Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database

   Search:  
validated results only / all results

and or

Filtering options: (leave empty for all results)
By author:     
By work:        
By subject:
By additional keyword:       



Results for
Please note: the results are produced through a computerized process which may frequently lead to errors, both in incorrect tagging and in other issues. Please use with caution.
Due to load times, full text fetching is currently attempted for validated results only.
Full texts for Hebrew Bible and rabbinic texts is kindly supplied by Sefaria; for Greek and Latin texts, by Perseus Scaife, for the Quran, by Tanzil.net

For a list of book indices included, see here.


graph

graph

All subjects (including unvalidated):
subject book bibliographic info
boethus Bowie (2023), Essays on Ancient Greek Literature and Culture, Volume 2: Comedy, Herodotus, Hellenistic and Imperial Greek Poetry, the Novels. 394
Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 170, 171, 174, 182
Frede and Laks (2001), Traditions of Theology: Studies in Hellenistic Theology, its Background and Aftermath, 251
Goodman (2006), Judaism in the Roman World: Collected Essays, 65
Grabbe (2010), Introduction to Second Temple Judaism: History and Religion of the Jews in the Time of Nehemiah, the Maccabees, Hillel and Jesus, 58
Joosse (2021), Olympiodorus of Alexandria: Exegete, Teacher, Platonic Philosopher, 223
Jouanna (2012), Greek Medicine from Hippocrates to Galen, 284
Motta and Petrucci (2022), Isagogical Crossroads from the Early Imperial Age to the End of Antiquity, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23
Nijs (2023), The Epicurean Sage in the Ethics of Philodemus. 33, 130
Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 128, 129, 178
Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 170, 171, 174, 182, 277
boethus, dynasty of Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 24, 42, 49, 50, 51, 55, 56, 527, 613
boethus, house of Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 65, 98, 345
boethus, joazar, son of Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 574
boethus, martha mary, gospel of Ernst (2009), Martha from the Margins: The Authority of Martha in Early Christian Tradition, 82, 247, 254, 273
boethus, of sidon Erler et al. (2021), Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition, 174
Long (2006), From Epicurus to Epictetus Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy, 125
Maso (2022), CIcero's Philosophy, 82
Zachhuber (2022), Time and Soul: From Aristotle to St. Augustine. 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 38, 45, 46, 51, 52, 57, 58, 59, 60, 82, 83
boethus, of sidon, commentary on the categories Zachhuber (2022), Time and Soul: From Aristotle to St. Augustine. 23
boethus, peripatetic Kazantzidis and Spatharas (2012), Medical Understandings of Emotions in Antiquity: Theory, Practice, Suffering, 215
boethus, world soul, cosmic soul Zachhuber (2022), Time and Soul: From Aristotle to St. Augustine. 28

List of validated texts:
9 validated results for "boethus"
1. None, None, nan (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus

 Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 171; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 171

2. Philo of Alexandria, On The Eternity of The World, 76-77 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus of Sidon

 Found in books: Brouwer and Vimercati (2020), Fate, Providence and Free Will: Philosophy and Religion in Dialogue in the Early Imperial Age, 67; Long (2006), From Epicurus to Epictetus Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy, 125

sup>
76 But some of those who used to hold a different opinion, being overpowered by truth, have changed their doctrine; for beauty has a power which is very attractive, and the truth is beyond all things beautiful, as falsehood on the contrary is enormously ugly; therefore Boethus, and Posidonius, and Panaetius, men of great learning in the Stoic doctrines, as if seized with a sudden inspiration, abandoning all the stories about conflagrations and regeneration, have come over to the more divine doctrine of the incorruptibility of the world; '77 and it is said also that Diogenes, when he was very young, agreed entirely with those authors ... XVI. ' None
3. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 15.41, 18.3 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus • House of Boethus • Joazar (son of Boethus)

 Found in books: Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 65, 345; Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 128; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 574

sup>
15.41 ̓Εν δὲ τοῖς ἑσπερίοις μέρεσιν τοῦ περιβόλου πύλαι τέτταρες ἐφέστασαν, ἡ μὲν εἰς τὰ βασίλεια τείνουσα τῆς ἐν μέσῳ φάραγγος εἰς δίοδον ἀπειλημμένης, αἱ δύο δὲ εἰς τὸ προάστειον, ἡ λοιπὴ δ' εἰς τὴν ἄλλην πόλιν βαθμίσιν πολλαῖς κάτω τε εἰς τὴν φάραγγα διειλημμένη καὶ ἀπὸ ταύτης ἄνω πάλιν ἐπὶ τὴν πρόσβασιν: ἄντικρυς γὰρ ἡ πόλις ἔκειτο τοῦ ἱεροῦ θεατροειδὴς οὖσα περιεχομένη βαθείᾳ φάραγγι κατὰ πᾶν τὸ νότιον κλίμα." "
15.41
ἀλλὰ πρῶτος μὲν ̓Αντίοχος ὁ ̓Επιφανὴς ἔλυσε τὸν νόμον ἀφελόμενος μὲν ̓Ιησοῦν, καταστήσας δὲ τὸν ἀδελφὸν ̓Ονίαν, δεύτερος δὲ ̓Αριστόβουλος ̔Υρκανὸν ἀφείλετο τὸν ἀδελφόν, ̔Ηρώδης δὲ τρίτος ἀντιπαρέδωκεν τὴν ἀρχὴν ̓Αριστοβούλῳ τῷ παιδί.' "
18.3
ἅμα δὲ καὶ τοῦ ̓Αγρίππου τὴν ἀρετὴν θαυμάσας, ἐν ὀλίγῳ αὔξειν τὴν οἰκείαν ἀρχὴν ἤτοι προσόδοις χρημάτων ἢ ἄλλῃ δυνάμει τοῦ κοινοῦ δὲ τῆς εὐθυμίας ἐπιμελοῖτο πρεσβεύων τοὺς νόμους καὶ τὸ θεῖον, συνεχώρει καὶ γράφει πρὸς τὸν Πετρώνιον, ἐκεῖνον τῆς τε ἀθροίσεως τοῦ στρατεύματος ἐπαινῶν καὶ τοῦ πρὸς αὐτὸν περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπεσταλκότος:18.3 καὶ τότε οὖν ἐπεὶ τὸ πρῶτον γίνεται ἡ ἄνοιξις αὐτῶν, ἄνδρες Σαμαρεῖται κρύφα εἰς ̔Ιεροσόλυμα ἐλθόντες διάρριψιν ἀνθρωπείων ὀστῶν ἐν ταῖς στοαῖς καὶ διὰ παντὸς τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἤρξαντο μὴ πρότερον ἐπὶ τοιούτοις νομίζοντες τά τε ἄλλα διὰ φυλακῆς μείζονος ἦγον τὸ ἱερόν.
18.3
οἱ δὲ καίπερ τὸ κατ' ἀρχὰς ἐν δεινῷ φέροντες τὴν ἐπὶ ταῖς ἀπογραφαῖς ἀκρόασιν ὑποκατέβησαν τοῦ μὴ εἰς πλέον ἐναντιοῦσθαι πείσαντος αὐτοὺς τοῦ ἀρχιερέως ̓Ιωαζάρου, Βοηθοῦ δὲ οὗτος υἱὸς ἦν. καὶ οἱ μὲν ἡττηθέντες τοῦ ̓Ιωαζάρου τῶν λόγων ἀπετίμων τὰ χρήματα μηδὲν ἐνδοιάσαντες:" '' None
sup>
15.41 5. Now in the western quarters of the enclosure of the temple there were four gates; the first led to the king’s palace, and went to a passage over the intermediate valley; two more led to the suburbs of the city; and the last led to the other city, where the road descended down into the valley by a great number of steps, and thence up again by the ascent for the city lay over against the temple in the manner of a theater, and was encompassed with a deep valley along the entire south quarter;
15.41
It was Antiochus Epiphanes who first brake that law, and deprived Jesus, and made his brother Onias high priest in his stead. Aristobulus was the second that did so, and took that dignity from his brother Hyrcanus; and this Herod was the third, who took that high office away from Arianflus, and gave it to this young man, Aristobulus, in his stead.
18.3
When, therefore, those gates were first opened, some of the Samaritans came privately into Jerusalem, and threw about dead men’s bodies, in the cloisters; on which account the Jews afterward excluded them out of the temple, which they had not used to do at such festivals; and on other accounts also they watched the temple more carefully than they had formerly done.18.3 and because he greatly admired Agrippa’s virtue, in not desiring him at all to augment his own dominions, either with larger revenues, or other authority, but took care of the public tranquillity, of the laws, and of the Divinity itself, he granted him what he had requested. He also wrote thus to Petronius, commending him for his assembling his army, and then consulting him about these affairs.
18.3
but the Jews, although at the beginning they took the report of a taxation heinously, yet did they leave off any further opposition to it, by the persuasion of Joazar, who was the son of Beethus, and high priest; so they, being over-persuaded by Joazar’s words, gave an account of their estates, without any dispute about it. ' None
4. Mishnah, Menachot, 10.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus • Boethus (dynasty of)

 Found in books: Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 178; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 49, 527

sup>
10.3 כֵּיצַד הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים. שְׁלוּחֵי בֵית דִּין יוֹצְאִים מֵעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב, וְעוֹשִׂים אוֹתוֹ כְרִיכוֹת בִּמְחֻבָּר לַקַּרְקַע, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא נוֹחַ לִקְצֹר. וְכָל הָעֲיָרוֹת הַסְּמוּכוֹת לְשָׁם, מִתְכַּנְּסוֹת לְשָׁם, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא נִקְצָר בְּעֵסֶק גָּדוֹל. כֵּיוָן שֶׁחֲשֵׁכָה, אוֹמֵר לָהֶם, בָּא הַשָּׁמֶשׁ, אוֹמְרִים, הֵן. בָּא הַשָּׁמֶשׁ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. מַגָּל זוֹ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. מַגָּל זוֹ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. קֻפָּה זוֹ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. קֻפָּה זוֹ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. בְּשַׁבָּת אוֹמֵר לָהֶם, שַׁבָּת זוֹ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. שַׁבָּת זוֹ, אוֹמְרִים הֵן. אֶקְצֹר, וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים לוֹ קְצֹר. אֶקְצֹר, וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים לוֹ קְצֹר. שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים עַל כָּל דָּבָר וְדָבָר, וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים לוֹ הֵן, הֵן, הֵן. וְכָל כָּךְ לָמָּה. מִפְּנֵי הַבַּיְתוֹסִים, שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים, אֵין קְצִירַת הָעֹמֶר בְּמוֹצָאֵי יוֹם טוֹב:'' None
sup>
10.3 How would they do it reap the omer?The agents of the court used to go out on the day before the festival and tie the unreaped grain in bunches to make it the easier to reap. All the inhabitants of the towns near by assembled there, so that it might be reaped with a great demonstration. As soon as it became dark he says to them: “Has the sun set?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Has the sun set?” And they answer, “Yes.” “With this sickle?” And they answer, “Yes.” “With this sickle?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Into this basket?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Into this basket?” And they answer, “Yes.” On the Sabbath he says to them, “On this Sabbath?” And they answer, “Yes.” “On this Sabbath?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Shall I reap?” And they answer, “Reap.” “Shall I reap?” And they answer, “Reap.” He repeated every matter three times, and they answer, “yes, yes, yes.” And why all of this? Because of the Boethusians who held that the reaping of the omer was not to take place at the conclusion of the first day of the festival.'' None
5. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus • Boethus (dynasty of)

 Found in books: Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 178; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 42

6. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus • Boethus (dynasty of)

 Found in books: Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 178; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 51, 613

7. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus • Boethus (dynasty of)

 Found in books: Taylor (2012), The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea, 178; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 51

19b מי איכא מידי דאנן לא מצינן למעבד ושלוחי דידן מצו עבדי הכי קאמרי ליה משביעין אנו עליך על דעתינו ועל דעת בית דין,הוא פורש ובוכה והן פורשין ובוכין וכו\' הוא פורש ובוכה שחשדוהו צדוקי והם פורשין ובוכין דא"ר יהושע בן לוי כל החושד בכשרים לוקה בגופו,וכל כך למה שלא יתקן מבחוץ ויכניס כדרך שהצדוקין עושין,ת"ר מעשה בצדוקי אחד שהתקין מבחוץ והכניס ביציאתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה פגע בו אביו אמר לו בני אף על פי שצדוקין אנו מתיראין אנו מן הפרושים אמר לו כל ימי הייתי מצטער על המקרא הזה (ויקרא טז, ב) כי בענן אראה על הכפורת אמרתי מתי יבוא לידי ואקיימנו עכשיו שבא לידי לא אקיימנו,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטין עד שמת והוטל באשפה והיו תולעין יוצאין מחוטמו ויש אומרים ביציאתו ניגף דתני רבי חייא כמין קול נשמע בעזרה שבא מלאך וחבטו על פניו ונכנסו אחיו הכהנים ומצאו ככף רגל עגל בין כתפיו שנאמר (יחזקאל א, ז) ורגליהם רגל ישרה וכף רגליהם ככף רגל עגל,א"ר זכריה בן קבוטל וכו\' מתני ליה רב חנן בר רבא לחייא בר רב קמיה דרב א"ר זכריה בן קפוטל ומחוי ליה רב בידיה קבוטל ונימא ליה מימר ק"ש הוה קרי,וכי האי גוונא מי שרי והא"ר יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא הקורא את שמע לא ירמוז בעיניו ולא יקרוץ בשפתותיו ולא יורה באצבעותיו ותניא רבי אלעזר חסמא אומר הקורא את שמע ומרמז בעיניו ומקרץ בשפתותיו ומראה באצבעו עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו מג, כב) ולא אותי קראת יעקב,לא קשיא הא בפרק ראשון הא בפרק שני,ת"ר (דברים ו, ז) ודברת בם בם ולא בתפלה ודברת בם בם יש לך רשות לדבר ולא בדברים אחרים,רבי אחא אומר ודברת בם עשה אותן קבע ואל תעשם עראי אמר רבא השח שיחת חולין עובר בעשה שנאמר ודברת בם בם ולא בדברים אחרים רב אחא בר יעקב אמר עובר בלאו שנאמר (קהלת א, ח) כל הדברים יגעים לא יוכל איש לדבר,19b is there any matter that we are unable to perform and our agents are able to perform? The role of the agent is to perform a task on behalf of the one who commissioned him. The agent cannot perform a task that the one who commissioned him is unable to perform. Since it is prohibited for Israelites to enter the priests’ courtyard and to perform the sacrificial rites, clearly the priests are not agents representing the Israelites. The language of the mishna in which the court Elders address the High Priest as their agent apparently contradicts that understanding. The Gemara answers: This is what they say to him: We administer an oath to you according to our understanding and the understanding of the court, cautioning him that he cannot rationalize violating the oath by claiming that he took the oath based on his own interpretation. He is bound by the understanding of the court. The mishna does not address the nature of the High Priest’s agency.,§ The mishna continues: After this oath, he would leave them and cry and they would leave him and cry. The Gemara explains: He turned aside and cried due to the indignity that they suspected him of being a Sadducee; and they turned aside and cried, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who suspects the innocent of indiscretion is afflicted in his body. The High Priest might in fact be beyond reproach and they may have suspected him falsely.,The Gemara asks: And why were the Elders so insistent that the High Priest take an oath? The Gemara explains: So that he would not prepare the incense and light it outside in the Sanctuary, before entering the Holy of Holies, and bring the coal pan with the incense already burning on it into the Holy of Holies in the manner that the Sadducees did. Since the High Priest is alone inside the Sanctuary and there is no way to ascertain whether he is in fact performing the service in the proper manner, the Elders insisted that he take an oath to perform it according to their instructions.,The Sages taught in the Tosefta: There was an incident involving a certain Sadducee who was appointed as High Priest, who prepared the incense outside and then brought it into the Holy of Holies. Upon his emergence he was overjoyed that he had succeeded. The father of that Sadducee met him and said to him: My son, although we are Sadducees and you performed the service in accordance with our opinion, we fear the Pharisees and do not actually implement that procedure in practice. The son said to his father: All my days I have been troubled over this verse: “For I will appear in the cloud above the Ark cover” (Leviticus 16:2). The Sadducees interpreted this verse to mean that God will appear above the Ark cover, i.e., will enter the Holy of Holies, only after the incense cloud is already there. I said: When will the opportunity become available to me, and I will fulfill it according to the Sadducee interpretation? Now that the opportunity has become available to me, will I not fulfill it?,The Sages said: Not even a few days passed until he died and was laid out in the garbage dump, and worms were coming out of his nose in punishment for his actions. And some say that he was struck as soon as he emerged from the Holy of Holies, as Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: A type of sound was heard in the Temple courtyard, as an angel came and struck him in the face. And his fellow priests came in to remove him from there and they found the likeness of a footprint of a calf between his shoulders. That is the mark left by an angel striking, as it is stated with regard to angels: “And their feet were straight feet, and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot” (Ezekiel 1:7).,§ It was taught in the mishna that Rabbi Zekharya ben Kevutal says: Many times I read before the High Priest from the book of Daniel. Rav Ḥa bar Rava taught this to Ḥiyya bar Rav before Rav in the following manner: Rabbi Zekharya bar Kefutal said, and Rav demonstrated with his hand that the name should be pronounced Kevutal. The Gemara asks: Why did Rav demonstrate his point with a gesture? Let him simply say it. The Gemara answers: Rav was reciting Shema at that moment and could not interrupt Shema by speaking.,The Gemara asks: And is interrupting in a manner of that sort, by gesturing, permitted during Shema? Didn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta say: One who is reciting Shema should neither make allusions with his eyes, nor open and close his mouth with his lips to convey a message, nor gesture with his fingers? And it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Elazar Ḥisma says: Concerning one who recites Shema and makes allusions with his eyes, or opens and closes his mouth with his lips, or gestures with his fingers, the verse says: “And you did not call out to Me, O Jacob” (Isaiah 43:22). By signaling while reciting Shema he behaves contemptuously toward God, and it is tantamount to not having recited Shema before Him. How, then, could Rav gesture while reading Shema?,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This prohibition to interrupt one’s recitation of Shema with a gesture applies in the course of reciting the first paragraph of Shema, which is more fundamental; that case where Rav gestured was in the course of reciting the second paragraph of Shema, where gesturing to convey a significant message is permitted.,Apropos interruptions in the course of reciting Shema, the Gemara cites a baraita in which the Sages taught: “And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart; and you shall teach them diligently unto your children, and you shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you arise” (Deuteronomy 6:6–7). This means that in the course of reciting them, the study of Torah and the recitation of Shema, it is permitted to interrupt to state a significant matter, but not in the course of reciting the Amida prayer, which may not be interrupted for any kind of speech. Another interpretation of the verse is: And you shall talk of them is to emphasize that it is permitted to interrupt Shema to speak these matters of Torah, but not to speak other matters that may lead to levity.,Rabbi Aḥa says: Talk of them means one must render them, the words of Torah, a permanent fixture, and not render them a temporary exercise. Rava said: One who engages in idle chatter without Torah or any particular purpose violates a positive commandment, as it is stated: And you shall talk of them; talk of them and not of other matters. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: Furthermore, one even violates a negative commandment, as it is stated: “All these matters are wearisome; no man can ever state them” (Ecclesiastes 1:8). The phrase: No man can ever state them, is understood as a prohibition against engaging in idle chatter.,sought to sleep at night, the young priests would snap the middle tzerada finger against the thumb before him, and they would say to him every so often: My Master, High Priest. Stand from your bed and chill yourself once on the floor and overcome your drowsiness. And they would engage him in various ways until the time would arrive to slaughter the daily offering.,What is the tzerada finger mentioned in the mishna? Rav Yehuda said: It is the rival tzara of that da one. Which finger is it? Tzerada is the rival of the thumb; it is the middle finger. The middle finger would be strongly positioned against the thumb, and when one separates them, the finger hits the palm, creating a sound. Rav Huna demonstrated the loud noise that could be achieved by snapping with the middle finger, and the sound traveled throughout Rav’s study hall. The sound created was loud enough to keep the High Priest awake.,It was taught in the mishna that they said to him: My Master, High Priest. Stand from your bed and chill yourself once on the floor and overcome your drowsiness. Rav Yitzḥak said that they said to the High Priest: Introduce something new. The Gemara asks: What is it that they asked him to introduce? They say to him: Demonstrate how to perform the ceremonial bowing kidda. This was a form of bowing that was difficult to perform, in which the High Priest was expert. The thought was that the exercise would keep him awake.,The mishna continues: And they would engage him in different ways until the time to slaughter the daily offering would arrive. It was taught: They would not occupy him with a harp or a lyre, which may not be played on a Festival, but would sing with their mouths. And what would they say? They would say this verse: “Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain on it; unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman keeps vigil in vain” (Psalms 127:1). The message to the High Priest was that his service must be performed for the sake of Heaven for it to be accepted by God; otherwise his efforts would be in vain.,The Gemara relates that the prominent men of Jerusalem would not sleep the entire night but instead engaged in Torah study, so that the High Priest would hear the sound of noise in the city and sleep would not overcome him in the silence of the sleeping city. It was taught in a baraita that Abba Shaul said: They would do so even in the outlying areas and stay awake all night in acknowledgment of the Temple; however, the result was that they would sin, as the men and women would participate in games together to pass the time, leading to transgression.,Abaye said, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak who said: Interpret that statement as referring to Neharde’a, as Elijah the Prophet said to Rav Yehuda, brother of Rav Salla Ḥasida: You have said and wondered: Why has the Messiah not come? Why is that surprising? Isn’t today Yom Kippur, and relations were had with several virgins in Neharde’a, as the men and women stayed awake all night and that led to promiscuity? Rav Yehuda said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, say about those sins committed by the Jewish people? He said: This is what God said:'' None
8. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of The Philosophers, 7.62-7.63 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus

 Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 171; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 171

sup>
7.62 Partition in logic is (according to Crinis) classification or distribution of a genus under heads: for instance, of goods some are mental, others bodily.Verbal ambiguity arises when a word properly, rightfully, and in accordance with fixed usage denotes two or more different things, so that at one and the same time we may take it in several distinct senses: e.g. in Greek, where by the same verbal expression may be meant in the one case that A house has three times fallen, in the other that a dancing-girl has fallen.Posidonius defines Dialectic as the science dealing with truth, falsehood, and that which is neither true nor false; whereas Chrysippus takes its subject to be signs and things signified. Such then is the gist of what the Stoics say in their theory of language. 7.63 To the department dealing with things as such and things signified is assigned the doctrine of expressions, including those which are complete in themselves, as well as judgements and syllogisms and that of defective expressions comprising predicates both direct and reversed.By verbal expression they mean that of which the content corresponds to some rational presentation. of such expressions the Stoics say that some are complete in themselves and others defective. Those are defective the enunciation of which is unfinished, as e.g. writes, for we inquire Who? Whereas in those that are complete in themselves the enunciation is finished, as Socrates writes. And so under the head of defective expressions are ranged all predicates, while under those complete in themselves fall judgements, syllogisms, questions, and inquiries.'' None
9. None, None, nan (missingth cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
 Tagged with subjects: • Boethus

 Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 170, 171, 174, 182; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 170, 171, 174, 182




Please note: the results are produced through a computerized process which may frequently lead to errors, both in incorrect tagging and in other issues. Please use with caution.
Due to load times, full text fetching is currently attempted for validated results only.
Full texts for Hebrew Bible and rabbinic texts is kindly supplied by Sefaria; for Greek and Latin texts, by Perseus Scaife, for the Quran, by Tanzil.net

For a list of book indices included, see here.