can what provoked the inclusion of that originally autonomous composition or composite. So I assign to visual signals the burden of this reading of the Talmud, underlining and indenting what is secondary in particular. The underlined passages, those that cany out the documentary program, form the forests and show the coherence of the document. The passages that are not underlined are writings unconnected to the program of the document and its composition. These are those free-standing and unconnected compositions, the present place of which requires explanation, I also differentiate the Mishnah and its companion the Tosefta from the rest of the exposition of laws. Passages that are shared with the Mishnah or the

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavfi Moed Qatan Chapter One

125

Tosefta are set in bold faced type. Other signals further differentiate the text. The Bavli is multi-lingual text, involving eastern Aramaic, biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic or Middle Hebrew. All Aramaic is in italics, all Hebrew in plain type. Then there are secondary expansions of primary propositions of Mishnah- or law-exegesis. I indent secondary expansions of primary propositions in the manner of making an outline. What do I hope to accomplish with my underlining of the primary constituents of the Talmud and indenting the secondary or unconnected ones? That is to provide a vivid picture of what is essential to the Talmud in the accomplishment of its documentary tasks and what is inserted for reasons that have nothing to do with the paramount program of the Talmud. At the head of each of my comments I give my reasons for differentiating the compositions and composites that are primary to the Talmud from those that are parachuted down. Then I discuss the other aspects of the composite that is before us. The reference-system consists of Roman numbers and Arabic numbers and letters. The Talmud, as I have already implied, is made up of composites that are formed out of compositions. A composition is a complete and coherent statement, containing everything we need to understand the intent of the author(s). A composite is a construction of two or more compositions, in which the formation and juxtaposition of completed thoughts serve to hold together a variety of propositions in a single coherent statement. To show what I take to be compositions, I have marked each smallest whole unit of thought (a.k.a., sentence) with a letter, A, B, C, then signaled with an Arabic numeral what I hold is a complete set of such smallest whole units of thought to make a single cogent point. Thus 1.A. signals the opening sentence of a complete, cogent statement (a.k.a., a paragraph). A sequence of such cogent statements that itself imposes sense and meaning upon all of the statements -a propositional construction -then is given a Roman numeral, thus I. I .A is the first sentence of a paragraph, and the paragraph is the first component of a proposition. I have produced translations of the Bavli and the Yerushalmi that are parsed in this way, beginning to end, and have produced outlines of the tractates of the two Talmuds as well. This work is all done. It remains to be exploited. Inquiry into the forests and trees of the thirty-seven tractates of the Bavli and the thirty-nine of the Yerushalmi is ready to be undertaken. Why go to all this trouble? The extant translations center on detail. None focuses on issues of structure, order, and system. All invite this effort at the detailed clarification of the ways in which the Bavli is written and composed into large scale composites. The Talmud is rarely perceived in context as a cogent and systematic statement overall. Issues of detail overwhelm concerns of structure and order. The received exegetical tradition, essential in its theological and political setting of faith and useful also in the academic one, yields a mass of detail but no coherent account formed of the details. Setting forth bits and pieces while never

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

126

gaining sight of the whole (and in recent times even alleging that there is no whole,' only parts to be detached and reassembled as one likes), the received exegetical and philological tradition addresses few large-scale questions of serious academic concern. But it is necessary for an understanding of the document and forms the basis for this next step in a centuries-old labor of mediation. On its successes, we build. Responding to questions it did not address, we move forward.

The topic of the tractate is conduct of labor on the intermediate days of the festivals of Passover and Tabernacle, that is, the days between the opening and closing festival days, on which servile labor is forbidden. In the interval certain forms of labor may be carried on, and the tractate through cases defines the principles that govern what may or may not be done in accord with the lower level of sanctity that applies between the first and the last days of the eight-day festival season. The passages indicated in underlining form the larger part of the Talmud chapter before us. It is comprised by compositions written for the purpose of the clarification of the Mishnah and the law of our tractate's chapter. The indented compositions and composites clarify details of what is primary to the exegesis of the Mishnah. These are underlined as well, because they serve the task of clarifying or amplifying the composites of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. The indentation signals compositions that are not formulated in response to the issues of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. We can account for their insertion in our document, and that validates the classification of the writing as integral to the primary purpose of the document. Occasionally we come upon compositions parachuted down into our composite. These form anomalies and point to lost documents for which the compositions are prepared,.

A. B. C. -

D. -

A,

MOEDQATAN I :1-2 1:l

-

Thev water an irrigated field on the intermediate days of a festival and in the Sabbatical Year lwhen many forms of aoricultural labor are forbiddenL whether from a spring that first flows at that time, or from a spring that does not first flow at that time. But thev do not water Ian irrigated field1 with ( I ) collected rainwater. or (2) water from a swape well. And thev do not die channels around vines. 1:2 R. Eleazar b. Azariah savs, "They do not make a new water channel on the intermediate davs of a festival or in the Sabbatical Year."

-

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One B. C. D. -

E. -

127

And sages sav. "Thev make a new water channel in the Sabbatical Year. and they repair damaged ones on the intermediate davs of a festival." Thev repair damaged waterwavs in the ~ u b i i c domain and dig them out. Thev repair roads. streets, and water pools. And thev (1) do all public needs, (2) mark off graves. and (3) go forth [to give warning1 against (maintaining a field that is planted with1 Diverse Kinds lor species of cropsl.

I. 1 A, JThev water an irrigated field on the intermediate davs of a festival -

and in the Sabbatical Year, whether from a spring that first flows at that time, or from a spring that does not first flow at that time:l

since it is ex~licitlvstated that t h o mav water a field from a suring that flows for the first time, which mav damage the soil bv erosion /making necessarv immediate repair o f the damage during the intermediate davs o f the festival/. is it necessarv to suecifv that thev mav water fiom a surinp that does not first flow at that time, which is not eoine to cause erosion? B. One rnav sav that it is necessary to include both the latter and the former: for ifthe Tannaite framer had given the rule onlv covering a spring that first flows on the intermediate davs o f the festival, it is in that case in articular in which it is uermitted to work on an irrigated field, but not for a rain-watered field, because the water is poing to cause erosion, but in the case o f a spring that does not first flow on the intermediate davs, which is unlikely to cause erosion. I might have said that even a rain-watered field may be watered. So bv s~ecifiingboth cases the framer o f the Mishnahparapra~hinforms us that there is no distinction between a sarinq that flows for the first time and one that does not flow for the first time. The rule is the same for both: an irrigated ulot rnav be watered from it, but a rain-watered plot rnav not be watered fiom [either a new or an available sprinpl.

The composition cites and amplifies the law of the Mishnah and is therefore underlined. Mishnah-criticism presupposes that the document says only what is necessary, but does not set forth in so many words rules that one may infer on the basis of what is made explicit. The solution demonstrates that without making the rule articulate, the Mishnah's formulation left room for misconstruction. Specifically, we can have concluded that a consideration present in one case but not in the other accounts for the lenient ruling accorded only that case. This is amply spelled out. 2. A. -

And on what basis is it inferred that the meaning o f the words ''irrigated field" is, a thirsh, W d /which has to be irrigated/?

128

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

B. It is in line with that which is written: "When vou were faint and -

wearv" (Dt. 25: 18). and the Hebrew word for wearv is represented in Aramaic bv the word that means. "exhausted."

C. And how do we know that the words translated rain-watered field -

refers to a well-fucked field?

D. "For as a man has sexual relations with a maiden, so shall vour -

sons be as husbands unto you" (Is. 6 2 3 . and the word in Aramaic is rendered, "Behold, as a bov fucb a pirl, so vour sons shall net laid in vour midst. "

Mishnah-criticism proceeds from the analysis of the wording - looking for flaws - to the correct rendition of the meaning of the code's words. The third step, now taken, is to identify the authority behind the Mishnah's anonymous, therefore normative, rule. The premise of the Talmud is that a rule that is anonymous stands for the consensus of sages and is the law, while one that bears a name is schismatic and is not the law. At stake, once we know the authority behind the law, is whether other rulings in the name of that same authority, intersecting if not in detail then in principle, are consistent with this one. If they are not, then the decided law shows flaws of coherence, and these have to be identified and worked out. 3. -

A. -

Who is the Tannaite authoritv who takes the position that work on the intermediate davs o f a festival is permitted i f it is to prevent loss, but ifit is to add to pain it is not permitted, and, furthe,: even to prevent loss, really heaw labor is forbidden?

The premise of the Mishnah's rule is now made explicit. The cases yield the rule that on the intermediate days of a festival one may carry out those acts of labor that prevent loss but not those that produce gain. And that leniency is further limited by the consideration that even to prevent loss, heavy labor is forbidden. B. Said R. Huna, "It is R. Eliezer b. Jacob, for we have learned in the Mishnah: R. Eliezer b. Jacob savs. 'Thev lead water from one tree to another, on condition that one not water the entire field. Seeds which have not been watered before the festival one should not water on the intermediate davs of the festival' IM.

Watering the entire field is forbidden, since it merely hastens the maturing process. But seeds that have not begun their growth-processes may not be watered at all; that would be work not to prevent loss but to secure gain. Neither however concerns preventing loss. That question now arises. C. Well, I mipht concede that there is a representation o f R. Eliezer S position that he arohibits work to add to one S gain, but have you

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

129

heard a tradition that he disallows work in a situation in which otherwise loss will result? D. Rather: said R. Papua, "Who is the authoritv behind this rule? It is R. Judah, for it has been taunht on Tannaite authoritv: 'From a saring that first flows on the intermediate davs of a festival thev irri~ateeven a rain watered field.' the words of R. Meir. And sages I=Judah vis B vis Meirl sav. 'Thev irrigate from it onlv a field that d e ~ e n d uDon s irri~ation,which has gone dry.' R. Eleazar b. Azariah savs, "Not this nor that. llbut thev do not irrigate a field from it Inamelv, a field the sering of which has pone drvl even in the case of an irrigated field]' IT. Moed 1:lA-CI. Even further. said R. Judah. 'Aoerson should not clean

out a water channel and with the dredging on the intermediate days of a festival water his garden or seed bed."' E. Now what is the meaning opthat has gone dry"? Ifvou sav that it F. -

reallv has dried up, then what is going to be accomplished bv watering it? Said Abbawe. "The point is that this former water source has pone drv and another has iust emerged. "

Judah's ruling at D clearly pertains to preventing loss; the field depends on irrigation, so its crop is in danger. That reading is challenged at E: how does this prevent loss? The answer is, the earlier spring has gone dry, a new spring has begun to flow. Judah maintains the farmer may use that. We now proceed to a gloss on the cited passage that has no bearing upon our problem. I indent the gloss to distinguish it from the primary statements of the Talmud. G R. Eleazar b. Azariah savs, "Not this nor that:" there is no -

difference between the case of an old spring that has gone dry or that has not gone d m in any event a spring that has iust flowed may not be utilized on the intermediate davs o f the festival.

We revert to our task, showing the authority behind the anonymous rule. Our interpretation of the cited passage has yielded the attribution to Judah. But another interpretation of the same passage, based on a different premise, produces a different result. H. And how to you know [that it is Judah in uarticular who takes the position that work on the intermediate davs o f a festival is permitted i f it is to prevent loss, but i f it is to add to gain it is not uermitted, and, further: even tourevent loss, really heaw labor is forbidden]? Perhaps R. Judah takes the position that he does, that is, that it is permitted to use the water for an irrigated field but not for a field that deuends on rain, only in the case o f a suring that has iust now begun to flow, I2B1 since it may cause erosion, [hence, that mav

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism cause damage, as stiuulatedl, but in the case o f a spring that has not iust now begun to flow and will not cause erosion, such a spring might be uermitted for use even on a field that deuends on

Then the law will permit watering a field from a spring that has not just emerged, even in a field that depends on rain; but the Mishnah's anonymous rule says that in the case of a spring that has not emerged for the first time, the water may be used for irrigation only for a field that depends on irrigation but not for a field that depends on rain water, in which case Judah and the Mishnah's anonymous rule take contradictory positions. I. -

I f so, then in accord with which authoritv will you assign our Mishnah-uaragrauh? For in fact, in R. Judah k view, there is no distinction between a spring that has just now flowed and one that has not iust now flowed: in either case, an irrigated field mav be watered, while one that deuends on rain mav not. And the reason that the passage specifies the surinp that has iust now flowed is onlv to show the extend to which R. Meir was ureuared topo, even a spring that has iust now flowed mav be used, and that is, even for a field that deuends uuon rain.

The solution is to insist that Judah does not make the proposed distinction, and that yields a rule in his name that is consistent with the Mishnah's. The language that is supposed to have yielded the distinction for Judah is to be read in the context of Meir's position, which is still more lenient than Judah's, as the language before us explains. We have now completed the exposition of the Mishnah. The next unit, which is a free-standing discussion pursuing its own interest and in no way a formal comment on our Mishnah-paragraph,cites our Mishnahparagraph in the context of its pursuit of a solution to its problem. That formally accounts for the introduction of the passage into the amplification of our Mishnahparagraph. But, as I shall explain at the end, introducing the composition into our composite serving M. 1:1 profoundly deepens our grasp of the law, not just the case and ruling, before us. Our concern in the Mishnah-paragraph before us has been to specify those interstitial acts that are neither heavy labor nor optional, but of moderate difficulty and necessary to preserve the value of the crop. Much then has to do with the character of the act. This yields an interest in the character and classification of agricultural labor: how hard, and for what purpose, is the work done. In what follows, we take up a free-standing composition that analyzes the classification of agricultural labor, once more with special reference to watering the field. Since what follows is a free-standing discussion that does not pursue the program of Mishnah-exegesis or continue the secondary implications of that program, and indeed does not even intersect with the law or principle before us, I

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

131

indent the passage. The citation, later on, of a sentence of our Mishnah-passage provides the formal explanation for the inclusion of the following composition, but, as I shall propose at the end, reading the Mishnah-paragraph in light of what follows yields a profound grasp of the law, not only the rule, to which the Mishnahparagraph's statement points. This is how the compositors of the Talmud move our vision from the rule to the laws, and from the laws to law. Because the composition amplifies the law of the Mishnah, it is categorized as a secondary development of the Talmud: composed for its own purposes but included for the purpose of Talmud-amplification. This is a good example of how the Talmud draws on free-standing exercises that intersect with the Talmud's program of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. 4. A. It has been stated: B. He who on the Sabbath weeds a field or waters his seedlings - on what count is he to be admonished [not to do sol?

C. Rabbah said. "On the count of vlowing." -

D. R. -

Joseph said. "On the count of sowing."

I underline the composition to signal that it belongs in the corpus of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. But that requires explanation. One who violates the law of the Sabbath is to be admonished that he is violating the law, being told specifically what law he is violating, and on what count. Here the act ofweeding or watering is classified among the categories of forbidden labor. Is watering an act of plowing or of sowing? The point of intersection is now clear. Our Mishnah-paragraph has dealt with irrigating a field, which is a marginal activity; under some conditions it may be performed on the intermediate days of the festival. Can we sow? Certainly not. Can we plow? As we shall now see, there is an aspect of plowing that pertains to the intermediate days ofthe festival, namely, softening the soil. E. Said Rabbah, "It is more reasonable to see matters as 1 do. For what is the purpose ofulowinp, ifnot to loosen the soil, and, here too, he loosens the soil. " F. Said R. Joseph, "It is more reasonable to see matters as I do. For what is the puruose o f sowing? It is to make produce sprout up. And here too, he makes produce sprout up."

Here is a point of intersection with our rule, since we recall we may save the crop but not enhance its growth. Joseph's thinking, then, intersects with the problem before us, when he introduces the notion that plowing is forbidden on the count of enhancing the crop's growth. But how will Rabbah differ, since plowing a crop enhances its growth by aerating the roots. Keeping in mind that we deal with a free-standing composition, we cannot find surprising the systematic analysis of the dispute just now introduced:

132

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

G Said Abbawe to Rabbah. "There is a uroblem in vour uosition, and there also is a uroblem in the uosition o f R. Joseuh.

H. "There is a uroblem in vour uosition: does this act come only I. -

under the classification ofulowing and not sowing? "And there also is a problem in the position o f R. Joseuh: does this act come onlv under the classification o f sowing and not ulowinp?

We are now on quite familiar ground, namely, the area where we deem a given action to fall into two distinct classifications. Yet, if the issue is crop-enhancement, then distinguishing one position from the other produces a distinction that makes slight difference. "And should you say that in anv place in which an act may be classified under two taxa, one is subiect to liability on onlv one count, has not R. Kahana said. 'If one ~ r u n e dhis tree but reauires the wood for fuel, he is liable on two counts, one on the count of olanting. the other on the count of harvesting'? " K. That k a uroblem. L. Obiected R. Joseoh to Rabbah, "He who weeds or covers Q who Dreserves them' IT. Kil. 1:15A-BI. Now from mv persuective, in that I hold that one is liable on the count of sowing, that exulains the uenaltv, since sowing is forbidden in connection with mixedseeds in the vinevard: but from vour persuective, in that you sav that the count is ulowing, is there anv urohibition ofulowinp in connection with mixed seeds? "

J. -

If plowing is classified as crop-enhancing, then on what basis is it forbidden to plow when the taboo against mixed seeds has been violated? That is an easy question to answer. Preserving the crop is a form of enhancing it. M . He said to him, "The count is that he has preserved them." -

N.

"But lo, since the concludinn clause states, R. Aaiba says, 'Also one who Dreserves them,' it must follow that the initial

Tannaite authority maintains that the count for sanction is not that ofureservinp the crop o f mixed seeds!" 0. "The whole o f the statement represents the uosition o f R. Aaiba, and the sense ofthe uassane is to explain the ouerative consideration, suecificallv: what is the reason that he who weeds or covers with dirt diverse seeds is flogged? It is because one is therebvureservine them, since R. Aqiba says, 'Also one who preserves them.' "

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

133

We now add a gloss to the foregoing, of which we may rapidly dispose; it is simply a scriptural foundation for a rule. What is the basis in Scriuture for the uosition o f R. Aaiba? QL It is in line with that which has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: R. "You shall not sow vour field with two kinds of seed" -

P. -

(Lev. 19:19)I know only that sowing is forbidden. How do we know that vreserving the sown seed is forbidden? T, Scrivture says. "Mixed seeds in vour field not ....." Jmeaning: it is the mixing of seeds that is emphatically forbidden. and you may have no share by your action in producing such a situation fLazarus)l.

S. -

We revert at U to the discussion broken off. We continue our interest in the intersecting issues, first, grounds for prohibiting watering a field -plowing vs. sowing; and, second, the matter of the sanctification expressed through prohibition of labor on the Sabbath and the Festival day, as against the sanctification expressed through that same prohibition on days that are comparable to the Sabbath and the Festival but of a diminished level of sanctification. For that purpose, we revert to our Mishnah-paragraph. And that in a formal sense accounts for the inclusion here of the entire, massive composition, together with its inserted and appended supplements. But, as I shall explain at the end, the result of the insertion of the discussion is greatly to deepen our understanding ofthe context in which the law of our Mishnahparagraph finds its place. So we grasp not merely the rule, but the generative principle of the law, when we have read our Mishnah-paragraph as part of a larger essay of thinking about labor, sanctification, the Sabbath and Festivals, and spells of time that are comparable to the Festival or to the Sabbath. Since we have dealt with the intermediate days of festivals, comparable to the Festival day, we turn now to the Sabbatical Year, that is to say, the seventh year of a seven-year cycle, which, as its name states, is comparable to the Sabbath, in bearing prohibitions as to acts of labor by reason of Sabbath rest, but at the same time is subject to a lesser degree of sanctification than the Sabbath.

U. We have learned in the Mishnah: Thev water an irrigated field on the intermediate days of a festival and in the Sabbatical Year IM. 1: 1Al:

The reason for the introduction of the Mishnah-paragraph's rule on the Sabbatical Year is immediately articulated:

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism V. LWith respect to the inclusion of in the Sabbatical Year:] -

Now there is no dificultv understand in^ the rule concerning the intermediate davs o f the kstival, which uertains to a situation in which there is substantial loss, on account o f which rabbis have uermitted irripation. [We s i m ~ l vrepeat the result of the opening exegetical discussion. without citing it verbatim. Our passage's author need not have known Nos. 1-3 above. Now reference is made to the present composition's important question, now linked to the Mishnah-rule before us:] But as to the Sabbatical Year: whether one holds that waterinp is classifiedas sowing or that watering is classified as plowinp, is it permitted either to sow or to plow in the Sabbatical Year (that it should be permitted to water the field]? [On what basis have we treated the intermediate davs of the festival as comparable to the Sabbatical Year, even though thev share the classification of spans of time that are comparable to the Sabbath or Festival dav but at a diminished level o f sanctification.l

The question is a powerful one and brings to the surface the premises of our entire discussion, which are, we compare days that are comparable to the Sabbath or Festival, therefore we invoke the rule governing the one for the law that prevails on the other, here, intermediate days of the festival, there, the Sabbatical Year. Once we have asked the question in this way, the answer is obvious, and Abbayye can be relied upon, as always, to see it: W. Said Abbavve. "It is concerning the Sabbatical Year at this time that the rule speaks. and the rule represents the position of Rabbi." X. For it has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: Y. Rabbi says, "This is the manner of release: release Ibr everv creditor of that which he has lent his neighbor' [Dt. 15:2) - it is of two different acts of release that Scripture speaks. one. the release of lands. the other, the release of debts. When vou release lands vou release debts, and when vou do not release lands, vou do not release debts." [The prohibition of agricultural labor in the Sabbatical Year now that the Temple is destroyed is merely by reason of rabbinical authoritv, and that prohibition is not enforced where loss is involved (Lazarus). Therefore, from our perspective, the lenient ruling for the intermediate davs of the festival applies also to the Sabbatical Year in the present age.] Z, Raba said, "You mav even maintain that the rule before us reuresents the uosition o f rabbis h i s a vis Rabbi]. It is the generative categories of labor that the All-Merciful has

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

135

prohibited. 13AI but the subsidiary classes of labor [such as the ones we are considering as analogous to the generative category, that is. watering is either in the class of plowing or in the class of sowing1 have not been forbidden. For it is written. 'But in the seventh year shall be a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land ...you shall neither sow vour field nor orune your vineyard. That which grows of itself of vour harvest you shall not reap and the grapes of your undressed vine you shall not gather' (Lev. 25:4-5). Since pruning falls within the generative category o f sowing, and nraue gatherinn falls within the generative catenorv o f reaping, for what concrete legal uurpose did the All-Merciful make written reference to these items? It is to present the inference that it is to these particular derivative classes ofgenerative categories oflabor that liabilitv pertains, but to all others, there is no liabilitv " AA. So thev don 't, don Y thev? But has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv:

We now adduce evidence that the subsidiary acts of labor do fall under the same restrictions as the generative acts of labor, and this is explicit. The evidence is from Sifra and is marked as Tannaite in attribution. Spelling out the evidence is not critical to the exposition and I treat it as a footnote or appendix. The concluding sentence disposes of the whole, as we shall see presently. BB. J"The Lord said to Moses on Mount Sinai, Sav to the -

people of Israel, When vou come into the land which I give vou. the land shall keep a Sabbath to the Lord. Six vears vou shall sow vour field, and six vears vou shall prune your vineyard and gather in its fruits; but i n the seventh year there shall be a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land. a Sabbath to the Lord; vou shall not sow vour field or prune vour vinevard. What grows of itself in vour harvest vou shall not reap. and the graDes of vour undressed vine vou shall not gather; i t shall be a vear of solemn rest for the land. The Sabbath of the land shall provide food for vou, for yourself and for your male and female slaves and for your hired servant and the soiourner who lives with you; for your cattle also and for the beasts that are i n your land all its yield shall be for food" (Lev. 25:l7):l "vou shall not sow your field or arune vour vinevard:" CC. the Torah forbids me onlv to sow or Drune, DD. And how do we know that farmers mav not fertilize, prune trees, smoke the leaves or cover over with powder for fertilizer?

-

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism EE. Scripture savs, "vour -

field vou shall not...." - no manner of work i n your field, no manner of work i n your vinevard. shall vou do. FE And how do we know that farmers mav not trim trees, nip off drv shoots. trim trees? GG Scripture savs. "vour field you shall not...." no manner o f work i n vour field, no manner o f work i n your vinevard. shall vou do. HH.And how do we know that one mav not manure, remove stones. dust the flower of sulfur fumigate? - no 11. Scripture savs. "vour field vou shall not manner of work i n vour field, no manner of work i n your vinevard. shall vou do. JJ. Since Scripture says. "vou shall not sow vour field or prune vour vinevard," KK. might one suppose that the farmer also mav not hoe under the olive trees, fill i n the holes under the olives trees, or dig between one tree and the next? LL. Scripture says, "vou shall not sow vour field or prune your vinevard" MM. sowing and pruning were subiect to the general prohibition of field labor. Whev then were thev singled out? NN. I t was to build an analogv through them, as follows: 00. what is distinctive i n sowing and pruning is that thev are forms o f labor carried on on the ground or on a

-

-

-

-

...."

-

-

-

-

-

tree. PP. So Iknow that subiect to the prohibition are also other forms of labor that are carried on on the ground or on a tree. lexcluding from the prohibition. therefore, the hrpes of labor listed1 ISifra CCXLV:I.3-61.

QQ What we have here is a rule made bv rabbinical authoritvL for which suuuort is adduced fiom Scriuture.

The solution to the problem at QQ is a simple one. The prohibition derives from rabbis, who then can release it on their own; the role of Scripture is not to declare the rule but only to provide support for rabbis' opinion. We have now completed our exposition. The foregoing insertion has alleged at KK-LL that it is permitted in the Sabbatical Year to aerate the soil under an olive tree. That matter is now treated on its own; the composition that follows is then an appendix to an appendix. The indentation is meant to show the relationship of the following composition to the foregoing. This is a good example of a free-standing composition that is included as a secondary amplitication of the Mishnah.

137

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One 5. -

A. And is it permitted to stir the soil under an -

olive tree in the Sabbatical Year? Has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv: B. Now it is uermitted to hoe [in the Sabbatical Year]? And has it not been written, C. "But the seventh vear you shall let [the land1 rest and lie still" (Ex. 23: 11). D. "You shall let it rest" from hoeing, "

E. "and lie still" from having stones removed. Said R. Uaba bar Hama, "There are two kinds o f hoeing. In one kind one closes up the holes faround the roots o f a treel, and in the other: he aerates the soil [around the roots o f a tree]. G "Aerating the soil is forbidden, closing uu the holes is uermitted /since the former serves the roots o f the tree, the latter merelv urotects the treel. F. -

"

Yet another free-standing composition is appended. We have dealt with plowing and sowing on the intermediate days of the festival, which we have treated as comparable to the Sabbatical Year. So it is natural to pursue the rules of the Sabbatical year as these have been introduced. Is it then permitted at all to plow in the Sabbatical Year? The next appendix follows. 6. -

A. It has been stated: B. He who plows in the Sabbatical Year C. R. Yohanan and R. Eleazar D. One said. "He is flogged." E. -

The other said. "He is not flogged."

Clearly, there is debate on the matter, and the premise of our discussion, comparing the two types of diminished sanctification, depends upon the opinion of the one who says he is not flogged. Were we to conclude here, we should have an ample presentation of our free-standing composition, as well as its secondary accretions. But we proceed to expand upon the expansion, in fresh commentary to what has just preceded. It answers, specifically, the question, hence the basis for the division. At stake for us is a rational reading of the law; we wish to show that both parties to a dispute have ample basis for their opinions, and, ideally, the basis for the dispute will be a deeper, more systematic conflict on how, exactly, we interpret Scripture. The issue in its own terms has been set forth. What is the basis in a more encompassing reading of matters? What underlies the dispute is now spelled out, in an appended commentary on the dispute itself. 7. -

A. Mav we say that the dispute concerns that which R. Abin said R. llaa said, for said

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism R. Abin said R. Ilaa, "In any passage in which vou find a generalization concerning an affirmative action, followed bv a aualification exvressing a negative commandment. veovle are not to construct on that basis an argument resting on the notion of a general proposition followed bv a concrete exemvlification only the substance of the concrete exemvlification." [Freedman, Sanhedrin, v. -8, n. 8: The rule in such a case is: the general vrovosition includes onlv what is enumerated in the varticular svecification. But when one is thrown into the form of a vositive command and the other stated as a negative iniunction this does not av~Iv.1 B. Bv this theorv o f what is at issue, one who savs he is flogged does not concur with what R. Abin said R. llai said, and one who said. "He is not flogged," concurs with what R. Abin said. [Lazarus: The general rule in vositive terms: "The land shall keev a Sabbath..." (Lev. 25:25 ) ; the ~articularsin negative terms, "You shall neither sow..." (Lev. 25:4-5): the general rule again in vositive form, "It shall be a vear of solemn rest ...." Then the varticulars are considered tvvical as illustrations. serving to include in the general rule all such items as are similar to the varticulars. If the varticulars are tvvical of the general rule. one who does anv of these would break the law. In the case of the former, he takes sowink pruning. reaving. and gleaning as tvvical illustrative instances, and vlowing is covered and is vunishable. In the case of the latter. plowing is not included among the forbidden processes and is not punishable.] C. No, all uarties reject the uosition stated bv R. Abin in R. Naik name. One who savs he is flogged has no uroblems anyhow. D. The one who savs he is not flogged may r e ~ l in v this way:

139

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One E. -

Since urunina falls within the penerative cateaorv ofsowinn, andaraue gathering falls within the generative categorv o f reapina, for what concrete legal uuruose did the All-Merciful make written reference to these items? It is to uresent the inference that it is to these particular derivative classes o f penerative cateaories oflabor that liabilitvuertains, but to all others, there is no liabilih? "

Following the printed text, we now go over the previously-introduced demonstration that for the purposes of the Sabbatical Year we treat as uniform, under the same law and penalty, an entire class of acts of labor. F. -

So thev don 't, don 't thev? But has it not been tauaht on Tannaite authoritv:

G -

J"The L o r d said to Moses on Mount Sinai, Sav to the people of Israel. When vou come into the land which I pive you, the land shall kee~ a Sabbath to the Lord. Six vears vou shall sow vour field, and six years vou shall prune your vinevard and gather in its fruits; but i n the seventh vear there shall be a Sabbath o f solemn rest for the land, a Sabbath to the Lord; vou shall not sow vour field or prune vour vinevard. What erows of itself i n vour harvest vou shall not reap, and the graDes of vour undressed vine you shall not gather; i t shall be a vear of solemn rest for the land. The Sabbath of the land shall provide food for you, for vourself and for your male and female slaves and for your hired servant and the soiourner who lives with you; for vour cattle also and for the beasts that are in vour land all its vield shall be for food" (Lev. 25:l-7):l "you shall not sow vour field or prune vour vineyard:" H. the Torah forbids me only to sow or Drune, I. And how do we know that farmers mav not fertilize, prune trees, smoke the leaves or cover over with powder for fertilizer? J. Scripture savs, "vour field vou shall not. - no manner o f work i n your field, no manner of work in your vinevard, shall vou do.

..."

-

-

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism K. L. -

M. -

N. -

0. P. -

Q.

R. S. T. -

U. -

And how do we know that farmers mav not t r i m trees. nio off drv shoots, t r i m trees? Scripture savs, "vour field vou shall not no manner o f work i n vour field. no manner of work i n vour vinevard, shall vou do. And how do we know that one mav not manure. remove stones, dust the flower o f sulfur, or fumigate? Scripture savs, "vour field you shall not...." no manner o f work i n vour field, no manner of work i n your vinevard. shall vou do. Since Scripture savs. "vou shall not sow your field or Drune vour vinevard." might one suopose that the farmer also may not hoe under the olive trees. fill in the holes under the olives trees, or dig between one tree and the next? Scripture savs, "vou shall not sow vour field or Drune vour vinevard" sowing and aruning were subiect to the general prohibition of field labor. Whev then were thev singled out? I t was to build an analogy throuph them, as follows: what is distinctive i n sowing and Druning is that thev are forms o f labor carried on on the ground or on a tree. So I know that subiect to the prohibition are also other forms of labor that are carried on on the wound or on a tree, lexcluding from the ~rohibition,therefore, the t v ~ e of s labor listed1 ISifra CCXLV1.3-61.

-

...."

-

-

-

V. What we have here is a rule made bv rabbinical authoritv, for which sumort is adduced from Scri~ture.

We proceed to a further refinement on the proposition at hand. The Sabbatical Year is augmented by a month fore and aft, during which prohibitions of a diminished order are introduced, on the one side, and continued, on the other. This protects the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year by training the farmers to observe the taboos before the advent of the year, and making certain they continue to observe them for a bit of time after the year has terminated, so that they do not cut the year short. So we ask whether the result just now adduced pertains to these still-less sanctified spells, and that is a gloss upon an appendix, and is so marked:

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One W. J3BI When R. Dimi came, he said, -

"Minht one suuuose that one is f l o s e d even for doinn so durinn the additional time that has been added to the Sabbatical Year [fore and aftl? But the discussion resolved in favor ofexemutinn one who worked during the addition t o the Sabbatical Year:" X . But I don P know what is this "discussion" and to what reference is made under the categorv, "addition"! Y. R. Eleazar said, "Reference is made to ulowinp, and this is the sense o f the statement: might one suuuose that one is jlonned on account ofulowinp in the Sabbatical Year? For that conclusion would derive from a reading o f the relevant verses under the ~ r i n c i ~ol fea generalization followed bv a particularization o f the foregoing followed bv another generalization. And the discussion resolved in favor o f exemutinn one who worked during the addition t o the Sabbatical Year i n the follow in^ wav: i f the flopping were in order, then what is the sense o f the manv particularizations that the text contains?" Z. R. Yohanan said. "Referenceis made to the days that sages added to the Sabbatical Year prior to the advent of the New Year that marks the commencement of the Sabbatical Year moper. and this is the sense o f the statement: might one sumose that one is flopped on account o f plowinn on the davs that sages added to the Sabbatical

141

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Year prior to the advent o f the New Year that marks the commencement o f the Sabbatical Year proper? For that conclusion would derive from the following: 'In

plowing time and in reaping time you shall rest' (Ex. 34:21). And the discussion resolved in favor ofexempting one who did so." as we shall have t o explain below.

A further appendix is now called for, to explain the reference to days added to the Sabbatical Year.

AA. To what is reference made in the alkcsion to the davs that

sages added to the Sabbatical Year prior to the advent of the New Year that marks the commencement of the Sabbatical Year prover? We now proceed to a secondary development of the statement that has just been made. Were we to stop before what follows, we should suffer no less of sense or meaning. The discussion that follows moreover goes off in its own direction. BB. That is in line with what we have learned in the Mishnah: U n t i l what time do they plow an orchard during the year preceding the Sabbatical Year? The House o f Shammai sav. "As long [the olowingJ as continues to benefit the produce [of the Sixth Year. Until that year's f r u i t ripens and is harvested1 B u t the House o f H i l l e l say, "Until Pentecost." And the opinion of the one is close to the opinion o f

."

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case ofBavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

143

the other IM. Sheb. 1:ll. Until what time do they plow i n a field of grain (lit.: a white field) during the year preceding the Sabbatical Year? Until the moisture jin the ground1 is gone As long as people plow i n order to ~ l a n chat t melons and gourds. Said R. Simeon, "You have p u t the l a w i n t o the hands of each individual. Rather, lone mav plow1 in a field of g r a i n u n t i l Passover Jwhen Israelites offer the first sheaf o f new grain at the Temple: cf. Lev. 23:101 and lone mav plow1 i n an orchard until Pentecost lwhen they present the f i r s t f r u i t s l IM. Sheb.

2:11.

CC. And -

said R. Simeon b. Pazzi said R. Joshua b. Levi in the name of Bar Qavuara, "Rabban Gamaliel and his court took a vote concerning these two svells and annulled them." [It was permitted to till down to the New Year itself (Lazarus).]

The allegation that has just now been made requires exposition in its own terms. It attracts interest for obvious reasons: how can a later court nullify the actions of an earlier one? DD. Said R. Zira to R. -

Abbahu, and some say, R. Simeon b. Laaish to R.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism Yohanan, "How could Rabban Gamaliel and his court have annulled an ordinance made bv the House of Shammai and the House o f Hillel? And lo. we have learned i n the Mishnah: [And whv do thev record the o ~ i n i o nof an individual along with that of the maioritv, since the law follows the o ~ i n i o n of the maioritv? So that. if a court should refer the opinion of the individual, it may decide to rely upon it.] For a court has not got the Dower to nullifv the opinion of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in numbers. [If1 it was greater than the other in wisdom but not in numbers, in numbers but not in wisdom, it has not got the Dower to nullifv its o~inionunless it is greater than it in both wisdom and numbers [M. Ed.

1:51!" E E . For a moment -

he was stu~efied,but then he said to him, "I sav, this is what thev stipulated

145

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case ofBavli Moed Qatan Chapter One among themselves: whoever wants to nullifv the rule may come along a n d nullifv it."

FF. Well. -

did that measure reallt belone t o them? Was it not a law revealed bv God to Moses at Mount Sinai? For that is in line with what R. Assi said R. Yohanansaid in the name of R. Nehunia o f the Vallev o f Bet Hauran, "The rules covering saalings,

ten

IAs regards ten saplings which are spread out within a seah space - they plow the entire seah space for the saplings' sake until the New Year of the Sabbatical Year (M. Sheb. I :6A-B)I. the willow lcarried around the a l t a r during the festivalL and the w a t e r offer in^ are laws revealed to Moses at Sinai."

GG Said -

R. Isaac, "When we received as a tradition the law adding additional restricted time to the Sabbatical Year as a law revealed to Moses at Sinai. it

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism onl~ was concerning the thirtv davs prior to the New Year. The House of Shammai and H i l l e l came alonp and ordained that work should case from Passover For the grain field1 and from Pentecost ifor an orchardl, and. at the same time, thev made the s t i ~ u l a t i o n with reaard to what they said that. whoever might afterward come along and want to nullifi those s ~ e l l sof restricted time mav come alonp and nulliff them " HH. But are these s~ecifieds ~ e l l sof time merelv law? Are thev not based i n fact on explicit verses ofscri~ture? For has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv: 11. "Six davs vou shall w o r k but on the seventh dav vou shall rest, in plowing time and in harvest vou shall rest" (Ex. 34:21) Jwhateverthe need, plowing and r e a ~ i n emav not be done on the Sabbath or the Sabbatical Yearl-

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

JJ.

R. A a i b a says, "The reference to plowing and reaaing is n o t reauired to indicate that these actions are forbidden i n the Sabbatical Year itself. f o r t h a t is exalicitly covered when S c r i p t u r e says, 'neither shall you sow vour field o r arune vour vineyard1 (Lev. 254-5). Rather, the puraose is t o impose the restriction of plowinp even i n the year p r i o r to the Sabbatical Year 14A1 when the effect of the plow in^ will extend into the Sabbatical Year, and it is to restrict harvesting produce ~ a r t l y K r o w n i n the Sabbatical Year but reaped i n the year following the Sabbatical Year." KK.R. Ishmael says, "Just as plow in^ is optional, so reaaing is optional. Excluded from the prohibition of work on the Sabbath then is the reaaing of the first sheaf of barley for the sheaf to be waved, which is a religious duty

-

147

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism land may be done on the Sabbathl." LL. Rather. said R. Nahman bar Isaac, "When the law was handed on as a t r a d i t i o n lconcerninp the time orior t o the Sabbatical Year/, this concerned permiftinp tilling to benefit saolinps, while the cited verses o f Scrioture concern orohibitine tillinp around old trees. " M M . Well. if i t was necessarv to ao~eal to a traditional low to allow t i l l i n g around saolinps up to the advent o f the New Year. is it not self-evident that doing so around old trees is aoing to be forbidden? NN. Rather, when the traditional law was handed down as a prohibition. it was reauired onlv from the view of R. Ishmael. while the verses o f Scrioture form the basis ofthe position of R. Aaiba 00.R. Yohanan said, Rabban Gamaliel and his court nullified the restrictions on the authoritv of the Torah. "

-

-

-

-

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One PP.What -

is the scriutural basis for their uosition? Q Q T h e v formed a verbal analopy based on the use o f the word "Sabbath" with reverence to both the Sabbatical Year, called the Sabbatical Year, and also the Sabbath of Creation, alonx these lines: RR. Just as in the case o f the Sabbath o f C r e a t i o n , prohibitions pertain to the holy dav but not to the time beforehand or afterward, so in the case of the Sabbatical Year, prohibitions pertain to the vear but not to the time beforehand or afterward. SS. Objected R. Ashi,

-

"On the view ofone who maintains that the restriction is a traditional law, can an arpument based on verbal analopv come alonp and nullifv a traditional law?And i f one savs that it is based on a verse o f Scriuture, alonp these same lines, can an arpument formed of a verbal analoev come alona and

149

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism nullifv the result of the reading o f a verse of Scri~ture?" Rather, said R. TT. Ashi, "Rabban Gamaliel and his court adopted the reasoning of R. Ishmael. who said, 'The prohibitions of tilling on the soell prior to the actual advent o f the Sabbatical Year derives from a traditional law. And to whal span oftime did that traditional law ~ertain?I t was durinp the time that the Temple was standine, iust as the rule o f the water libation lwhich likewise derived from a traditional law1 pertained onle during the time that the Temple was standinp. But when the Temple is no longer standinp. the law received b~ tradition does not applv. "'

We see that the governing program of the Talmud - Mishnah-exegesis and amplification -prevails throughout. There are no compositions inserted out of relationship to the primary program of the Talmud. The indentations signal originally-free-standing compositions that serve as footnotes and as appendices tacked on for good reason. For that reason I underline the entire appendage, even though it was written for reasons other than the amplification of the Mishnah and the law. So the final entry clearly serves as a massive appendix; it is intelligently situated at the end for that purpose, since in this location it does not impede the presentation of the whole. In contemporary scholarship we should situate in an appendix at the end of a chapter or of a book such a discussion, only tangentially

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

151

relevant to the main point. One of the marks of the conclusion of a systematic and cogent presentation of a point is the insertion of such sizable complexes of supplementary data. Whoever wrote up the composition to begin with had his own focus and in no way evinces knowledge of the ultimate location of his writing; and whoever inserted the composition selected it for the sake of completeness, even recognizing how the insertion would impart to his composite a discursive character. He has paid a heavy price for his decision, since the Talmud before us loses cogency before it has run its course even half way. Then what lesson did he propose to teach by the composition as we have it, in which the opening units pursue a single line of thought, and everything else wanders off hither and yon? To frame the question more concretely: we have now completed the presentation of the entire treatment of M. 1:1A. The run-on effect of the whole proves blatant. Had we stopped at No. 3, we should have found a fairly ample exposition ofthe Mishnahpassage. Not only so, but Nos. 4-6 really do not address the Mishnah-rule at all; they go their own way, with a focus upon the Sabbatical Year, not the intermediate days of the festival. But the Sabbatical Year in the Mishnah-rule is subordinate, introduced by reason of an analogy that is not spelled out. Any allegation that the Talmud is coherent and well-drafted must address the challenge of the sizable and meandering composite before us. The secondary expansion, No. 4, drawing in its wake the appended, also free-standing discussions at Nos. 5 and 6, furthermore bearing their extensions and accretions, obviously has taken up most of our attention. Together with its enormous amplification in successive appendices, the consideration of that matter has defined the context in which the Talmud wishes us to read the Mishnah-paragraph at hand. So we have now to ask, What has the framer accomplished in introducing the passage into the context of our Mishnah-paragraph? First, he has raised the issue of the Sabbath and its categories of prohibited labor, and therefore he has introduced a complication into our consideration of the Mishnah-passage. We deal here with watering. Watering on the Festival is forbidden, since all acts of labor but cooking that are forbidden on the Sabbath are forbidden on the Festival. Then we forthwith deal with the prohibition of watering on the Sabbath and ask by what reason it is forbidden, with implications for the considerations operative in our Mishnah-rule governing the diminished sanctity of the intermediate days of the festival. In doing so, the compositor who took a free-standing discussion and deposited it here has accomplished a second matter in the exegesis of the theme before us. He has sealed the paramount issue of our tractate: to what do we compare the intermediate days of the festival? Are they comparable to the Festival and the Sabbath, only subject to diminished restrictions rat her than the strict ones that apply to the Sabbath? Or are they comparable to weekdays, but subject to some restrictions rather than none as in the case of weekdays?

152

Losr Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

Juxtaposing the exposition of M. 1 :1 with a rule concerning the Sabbath (therefore also: the Festival taboo against labor), and introducing a case comparable to the Mishnah's, namely, watering the field, the compiler of the set has underscored the theoretical issue that must engage us. That is the governing analogy, Sabbath-Festival or ordinary week day, that generates the specific rulings at hand. I maintain that the juxtaposition makes a point directly pertinent to the theoretical problem our Mishnah states in concrete terms. So let me spell out the connections that I claim join to the exposition of our Mishnah-rule this otherwise utterly irrelevant passage. That brings us to the substance of the comment on the Mishnah-passage that is effected by the compositor simply by introducing the present free-standing composition. It is to introduce the complications of classifications of acts of labor into the simple matter at hand. Our Mishnah-paragraph has made the point that we may keep a crop alive through irrigating it, but we may not go to great effort to water the crop, and we may also not do more than keep it alive; that is, we may do nothing to enhance the growth. That point is made explicit in the language, "work on the intermediate days of a festival is permitted i f it is to prevent loss, but i f it is to add to gain it is not permitted. " The free-standing composition then goes over the same ground in a different setting. Why? Because the free-standing composition addresses the matter of crop enhancement on the Sabbath; the Festival day is comparable to the Sabbath in every prohibition but that concerning food-preparation. Hence the issue of the Sabbath and the Festival, so far as crop-enhancement is the governing consideration,pertains here. We then draw the contrast between cropenhancement - watering the crop, the same act the Mishnah-rule has introduced -on the Sabbath or Festival and on the intermediate days of the festival. What we simply may not do on the former occasion we may or may not be permitted to do on the latter. Introducing this discussion has served to remind us that while we deal with the intermediate days ofthe festival, the diminished sanctity that pertains must be protected, and the very same considerations that govern on the Sabbath (here: crop-enhancement) govern also on the intermediate days of the festival, but in a different way. The operative principle then is underscored: loss is prevented, gain is not permitted. And that means, what may not be done on the Sabbath or Festival also may not be done on the intermediate days of the festival. By introducing the rule for the Sabbath and producing the explanation that the operative consideration behind the rule is the prohibition against crop-enhancement, the framer has made his main point: the intermediate days of the festival are comparable not to ordinary days, but subject to some restrictions, but to the Festival or Sabbath, and are subject to formidable restrictions. The governing analogy is the Sabbath and Festival, their restrictions diminished only for very special reasons, and not the everyday practices of the unconsecrated week, subject to a few special limitations. If this juxtaposition expresses the point I have spelled out -the priority of the Sabbath-

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

153

Festival in defining the governing metaphor - then we should have a sustained interest in showing how the intermediate days of the festival really are comparable to the Festival itself, and are not comparable to, and do not follow the rules that pertain on, the ordinary days of the secular calendar. The upshot is that, in introducing an independent composition, with its own focus, the compositor has asked us to read the Mishnah-rule in a more complex way and so made us understand the rule as part of a larger web of law on the comparison of sacred and this-worldly matters. We then form a preliminary hypothesis that the key to the selection-process is an interest in comparison and contrast of like classes of things, e.g., spans of time that are not sanctified like the Sabbath and Festival but that are in a diminished level of sanctification. Within that category falls each class of data we have worked on. Then the connections that are made yield the conclusions that are drawn, and, inclusive of the supplementary appendices, the whole holds together and imparts a lesson that on their own the parts do not convey. In this way the Talmud vastly transcends the labor of Mishnah-commentary and also enriches our grasp of the law that the Mishnah conveys through detail. We now proceed to the next clause of our Mishnah-paragraph. 11.1A. -

But they do not water [an i r r i ~ a t e dfield1 with (1) collected rain water, or (2) water from a swaDe well I1:lC):

B. -

There is no trouble in understandinn whv water from a swape well should not be used, since waterinn in that wav involves heaw labov. But what objection can there be to usinacollected rain water, since what heavy labor can possiblv be involved in irriaatinp with rain water?

We resume the work of Mishnah-commentary, now turning directly to the sense of the statement. We do not understand why the same rule applies to two distinct classes of water-sources. The answer takes the form of a dispute: C. Said R. llaa said R. Yohanan, "It is a urecautionaw decree, on account o f the uossibilitv o f the farmer k going on to make use o f

water from a swaue well. " D. R. Ashi said, "Rain water itself can be as hard to draw as the water o f a swaue well. "

Yohanan concedes the premise of the question, Ashi does not, but insists upon commensurability. Now the dispute is situated on a shared premise, so shown to be rational: said R. Zira said Rabbah bar Jeremiah said Samuel. "From irrigation streams that

E. At issue between them is what R. Zira said. For -

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

draw water from ponds it is permitted to irrigate on the intermediate days of the festival." One authoritv [Ashi) concurs with the position ofR. Zira, and the other authority does not concur with the position o f R. Zira.

The dispute now rests upon whether or not it is permitted to draw water from ponds, as Zira maintains is the case; so the problem is whether or not the rain water is in the same classification as standing water. We proceed to analyze 1.E in its own terms, and since the analysis is not required for the purpose that defines the matter but complements the discussion, in our setting we should treat as a footnote what follows, which is therefore indented: 2. A. Reverting to the bodv o f the f o r e ~ o i n ~said : R. Zira said Rabbah -

bar Jeremiah said Samuel. "From irrigation streams that draw water from ponds it is permitted to irrigate on the intermediate davs of the festival."

B. Objected R. Jeremiah to R. Zira, -

" But they do not water Ian irrigated field1 with collected rain water, or water from a swape

well." C. He said to him. "Jeremiah mv son, the pools in Babvlonia are like water that never languishes. "

The intersection with the Mishnah-rule is now explicit and shows why the entire composition serves Mishnah-exegesis. What follows are other items that are comparable, namely, bodies of water that draw from a constant source and do not involve physical labor in collecting the water for irrigation. These too form complements to the topic of the Mishnah. 3. A. Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: -

B. Ditches and pools that were filled with water on the eve of -

the festival rnav not be used for irrigation on the intermediate davs of the festival. But if an irrigation ditch passes between them. they mav be used. C. Said R. Pappa "But that is so onlv if the Preater Dart of that field derives its water from that irrigation ditch." D. R. Ashi said. "Even though the greater part of that field does not derive its water from that irrigation ditch, since the water flows continuously, the owner concludes, the field does not get enough water one dav, it will get enough two or three davs later rand he will not undertake heaw labor during the intermediate davs o f the festival]. "

The data not only add facts but also receive amplification at 3.D, which shows us the underlying reckoning that leads sages to their rulings. We now move on to Tosefta's complement to the Mishnah, which we analyze just as we do a

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case ofBavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

155

Mishnah-paragraph. I cite the whole of the passage, though the Bavli gives us only the opening sentence and discusses that alone: 4. A. Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authoritv: -

B. A pool that gets a trickle ofwater from an irrigated field higher up mav be used for watering another field. IR. Simeon b. Menassia says. "TWO ~001s.. one above the other -one should not draw water from the lower to water the uDoer, but he may draw water from the upper to water the lower one. R. Simeon b. Eleazar savs, "A furrow. part of which is low and Dart high -one should not draw water from the lower Dart for the uDDer part and irrigate it. But he mav draw water from the u m e r p a r t for the lower part and irrigate by that means" (T. Moed 1:lF-1)l.

C. JWith reference to the statement, A -

~ o o that l gets a trickle of water from an irrigated field higher UD mav be used for watering another field.1 but lo, will it not give out?

D. Said R. Jeremiah. "in any event at this moment it is still trickling." E. Said Abbawe. "The rule aoplies onlv so lone as the first s~rinq -

has not languished." [Lazarus: but once the trickling has ceased, the ~ o ohas l lost its s u ~ ~and l v becomes like aswaDe well or stored rain likelv to entail exertion.1 The contribution lies in the analysis, which once more underscores the governing principle, for the reason that Lazarus contributes to the elucidation of Abbayye's comment. Now we go forward with fbrther components of the passage just now cited. 5. -

A. It has been taught on Tannaite authority: B. R. Simeon b. Menassia savs, "Two ~ools.. one above the other -one should not draw water from the lower to water the umer, but he mav draw water from the u m e r to water the lower one. More than this did R. Simeon b. Eleazar IBavli: Eleazar b. R. C. Simonl sav. "Even i n the case of a furrow, Dart o f which is low and Dart high - one should not draw water from the lower part for the u m e r Dart and i r r i ~ a t eit. IT. adds: But he may draw water from the u m e r Dart for the lower Dart and irrigate by that meansWlIT. Moed 1:lF-IL,

This completes the citation and amplification of the Tosefta-paragraph. We go on with another rule in the status of Tamaite formulation: 6. A. Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: -

B. They may raise UD water bv buckets from a well during the festival -

week for vegetables so as to eat them. But if it is onlv to enhance their growth, it is forbidden to do so [since this is done for ~rofit,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism not merely for maintainine the crop for the week or preventing

lossl. The cited rule is now given amplification through a specific case, which clarifies the sense of the foregoing: 7. A. Rabina and Rabbah Tosefaah were going along the wav. 7hev saw somebodv who was drawing buckets o f water during the intermediate davs ofthe fistival. Said Rabbah Tosefaah to Rabina, "So let k PO and excommunicate that man." B. He said to him, "But has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv: Thev mav raise up water bv buckets from a well during the festival week for vegetables so as to eat them. But if it is onlv to improve their atmearance, it is forbidden to do so? " C. He said to him, "Do you really think that the meaning o f 'raise uu ' means raise U D water? What is the real meaning o f 'raise uu'? J4B1it is to DUN out vepetables. That meaning o f the word is in line with what we have learned in the Mishnah: "He who thins jusinv the word at hand1 Erase vines. iust as he [is allowedl to thin his own Isroduce, the normal clustersl, so may he thin Jthe defective clustersl which belong to the ~oor,"the words of R. Judah. R. Meir says, "He is aermitted to thin his own Iproducel, but he is not sermitted Ito thin sroducel which belongs to the soor" IM. Peah 751. " D. He said to him, "But has it not been tauaht on Tannaite authoritv: Thev mav raise uv water bv buckets from a well during the festival week for vegetables so as to eat them? " E. He said to him, "So i f that has been taught on Tannaite authorih: that is what has been taunht land no more discussion1. "

The exposition of the Mishnah-paragraph in dialogue with the Toseftan supplements is now complete, the whole a cogent composite and a coherent statement of the principle behind the rule: maintaining the crop, not making a profit, defines the acts that may be performed on the intermediate days of the festival, and how this works in detail is then spelled out for the case at hand. III.1A. --

And they do not dig channels around vines:

B. What are "channels "? -

C. Said R. Judah, "Thev are little hollows." D. So too it has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: E. What are channels dug around a tree? These are ditches dug F. -

around the roots of trees IT. Moed 1:2B-C1.Thev hoe lightly around the roots of olives and vines. Is that so? But did not R. Judah permit the sons o f Bar Zittai to make little hollows in their vineyards?

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One G

157

That 's no problem, the statement o f our Mishnah speaks o f fresh ones, R. Judah 's to established ones.

The explanation of word-choices is followed by citation and clarification of precedents. IV.l A. --

R. Eleazar b. Azariah savs. "Thev do not make a new water channel on the intermediate davs of a festival or in the Sabbatical Year." And sapes say, "Thev make a new water channel in the Sabbatical Year. and they r e ~ a i rdamaged ones on the intermediate davs of a festival:"

We find ourselves thrust once more into the comparison of different spells that are at a lower level of sanctification than the Sabbath or the Festival, namely, the intermediate days of the festival and the Sabbatical Year. Consequently, we resume the task we began earlier, and, specifically, we want to know why the Sabbatical Year is subject to the prohibition at hand, which obviously pertains to the intermediate days of the festival. Here, the Mishnah-rule has dictated its own exegetical problem. The matter is spelled out in so many words in the terms I introduced earlier: B. There is no uroblem with resuect to the urohibition concerning the -

C. D. E. F. G -

H. I. -

intermediate davs of a festival, since the ouerative consideration is that this is heaw labo,: but whv ever not make a channel in the Sabbatical Year? R. Zira and R. Abba b. Mamel differ on the matter One said. "The reason is that the one who digs appears to be hoeing." And the other said. "The reason is that he looks as though he is preparing the banks for sowing." So what's at stake? At issue is a case in which the water comes alone immediatelv. From the uersuective ofhim who has said, "The reason is that he looks as though he is vrevaring the banks for sowing." it is still objectionable. But from the uersuective ofhim who has said, "The reason is that the one who dies avvears to be hoeing." there is no objection. But should not the one who objects for the reason that it looks as though he is spading also object that he looks as though he is preuarina the bank for seed? Rather, this is what's at stake between the two explanations: it would involve a case in which he takes what is in the trench and tosses it out. From the perspective ofhim who says, "The reason is that he looks as though he is preparing the banks for sowing." there is no objection; but from the perspective o f him who savs,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism "The reason is that the one who digs amears to be hoeing." it is still subiect to an obiection. J. But from the uersuective o f him who savs that he auuears to be prevarinn the sides for seed, would he not also admit that he seems to be hoeinn? K. Not reallv, for one who hoes, as soon as he takes uu a soadeful, he puts it down anain in olace.

What makes the exposition satisfying is that each side is given an opportunity to apply its reasoning at every stage in the argument, hence a full account, through the dialectic of back-and-forth exchange of positions and reasoning, is set forth. We proceed to a secondary analysis of the matter just now spelled out; the whole is continuous and cogent. The next step in the exposition raises the possibility that a given authority has taken two positions that contradict one another in principle. 2. -

A. Amemar reueated the Mishnah k law along with the reason, The reason is that the one who digs appears to be hoeing, but this presented a uroblem to him because o f a contradiction between two statements o f R. Eleazar b. Azariah /in the following lanpuanel: "And has R. Eleazar b. Azariah taken the position that any act that looks as if he is hoeing is forbidden? And in contradiction to that position: A person places lalll the manure i n his oossession i n lone larvel pile. R. Meir forbids Ithe farmer from doing this1 unless he either deepens lthe ground bvl three Lhandbreadthsl or raises lthe ground bvl three lhandbreadthsl I f one had a small amount l o f manure alreadv oiled up i n the fieldl. he continuallv adds to it. R. Eleazar b. Azariah forbids Jthe farmer from doing sol unless he either deepens lthe ground b v l three lhandbreadthsl or raises lthe wound bvl three Jhandbreadthsl or unless he olaces lthe manure1 on rocky ground IM. Shebiit 3:3D-GI. ILazarus: here Eleazar permits digging i n the field i n the sabbatical vear to oreaare a place for the manure store without concern about giving a wrong imaression, such as he had i n mind when he prohibited making a water channel.[

.

B. R. Zira and R. Abba b. Mamel differ on the matter C.

One said. "The cited passage speaks of a case in which he had already had the lace excavated." D. And the other said. "The ouerative consideration is that the manure heap itself shows what his real intention is."

The possibility of Eleazar's adopting contradictory principles - do we take account of the farmer's giving the wrong impression? -- is now explored and worked out. The exposition of the Mishnah's rule has given way to a systematic

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

159

account of the consideration of the Sabbatical Year. Yet this too has a profound bearing on the conduct of the farmer on the intermediate days of the festival. V.l A, -

and they r e ~ a i rdamaged ones on the intermediate davs of a festival: B. What is the meaning o f "damaged ones"? C. Said R. Abba "If one was only a handbreadth d e e ~he . may restore it to a depth of six handbreadths."

The Mishnah-exegesis is simple and routine. We proceed to an important clarification of the kind of "damaged ones" that the farmer may repair. This imposes a considerable clarification and limitation: the original principle -no heavy labor, no work for enhancing profit - is illustrated once more. We now ask a question that flows from the matter at hand, one that defines an interstitial case. 2. -

A. It is obvious that restoring the channel from a halfhandbreadth to three, since there was to bepin with hardlv anv flow o f water, is null land work that is useless andso forbidden]; to deeuen it from two handbreadths to the orininal twelve involves heavy labor and that is not permitted. But what about deeueninn it from two to seven? Here he deepens it bv five handbreadths, from one to six, so here too he dee.uens it bv five, two to seven? Or uerhaus what is poinn on here is that he is actuallv deeueninn it bv an extra handbreadth, so that involves heavy and needless labor and is forbidden? B. The auestion stands. -

We proceed to a set of precedents, clarifying the application of the law to real cases. 3. -

A. -

days o f the festival] to clear awav the growths obstructing the irrigation ditch. B. R. Jeremiah permitted the people ofSacuta [during the intermediate davs o f the festival1 to dredge a ditch that had been blocked. C. R. Ashi permitted the people o f Mata Mehasia to clear obstructions from the Barnis canal, saving, "Sincepeoule net their water from it, it is as public domain, and we have learned in the Mishnah: And they do all public needs. "

The Mishnah-sentence has now been fully clarified, and we go on to the next clause. V1.1 A. --

Thev repair 15AI damaged waterwavs in the ~ u b l i cdomain and dig them out:

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

160

We begin by a close reading of the word-choice: repair, yielding, but not make new ones. We immediately qualify the result of that reading: B. Repairing is all right, but not diminp afresh. C. Said R. Jacob said R. Yohanan. "They have taught this rule only when the vublic has no need of the waterways, but if the vublic needs them. then it is vermitted even to dig afresh."

The proposed distinction yields the principle that public welfare overrides the prohibitions of hard labor on the intermediate days of the festival. This is forthwith challenged:

D. But if the vublic needs them. is it permitted to do that work? And -

E. F. -

G -

H. I. -

has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv: Cisterns. vits. and caverns that belong to private vrovertv may be cleaned out, and. it goes without saving. those that belong to the vublic: but cisterns, pits, and caverns belonging to the vublic may not be dun. and all the more so those of a orivate verson? Does this not address a case in which the public has need o f these facilities? No, it addresses a case in which the public has no need o f those facilities. Along these same lines with respect to a private par? where the private person has no need o f the facilih! is reuairinp allowed? And has it not been t a u ~ h on t Tannaite authoritv: As to cisterns, pits. and caverns of a vrivate verson. thev collect water in them but they may not be cleaned out, nor may their cracks be ~lastered; but as to those belonging to the public. they may be cleaned out and their cracks may be plastered? Now what is the point here? It is when a private uersor: has need o f the facilitv And in that case, in regard to what is reauired for public use, where the uublic has need ofit the same rule pertains? And where the ~ u b l i chas need o f the facilitx is it forbidden to dip? Has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv: As to cisterns, pits. and caverns belonging to a vrivate person, they collect water in them and clean them out. but thev may not plaster their cracks nor put scourings into them to fill cracks; as to those serving the public. they may dig them to bepin with and vlaster them with cement? So the initial formulation poses a contradiction. This is how to iron out the diflicultv: They may clean out wells, ditches or caverns of a vrivate verson. when the vrivate varty reauires the facility. and. it goes without saying. those that belong, to the vublic when the uublic reauire use o f the facilitv, in which case even dipping them out is permitted. But they may not dig out wells. ditches, or caverns belonging to the vublic when the public does not reauire use of the facility. and, it goes without saying,

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qalan Chapter One

161

those belonging to a ~rivateDartv. When the urivate uartv does not reauire using them, then even cleaning them out is forbidden. We have now made the necessary distinctions to iron out our problem, leaving open only the question of how to relate our result to the formulation of the rule in the Mishnah. Said R. Ashi, "A close reading o f our Mishnah-uara~rauhvields the same result: And they do all public needs. Now what is encompassed within the au~mentativeformulation, all? Is it not to encomoass, also, dinping?" K. Not at all, it is to encompass what is covered in that which has been taught on Tannaite authority: On the fifteenth dav of Adar

J. -

agents of the court eo forth and dip cisterns. wells, and caves. And they repair immersion pools and water channels. Everv immersion pool that contains forty seahs of water is suitable for receiving further drawn water if need be. and to everv immersion pool that does not contain forty seahs of water they lead a water course and s complete its volume to the measure of forty seahs of water that has not been drawn so that i t is suitable to receive further drawn water if need be IT. Shea. 1:ll. And

how on the basis of Scripture do we know that if thev did not go forth and carry out all these duties. that anv blood that is shed there is credited bv Scripture as though they had shed it? Scripture states. "And so blood be upon vou" (Dt. 19:10). L. Lo, in point o f fact the framer o f the Mishnah has covered these matters explicitlv: Thev repair roads, streets, and water pools. And they do all public needs! what is encompassed within the auarnentative formulation, all? Is it not to encomuass, also, diaaina? M . Yes, that's the proof? -

The exposition has come to a successful conclusion, in that all of the complementary formulations of the rule at hand are held together in a single coherent statement and moreover are shown to accord with Scripture. The next clause of the Mishnah is linked to Scripture's statements on the same subject. V1l.l -

A. mark off graves: 9. Said R. Simeon b. Pazzi. "Whence do we find an indication in -

Scri~turethat it is required to mark off graves? Scrioture states, 'And when they Dass through the land and one sees a man's bone, then shall he set up a sign by it' (Ez. 29: 15h" C. Said Rabina to R. Ashi, "So before Ezekiel made that point, how did we know it?"

162

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

H. Said R. Ashi to Rabina. "So until Ezekiel came along and made 1. -

that statement, how did we know the correct rule?" "According to vour reasoning, when R. Hisda made his statement, 'This matter we have not learned from the Torah of our lord, Moses, but from the teachings of Ezekiel b. Buzi we have learned it. "No alien. uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter mv sanctuarv" (Ez. 44:9),' -until Ezekiel came along and made that statement, how did we know the correct rule? Rathe,: it is a tradition that was handed on, and Ezekiel came along and suuulied it with suuport from Scriuture. Here too, it is a tradition that was handed on, and Ezekiel came along and suuulied it with suuport from Scripture. "

The relationship of Ezekiel's prophecy to the Torah of Moses is worked out as a byproduct of our interest in Scripture's allusions to the rule ofthe Mishnah. We now go off on a tangent and address the issue of VII. 1.I: the source of the rule that aliens may not enter the sanctuary. The composition that follows took shape on account of its own interests but is inserted as an appendix to the exposition of the Mishnah and the law. That ambiguity is why it is underlined but indented. R. Abbahu said, "It derives from the followina: 'And he shall cry, unclean. unclean' (Lev. 13:45) - the uncleanness affecting him cries out for him and savs, 'Keep awav."' And so said R. Uzziel, grandson of Rabbah, "...the uncleanness affecting him cries out for him and savs, 'Keep awav."' But does that verse serve the specifieduurpose? It is in point o f fact reauired in line with that which has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: "And he shall cn/, unclean, unclean" (Lev. 13:45) -one has to publicize his pain in public. so that the public mav seek for mercv on his behalf. Ifthat were the case, then Scripture can as well have written, "Unclean he shall cry out." Whv sav, "Unclean. unclean"? It is to yield both points. Abbawe said, "It derives from the followinp: 'And do not put a stumbling block before the blind'(Lev. 19:14)." R. Pauua said, "It derives from the following: 'And he will sav. Cast vou up. cast vou up, clear the wav' (Is. 57: 14)." R. Hinena said, "It derives from the followina: 'Take up the stumbling block out of the wav of mv people' (Is. 57:14)." R. Joshua b. R. Idi said, "It derives from the followina: 'And you shall show them the way in which thev~mustwalk' (Ex. 18:20)." E. Mar Zutra said, "It derives from the following: 'And vou shall separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness' ILev. 15:31)."

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

163

F. R. Ashi said, "It derives from the following: 'And they shall -

have charge of mv charge' (Lev. 22:9), meaning. Drotect my charge [the ~riesthoodl." G Rabina said, "It derives from the following: 'And to him who orders his wav will 1show the salvation of God' (Ps. 50:23)." We proceed to a footnote on Rabina's statement, that is, further exposition of Ps. 50:23: 4. -

A. And R. Joshua b. Levi said. "Whoever ~ r o ~ e rsets l v his ways in this world will have the merit of witnessing the salvation of the Holv One, blessed be he, B. "as it is said. 'To him who orders his wav I will show the salvation of God' (Ps. 50:23). C. "Do not read 'orders' but ' ~ r o ~ e r lsets' v lhisl wav" ICohen. Sotah, D.21, n. 6: He calculatesthe loss incurred in fulfilling a DreceDt against the reward it will bring

him.l 5. -

A. R. Yannai had a disciple who dav bv dav raised tough auestions, but on the Sabbaths o f Festivals did not raise tough auestions. B. J5B1 In his reaard he recited the verse. "And to him who orders his way will I show the salvation of God" (Ps. 50:23).

The composite follows familiar lines of order and structure. We take up the exposition ofthe Mishnah-rule again, now turning to Tosefta's supplement. It is topical, concerning marking off graves; it has no bearing on the issue of our Mishnahsentence, which is, labor permitted on the intermediate days of the festival. The framers of the Talmud have in mind not only an exposition of the Mishnah's laws and logic, but also an amplification of the subjects that it covers. But, we note, these amplifications are subordinate, coming later in the sequence of treatments of a Mishnah-sentence or paragraph. Since what follows is topical and in no way clarifies the Mishnah's rule governing the intermediate days ofthe festival, I treat it as a secondary and subordinate statement. 6 . A. Our rabbis have tauaht on Tannaite authoritv: B. -

They do not may a mark to indicate the aresence of corpse matter that is not bigger in volume than an olive's bulk, nor a human bone that is not bigper than a barley seed, nor any human remains that would not convey uncleanness when under a tent. But they do make a marking to indicate the presence of a spine, skull, or maior limb of a skeleton, or the larger part of the small bones.

164

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism They make markings not when the matter is certainlv known, but onlv when it is uncertain. What are cases of uncertaintv? leafv bowers. iutting ledges. and a grave-area. And thev do not make a mark right on the spot of the source of uncleanness. so as not to waste what is unaffected land so remains1 uncontaminated. nor is a mark placed far from the spot. so as not to waste space in the Land of Israel Icf. T. She&

1:51. But will an olive's bulk ofhuman flesh not convev uncleanness in a tent? Lo, we have learned in the Mishnah: These contaminate in the Tent: 11) the corpse. and 12) an olive's bulk lof flesh] from the corpse. land 13) an olive's bulk of corpse dregs. and J4) a ladleful of corpse mould: (5) the backbone, and the skull, and 16) a limb from the corpse, and (7) a limb from the living person on which is an appropriate amount of flesh: 18) a auartera a b of bones from the larger part of the frame lof the skeleton1 o r 19'1 from the larper number: and (10) the larger part of the frame o r 111) the larger number of the corpse, even though there is not among them a auarter-aab. are unclean. How much is the "larger number"? One hundred twentv-fivel IM. Oh. Said R. Pauua, "Here we deal with a uiece o f flesh ureciselv an olive is bulk in size, since ultimatelv it will be found lacking. It is better that on its account food in the status of priestly rations and Holv Things should be burned on its account for a little while, but not for all time." What are cases of uncertainty? Leafv bowers, i u t t i n ~ledges, and a grave-area: leafv bowers: a tree that overshadows the ground near a cemeterv. jutting ledges: Protruding stones that ~ r o i e c from t a wall IT. Oh. 9:2l. and a grave-area: that is in line with that which we have learned in the Mishnah: He who plows U D the grave- lo, he makes lthe field intol a grave area. How much l s ~ a c e does l he make? The length of a furrow of a hundred cubits. lover1 a saace of four seahs IM. Oh. 17:lA-BL,

The block of topically-agglutinated materials is itself now subjected to its own amplification. 8. A. So does dirt deriving from a grave-area convev uncleanness -

through overshadowing bv a common tent? But did not R. Judah sav Samuel said. "One [who wants to remain uncontaminated bv c o m e matterl in a beth haueras Ta grave area an area vossiblv contaminated by corpse matterl blows awav the earth and goes alone his wav."

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One B. R. Judah bar Arnmi in the name of R. Judah said. " A beth -

haueras la prave area, an area uossiblv contaminated by coruse matter1 that has been trodden down is no longer a source of uncleanness." C. Said R. Pauua, "There is no contradiction. The one statement speaks of a field in which the location of a grave has been lost" [so the whole field is a source of uncleannessl. and the other s ~ e a kof s a field in which a Prave has been turned up bv a plow [which crushes the bones so that they are no longer a source of uncleannessl." D. But is a field in which a grave has been plowed uu even classified as a wave area? E. Yes indeed, for we have learned in the Mishnah: There are three kinds of grave areas: Ill He who plows up the grave

- i t mav be planted with anv kind o f tree. but it may not be sown with anv kind of seed. except for seed lthe plants o f which1 are cut.And if one uprooted it, one heaps up the threshing floor i n it, and sifts "the grain through two sieves." the words of R. Meir. And sages sav, "The grain with two sieves, and the pulse through three sieves." And one burns the stubble and the stalks [in the grave areal. And i t renders unclean through contact and throuvh carrying. and i t does not render unclean through the Tent. 121 A field i n the midst of which a grave has been lost is sown with any kind of seed but is not planted with anv kind of tree. And they do not preserve trees i n it. except for a barren tree. which does not produce fruits. And i t renders unclean throueh contact and throueh carrving and through the Tent. 131 A field of mournersltomb niches is not planted. and is not sown. but its dust is clean. And thev make from i t ovens for holv lusel IM. Oh. 18:2-41. A. What is the definition o f A field of mourners? B. R. Joshua bar Abba in the name of Ulla said, "It is a -

-

9. -

field in which thev take leave of the dead." C. And how come lit is classified as a wave area, imparting -

uncleannessl? D. Said Abimi. "It is because of the contin~encyof -

abandonment bv the owners fof the limbs that mav have been dronped there when collection was made for secondary burial]." And is it not necessary to mark o f a field in which a prave has 10. A. been dug UP bv a plow? Has it not been taught on Tannaite authoritv: B. I f one found a field that is marked off as havine corpse -

matter i n its midst. and the nature of the uncleanness is not known, if there is a tree i n it, one mav be sure that a

165

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism grave has been plowed up in it. I f there is no tree in it. one mav be sure that a grave has been lost in it. Said R.Judah. "Under what circumstances? When there is available a sage or a disciple. for not evervbodv is going to be expert in this matter" IT. Ahilot 17:12L,

Said R. Pauua. "When that uassape was repeated on Tannaite authoritx it made reference to a field in which a grave had been lost and which therefore had been marked. If. then. there are trees in the field, that means that a grave had been plowed up by a low thereafter: if there are no trees in it, it means a grave has been lost in it." But should we not take account o f the uossibility that trees are located in the field but the grave lies outside o f it? For that would be in line with what Ulla said, "We speak of a case in which trees are located at the edges of the field," so here too, "We speak of a case in which trees are located at the edges of the field." L6AI But uerhaus the uncleanness is located inside the field and trees are situated outside [Lazarus: and since corpses are not buried on the road, the grave must be located among the trees and it must have been run over by the plow when the field was tilled for the sake of the trees]. We deal with a case in which the trees were planted irremlarlv. I f vou urefer, I shall sav, "It is in line with what we said earlier: nor is a mark ~ i a c e dfar from the spot. so as not to waste soace in the Land o f Israel. " Said R. Judah. "Under what circumstances? When there is available a sage or a disciple, for not everybody is going to be expert in this matter:"

Said Abbawe, "That Droves that, when a neouhvte rabbi is located in a dace, all affairso f the ulace are assigned to his authoritv " Said R. Judah. "lfone found a stone with amarking, the space under it is deemed to be unclean [with corpse uncleannessl. If there were two such stones, then if there is lime between them, the space between them is deemed unclean. If there is no lime between them, then the space between them is deemed clean." But is that the case even i f there is no mark ofulowinp there? And has it not been taught on Tannaite authority: Ifone found a single stone marked off, even though it is not to be kept i n that way. he who overshadows it is clean. If one found two of them. if there is a mark of plowing between them. the space between them is clean, if not. i t is unclean IT. Shea. 1:5D-El. Said R. P a ~ v "Here a we deal with a case in which the lime

was poured on top of the stones and then spread down on

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

167

either side. If there is a mark of lowing between them. the sDace is clean, for we assume that the lime that splashed was peeled offbv the plowina: i f there is no mark ofulowina, the lime is clearlv intended to mark the space between and that space is held to be unclean. " Said R. Assi. "If there is a marking on one side, that side is 13. unclean, the rest of the whole field is clean. it there is marking on two sides, those are unclean. the whole rest of the field is clean: if there was markina on three sides. those are unclean, but the whole rest ofthe field is clean. lfthere is a marking on four boundaries. they are then held to be the marks of what is clean, but the entire field inside is unclean." 9. "For a master has said, nor is a mark placed far from the spot, so as not to waste space in the Land of Israel."

If we had a Talmud for Mishnah-tractate Ohalot, we should have found the present composition a likely candidate for inclusion, e.g., in the exposition of Mishnah-tractate Ohalot Chapter Two. Our problem is, why is this excellent composition inserted here? The answer is, the whole is a secondary amplification of other rules that pertain to a topic we treat in the context of our tractate's problem. Topical appendices inserted into the text give the Talmud the appearance of prolixity. In fact, understood for what they are and explained within the technical capacities available to our document's writers, the compositions that add to the exposition of various topics greatly enrich the presentation of the whole and truly belong. The definition of the document as a whole must then encompass a further purpose, besides Mishnah-amplification, which is, the composition of a topical encyclopedia. What does belong is a further exposition of the Mishnah-clause that follows: giving a warning that farmers who find in their fields situations in which diverse seeds are sown in the same plot had better remove the inappropriate species:

VIII.I A.

and go forth Ito give warninpl against Diverse Kinds:

Here the issue is whether or not on the intermediate days of the festival to go out into the fields to find whether Diverse Kings are growing there. Opinion on when this is done contradicts the premise of the rule of the Mishnah, since the following indicates that is done not on the intermediate days of Passover, but long before Passover, some four or so weeks prior, in the middle of the preceding month of Adar: 9. But in fact in the intermediate days o f a festival do we no about to -

inspect whether or not there are mixed seeds in a field? But there is the following contradiction: O n the first day ofAdar they make public announcement concerning [payment ofl sheqel dues and

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism concerning the sowing of mixed seeds ILev. 19:19. Dt. 22:91. O n the fifteenth dav of that month thev read the Megillah IScroll of Esther] in walled cities. And thev r e ~ a i the r ~ a t h s .roads, and immersion ~ools.And thev carrv out all Dublic needs. And they mark off the craves. And thev go forth Ito ins~ectthe fields1 on account of mixed seeds IM. Shea. 1:1I!

The clear contradiction between the two rules, both occurring in the Mishnah, is now resolved: C. R. Eleazar and R. Yosk bar Hanina D. One said. "The latter refers to the crovs that riven earlier lin midAdarl. the other, of late-rivenine crops land our Mishnah-paramavh has a further insvection. now in mid-Nisan. during the intermediate davs of the festival of Passoverl." E. And the other said. "In the one case [in Adarl they go out to insvect the condition of grain fields, in the other. vegetable patches." F. Said R. Assi said R. Yohanan. "The rule vertains only in a case in which the svrouts are not vet recognizable [earlier on]; but where it is possible to discern the character of the svrouts earlv on. they went forth to inspect the situation earlier."

The contradictions as to the facts are now neatly resolved, and we ask a further question as to why it is permitted to do at least part of the work on the intermediate days of the festival. This brings us to the principle ofthe law, now that we have dealt with a detail of disharmony. 2. A. What makes the festival week special that we e o out at that time -

for the Durpose at hand? B. Said R. Jacob said R. Yohanan, "It is at that time labor is cheap -

C. -

with us [since there is no demand for labor durinp the intermediate davs ofthefestivall. " [The work is light, and the cost is trivial. So there is no reason to vrohibit it.1 Said R. Zebid, andsome sav, R. Mesharshawa, "That leads to the inference that, when we uav them, we uav them out o f the heave offerinp taken up from the sheael-chamber: For i f vou should imapine that the owners o f the fields are paid, what difference does it make to us? Pav whatever the workers ask land don Y trv to hire workers at a time when waees are low, since the householders are going to have to shell out]!"

We have completed the exposition of the Mishnah-rule, and, as before, we proceed to a topical appendix, on the subject of the law of Mixed Seeds. Here we have a talmud for Mishnah-tractate Kilayim, which in the Bavli lacks one.

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One 3. -

169

A. How much rconstitutes a mixture of seedsl? B. -

Said R. Samuel bar Isaac. "It is in line with that which we have learned in the Mishnah: IConcerninpl everv seah lof one kind of seedsl which contains 16B1 a auarter I-aabl of another kind - he shall lessen lthe auantitv of seeds of the other kind. so that those seeds form less than a auartergab1 IM. Kil. 2:lAI."

Thev ordained that thev should declare ownerless the crop of the entire field?

C. But has it not been taupht on Tannaite authoritv: -

D. There is no contradiction, the Mishnah-rule describes how things were done before the ordinance, the latter tells us how things were done afierward,in line with what has been taupht on Tannaite authorilv: .At first thev would uproot the crops

and throw them in front of their cattle, but the householders were delighted on two counts. first, that thev weeded their fields for them. second. thev threw the croD to the cattle. So thev ordained that they should uDroot the forbidden crop and throw it in the road. So the householders were still delighted, because the court then took care of weedine. their field. So in the end they ordained that thev should declare ownerless the crop of the entire field. There clearly is a pattern of Mishnah-exposition followed by Tosefiaexposition followed by topical appendices. A brief summary of the results suffices to show how the work is carried out. 1.1 raises a hndamental question of Mishnahexegesis. No. 2 proceeds to explain the meanings of words. No. 3 asks a third routine question of Mishnah-exegesis. Nos. 4-5 pursue their own interests, and the composite is included here because of the point of intersection with our Mishnah; this is then an appendix. 11.1 asks an obvious question in clarifying the principle of the Mishnah's rule. No. 2 footnotes the foregoing. Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6+7 provide an anthological supplement, principally deriving !?om the Tosefta, to the theme of the Mishnah. 111.1 engages in a simple exercise of Mishnah-exegesis. lV.l asks a question invited by the point of the Mishnah's rule. No. 2 clarifies the foregoing explanation. V.l explains the meaning of the language of the Mishnah, and No. 2 then builds on the facts given in No. 1 . No. 3 then provides case reports on how the law at hand is applied. VI.1 investigates the implications of the rule of the Mishnah in light of other Tannaite formulations on the subject. VII.1, 2, 3 ask the familiar question of the scriptural basis for a rule of the Mishnah. No. 4 is tacked on to the foregoing by reason of the shared proof-text. No. 5 is present for the same reason. The Mishnah's theme then accounts for the inclusion of the Tannaite appendix that follows, Nos. 6, 7-1 3, which is hardly required except for a complete presentation of the topic. VIII.1 investigates the implications of the framing of the Mishnah's rule and harmonizes them with other rulings. No. 2 continues the exposition of the Mishnah's rule. No. 3 then turns to the theme at hand.

170

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

Lest we forget our purpose in this survey: we do not classify a single composition - single sentence! - as anomalous. There is not a hint of writing that does not conform to the Bavli's program of Mishnah-commentary and amplification of law. A. -

B. C. -

D. -

1:3 R. Eliezer b. Jacob savs, "Thev lead water from one tree to another, "on condition that one not water the entire field. "Seeds which have not been watered before the festival one should not water on the intermediate davs o f the festival." And sages ~ e r m i in t this case and in that.

The exposition of the Mishnah begins with a clarification, which tells us when one may indeed water the entire field, and that is, in principle, to prevent massive loss. 1.1 -

A, Jon condition that one not water the entire field:l said R. Judah, "If the field's soil is clav. he may water it."

B. -

So too it has been taupht on Tannaite authori~: C. When thev made the rule that it is forbidden to irrigate on the intermediate days of a festival. thev made that statement only concerning seed that had not drunk before the festival: but as to seed that had been watered before the festival, thev mav be watered during the intermediate davs of the festival: and if the soil of the field was clav, it is permitted to water it. And a bare field [without a crop at that time1 is not watered during the festival week. But sages ~ e r m idoing t so in both cases [where seeds were not watered, watering a bare fieldl. D. Said Rabina, "That statement leads to the inference that it is permitted to hand-surinkle a vegetable patch durinp the intermediate davs o f a festival. For in the case o f a bare field, whv is it permitted to do so? It is because that renders the soil fit to be sown or ulanted, and here too. that is uermitted. "

We proceed to further Tannaite rulings, introducing the Talmud's special interest in the comparison of the two distinct types of spells of time that possess diminished sanctity, the intermediate days of the festival and the Sabbatical Year. The Mishnah-statement at hand has omitted reference to the latter, so it is the Talmud's framers' interest, not the Mishnah's rule, that accounts for the selection and introduction of what follows. 2. A, Our rabbis have taupht on Tannaite authoritv: B. They sprinkle water on a field of grain in the Sabbatical Year but not during the intermediate davs of a festival.

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

171

C. But lo, it has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: -

D. It is permitted to sprinkle a grain field both in the Sabbatical Year and in the intermediate davs of the festival? E. Said R. Huna, "There is no contradiction, the one sueaks for R. Eliezer b. Jacob IR. Eliezer b. Jacob says. "Thev lead water from one tree to another, on condition that one not water the entire field. Seeds which have not been watered before the festival one should not water on the intermediate davs of the festival"1, the other, rabbis. "

3. -

A. It has been further taupht on Tannaite authoritv: B. A field of grain may be sprinkled on the even of the Sabbatical Year so that the greens may sprout in the Sabbatical Year: and not only so. but they may sprinkle a field of erain in the Sabbatical Year so that the greens may sprout in the year after the Sabbatical

Year. The secondary expansion of the Tannaite rules of No. 2 then explicitly links our topic's problem, conduct on the intermediate days of the festival, with the comparison of the rule governing that span of time with the one that covers the Sabbatical Year. Seeing the whole all together: 1.1 clarifies the application ofthe Mishnah's rule. Nos. 2, 3 deal with the subsidiary issue of the Sabbatical Year, which is not addressed in our Mishnah-paragraph. The Talmud's purpose of exegesis of the Mishnah and the law defines the program and the order of exposition, and the whole forms a coherent exposition. A. -

1:4 They hunt moles and mice in a tree-planted field and in a field of grain, i n the usual manner, on the intermediate davs of a festival and in the Sabbatical

B. C. Year. D. And sapes say [R.Judahl. "[They do sol in a tree-planted field -

E.

E -

in the normal manner, and in a grain field not in the normal manner." Thev lmav onlvl block up a breach in the intermediate days of a festival. And i n the seventh vear lthe Sabbatical Yearl, one builds i t in the normal way,

The distinction between the normal manner - meaning, how the act is done every day - and a manner that indicates recognition of the occasion of the intermediate days of the festival and their sanctity will play a role throughout. It is a practical way of signifying the special character of the season. We commence with the usual clarification of words and phrases.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

172

1.1 A. What is the definition o f moles? B. Said R. Judah. "It is a creature without eyes." C. Said Raba bar Ishmael, and some sav, R. Yemar bar Shelamawa, "What is the uertinent verse o f Scriuture? 'Let them be as a snail that melts and passes away. like the young mole that has not seen the sun' (Ps. 58:9)."

The next step is to introduce Tannaite formulations pertinent to the Mishnah's rule. 2. A. Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authoritv: B. Moles and mice may be t r a ~ ~ ei nda grain field -

and i n an orchard i n the ordinary way, and ants' holes may be destroyed. How are they destroyed? Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel savs, "They get earth from one hole and ~ uittinto another and the ants strangle each other" IT. Moed 151,

C. Said R. Yemar bar Shelamawa in the name ofAbbawe, "And that -

is the case only i f the nests are located otz ouuosite sides o f the river: i f there is no bridge, i f these is not even a ulank, i f there is not even a roue. " B. j7A1 How far apart must thev be? C. Up to a parasang.

11.12 -

And R.Judah savs. "IThev do sol i n a tree-~lantedfield i n the normal manner. and i n a grain field not i n the normal manner:"

Once the distinction is made between the everyday manner and that that prevails on the intermediate days, we define precisely what is meant. Our rabbis have taupht on Tannaite authoritv: What is the usual way? He digs a hole and sus~endsa traD in it. What is the unusual way? He drives in a stake or strikes i t with a Dick and crushes the dirt underneath IT. Moed 1:4A-B1.

It has been taught on Tannaite authority: R. Simeon b. Eleazar savs. "When thev sooke o f a grain field in which it was not to be done in the normal manner. reference was made to a grain field near town. But as to a grain field near an orchard, even doing i t in the normal way is ~ermitted, lest the Dests come out o f the w a i n field and destroy the orchard" IT. Moed 1:4C-Dl. They block UD a breach i n the intermediate days of a festival. And in the seventh year, one builds i t i n the normal way:

How is the breach blocked up? Said R. Joseuh, "With rLazarus:l a hurdle made o f twins and dauhne stakes. " In a Tannaite statement it was set forth: one ~ i l e up s pebbles but does not hold them down with mortar.

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

173

We now expound the application of the rule governing repairing walls. The Mishnah-formulation has not specified types of walls and their purposes, and that matter has to be clarified: where is a wall so urgent that the distinction between the normal and unusual way of doing the work no longer applies at all? Said R. Hisda "This rule [concerning repairing walls1 has been taught only of a wall around a vegetable uatch, but as to a wall around a courtyard, one may build it uo in the normal way." May we say that the following suuuorts his uosition: As to a wall that is hanging over into public domain. they may tear i t down and rebuild i t in the usual way, because i t is a public nuisance IT. 1:7A-BI?

Well, that does not necessarily sustain the urouosition, for that case bears astatedreason, namelv, because it is a public nuisance. And there are those who uresent matters in this wav: Come andtake note: As to a wall that i s hanging over into ~ u b l i c domain. thev mav tear i t down and rebuild i t in the usual way, because it is a ~ u b l i cnuisance IT. 1:7A-B1, so i f it is a uublic

nuisance, that may be done, but i f not, it may not be done. Then mav we sav that this forms a refutation ofthe position ofR. Hisda? R. Hisda mav sav to vou, "There one mav both tear down the wall and rebuild it, here one mav build the wall but not tear it down." So in that case, too, mavbe one should tear down the wall but not rebuild it? Ifso, one will just give uu and not tear it down at all! Said R. Ashi, "A careful reading o f the Mishnah yields that same result: And in the seventh vear, one builds i t in the normal wav. Now what is the point of saving he mav block up the breach. If it is the wall o f his courtvard, this hardlv reauires explicit articulation. So it can only be a breach in his garden wall, even though it might auuear that he is doing it to s a f i ~ u a r dhis crop. " That leads to the urouosed inference.

1.1 clarifies a word-choice in the Mishnah. No. 2 then complements the Mishnah with a Tannaite addition. 11.1,2 do the same. 111.1 answers a question of Mishnah-exegesis. No. 2 explains the application of the Mishnah's rule. The whole is carehlly put together as a systematic exegesis of the Mishnah, and nothing that the exegetes contribute seems to me vastly to abandon the clear intent of the Mishnah's rule. A. -

1:5A-B J o n the intermediate days of the festival.1 R.Meir savs, "They examine marks of the presence of the skin ailment [to begin with1 to provide a lenient ruling but not to provide a strict ruling."

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

174 B. -

And sages say. "Neither to orovide a lenient ruline nor to provide a strict ruline."

The list of permitted activities is now extended with a Tannaite supplement: L1 -

A, It has been taupht on Tannaite authoritv: B. R. M e i r says, "They examine marks o f the oresence of the skin -

C. -

D. -

ailment Ito begin withl to provide a lenient ruling but not to provide a strict ruling." R. YosC says, "Neither to orovide a lenient ruling nor to arovide a strict ruline. for if you undertake a ruline i n his case so as to present a lenient ruline. you w i l l have also to provide the stringent ruline if i t is called for." Said Rabbi. "The oainion of R. M e i r makes more sense i n the case of one who is merely shut ua for insaection. and the ooinion of R. YosC makes more sense i n the case of one who is certified as unclean" IT. Moed 1:81.

A hrther clarification of the Tannaite rule is now advanced, with a refinement of who, exactly, is examined with a view to a lenient or a strict ruling. The disagreement concerns someone who may now be decisively classified as unclean. 2. A. Said Raba. "In the case o f someone who is now assumed to be -

clean, all parties concur that he is not subiect to an examination at all during the intermediate davs o f the festival. In the case o f someone who has been shut up for the first week all parties concur that he is examined. Where there is a disapreement, it concerns 17B1 one who has been shut uu for a second span o f time. B. "One authoritv rMeir7 takes the view that we leave the decision to the priest's discretion, so that i f the person is clean, he declares him clean, but ifhe looks unclean, the wiest shuts his mouth, while the other authority invokes the verse, 'this is the law of the plague

and the skin ailment. to make a pronouncement of clean or unclean' [Lev. 1359). [meaning. without dissimulationl."

We proceed to a secondary exposition of a component of the foregoing composition, Rabbi's statement, which is given its own analytical discussion. 3. A. The master has said: "The opinion of R. Meir makes more sense i n the case o f one who is merely shut uo for inspection. and the ooinion of R. YosC makes more sense i n the case of one who is certified as unclean:"

B. But has not the o~positebetween taught on Tannaite authority? C. It represents a conflict o f Tannaite statements in respect to the position o f Rabbi. One authoritv takes the view that having

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

175

comwnv is preferable to the victim, the other, having the companv o f his wife is preferable to him. [Lazarus: Meir has confirmed

patient in mind and holds, "Inspect him now to mitigate his plight; if he is still a leper, he loses nothing; if he is found cured, he can at once get back to town. even though he has to part from his wife for seven davs. he does not mind. since he wants to get back to his buddies. Yosk has in mind a second shutting up and savs there should be no inspection. for if he is found a le~er.he is then confirmed as such and isolated from evewbodv except his wife.] This clarification bears implications for Rabbi's view on the matter of whether or not the man who is confirmed as unclean with the skin ailment may have sexual relations with his wife, and the continuation now examinations Rabbi's view on that matter, introduced by way of explaining his ruling in the primary discussion above.

D. Is that to sav that sexual relations fin Rabbi k view1 are permitted to a Derson who is confirmed unclean with the skin ailment? E. Yes indeed, for so it has been taupht on Tannaite authoritv: E "And he will dwell outside his tent" (Lev. 14:s) G he is prohibited from having sexual relations, for "His tent" {Lev. 14:s) -his tent means onlv his wife. as i t is said. "Return to vour tents" (11Kings 15:l) ISifra CL:I.41, H. R. Judah savs. "And after he is cleaned they shall reckon for him seven davs' (Ez.44:26)- that is while he is countinp seven clean davs. but not while he is confirmed as unclean with the skin ailment." I. R. Yosd b. R. Judah says, "If he is ~ r o h i b i t e dduring the davs of his counting, all the more so is he to be prohibited durinp the davs when he is completelv unclean." J, Said R. Hivva. "I said before Rabbi, 'You have taught us. our lord. that Jothan was born to Uzziah I2 Kgs. 15:51 onlv during the davs when he was certified unclean"' IT. Nee. 8:61.

-

-

K. He said to him, "Yeah, that's iust what I said." -

We now proceed to an exposition of the evidence just now introduced. As usual, once a piece of evidence is presented, it will demand a reading on its own terms, not only in the context in which it has been laid out. Because the discussion is secondary to a mere amplification, I treat it as a footnote: L. What is at issue between them? M . R. YosP b. R. Judah takes the view that the All-Merciful has made -

it explicit that during the davs o f his counting out [clean davsl rshall dwell outside his tent."l and all the more so should he not have sexual relations when he is confirmed as unclean with the skin ailment.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

176 N_

Rabbi takes the position is that what Scripture has articulated is to be taken as fact, and what has not to be exulicitlv articulated is not to be imputed.

We now return to the point at which we broke off, namely, Raba's allegation, at No. 2, which explains the range of conflict in the Tannaite dispute. Here too we find a clarification of a tangential text in its own terms, which I treat as footnoted material. Does that uosition ofRaba stated earlier /in the case ofsomeone who is now assumed to be clean, all uarties concur that he is not subject to an examination at all during the intermediate davs o f the festival. In the case o f someone who has been shut up for the first week, all uarties concur that he is examined. Where there is a disagreement, one authoritv [Meirl takes the view that we leave the decision to the priest 5. discretion, so that ifthe uerson is clean, he declares him clean, but ifhe looks unclean, the uriest shuts his mouth, while the other authoritv invokes the verse. 'this is the law of the vlague and the skin ailment. to make a vronouncement of clean or unclean' (Lev. 13:59).1 bear the imulication that the postuonement o f a decision on the cultic status o f the uerson depends on the uriest 's discretion? Yes indeed, for so it has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: "And on the dav" (Lev. 13:14) - there is a dav on which you insvect him. and there is a dav on which you do not inspect him. In this connection they have said: A bridegroom on whom a plague appeared -they ~ i v him e the seven davs of the marriage feast jbefore inspecting himl. him, and his house. and his garment. And so with respect to the festival: thev give him all the seven davs of the festival IM. Neg. 3:21. the words of R. Judah. Rabbi savs, "Lo i t says. 'And the priest will command that thev emDtv the house before the priest goes in to see the plague, that all that is in the house not be made unclean' (Lev. 14:36). "If thev wait for an optional matter, should they not wait for a required matter?" ISifra CXXX1V:I.l-21

What is at issue between them? Said Abbawe, "The imulications o f the exegesis o f Scri~tureis what is at issue between them." And Raba said, "The disuosition o f an outional matter is what is at issue between them. And R. Judah does not derive the rule from the verse cited b y Rabbi /Lev. 14:361, because that is an anomalv, for: in anv event, 18AI wood and stone in general do not contract uncleanness, while here thev contract uncleanness. Rabbi for his part savs that the verse is reauired /not for the uuruose cited bv Judah but for another purpose. 1 for had Scripture written, 'and on the day when raw flesh shall be seen in him' alone, 1 might

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

177

have supposed that one may postpone inspection onlv in connection with carrying out a relipious dutv but not in the case ofan optional matter: so the All-Merciful has already said, 'And the wiest shall command.' And i f the All-Merciful had said only, 'And the priest shall command that thev emptv the house,' I mipht have suuposed that that is in the case o f these matters because uncleanness does not affect a human being, but in a case in which the uncleanness affects a human being, I might have suuuosed that the priest has to inspect him without delav. So both verses are reauired. " The master has said: "And on the dav" (Lev. 13:14) - there is a dav on which vou inspect him, and there is a dav on which you do not inspect him. How does the cited verse vield this conclusion? Said Abbawe. " I f the verse vielded no such conclusion, the AllMerciful could as well have written, 'on the dav.' Whv sav, 'and on the day'? That yields the conclusion that there is a day on which you inspect him. and there is a day on which vou do not insvect

him." Raba said, "The whole o f the verse is redundant, for otherwise Scriuture could have said, 'and when raw flesh is seen in him.' Why add, 'and on a dav'? That vields the conclusion that there is a day on which you inspect him. and there is a dav on which you do not inspect him." And Abbawe? That is reauired to indicate, by day and not by night. And how does Raba know that it is to be bv dav and not bv night? He derives that fact from the follow in^: "According to everything that the priest sees" (Lev. 13:12) [which is to sav, bv dav. when people can see pro~erlyl. And Abbawe? That is reauired to exclude from the inspection process a wiest who is blind in one eve. And does not Raba reauire the verse to make this point as well? True enough. Then how does he know that it is to be bv day but not by night? He derives it from the verse, "Like as a plague was seen bv me in the house" (Lev. 14:35) - bv me. not with the help of a lamp. And Abbawe? I f the rule derived from there, I might have supposed that the restriction applies when the uncleanness does not affict a person k bodv. but where uncleanness affectsthe boh! I might havesuuuosed that one mav inspect it by a lamp. So the original uroofitext is the better one.

Once more we note that appended footnotes tend to be tacked on at the end of a fairly coherent discussion. The layout of the whole is clear. 1.1 complements the Mishnah's ruling with hrther relevant data, and Nos. 2 , 3 , 4 (reverting to No. 2), and 5 folm a talmud to the foregoing. It i s hardly necessary to note that we

Lost Documents ofRabbinic Judaism

178

deal with a highly patterned program, first Mishnah-exegesis, then amplification, starting with other Tannaite formulations that intersect with, or treat the subject of, the Mishnah-paragraph, and, finally, appended materials. C. -

D. E. F. G -

1:SC-G And further did R. Meir sav. " I o n the intermediate davs of the festival1 a man mav go out and gather the bones o f his father and his mother, "because i t is a time o f r e i o i c i n ~ for him." R.Yos6 says. "It is a time of mourning for him." A person may not call for mourning for his deceased, or make a lamentation for him thirtv days before a festival.

Once more we commence with Mishnah-exegesis. Now what is important is amplifying the sense of the matter in light of intersecting rulings. I, 11, and I11 all begin with the same program of lower criticism. "because i t is a time of reioicine for him:"

An objection was raised on the basis o f the followinn: He who collects the bones of his mother and father for secondary burial - lo, one observes mourning for them all that dav. But in the evening he no l o n ~ e observes r mourning for them. And in that connection said R. Hisda "Even if he had them tied up in a sheet." Said Abbawe. "Say the rule as follows: 'because the reioicine of the festival affects him."' A person mav not call for mourninp for his deceased: What is the sense o f...mav not call for mourning for his deceased?

Said Rub, "In the West, when a professional lamenter comes around, ueoule say, 'Let evervbodv o f mournful spirit weeu with him. "' or make a lamentation for him thirtv davs before a festival: What makes the spell ofthirtv davs the suecified span o f time?

Ilt is to prevent mourning from interfering with the pilmimage, for1 said R. Kahana said R. Judah said Rab, "There was the case of someone who saved money to go up to Jerusalem for the festival, and the ~rofessionalmourner came a l o n ~and stood at the door of his house. and his wife took the monev and handed it over to him, so he never got to go up. At that moment they said. a Derson may not call for mourn in^ for his deceased. or make a lamentation for him thirtv davs before a festival."

And Samuel said, 18BI "It is because for at least thirtv davs. the deceased is not put out of mind." What is at issue between them? At issue between them is where the professional mourner does it for n o t h i n ~

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

179

1.1 harmonizes Tannaite rules on the same subject. 11.1 clarifies the facts to which the Mishnah's rule makes reference. 111.1 explains what is at issue in the rule of the Mishnah. A. B. -

C. -

D. E. -

F. -

1:6 They do not hew out a tomb nicheor tombs on the intermediate days of a festival. But thev refashion tomb niches on the intermediate days of a festival. They dig a wave on the intermediate days of a festival, and make a coffin, while the corpse is in the same courtyard. R. Judah prohibits. unless there were boards [already sawn and made ready i n advancel,

Predictably, each passage of the Mishnah is given a clarification, as required; I see no amplification or any theoretical considerations or ambitious secondary developments. What are tomb niches and what are tombs? Said R. Judah. "Tomb niches are formed by d i ~ i n g and , tombs are formed by building." So too it has been tauaht on Tannaite authoritv: What are tomb niches and what are tombs? Tomb niches are formed by digging. and tombs are formed by building. But thev refashion tomb niches on the intermediate davs of a festival:

How do thev refashion them? Said R. Judah. "If it was too long. thev may shorten it." In a Tannaite formulation it is set forth: One makes i t broader or longer IT. Moed 1:8A-BI. They dip a Prave on the intermediate davs of a festival: What is a rave? Said R. Judah. "It is a small hollow creek" ILazarusl, But has it not been tauaht on Tannaite authoritv: a Prave and a small hollow.. Icf. T. Moed 1:8C1.

.

...

jThat does not mean thev are the same thing. for1 said Abbawe, and some say, R. Kahana, "Thev relate as do a /Lazarus: 1 trough and a little trouah. " and make a coffin, while the corpse is in the same courtyard:

We have a Tannaite formulation along these same lines in that which our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authoritv: They do all that is needed for the deceased. cutting the hair, washing his garment. making a box of boards out of boards that had been cut prior to the festival.

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

180

D. -

Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel savs, "Thev mav even bring lumber and. in the privacv of one's house. cut it to size."

1.1 explains the meaning ofwords in the Mishnah. 11.1 amplifies the sense o f the Mishnah's statement. 111.1 produces a relevant Tannaite complement. 1:7-8 1:7 A. Thev do not take wives on the intermediate davs of a festival, B whether virgins or widows. C. Nor do they enter into levirate marria~e, D. for i t is an occasion o f reioicing for the groom. E. But one mav remarry his divorced wife. F. And a woman mav Dreaare her wedding adornments on the intermediate davs o f a festival. G R.Judah savs. "She should not use lime. since this makes her uglv." 1:s A. A n unskilled oerson sews i n the usual wav. B. But an e x ~ e rcraftsman t sews with irregular stitches. C. Thev weave the roDes for beds. D. R. Yos6 savs, "Thev lonlvl tighten them." -

.

-

-

T h e opening clause is immediately challenged at its vulnerable point: is this not a form of celebration of the festival, so that there should b e n o such prohibition? 1.1 -

A. So i f it's an occasion of reioicing for the groom, what's so bad about that? B. Said R. Judah said Samuel. and so said R. Eleazar said R. Oshaia and some sav, said R. Eleazar said R. Hanina "The consideration is that one occasion of reioicing should not be ioined with another such occasion." C. Rabbah bar R. Huna said, "It is because he neglects the reioicing of the festival to engage in reioicing over his wife." D. Said Abbavve to R. Joseoh. "This statement that has been said bv Rabbah bar R. Huna belongs to Rab. for said R. Daniel bar Qattina said Rab, 'How on the basis of Scripture do we know that people mav not take wives on the intermediate davs of the festival? As it is said, "You shall reioice in vour feast" (Dt. 16:14). meaning, in your feast -not in vour new wife."' E. Ulla said, "It is because it is excess trouble." F. R. Isaac Naopaha said. "It is because one will neglect the reauirement of being fruitful and mu~tip~ying" [if people postponed weddings until festivals, they might somehow diminish the occasion for procreation, which is the first obligationl."

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

181

We have been given a range of discrete explanations, but a challenge to them all forms of them a single statement. G An obiection was raised: All those of whom they have said that they are forbidden to wed on the festival 19AI are permitted to wed on the eve of the festival. Now this Doses a uroblem to the exulanations ofall the cited authorities! H. There is no problem from the uersuective o f him who has said, "The consideration is that one occasion of reioicing should not be joined with another such occasion." for the main reioicing o f the wedding is onlv a single day. 1. And from the uersuective ofhim who has said, "It is because it is excess trouble." the urinciual bother lasts onlv one day. J. And-from the uersuective o f him who has said, "It is because one will neglect the reauirement of being fruitful and multiplying." for merely one day someone will not uostuone the obligation for any considerable length o f time.

The most interesting point, also the most abstract, concerns not conhsing two occasions for rejoicing but allowing each its own integrity, hence not celebrating two religious duties at one and the same time. We now ask Scripture to show us the context and meaning of that principle that occasions for rejoicing (like occasions for sanctification, a point fundamental to tractate Besah) be kept distinct. Next comes scriptural support for the governing principle, a passage not composed with the needs of our passage in mind but entirely serviceable in the present setting -hence underlined. 2. -

A. And how on the basis ofScrQture do we know that one occasion of reioicing should not be joined with another such occasion? B. It is in line with that which has been written: "So Solomon made -

C. -

D. -

the feast at that time and all Israel with him. a ereat congreeation from the entrance of Hamath to the Brook of Egyut. before the Lord our God seven davs and seven days. even fourteen days" ( 1 ( reioicing with another such occasion, he should have uostponed the celebration ofthe consecration ofthe Temule until the Festival andshould then have held it for seven davs concurrentlv, for both the Festival and the consecration [rather than celebrating the occasions seauentiallyl. Well, mavbe the rule means onlv that one should not deliberatelv postuone a wedding until the festival, but where it iust hauuens to work out that wav, we mav nonetheless hold the wedding on the festival? Well, i f that were the case, then he should have left unfinished some small detail o f the building o f the house of the sanctuary?

182

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

E. We do not leave over some small detail in the building ofthe Temple! F. He could have left o f f a cubit ofthe scarecrow k parapet! G The scarecrow's Daraoet was an essential Dart of the Temole. H. Rather, in point offact the cited formulation ofScri~tureleaves a redundancv. For it savs "fourteen davs," so whv go and sav also, "Seven davs and seven davs"? That vields the simple fact that the two sets o f seven davs were keut distinct from one another ferrch markinp its own occasion for reioicinpl.

The discussion is now concluded, but it carries in its wake a further treatment of the theme at hand, and that accounts for the introduction of what follows as appendix. What we have is a complex in which we discuss the intruded materials, and then we further discussion the appendix to that appendix, and on to the end. Some of the materials can be understood only in the context of what has gone before and form a continuing talmud thereto; and some of the materials are completely autonomous compositions, which stand on their own. 3.

Said R. Parnakh said R. Yohanan, "In that year, the Israelites did not observe the Day ofAtonement, so they worried, saying, 'Perhaps Israel has become subject to extinction. An echo came forth and said to them, 'You all are singled out for the life of the world to come."' B. What was the exegesis that led them to that concern? C . They thought along these lines: "It is a matter a fortiori. For if in the case of the tabernacle, which was sanctified not for all time [but only for an interval], the offering of an individual [presented on the occasion of the consecration of the tabernacle, Num. 71 overrode the restriction of the Sabbath, which ordinarily represents a prohibition the violation of which is penalized by stoning, then in the case of the sanctuary, the sanctification of which is for all time, all the more so should it be permitted to present an offering in behalf of the community and the Day of Atonement, which are subject to the penalty merely of extirpation, all the more so [should it be permitted to present offerings in behalf of the individual]!" So what were they worried about? D. [Reference is made to the private offeringspresented by the heads ofthe tribes as individuals, Num. 7:] there, in that earlier case, the offerings were presented to meet the requirements of the Most High [since the burnt offerings and sin offerings yielded no meat for the people, and the sin oferings yielded meat only to the male priests], while here the offerings were presented to meet the requirements of commonfolk [since there were peace offeringsfor evetybody 's pleasure].

A.

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One E. F. 4.

5.

183

Well, here too, they could have made the offering, without eating the meat or drinking. There is no such thing as celebration without eating and drinking. A. And how do we know that the consecration of the tabernacle overrode the restrictions of the Sabbath? Should l s a y because it is written, "On the first day...on the seventh day so and so offered...," [at Num. 7 :12, 18, 42? But maybe that means only, the seventh day in sequence of offerings [but not the Sabbath]! B. Said R. Nahman bar Isaac, "Said Scripture, 'On the day of the eleventh day' (Num. 7:72)-just as a day is consecutive, so all the eleven days were consecutive [encompassing the Sabbath, without skipping]." C. But perhaps reference is made to days that ordinarily were suitable for such private offerings? D. There is yet another verse of Scripture that pertains: "On the day of the twelfth day" (Num. 7:78)-just as a day is consecutive, so all the twelve days were consecutive [encompassing the Sabbath, without skipping]. E. But perhaps here too reference is made to days that ordinarily were suitable for such private offerings? F. If that were the sense, why do I need two distinct verses to make the same point? A. And how do we know that the consecration of the tabernacle overrode the restrictions of the Day of Atonement? Should I say because it is written, "...even fourteen days"? B. But perhaps reference is made to days that ordinarily were suitable for such private offerings? C. We draw a verbal analogy based on the common usage o r d a y " in that other context.

What follows is a sequence o f free-standing compositions, which have been strung together to form a topical appendix to the foregoing appendix. We begin with an exposition o f language that has been introduced as a supplement. 6.

A. "An echo came forth and said to them, 'You all are singled out for the life of the world to come:"' B. How do we know that they were forgiven? C. It is in line with what Tahalipa taught as a Tannaite statement: D. "On the eighth day he sent the people home and they blessed the king and went to their

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism own tents joyful and glad of heart for all the goodness that the Lord had shown to David his servant and to Israel his people' (1 Kgs. 8:66) E. "to their own tents;' they went and found their wives in a state of cleanness suitable for sexual relations. F. "joyful:' for they had feasted on the splendor of God's presence; G "and glad of heart:' for the wife of every one of them became pregnant with a male child. H. "for all the goodness:' for an echo came forth and said to them, 'You all are singled out for the life of the world to come."'

We proceed to a verse of Scripture that has been quoted and we provide an exegesis of the proof-text. 7.

A.

"to David his servant and to Israel his people:" B. Now there is no problem understanding the reference to Israel, his people, since the sin of violating the Day ofAtonement was forgiven them. But what is the meaning of the reference to David his servant? C. Said R. Judah said Rab, "When Solomon had built the house of the sanctuary, he tried to bring the ark into the house of the Holy of Holies. The gates cleaved to one another. He recited twenty-four prayers [Freedman, p. 734, n. 4: in 2 Chr. 6 words for prayer, supplication and hymn occur twenty-four times], but was not answered. D. "He said, 'Lift up your head, 0 you gates, and be lifted up, you everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and might, the Lord mighty in battle' (Ps. 24:7K). E. "And it is further said, 'Lift up your heads, 0 you gates even lift them up, you everlasting doors1 (Ps. 24:7). F. "But he was not answered. G "When he said, 'Lord God, turn not away the face of your anointed, remember the

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One mercies of David, your servant'(:! Chr. 6:42), forthwith he was answered. H. "At that moment the faces of David's enemies turned as black as the bottom of a pot, for all Israel knew that the Holy One, blessed be he, had forgiven him for that sin."

What follows is a first-class composition, formulated entirely in its own terms and parachuted down here only because of its general relevance to the topic and relevant verses; the prior discussion is complete without it; the composition is entirely comprehensible without reference to what has gone before. 8.

A. R. Jonathan b. Asemai and R. Judah, son of proselytes, repeated the Tannaite presentation of the laws of vows at the household of R. Simeon b. Yohai and took their leave of him by night, but the next morning they came, and again they took their leave of him. He said to them, "But did you not take leave of me last night?" B. They said to him, "But did you not take leave of me last night?" C. They said to him, "You have taught us, our lord: 'A disciple who takes leave of his master but spends the night in that town has to take leave from him once again, in line with this verse: "On the eighth day he sent the people home and they blessed the king and went to their own tents joyful and glad of heart for all the goodness that the Lord had shown to David his servant and to Israel his people" (1 Kgs. 8:66); and then it is written, "And on the twenty-third day of the seventh month he sent the people away" (2 Chr. 7: 10).

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

9.

Thus we learn that a disciple who takes leave of his master but spends the night in that town has to take leave from him once again."' A. He said to his son, "My son, these men are men ofstanding. Go to them so that they will bestow their blessing on you. " B. He went and found them contrasting verses one against the next, in thefollowing way: "It is written, 'Balance the path of your feet and let all your ways be established' (Prov. 4:26), and, by contrast, 'Lest you should balance the path of life'(Prov. 5 5 ) . But there is no conflict between the advice of these two verses. The one speaks to a case in which a religious obligation can be carried out through someone else, [9Bj the latter, a case in which the religious obligation can be carried out only by oneself." C. They again went into session and raised questions along these lines: "It is written, 'Wisdom is more precious than rubies, and all things you can desire are not to be compared to her' (Prov. 3: lo), meaning that what Heaven wants ofyou are comparable to Wisdom [Lazarus: your own affairs and wishes are not comparable to the study ofthe Torah, but such pursuits as please Heaven are comparable to it], but it is written, 'And all things desirable are not to be compared with Wisdom'(Prov. 8: 1 I), which means that what Heaven demands of you is comparable with her. And

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One again, 'And all things desirable are not to be compared to her' (Prov. 8: 12), meaning that even things that Heaven wants of you are not comparable to her [so study of Torah is supreme over all]. But there is no conflict between the advice of these two verses. The one speaks to a case in which a religious obligation can be carried out through someone else, the latter, a case in which the religious obligation can be carried out only by oneself." They said to him, "What did you want here? He said to them, "Father said to me, 'Go to them so that they may bestow their blessing on you. "' They said to him, "May it please God that you sow and not harvest, go in but not go out, go out but not go in; that your house be empty but your inn filled; that your table be upset and you not see a new year: When he got home, he said to hisfather; he said to him, "Not only did they not bless me, but they called down troubles upon me!" He said to him, "So what did they say to you?" "Thus and so did they say to me!" He said to him, "But all of their statements were blessings: "that you sow and not harvest:' that you father children and they not die; "go in but not go out: ' that you bring home daughters in law and your sons not die so that "

"

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

189

is none else, and my people shall never be ashamed' (Joel 2:26-27)."

Each Mishnah-sentence that follows is given amplification through a further Tannaite formulation, which then is illustrated. And a woman mav prepare her wedding adornments on the intermediate davs of a festival:

Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authoritv: What are women's adornments: she may blue her eyes, curl her hair. trim her hair and nails. put on rouge, and some say, shave her sexual organs. R. Hisda k wife made herself up in fiont o f her daughter in law. In session before R. Hisda. R. Hina bar Hinnena said, "That rule Ja woman mav prepare her wedding adornments1 applies onlv in the case of a girl. But as to a mature woman. that is not so." He said to him, "Bv God! Even vour mother, and even vour mother's mother, and even if she is ready to fall into the grave!' For people sav. 'At sixty, at six, rLazarus:l the sound ofthe timbrel makes her nimble. "' R. Judah savs. "She should not use lime, since this makes her ugly:"

It has been taught on Tannaite authority: R. Judah savs. "A woman should not put lime on her face on the intermediate days of a festival, since it makes her uglv." But R. Judah concedes that if the lime can be scraped off during the intermediate davs of the festival, she mav ~ u itt on during those same intermediate davs, for even t h o u ~ hi t is distressing to her now, she will be hapev about i t later." [There is therefore a contradiction between the two rulings in Judah's name.] But does R. Judah hold this view? And have we not learned in the Mishnah: Before the festivals of gentiles for three davs it is forbidden to do business with them: (1) to lend a n v t h i n ~to them or to borrow anything from them; (2) to lend monev to them or to borrow monev from them.; (3) to repav them or to be repaid bv them. R. Judah savs, "Thev accept repayment from them, because i t is distressing to him." Thev said to him, "Even though i t i s distress in^ to him now, he will be haepy about i t later" IM. A.Z. 1:11?

E. Said -

R. Nahman bar Isaac, "Forget about the laws of the intermediate davs of the festival. for all of them fall into the category,

'Even though i t is distressing to him now, he will be h a ~ ~ v about i t later."'

F. -

Rabina said, "As to anentile, so far as petting repaid is concerned, it is always a source ofanguish. "

190

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism 2. -

A, Said R. Judah, "Israelite girls who reached pubertv before they reach the normal age of maturitv in vears rtwelve vears and a davl, if thev are Door. may put on a lime-concoction: if they are rich, thev vut on fine flour: princesses put on oil of mvrrh. as it is said, 'Six months with oil of mvrrh' (Est. 2:12)."

A footnote to the foregoing follows, a comment on the cited proof-text. 3. A. B. C. D. -

4. -

"Six months with oil of mvrrh" (Est. 2:12): What is oil o f myrrh? R. Huna bar Hiwa said, "It is stacte." R. Jeremiah bar Abba said. "It is oil derived from olives not vet a third grown." A. It has been taupht on Tannaite authoritv: B. R. Judah savs, "lolives for olive oil1 from a manured field refers to olives that are not a third grown. And whv is it used for smearing? Because it serves as a devilatow and skin-softener." C . Whv do thev a ~ ~ it? l vBecause it removcs hair and softens the -

skin.

T h e illustrative case has no bearing on the foregoing and is added for encyclopedic purposes. is. A. R. Bibi had a daughter with darkskin, on which he put that ointment limb by limb, and this produced for her a husband who hadfour hundred zuz. B. A gentile neighbor also had a daughter with dark skin, on which he put that ointment all at once, so she died. C. He said, "Bibi killed my daughter." D. Said R. Nahman, "R. Bibi drank beer, so his daughters needed ointments, but we don't drink beer, so our daughters don 'r need ointments. "

We now revert to the work o f Mishnah-clarification. rlOAl An unskilled aerson sews in the usual way: What is the definition o f an unskilled aerson? At the household of R. Yannai thev said. "It is anvone who cannot draw a needleful of stitches all at once." R. YosC bar Hanina said, "It is anv that cannot sew an even seam on the hem of his shirt." But an exaert craftsman sews with irregular stitches: What does it mean to sew with irregular stitches? R. Yohanan said, "Overstevping."

Rabbah bar Samuel said, "Hounds' teeth."

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case ofBavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

V1.1 A. -B. C. D. E. -

F. -

G H. -

1. -

J. K. -

L. M. -

N.

Thev weave the ropes for beds. R. Yos6 savs, "They lonlvl tighten them:" What defines weaving and tightening? When R. Dimi came, he said, "There was a dispute on this matter between R. Hiwa bar Abba and R. Assi, both o f them sueaking in the name o f Hezekiah and R. Yohanan. "One said. 'Interlacing means inter lac in^ warp and woof, and tightening means putting in the warp but not the woof.' "And the other said, 'Interlacing means ~ u t t i n gin the warp without the woof, and tightening means he tightens a girth cord if it becomes loose."' Is that so? But lo, R. Tahalipa bar Saul taupht, "And thev concur that thev may not insert new cords to begin with." Now that poses no uroblem to him who maintains that the interlacing that is permitted is, interlacing warp and woof, and tightening means putting in the warp but not the woof. In line with that view. R. Tahalipa could say, "And thev concur that thev may not insert new cords to begin with." But from the perspective ofhim who has said, Interlacing means putting in the waru without the woof. and tightening means he tightens a girth cord if it becomes loose, what sense does R. Tahaliua b. Saul $ statement make? I f you maintain that interlacing the warp and woof is forbidden, is there anv need to add that they mav not insert new cords to begin with? That's a uroblem. Said R. Nahman bar Isaac to R. Hiwa bar Abin, "But is there anvbodv who takes the view that 'interlacing' means insert in^ a waru without the woof? Have we not learned in the Mishnah: R. Meir savs,"The bed [becomes susceotible to uncleanness1 when one will have knit together on it three rows lof the mesh of the under webbing]" IM. Kel. 16:1FI?" Rathel: when Rabin came, he said, "All concur that interlacing involves both warp and woof. Where there is a disuute, it concerns tightening. One master takes the view that the tightening that is permitted means inserting the waru without the woof. and the other master maintains that what is uermitted is tightening a cord that became loose." An objection was raised: "During the intermediate days of a festival thev mav interlace bed frames, and, it goes without say. thev may be tightened." the words of R. Meir. R. Yose savs. "Thev mav be tightened but not interlaced." Some say. "Thev may not tighten at all." Now from the persuective ofhim who has said, "Tighteningmeans inserting the waru without the woof," then there is a d a c e for "some say" to dissent. But from the perspective o f him who savs

191

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism that ti~hteninameans tightening the cord that has become slack, then in the view o f some sav, will even this s i m ~ l eimprovement not be allowed? 0. - Well, ves! For since it is possible to fill U D the sap with bedding, we don T have to go to anv more trouble than that during the intermediate davs o f the festival.

1.1 provides a reason for the Mishnah's rule, and No. 2 then derives fiom Scripture the consideration that explains the Mishnah's rule. Nos. 3-6+7, 8-10, supplement No. 2, a run-on thematic anthology, each item tied to the foregoing. 11.1 complements the Mishnah with a Tannaite extension, and No. 2 follows suit. 111.1 harmonizes two rulings of the cited authority. No. 2, supplemented by Nos. 3, 4,5, adds a thematic complement. IV.l, V.l, VI.l explain references in the Mishnah. A. B. -

1:9 They set up an oven or double stove or a hand mill on the intermediate davs of a festival. R. Judah says, "They do not rough the millstones lwhich are smooth and so not now usable for grinding grain1 for the first time."

-

Mishnah-exegesis, word by word, is the Talmud's first step. 1.1

A. What is the meaninp o f rough? B. R. Judah said, "It means chiseling holes into the millstones Iso that the grain may be milledl."

C. R. Yehiel said, "It means tixing an eye hole [on the upper stone, through which the grain is ooured in (Lazarus)l."

D. An objection was raised: "They set up an oven or double stove or a hand mill on the intermediate days of a festival. on condition that the work is not com~letelvfinished," the words of R. Eliezer. E. And sages say, "It may even be finished." F. R. Judah says in his [Eliezer'sl name, "They may set UD a new one and roughen an old one." G And some sav. "They may not do anv rouehenine at all." H. Now fiom the pers~ectiveo f him who savs that "rough" means scoring the millstones, that explains whv the Drocess pertains also to an old mill [which has been smoothed through usel, but fiom the uers~ectiveofhim who says that it means fixing an eve hole, how does a used mill require fixing an eve hole /since it alreadv has onel? I. It would involve, for example, one that requires wideninp a bit MOre.

2. A, R. Huna heard somebodv scrauinp millstones during the intermediate davs o f a festival . He said, "Mav the person o f him who profanes the intermediate davs o f the festival be profaned. "

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

193

B. He then takes the position o f "some say [Thev may not do any roughening at alll."

3. A. R. Hama resented this ex~osition:"On the intermediate days of the festival. o e o ~ l emay roughen millstones." B. In the name of R. Meir one said, "On the intermediate days of the festival one may even trim the hooves of a horse on which he rides. or an ass on which he rides. IlOBl but one may not do so to the ass who turns the mill. " C. R. Judah permitted trimming the hooves o f the ass that turns the mill, setting up a mill, building a mill, constructing a base for the mill, and building a stable for horses. D. Rub uermitted curtving horses, constructing a bed, or making a mattress box.

We now proceed to a number of other actions that various authorities permitted to be carried out on the intermediate days ofthe festival. Here the Mishnahrule is supplemented, but there is no effort at identifying a general principle to guide decisions. I do not see what follows as footnotes or appendices, but we also do not have Mishnah-exegesis, rather a compilation of rules relevant to the basic theme that the Mishnah has given us. I underline the composite to mark it as a supplement to the Mishnah's theme.

A. During the intermediate days o f a festival Rabauermitted bleeding

4. -

cattle. B. Said to him Abbawe, "In support o f vour position it has been taught on Tannaite authoritv: During the intermediate days of a festival they may bleed cattle and they do not withhold any means of healing from an animal." A. Raba permitted softening carded sheets o f cloth. B. How come? C. It is a urocess that can be carried out bv unskilled labor D. Said R. Isaac bar Ammi said R. Hisda. "It is forbidden to pleat sleeve ends [Lazarusl. How come? Because that is a urocess that can be carried out onlv bv skilled labor."

5. -

What follows is an appendix built around the distinction that Raba makes between doing an action for one, licit purpose as against doing it for another, illicit one. We therefore take account of the intentionality of the actor in connection with assessing whether or not action is permitted on the intermediate days of the festival. I treat the unit as free-standing but integral to exegesis of the law of the Mishnah, if not the Mishnah's particular rule. 6.

A.

Said Raba, "One who levels the ground, f i t is with the purpose in mind ofevening the slope of the threshingfloor,

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism that ispermitted; f i t is with the purpose in mind of leveling the soil, it is forbidden. "How so? v h e takes up the heaped up soil to heap on soil, or hardsoil to lay on hardsoil, that indicates that the purpose is to improve the threshingfloor. But if he takes heaped up soil and puts it on hard soil, that shows it is to improve the ground. " And said Raba, "Someone who collects chips of wood in his field, f i t is with gatheringfire wood in mind, it is permitted; f i t is with clearing the ground in mind, it is forbidden. "How so? l f h e picks up big pieces and leaves little ones, that shows that it is with the purpose ofgatheringfire wood; ifhe picks up both the big and littlepieces, this shows that he has in mind to clear the field." Andsaid Raba, "Someone who opens sluices to let water run ofinto thefield, ifit be with the purpose in mind of collecting the fish, it is permitted; if it is to irrigate the field, it is forbidden. "How so? l f h e opens twofloodgates, one above, the other below, that proves it is to collect the fish; but if it is only one gate, that is with the purpose in mind of irrigating thefield. " And said Raba, "Someone who trims his palm, i f it is with the purpose ofgetting food for his animals, it is permitted. IS it is to benefit the palm, it is forbidden. "How so? Ifhe trims only one side, this shows that it is with the need of his cattle that he trims the palm; if he trims both sides, it is to benefit the palm and the act is forbidden on the intermediate dates of the festival. And said Raba, "Unripe tuhalani-dates may be picked but not pressed. R. Pappa said, "But ifthey were getting rotten, then it is like a business deal that would involve a loss ifone does not carry it out on the intermediate days o f a festival and they may be pressed during the intermediate days of a festival. " And said Raba, "Any sort of business deal is forbidden [on the intermediate days of a festival. " Said R. Yose bar Abin, "But with regard to a deal that, if not carried out right away, may go sour, it is permitted." "

"

Now comes another well-crafted composition, involving cases in which sages' actions illustrate the practical law. 7.

A. Rabina had a deal that would have produced six thousand zuz, he put it o f until after the festival and sold the same at twelve thousand.

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

195

Rabina lent some money to people from Aqra deShanuta. He asked R. Ashi and said, "What about going over there now [during the intermediate days of the festival]?" He said to him, "Sincejust now they have the ready cash but some other day they may not put their hands on it, itfalls into the category of a deal that, if not carried out right away, may go sour, so it is permitted. " It has been taught on Tannaite authorify along these same lines with regard to dealing with idolaters: [Israelites] may go [ l IA] to a fair of gentiles and buy from them beasts, slave-boys and slave-girls, houses, fields, and vineyards, and write deeds and deposit them in their archives, because thereby what one does is rescue [property] from their hands.

Rab permitted Hiyya bar Ashi to repair basket traps during the intermediate days of a festival. How come?

This is unskilled work. But mending mesh nets $forbidden. How come? This is skilled work. R. Judah permitted Ammi the oven maker to build up ovens, and Rabbah bar Ashbi to plait sieves. Is that so? But did not Rabbah bar Samuel repeat as a Tannaiteformulation, "And they concur that they do not build up an oven to begin with"? There is no contradiction, the former ruling applies during the dry season, the latter during the rainy season [Passover, Tabernacles, respectively;/ in the former period the clay dries quickly and the oven can be used right away, but in the latter festival the rain delays the hardening process, so the oven will not be available right away (Lazarus)]. 1.1 defines the principal word of a Mishnah-sentence. No. 2 provides a case illustrative of the rule. Nos. 3-10 supplement the foregoing composite and stand on their own. They have not been composed with Mishnah- or law-exegesis in mind but as expositions of rules and principles with their own focus.. But a collection of expositions of law can well accommodate the composite. 1:lO A. -

B. C. D. -

Thev make a v a r a ~ e tfor a roof or a vorch in an unskilled manner, but not in the manner of a skilled craftsman. Thev plaster cracks and smooth them down with a roller, by hand. or bv foot. but not with a trowel. Ahinve, socket. roof beam, lock, or kev, lanv ofl which broke

196

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

E. F. G -

do thev repair on the intermediate davs o f the festival, so lone as one had not learlier on1 had the intention to lpostpone the work so as to1 do work on i t on the intermediate davs of the festival. A n d a l l pickled foods which a man can eat durine the intermediate davs o f a festival he also mav pickle.

We commence with the explanation of the Mishnah's words, phrases, and specific rules. 1.1 -

[They make a parapet for a roof or a porch i n an unskilled manner. but not i n the manner o f a skilled craftsman:l What is the definition o f an unskilled manner?

B, Said R. Joseuh, "With ILazarus:l a hurdle made o f twigs and dauhne stakes. " s ~ e b b l e sbut D. In a Tannaite statement it was set forth: one ~ i l e UD does not hold them down with mortar. 11.1A. -

Thev plaster cracks and smooth them dawn with a roller. by hand. or bv foot. but not with a trowel:

B. Now i f it is permitted to use a roller to flatten it down, is there any auestion that one mav do so bv hand or by foot?

C. This is the sense o f the statement: They mav plaster crevices and flatten down the laster as with aroller. bv hand or bv foot, but not with ramming tools. III.1A. --

A hinee, socket. roof beam, lock, or kev. lanv ofl which broke

do t h e ~ repair on the intermediate days o f the festival. so I o n ~ as one had not learlier on1 had the intention to [postpone the work so as to1 do work on i t on the intermediate days o f the festival: B. An objection was raised: Yohanan the H i e h Priest IJohn Hvrcanusl: until his time. hammers would pound lwork was done] i n Jerusalem [during the intermediate davs of Passover and Sukkotl [M. M.S. 5:15C1. The meaning then is, until his time but not afterward!

C. There is no contradiction. There reference is made to the hammer o f a smith, here, it is to the joiner k mallet [which is permitted].

D. Objected R. Hisda, "Then some will sav that a loud noise is forbidden, but a soft one uermitted. " E. Rather: said R. Hisda. "There still is no contradiction: The tool F. G -

that mav be used is a bill hook the other is an adze" [Lazarus's translations of the substantivesl. R. Pama said. "The one s ~ e a k sof the period ~ r i o to r the decree, the other. afterward." R. Ashi said, "The one reuresents the uosition o f R. Judah, the other R. Yosk. For said R. Isaac bar Abdimi, 'Who is the Tannaite authoritv who takes the view that one has to uerform in an extraordinan, manner an act that is permitted in a matter in which

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

197

considerable loss is going to be incurred bv uostponement? It is not in accord with R. Yose'. "' Said Rabina. "In accord with whom do we these davs deem permitted in the intermediate davs o f a festival the raising o f [Lazarus: 1 uivot cups o f doors? It is in accord with R. Yose'." And all pickled foods which a man can eat during the intermediate davs of a festival he also may pickle: At Luba on the Badita Canal evewbodv went fishing and caught some [at Passover, when fish are abundantl, and Raba uerrnitted them to salt them [even though some then were being preserved on the intermediate davs o f the festival for use after the Festival dav, which is forbidden bv the imulication o f the rule before us/. Said to him Abbawe, "But lo, we have learned in the Mishnah: And all pickled foods which a man can eat during the intermediate davs of a festival he also mav pickle!" He said to him, "Since to begin with they caught them with eating them in mind, and ifthev leave them, thev will rot, it falls into the categow o f a deal that. if not carried out right awav. mav go sour, so it is uermitted. " There are those who report the case in this wav: Raba permitted them to go trauping. They went and brought in the fish and salted them. Said to him Abbawe. "But lo, we have learned in the Mishnah: And all pickled foods which a man can eat d u r i n ~the intermediate davs of a festival he also may pickle!" He said to him, "These too rnav be eaten i f they are pressed. " That is in line with the case of Samuel, when thev ~ressedfish in salt sixtv times. and he ate it.

The case draws in its wake a number of other cases that exhibit the same traits, the whole an appendix that does not require the foregoing for cogency. 2.

A.

3.

A.

B.

C.

D.

Raba visited the household ofthe exilarch. They madefor himfish pressed sixty times, and he ate it. Rub visited Bar Shappir; and they set before him afish that was boiled a third, salted a third, and broiled a third. Said Rub, "Adda the fisherman told me that afish is bestjust when it is going to turn putrid." And said Raba, "Said to me Adda the Fisherman, 'Broil the fish with its brother [salt], put it into its father [water], eat it with its son [sauce], and wash it down with its father [water]. "' And said Raba, "Said to me Adda the Fisherman, 'After eating fish, fill our belly with cress and milk, don Y lie down. "' And said Raba, "Said to me Adda the Fisherman, 'Ajier eating fish, cress and milk, drink water not fermented date-juice, or that but not wine. "'

198

Lost Documents ofRabbinic Judaism

1.1, 11.1 clarifies the sense of the Mishnah's statements, and 111.1 then harmonizes the implications of this Mishnah's rule with those of another. IV.1 refines the application of the law, and Nos. 2, 3 then provide an appendix to the foregoing. The chapter of the Talmud forms a set of forests and contains very few £tee-standingtrees. We note conglomerates of forests, groves that take shape around their own foci but that augment the primary forests. These groves present an ambiguity, claiming a position in the present setting but deriving from an issue not raised here.

The Talmud is comprised by secondary and peripheral composites and compositions as well as primary ones. What is primary to the document -underlined and extending £tom margin to margin - are the compositions and composites that carry out the document's paramount program -the exegesis ofthe Mishnah and the law. These are essential to the Talmud and originate in the processes of the composition of its exegetical and legal-expository components. They dictate its topical program beginning to end. Without the primary compositions and composites we have no Talmud. What is secondary to the Bavli -not underlined, and generally indented -is writing not provoked by the tasks of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. Without the secondary accretions we have the Talmud: its program and its purpose fully exposed. The propositional construct sets forth [ l ] a statement drawn from the Mishnah joined to [2] a sustained commentary on the Mishnah and amplification of its law and sometimes supplemented by [3] autonomous compositions, occasionally quite extensive composites independent of all connection with Mishnahand law-exegesis. That is the fixed order of the Bavli's types of expositions. It is logical, starting with the foundations in law and ending with the decorations in narrative or in scriptural exegesis. Accordingly, I claim that internal evidence deriving from the Bavli's program of Mishnah- and law-exegesis permits us to differentiate the primary from the secondary constituents of the Talmud. What we gain from that distinction is access to what is essential to the Talmud and recognition of what is merely adventitious supplement. The visual signals yield perspective on the document and guidance in entering into the order of its exposition. It is no longer a mass of unfelt words, a mishmash of this and that, singleton facts, episodic information that the impression that "reading" the Talmud in sequential, discrete sentences yields. The Bavli contains a predominance of expositions of the Mishnah and its law and a small proportion of topical expositions - some of them singleton-compositions, but most of them composites made up of sizable collections of composi-

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

199

tions that are utterly independent of the Mishnah and its law. These composites are, respectively, primary and secondary in the plan of the Bavli, which formally rests for structure, order, and program on the Mishnah's repertoire of topically-arranged laws. And the documentary program of the framers of the Bavli governed the writing of most of what found its way into their composites. The upshot is, the Bavli is formed in response to the demands for clarification and extension of Mishnah- and law-exegesis, and by far the greater part of the composites -the pages and pages of underlined discourse that precede this conclusion - originally were written mainly for the documentary purpose that governs throughout. The Bavli was composed in the framework of its redactional program, whether that composition took a generation or a century.

The Bavli contains free-standing compositions and composites not written in response to the program of the document. Signaled in my sample by the absence of underlining and sometimes also by indentation, these compositions always are positioned after the full exposition of the composites that carry out the Bavli's primary program. They are classified as secondary and superfluous to the Bavli's documentary plan. They conform to rules of rhetoric, logic of coherent discourse, and topic different from those that predominate in the Bavli's primary compositions and composites. They point toward the existence of documents governed by other conventions than those that predominate in the Bavli. In a variety of cases the documentary program dictates the conventions that predominate in the secondary compositions and composites. We therefore begin at the fundamental point: the rules of composition. All the compositions and composites of the first order of the Bavli were written in response to the documentary program of the Bavli and could not have been written or have made much sense outside the limits of the documentary program. Proof of that self-evident proposition is readily at hand. Simply take any Mishnah- or law-exegetical composition out of the setting of the Bavli, and, viewing it as a free-floating composition, try to explain its program and intent. It cannot be done, there is neither program nor intent outside of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. It would be a simple matter to multiply cases where the Bavli is unintelligible outside of the Mishnah's or the Tosefta's or a Tannaite sage's formulation of the law - but to no purpose. The framer of the cited paragraphs - and all his colleagues in the thirty-seven tractates of the Bavli and the thirty-nine of the Yerushalmi but in no other documents ofthe Rabbinic canon -takes for granted that the first order of business is Mishnah-exegesis. He knows what he wants to know - in the present case, he knows that the exegetical work begins with the demonstration of the perfection of the Mishnah, the utter absence of redundancy. That is what I mean when I speak of writing in accord with a documentary pro-

200

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

gram, in other words writing that is primary to the Bavli in the execution of its documentary program. Remove the Mishnah and Tosefta and Tannaite law formulations from the Bavli and vast stretches of the Bavli become unintelligible by any standard. We simply cannot make sense of the composition. That proves as fact this claim: the documentary program of the Bavli -citation and gloss of the Mishnah or comparable writing in accord with a well defined exegetical template -governs the rules of formulation of materials composed for the inclusion in the Bavli. The writing of the compositions and composites is an integral part of the process ofredaction of those compositions and composites in the document itse[f;the Bavli There are no tractates of the Bavli4that do not take up a Mishnah-tractate and expound it. There is none devoted to a legal text of Scripture (unlike Sifra with Leviticus), none devoted to collections of sayings of sages (unlike tractate Abot), for example, none aimed at investigating a theological proposition around a particular theme (unlike Lamentations Rabbah). What characterizes the compositions and composites of the Bavli that ignore the Mishnah and its exegesis? All the secondary and autonomous compositions and composites in the Bavli whatever their topical program bear a single definitive trait, a negative one. Were we to remove from the Bavli these free-standing compositions or composites our capacity for understanding the Mishnah and its law would be totally unaffected. It follows that whoever wrote these compositions followed a plan for writing his composition and assembling his composite that ignored the Bavli and its program of Mishnah- and law-exegesis. That does not mean that either the Bavli was unknown in the circles that produced the secondary compositions and composites or that the making of the Bavli and of compositions for the particular purpose of the Bavli was not underway when extra-Talmudic compositions were being framed - written and redacted in composites. On the contrary, more than a single type of canonical writing was carried on at the same time and in the same place and by the same circles of authorities. An exact formulation of the proposition requires a certain redundancy: The governing rules of rhetoric, topic, and logic of coherent discourse that distinguish one document from another document prevailed in one kind of writing and not in another kind when more than one document was in preparation. Conventions of rhetoric, logic of coherent discourse, and topic dictated the program of other components of the rabbinic canon beside the Mishnah and the Bavli, and these prevailed even as the Bavli was being written and reaching closure. No one can reasonably claim that the documents of the Rabbinic canon formed a queue, each compilation of propositions waiting its turn to be written, formed into a sizable aggregate, and circulated. Temporal and ordinal sequence is no issue. What the compositions formed without regard to the Bavli's program and progress show is that the Bavli did not monopolize the literary activities of the rabbis engaged in canonical work. They wrote in more than a single pattern, they

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

201

analyzed propositions in accord with more than a single template. That obvious proposition is demonstrated by a simple fact. To the same named authority are attributed a variety of kinds of formalized prose and a diverse program of analysis. So more than a single type of writing was carried on at the same time and in the same setting -by the same authority or school at that. The secondary compositions and composites of the Bavli belong somewhere else than in the Bavli, where, by the governing criteria of the documentary program, they do not belong at all. What is secondary in the Bavli is primary in some other document. Then, self-evidently, we must ask: what does the composition and inclusion in the Bavli of writings out of all relationship to the Bavli imply? It is the answer to the question, did the authors of free-standing composites expect their writing to be gathered into composites and large collections of composites? A simple fact suggests that they did anticipate their compositions that are preserved as free-standing bits of fixed and formal statements would move onward to constitute sizable aggregates of similar, formalized writing - completed documents, comparable to the Mishnah or Sifia or Lamentations Rabbah or tractate A b ~ t . ~ The Rabbinic canon of late antiquity - continued and augmented in medieval and modem times -is comprised by completed documents, relatively large (treating tractate Abot as the smallest document in the canon) and fully exposed. Free-standing compositions and composites may have been prepared but did not survive. All surviving compositions and composites find a place in a canonical collection of considerable dimensions. The writers of compositions conformed to rules of writing that governed all the compositions in the large composites that they produced and even in the canonical documents in which they were collected. The Rabbinic canon did not make provision for the preservation of freestanding compositions, singletons. We have no free-standing singletons outside the framework of whole documents -the Bavli, Song of Songs Rabbah, or whatever else. Accordingly, the documentary hypothesis maintains its critical postulate: writings preserved in the Bavli that ignore the Bavli's primary program of Mishnahexegesis belonged in collections defined by other primary programs altogether. A clear statement of the postulate ofthe documentary hypothesis is called for in conclusion: the work of the whole took priority over the work of the parts, the document predominated over the formation of the document's composites or the preparation of the composition.

That leads us back to the canonical question, what sort of documents did the writers of compositions and the compilers of composites that are secondary in the Bavli anticipate for the ultimate location of the results of their labor? The writers of free-standing compositions and composites such as we mark out in the Bavli

202

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

through the absence of underlining planned to produce - or to contribute to documents of three types: [ l ] collections of exegeses of Scripture, [2] collections of sayings bearing a single attribution, and [3] collections of narratives of doings of Israelite heroes, mainly scriptural heroes and also sages. Instead of the Bavli or (more plausibly) in addition to it, the writers of these compositions and the compilers of the composites had in mind three other types of documents: [ l ] Scripture-exegetical, [2] collections of sayings assigned to the same authority and [3] narratives of various kinds. But only one of the postulated three types of documents, scriptural exegeses, entered the Rabbinic canon. [I] The writing of compositions to be accumulated into documents of exegeses of Scripture, comparable to documents of exegesis of the Mishnah, went forward. These include Sifia and the two Sifies as well as the Rabbah-composites, Genesis, Leviticus, Lamentations, and the others of the venue defined by late antiquity. And the Talmud made a place for extended episodes of Scripture-exegesis as well. But the Talmud's collection of Scriptural exegesis of a given book differs in substance from other documents of collected exegeses of Scripture. [2] Tractate Abot is the only substantial collection of propositions identified by their attributions. But the Bavli contains a considerable volume of composites linked only or mainly by the attributions, the designated authorities responsible for groups of sayings. The Bavli preserves remnants of compositions that accumulate sayings attributed to particular masters. [3] There are no documents of history or biography or other narratives in the Rabbinic canon of late antiquity. The compositions that could have been assembled in entire documents are scattered throughout the Bavli and the Yerushalmi, and some narratives find a place for themselves in compilations of Scriptural exegesis, Genesis Rabbah, Leviticus Rabbah, and Lamentations Rabbah, for example. The Bavli is constructed of vast aggregates of Mishnah- and law-commentary. It also encompasses a small proportion of scriptural exegesis. It contains miscellanies of compositesjoined by a common attribution. These rarely accumulate in sizable collections. The Bavli occasionally accommodates biographical and historical narratives. But none is of sufficient volume to compare in size with tractate Abot or the smaller tractates of the Bavli. Finally, the Bavli contains a sizable corpus of theological expositions, mainly focused on themes or axiological expositions of topics. These consist mainly of iterations of theological commonplaces, not systematic analytical expositions of propositions. For system and analysis ofthe theology that inhses the writing whether Halakhic or Aggadic we have to look elsewhere. These theological expositions do not follow the formal patterning of language that characterizes the first three classes of writing, The accommodation by the Bavli, through formal patterning of language, of three other types of writing comes at the end of a process of accumulation of free

5. Norm and Anomaly: The Case of Bavli Moed Qatan Chapter One

203

standing writings. But the writers of those anomalous compositions and composites -exegetical or attributive or narrative -wrote their compositions with composites of writings of the same classification in mind. I therefore suppose that the free standing exegetical, attributive, and narrative writings come before the Bavli reached paramount and exclusive status as the collection point for canonical constructions. A protracted process of writing the exegetical compositions and refining them has left little mark upon the Bavli as we have it, which is the creation of the determinate generations of its planners and compositors and not of a long and indeterminate process of tradition of miscellaneous writings ultimately collected despite their diversity. The orderly and well composed character of most of the Bavli points toward a relatively brief period of formation and formulation. Rules of formulation and conception governed for an indeterminate number of generations. But these rules dictated the questions that would be asked and the form imposed on the answer for however long that spell of time lasted. The presence of a massive if subordinate collection of topical expositions of various kinds, which take a second place in the Bavli's composite, points toward another sort of literary activity beside the exegetical one of Mishnah- and law-exposition. But this activity left on the Talmud no indelible marks and failed to guide the analytical program of the Bavli, which accorded a primary position to its own analytical program and to that alone. The Bavli - I repeat, the most diverse document of the late antique Rabbinic canon - contains remarkably slight evidence of lost documents. Its occasional anomalies are just that - anomalies and not signals of large but lost collections of biographical narratives or scriptural exegeses or theological expositions. These survived in odds and ends. The documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon limits itselfto the extant canon of Rabbinic Judaism and ident$es its components as the building blocks of any account of that Judaism. ENDNOTES

' I refer to my intellectual Templates ofthe Law ofJudaism. Lanham, 2006: University Press of America. Analytical Templates ofthe Bavli. Lanham, 2006: University Press of America. And Analytical Templates ofthe Yerushalmi.Lanham, 2008: University Press of America. I refer to the thesis of my Judaism's Theological Voice: The Melody ofthe Talmud. Chicago, 1995: The University of Chicago Press. ' See my How Adin Steinsaltz Misrepresents the Talmud. Four False Propositions from his "Reference Guide. "Atlanta, 1998: Scholars Press for South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism. The Massekhtot Qetanot form a special case. I cannot give a precise definition to the trait, "sizable." The canonical documents that reached closure in late antiquity range from tractate Abot upwatrd to massive tractates of the Bavli, Sifra, Genesis Rabbah, and the like. We may point to tractate Abot as the smaller size. The minor tractates of the Bavli do not change the picture.

Epilogue Documents define the rules of composition governing rhetoric, logic, and topic. These are discerned in interior traits of form and order. Variation from those rules dictates the anomalous status of some of the components of these same canonical writings. But what is anomalous in one document marks what is normative in another document, what does not obey the rules of composition in our canon from the Mishnah through the Bavli and associated Midrash-compilations conforms to the other rules of composition that are to be inferred from these same anomalous composites. Narratives of history and theology and sages' biography do not conform to the rules of composition of the Mishnah but can be shown to obey other rules of composition - documentary governing form and order. Our sample of the Bavli has yielded a remarkably slight component of variant writing, The anomalous compositions contained in the Mishnah, Tosefia, Sifra, both SifrCs and Mekhilta point to three types of documents that we ought to have but lack - the "missing documents:" [ I ] collections of narratives, of [a] history and [b] biography -[a] events that form sequences and [b] continuous lives of sages including collections of expositions on diverse subjects but set forth in the name of particular sages; [2] systematic expositions of theological propositions comparable to the expositions of legal propositions contained in the Mishnah, Tosefta and two Talmuds; [3] systematic exegeses of connected passages of books of Scripture comparable to Genesis Rabbah - verse by verse expositions. What reason do we have to suppose that these three kinds of writing were carried forward at the time of the writing of the conventional compositions and the systematic agglutination of documentary composites? Our samples give evidence. They lack connected, sustained narratives, filly realized theological expositions,

206

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

and commentaries on more than a few verses of Scripture at a time. We do find bits and pieces of narrative and exegesis. These involve history and biography, theology and exposition of Scripture. But they do not yield large-scale collections that would prove comparable to the canonical collections of expositions of Halakhah and Aggadah by which the Rabbinic canon is comprised. Out of the references to Proverbs or to prophecy we cannot reconstruct anything comparable in volume or coherence to what is yielded by the norms that operate in Genesis Rabbah, for instance. The three large categories of writing not characteristic of the canonical compilation but adumbrated in the Mishnah and instantiated by the illustrative collections of Midrash-exegesescan have yielded complete documents comparable in patterning and formal discipline to the canonical documents that we do have. But if they do not categorize the remnants produced by our probe, our argument does not depend on what we have not found in the sample. What we have found are compositions that form anomalies in the construction into canonical documents. But the question arises: what premise justifies the appeal to documentary anomalies? That is to inquire: why take for granted that all writing culminates in fully articulated canonical composites defined by particular rules of rhetoric, topic and logic? The argument in the preceding pages has maintained as a given that making large composites culminating in books formed an inevitable result of writing compositions. The reason we postulate the existence of now-lost documents derivesfiom the writing of compositions lacking a documentary home. Our sample has yielded bits and pieces of writing so formalized that they point to a documentary situation. The anomalous compositions demand a place in a document that conforms to the patterns adumbrated by the indicative traits of those compositions. If we have a sequence of comments on successive verses of a book of Scripture -Genesis is our model in Genesis Rabbah -then the odds and ends that touch on Job or Proverbs, or Isaiah or Ezekiel should form comparable collections. Medieval collectors and arrangers of compositions into composites certainly concurred and undertook the composition of yalquts, devoted to the sequential exegesis of verses of prophecy and wisdom. But we have no reason to assume a universal commitment throughout the textual communities of Rabbinic Judaism to the making of whole documents books -in the model of Genesis Rabbah on Genesis start to finish or an Ezekiel Rabbah to serve the whole of Ezekiel for instance. The invocation of the category, anomaly, begs the question. The composites can have circulated in the schools without forming chapters in collections comparable to Sifra or Genesis Rabbah. The components of the canon as we assume it existed in the seventh century from the Mishnah through the Bavli and commentaries on the Pentateuch and most of the Five Scrolls - involved both wholly executed commentaries on complete books of Scripture and also random paragraphs and composites thereof developed into propositional expositions. The step from a composite of bits and pieces to

6. Epilogue

207

fully realized collections - from chapter to whole book, to use anachronistic formal categories - need not have been taken. But that small step from remnant to entire construction was taken in the Middle Ages and repeatedly so by printers from the advent of the printing press. The whole of Scripture was subjected to exegetical examination and made the center of systematic and continuous verse by verse exegesis. So we are obligated to ask about the traits of the documents we do have. To state the question simply: how do Sifra or Genesis Rabbah or the exposition of a legal category as in the case of a Mishnah-tractate, which we do possess, d~ferfiorna whole biography of a rabbi, or a continuous history of an event, or the articulation of a theological proposition, which we do not possess? To construct a theoretical response to the question, we first review the results of our probe: what of what types of documents is the canon comprised? The Mishnah answers the question in its anomalous components, It points to missing documents formed around the names of sages or around governing propositions or topics or around language-patterns. It further encompasses narratives as media for the articulation of the law and as autonomous compositions. But the anomalous formations of the Mishnah also point toward the formation of documents wholly unlike the Mishnah. These encompass exercises of theological argument, scriptural exegesis and rhetorically patterned composites and records of what was said on particular occasions. Of these models for future production, the one I find most startling is the "'on that day"' conglomerate. It points toward an interest in the formalization of distinct historical events and the search for the norms that are captured by the forms embodied in singular events. Events are systematized and hierarchized. Mishnah-tractate Eduyyot and its companion in the Tosefta express equivalent interests in the particular context of law and theology -the history of the law. The particular historical events and contexts produced by the Mishnah, however, do not reveal a bias or an interest that shapes the entire repertoire of narratives. The narratives prove miscellaneous, not pointed and purposive the way Sifra is pointed and purposive. The Tosefta's corpus of anomalous compositions and composites matches the collection of the Mishnah. The topics correspond, and the relationship between the Mishnah's and the Tosefta's anomalous compositions match the relationship between the Mishnah's and the Tosefta's corresponding compositions. To the hypothesis of lost documents randomly preserved in the Mishnah and the Tosefta that trait presents a surprise. We should have anticipated free-standing compositions, not more cases in which the Tosefta is linked tightly to the Mishnah in form and program. The Mishnah's repertoire of anomalous compositions and composites exceeds the Tosefta's in its repertoire. The Tosefta contains no new anomalies, nothing new and different from the Mishnah's,

208

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

That uniformity of the model-anomalies characterizes the documents surveyed next, We found in the Midrash-compilations no further models of formal patterns beyond those defined by the Mishnah, indeed we found fewer samples indicative of hidden documents or lost ones. Mekhilta Attributed to R. Ishmael, Sifra and the two SifrCs yield little to suggest the presence of lost documents. These exhibit a miscellaneous character. Singletons such as topical collections on peace or on the value of suffering do not suggest systematic writing of a particular type. Consider the occasional quality of the writing. I point to these topical miscellanies. Genesis Rabbah sets forth a miscellany of stories about Simeon b Yohai, another exposition about Eliezer b, Hyrcanus, two matched stories about Jacob of Kefar Naborayya and two collections of stories about the death of the pious, stories on the divine intention for all things. how God protected the sages from Diocletian. It further supplies a topical miscellany on God's relationship to man, and a set that argues gentile prophets are less than Israelite ones. For narratives it sets forth an expansion on the story of Sheba the son of Bichri. We find ourselves at our starting point: the repertoire of anomalous writing defined by the rule of the Mishnah. These amount to the reiteration of the anomalous compositions set forth in the program of the Mishnah. And, more to the point, the anomalous writings that we do have conform in program and viewpoint to the Mishnah's forms and conceptions. Why do we not find what on the basis of remnants of documentary anomalies we have reason to expect to discover, and why are there no hints that work proceeded on original documents, collections of types not hinted at in the Mishnah? No one left evidence of work on tractates of virtue, collections of ethical doctrines fully exposed, collections of stories about holy men well organized into chapters of exposition. From the traits that define the program we do find in the Mishnah, Midrash and Talmud we extrapolate the redactional program that governed the making of the canonical documents from the Mishnah through the Bavli encompassing the specitied Midrash-compilations.Contrast the documents we do have with those additional ones that our survey suggests we should have but that are lost. The construction of the canon is defined by the Mishnah and its exegesis of the law in the Tosefta and the two Talmuds and by Scripture and the exegesis of its theology. Thus the canonical status of a document is governed by the native categories of Halakhah and Aggadah. We can explain the composition of entire documents from the compositions and components and also the failure to compose whole books for the Rabbinic canon. Composites form books for the systematic exposition of Halakhic and Aggadic topics but do not form whole books for the systematic exposition of history and theology, The Halakhah of the Mishnah, Tosefta and Talmuds define one type of category-formation inclusive of the topical program, and the Aggadic exposition in the model of the Tannaite Midrash-compilations - Genesis Rabbah and Sifra exemplify the type - define the other,

6. Epilogue

A canonical document is defined by either its capacity systematically to expound the topics of the law or its relevance to the exposition of theological topics of Scripture. A life of Yohanan ben Zakkai, Eliezer b. Hyrcanus, Aqiba, Judah, Meir or Judah the Patriarch required for its center and focus the exegesis of the life of the sage. But the sage does not constitute a native category of the Halakhah or of the Aggadah. That is why he does not effect the conglomeration of stories into whole lives. The narratives we do have do not connect in cogent, sequential lives. The canon of Rabbinic writings in late antiquity embodies the native categories that define coherence: why this not that? Accordingly, it made no provision for sages as the centerpiece, only for the abstractions of Halakhah and Aggadah, law and lore: norms of conduct and conviction. The purpose of the fully-exposed document - the hundred chapters of Genesis Rabbah - was to organize and articulate principles of law and theology and for that purpose biography and narrative did not pertain. History, biography, and theological topics formed the program of compositions and even composites, but not of whole books comparable to the Mishnah or Sifre to Numbers. A theological topic does not compare to a theological exposition, just as a Halakhic topic does not compare to a Halakhic tractate of the Mishnah. So in the canonical document we find second-level illustrations, expositions of fundamental principles, illustrations in concrete behavior of rules of law or theology. The lost documents were never -ever -lost. They were not constructed to begin with. Compositions did not agglutinate in large conglomerations. Topics generated compositions, but sustained and coherent expositions of topics as fully articulated composites bearing propositions were not, Theological compositions were fully considered for the canon - that is why we have them. But they were dismissed in the process of forming large-scale canonical composites - the Mishnah or Genesis Rabbati for instance. The anomalous remnants we have reviewed fit the documents that preserve them. The Bavli chapter is evidence of the disciplined judgment on the inclusion of anomalies, of which we find remarkably few. But when it came to composing collections of what we classify as anomalous materials, the compilers of the documents we surveyed found no critical task for themselves in the canonical context. Stating the upshot simply. In the Rabbinic canon we possess the best of all possible Rabbinic canons: the composition of large scale documents of Halakah andAggadah centered on the exposition of Scripture 5 theologv and the Mishnah 5 law. Once Scripture and the Mishnah defined the boundaries and foci of the Torah, the challenge to the Rabbis was clear: organize, formalize, canonize Scripture in the model of tradition, law in the setting of theology, and the whole in the context of prophecy. Category-formations supply the key. Our form-analysis has yielded two definitive category-formations, and there are no missing documents but only types of writing that do not culminate in complete documents. What we find is that Halakhah and Aggadah form the genera-

210

Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism

tive, organizing categories of the Rabbinic canon, and Scripture's definitive contribution of law and narrative and ethics finds ample place in them. Scripture defines the native categories. Th Halakhah derives from the books of Moses, and the Aggadah correlates with the Wisdom collections Proverbs and Job for example, But there is a third native category expressed in Scripture, prophecy. The truly lost documents are those adumbrated by reference to Prophecy, and what we have omitted is the category-formation defined by prophecy. The challenge that awaits is to account for the missing category critical to the structure of Scripture - Tanakh, after all, is made up of Torah, Prophets and Writings and remarkably scattered in the Rabbinic canon. What now requires definition is the reading of prophecy in the setting of the sages' Torah.

STUDIES IN JUDAISM TITLES IN THE SERIES PUBLISHED BY UNIVERSITY PRESS OF AMERICA Judith Z. Abrams The Babylonian Talmud: A Topical Guide, 2002. Roger David Aus The Death, Burial, and Resurrection of Jesus, and the Death, Burial, and Translation of Moses in Judaic Tradition, 2008. Feeding the Five Thousand: Studies in the Judaic Background of Mark 6:30-44 par. and John 6:l-15, 2010. Matthew 1-2 and the Virginal Conception: In Light of Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaic Traditions on the Birth of Israel's First Redeemer, Moses. 2004. My Name Is "Legion": Palestinian Judaic Traditions in Mark 5:l-20 and Other Gospel Texts, 2003.

Alan L. Berger, Harry James Cargas, and Susan E. Nowak The Continuing Agony: From the Carmelite Convent to the Crosses at Auschwitz, 2004. S. Daniel Breslauer Creating a Judaism without Religion: A Postmodern Jewish Possibility, 2001. Bruce Chilton Targumic Approaches to the Gospels: Essays in the Mutual Definition of Judaism and Christianity, 1986. David Ellenson Tradition in Transition: Orthodoxy, Halakhah, and the Boundaries of Modern Jewish Identity, 1989. Roberta Rosenberg Farber and Simcha Fishbane Jewish Studies in Violence: A Collection of Essays, 2007. Paul V. M. Flesher New Perspectives on Ancient Judaism, Volume 5: Society and Literature in Analysis, 1990. Marvin Fox Collected Essays on Philosophy and on Judaism, Volume One: Greek Philosophy, Maimonides, 2003.

Collected Essays on Philosophy and on Judaism, Volume Two: Some Philosophers, 2003. Collected Essays on Philosophy and on Judaism, Volume Three: Ethics, Reflections, 2003.

Zev Garber Methodology in the Academic Teaching of Judaism, 1986. Zev Garber, Alan L. Berger, and Richard Libowitz Methodology in the Academic Teaching of the Holocaust ,1988. Abraham Gross Spirituality and Law: Courting Martyrdom in Christianity and Judaism, 2005. Harold S. Himmelfarb and Sergio DellaPergola Jewish Education Worldwide: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, 1989. Raphael Jospe Jewish Philosophy: Foundations and Extensions (Volume One: General Questions and Considerations), 2008. Jewish Philosophy: Foundations and Extensions (Volume Two: On Philosophers and Their Thought), 2008.

William Kluback The Idea of Humanity: Hermann Cohen's Legacy to Philosophy and Theology, 1987. Samuel Morel1 Studies in the Judicial Methodology of Rabbi David ibn Abi Zimra, 2004. Jacob Neusner Amos in Talmud and Midrash, 2006. Analytical Templates of the Yerushalmi, 2008. Ancient Israel, Judaism, and Christianity in Contemporary Perspective, 2006. The Aggadic Role in Halakhic Discourses: Volume 1, 2001. The Aggadic Role in Halakhic Discourses: Volume 11, 200 1. The Aggadic Role in Halakhic Discourses: Volume 111, 2001.

Analysis and Argumentation in Rabbinic Judaism, 2003. Analytical Templates of the Bavli, 2006. Ancient Judaism and Modern Category-Formation: "Judaism, " "Midrash, " "Messianism, " and Canon in the Past Quarter Century, 1986. Bologna Addresses and Other Recent Papers, 2007. Building Blocks of Rabbinic Tradition: The Documentary Approach to the Study of Formative Judaism, 2007. Canon and Connection: Intertextuality in Judaism, 1987. Chapters in the Formative History of Judaism, 2006. Chapters in the Formative History of Judaism: Second Series: More Questions and Answers. 2008. Chapters in the Formative History of Judaism: Third Series: Historical Theology, the Canon, Constructive Theology and Other Problems, 2009. Chapters in the Formative History of Judaism: Fourth Series: From-Historical Studies and the Documentary Hypothesis, 2009. Chapters in the Formative History of Judaism: Fifth Series: Some Current Essays on the History, Literature, and Theology of Judaism. 2010. Comparative Midrash: SifrP to Numbers and SifrP Zutta to Numbers: Two Rabbinic Readings of the Book of Numbers, Volume One: Forms, 2009. Comparative Midrash: SifrP to Numbers and SifrP Zutta to Numbers: Two Rabbinic Readings of the Book of Numbers, Volume Two: Exegesis, 2009. The Documentary History of Judaism and Its Recent Interpreters, 2009 Dual Discourse, Single Judaism, 2001. The Emergence of Judaism: Jewish Religion in Response to the Critical Issues of the First Six Centuries, 2000. Ezekiel in Talmud and Midrash, 2007. First Principles of Systemic Analysis: The Case of Judaism within the History of Religion, 1988.

Habakkuk, Jonah, Nahum, and Obadiah in Talmud and Midrash: A Source Book. 2007. The Halakhah and the Aggadah, 2001. Halakhic Hermeneutics, 2003. Halakhic Theology: A Sourcebook, 2006. The Hermeneutics of Rabbinic Category Formations, 2001. Hosea in Talmud and Midrash, 2006. How Important Was the Destruction of the Second Temple in the Formation of Rabbinic Judaism? 2006. How Not to Study Judaism, Examples and Counter-Examples, Volume One: Parables, Rabbinic Narratives, Rabbis' Biographies, Rabbis' Disputes, 2004. How Not to Study Judaism, Examples and Counter-Examples, Volume Two: Ethnicity and Identity Versus Culture and Religion, How Not to Write a Book on Judaism, Point and Counterpoint, 2004. How the Bavli is Constructed: Identifying the Forests Comprised by the Talmud's Trees: The Cases of Bavli Moed Qatan and of Bavli Makkot, 2009. How the Halakhah Unfolds: Moed Qatan in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, 2006. How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume 11, Part A: Nazir in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, 2007. How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume 11, Part B: Nazir in the Mishnah, Tosefia, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, 2007. How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume 111, Part A: Abodah Zurah in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, 2007. How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume Ill, Part B: Abodah Zurah in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, 2007. How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume IV, Hagigah in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, 2009.

The Implicit Norms of Rabbinic Judaism, 2006. Intellectual Templates of the Law of Judaism, 2006. Isaiah in Talmud and Midrash: A Source Book, Part A, 2007. Isaiah in Talmud and Midrash: A Source Book, Part B, 2007. Is Scripture the Origin of the Halakhah? 2005 Israel and Iran in Talmudic Times: A Political History, 1986. Israel's Politics in Sasanian Iran: Self-Government in Talmudic Times, 1986. Jeremiah in Talmud and Midrash: A Source Book, 2006. Judaism in Monologue and Dialogue, 2005. Lost Documents of Rabbinic Judaism. 2010. Major Trends in Formative Judaism, Fourth Series, 2002. Major Trends in Formative Judaism, Fifrh Series, 2002. Messiah in Context: Israel's History and Destiny in Formative Judaism, 1988. Micah and Joel in Talmud and Midrash, 2006. Narrative and Document in the Rabbinic Canon, Vol. I: From the Mishnah to the Talmuds. 2009. Narrative and Document in the Rabbinic Canon, Vol. 11: The Two Talmuds, 20 10. The Native Category - Formations of the Aggadah: The Later MidrashCompilations - Volume 1, 2000. The Native Category - Formations of the Aggadah: The Earlier MidrashCompilations - Volume 11, 2000. Paradigms in Passage: Patterns of Change in the Contemporary Study oj Judaism, 1988. Parsing the Torah, 2005. Persia and Rome in Classical Judaism, 2008

Praxis and Parable: The Divergent Discourses of Rabbinic Judaism, 2006. The Program of the Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan A, 2009. Rabbi Jeremiah, 2006. Rabbinic Theology and Israelite Prophecy: Primacy of the Torah, Narrative of the World to Come, Doctrine of Repentance and Atonement, and the Systematization of Theology in the Rabbis' Reading of the Prophets, 2007. The Rabbinic Utopia, 2007. The Rabbis, the Law, and the Prophets. 2007. Reading Scripture with the Rabbis: The Five Books of Moses, 2006. The Religious Study of Judaism: Description, Analysis, Interpretation, Volume 1, 1986. The Religious Study of Judaism: Description, Analysis, Interpretation, Volume 2. 1986. The Religious Study of Judaism: Context, Text, Circumstance, Volume 3, 1987. The Religious Study of Judaism: Description, Analysis, Interpretation, Volume 4, 1988. Sifre' Zutta to Numbers, 2008. Struggle for the Jewish Mind: Debates and Disputes on Judaism Then and Now, 1988. The Talmud Law, Theology, Narrative: A Sourcebook, 2005. Talmud Torah: Ways to God's Presence through Learning: An Exercise in Practical Theology, 2002. Texts Without Boundaries: Protocols of Non-Documentary Writing in the Rabbinic Canon: Volume I: The Mishnah, Tractate Abot, and the Tosefta, 2002. Texts Without Boundaries: Protocols of Non-Documentary Writing in the Rabbinic Canon: Volume 11: Sifra and Sifre to Numbers, 2002.

Texts Without Boundaries: Protocols of Non-Documentary Writing in the Rabbinic Canon: Volume 111: Sifre to Deuteronomy and Mekhilta Attributed to Rabbi Ishmael, 2002. Texts Without Boundaries: Protocols of Non-Documentary Writing in the Rabbinic Canon: Volume IV: Leviticus Rabbah, 2002. A Theological Cornmentary to the Midrash - Volume I: Pesiqta deRab Kahana, 2001. A Theological Cornmentary to the Midrash - Volume 11: Genesis Raba, 2001. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume III: Song of Songs Rabbah, 2001. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume IV: Leviticus Rabbah, 2001. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume V: Lamentations Rabbati, 2001. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume VI: Ruth Rabbah and Esther Rabbah. 2001. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume VII: Sifra, 2001. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume VIII: Sifre to Numbers and Sifre to Deuteronomy, 200 1. A Theological Commentary to the Midrash - Volume IX: Mekhilta Attributed to Rabbi Ishmael. 2001. Theological Dictionary of Rabbinic Judaism: Part One: Principal Theological Categories, 2005. Theological Dictionary of Rabbinic Judaism: Part Two: Making Connections and Building Constructions, 2005. Theological Dictionary of Rabbinic Judaism: Part Three: Models of Analysis, Explanation, and Anticipation, 2005. The Theological Foundations of Rabbinic Midrash, 2006. Theology of Normative Judaism: A Source Book, 2005.

Theology in Action: How the Rabbis of the Talmud Present Theology (Aggadah) in the Medium of the Law (Halakhah).An Anthology, 2006. The Torah and the Halakhah: The Four Relationships, 2003. The Treasury of Judaism: A New Collection and Translation of Essential Texts (Volume One: The Calendar), 2008. The Treasury of Judaism: A New Collection and Translation of Essential Texts (Volume Two: The Life Cycle), 2008. The Treasury of Judaism: A New Collection and Translation of Essential Texts (Volume Three: Theology), 2008. The Unity of Rabbinic Discourse: Volume I: Aggadah in the Halakhah, 2001. The Unity of Rabbinic Discourse: Volume 11: Halakhah in the Aggadah, 2001. The Unity of Rabbinic Discourse: Volume Ill: Halakhah and Aggadah in Concert, 2001. The Vitality of Rabbinic Imagination: The Mishnah Against the Bible and Qumran, 2005. Who, Where and What is "Israel?":Zionist Perspectives on Israeli and American Judaism, 1989. The Wonder-Working Lawyers of Talmudic Babylonia: The Theory and Practice of Judaism in its Formative Age, 1987. Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi in Talmud and Midrash: A Source Book. 2007.

Jacob Neusner and Renest S. Frerichs New Perspectives on Ancient Judaism, Volume 2: Judaic and Christian Interpretation of Texts: Contents and Contexts, 1987. New Perspectives on Ancient Judaism, Volume 3: Judaic and Christian Interpretation of Texts: Contents and Contexts, 1987

Jacob Neusner and James F. Strange Religious Texts and Material Contexts, 2001. David Novak and Norbert M. Samuelson Creation and the End of Days: Judaism and Scientific Cosmology, 1986.

Proceedings of the Academy for Jewish Philosophy, 1990.

Risto Nurmela The Mouth of the Lord Has Spoken: Inner-Biblical Allusions in Second and Third Isaiah, 2006. Aaron D. Panken The Rhetoric of Innovation: Self-Conscious Legal Change in Rabbinic Literature. 2005. Norbert M. Samuelson Studies in Jewish Philosophy: Collected Essays of the Academy for Jewish Philosophy, 1980-1985, 1987. Benjamin Edidin Scolnic Alcimus, Enemy of the Maccabees, 2004. Ifthe Egyptians Drowned in the Red Sea, Where Are the Pharoah's Chariots?: Exploring the Historical Dimension of the Bible, 2005. Judaism Defined: Mattathias and the Destiny of His People. 20 10. Thy Brother's Blood: The Maccabees and Dynastic Morality in the Hellenistic World. 2008.

Rivka Ulmer Pesiqta Rabbati: A Synoptic Edition of Pesiqta Rabbati Based Upon All Extant Manuscripts and the Editio Preceps, Volume 1,2009. Pesiqta Rabbati: A Synoptic Edition of Pesiqta Rabbati Based Upon All Extant Manuscripts and the Editio Preceps, Volume 11, 2009. Pesiqta Rabbati: A Synoptic Edition of Pesiqta Rabbati Based Upon All Extant Manuscripts and the Editio Preceps, Volume 111, 2009.

Manfred Vogel A Quest for a Theology of Judaism: The Divine, the Human and the Ethical Dimensions in the Structure-of-Faith of Judaism Essays in Constructive Theology, 1987. Anita Weiner Renewal: Reconnecting Soviet Jewry to the Soviet People: A Decade of American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (AJJDC)Activities in the Former Soviet Union 1988-1998, 2003.

Eugene Weiner and Anita Weiner Israel-A Precarious Sanctuary: War, Death and the Jewish People, 1989. The Martyr's Conviction: A Sociological Analysis, 2002.

Leslie S. Wilson The Serpent Symbol in the Ancient Near East: Nahash and Asherah: Death, Life, and Healing, 2001. Tzvee Zahavy and Jacob Neusner How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume V: Hullin in the Mishnah, Tosefra, and Bavli, Part One: Mishnah, Tosefra, and Bavli, Chapters One through Six, 2010. How the Halakhah Unfolds, Volume V: Hullin in the Mishnah, Tosefra and Bavli, Part Two: Mishnah, Tosefra, and Bavli, Chapters Seven through Twelve, 20 10.