1. Mishnah, Menachot, 10.3, 10.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim) • Boethusians, • Boethusians, water libation
Found in books: Cohn (2013) 164, 169; Rubenstein(1995) 110, 139; Simon-Shushan (2012) 261; Taylor (2012) 171, 178
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:
10.5. מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הָעֹמֶר, יוֹצְאִין וּמוֹצְאִין שׁוּק יְרוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהוּא מָלֵא קֶמַח וְקָלִי, שֶׁלֹּא בִרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בִּרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים. מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הָעֹמֶר, הֻתַּר הֶחָדָשׁ מִיָּד, וְהָרְחוֹקִים מֻתָּרִים מֵחֲצוֹת הַיּוֹם וּלְהַלָּן. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הָנֵף כֻּלּוֹ אָסוּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וַהֲלֹא מִן הַתּוֹרָה הוּא אָסוּר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כג), עַד עֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה. מִפְּנֵי מָה הָרְחוֹקִים מֻתָּרִים מֵחֲצוֹת הַיּוֹם וּלְהַלָּן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן יוֹדְעִין שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין מִתְעַצְּלִין בּוֹ:''. None | 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.
10.5. After the omer was offered they used to go out and find the market of Jerusalem already full of flour and parched grain of the new produce; This was without the approval of the rabbis, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: it was with the approval of the rabbis. After the omer was offered the new grain was permitted immediately, but for those that lived far off it was permitted only after midday. After the Temple was destroyed Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that it should be forbidden throughout the day of the waving. Rabbi Judah said: is it not so forbidden by the law of the Torah, for it is said, “Until this very day?” Why was it permitted for those that lived far away from midday? Because they know that the court would not be negligent with it.''. None |
|
2. Mishnah, Sotah, 3.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Sigal (2007) 189; Taylor (2012) 171
3.4. אֵינָהּ מַסְפֶּקֶת לִשְׁתּוֹת עַד שֶׁפָּנֶיהָ מוֹרִיקוֹת וְעֵינֶיהָ בּוֹלְטוֹת וְהִיא מִתְמַלֵּאת גִּידִין, וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים הוֹצִיאוּהָ הוֹצִיאוּהָ, שֶׁלֹּא תְטַמֵּא הָעֲזָרָה. אִם יֶשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת, הָיְתָה תוֹלָה לָהּ. יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁנָה אַחַת, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁלשׁ שָׁנִים. מִכָּאן אוֹמֵר בֶּן עַזַּאי, חַיָּב אָדָם לְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תוֹרָה, שֶׁאִם תִּשְׁתֶּה, תֵּדַע שֶׁהַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה לָהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תוֹרָה, כְּאִלּוּ מְלַמְּדָהּ תִּפְלוּת. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, רוֹצָה אִשָּׁה בְקַב וְתִפְלוּת מִתִּשְׁעָה קַבִּין וּפְרִישׁוּת. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, חָסִיד שׁוֹטֶה, וְרָשָׁע עָרוּם, וְאִשָּׁה פְרוּשָׁה, וּמַכּוֹת פְּרוּשִׁין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְכַלֵּי עוֹלָם:''. None | 3.4. She had barely finished drinking when her face turns yellow, her eyes protrude and her veins swell. And those who see her exclaim, “Remove her! Remove her, so that the temple-court should not be defiled”. If she had merit, it causes the water to suspend its effect upon her. Some merit suspends the effect for one year, some merit suspends the effects for two years, and some merit suspends the effect for three years. Hence Ben Azzai said: a person must teach his daughter Torah, so that if she has to drink the water of bitterness, she should know that the merit suspends its effect. Rabbi Eliezer says: whoever teaches his daughter Torah teaches her lasciviousness. Rabbi Joshua says: a woman prefers one kav (of food) and sexual indulgence to nine kav and sexual separation. He used to say, a foolish pietist, a cunning wicked person, a female separatist, and the blows of separatists bring destruction upon the world.''. None |
|
3. Mishnah, Yadayim, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Cohn (2013) 168; Sigal (2007) 54; Taylor (2012) 171, 189
4.6. אוֹמְרִים צְדוֹקִים, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עֲלֵיכֶם, פְּרוּשִׁים, שֶׁאַתֶּם אוֹמְרִים, כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְסִפְרֵי הוֹמֵרִיס אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, וְכִי אֵין לָנוּ עַל הַפְּרוּשִׁים אֶלָּא זוֹ בִלְבָד. הֲרֵי הֵם אוֹמְרִים, עַצְמוֹת חֲמוֹר טְהוֹרִים וְעַצְמוֹת יוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל טְמֵאִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לְפִי חִבָּתָן הִיא טֻמְאָתָן, שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם עַצְמוֹת אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ תַּרְוָדוֹת. אָמַר לָהֶם, אַף כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ לְפִי חִבָּתָן הִיא טֻמְאָתָן, וְסִפְרֵי הוֹמֵרִיס, שֶׁאֵינָן חֲבִיבִין, אֵינָן מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדָיִם:''. None | 4.6. The Sadducees say: we complain against you, Pharisees, because you say that the Holy Scriptures defile the hands, but the books of Homer do not defile the hands. Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai said: Have we nothing against the Pharisees but this? Behold they say that the bones of a donkey are clean, yet the bones of Yoha the high priest are unclean. They said to him: according to the affection for them, so is their impurity, so that nobody should make spoons out of the bones of his father or mother. He said to them: so also are the Holy Scriptures according to the affection for them, so is their uncleanness. The books of Homer which are not precious do not defile the hands.''. None |
|
4. New Testament, Acts, 5.34 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Sigal (2007) 7, 48; Taylor (2012) 189
5.34. Ἀναστὰς δέ τις ἐν τῷ συνεδρίῳ Φαρισαῖος ὀνόματι Γαμαλιήλ, νομοδιδάσκαλος τίμιος παντὶ τῷ λαῷ, ἐκέλευσεν ἔξω βραχὺ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ποιῆσαι,''. None | 5.34. But one stood up in the council, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, honored by all the people, and commanded to take the apostles out a little while. ''. None |
|
5. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Sigal (2007) 54; Taylor (2012) 171
|
6. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim) • Boethusians,
Found in books: Cohn (2013) 169; Rubenstein(1995) 111; Simon-Shushan (2012) 260; Taylor (2012) 178
|
7. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians, • Boethusians, water libation
Found in books: Cohn (2013) 47; Rubenstein(1995) 66; Simon-Shushan (2012) 212
|
8. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Cohn (2013) 47; Taylor (2012) 171, 178, 189
|
9. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Sigal (2007) 54; Taylor (2012) 171
115b. הא כיצד נחלה ממשמשת והולכת עד ראובן ולימא עד יעקב אמר אביי גמירי דלא כלה שבטא,אמר רב הונא אמר רב כל האומר תירש בת עם בת הבן אפילו נשיא שבישראל אין שומעין לו שאינן אלא מעשה צדוקין דתניא בארבעה ועשרים בטבת תבנא לדיננא שהיו צדוקין אומרין תירש הבת עם בת הבן,נטפל להן רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אמר להם שוטים מנין זה לכם ולא היה אדם שהחזירו דבר חוץ מזקן אחד שהיה מפטפט כנגדו ואומר ומה בת בנו הבאה מכח בנו תירשנו בתו הבאה מכחו לא כל שכן,קרא עליו את המקרא הזה (בראשית לו, כ) אלה בני שעיר החורי יושבי הארץ לוטן ושובל וצבעון וענה וכתיב (בראשית לו, כד) אלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה אלא מלמד שבא צבעון על אמו והוליד ענה,ודלמא תרי ענה הוו אמר רבה אמינא מלתא דלא אמרה שבור מלכא ומנו שמואל איכא דאמרי אמר רב פפא אמינא מלתא דלא אמרה שבור מלכא ומנו רבה אמר קרא (בראשית לו, כד) הוא ענה הוא ענה דמעיקרא,אמר ליה רבי בכך אתה פוטרני אמר לו שוטה''. None | 115b. The Gemara asks: How so, i.e., how is the investigation performed when he has no offspring at all? The Gemara answers: The family lineage that determines the inheritance is successively examined up to Reuben, son of Jacob, i.e., the heirs are determined by investigating the family genealogy, and that investigation can extend all the way to Reuben, son of our forefather Jacob. The Gemara asks: And let it say: Until Jacob himself, rather than until Reuben, since if none of Reuven’s descendants survive, one would have to examine Jacob’s descendants. Abaye said in reply: It is learned as a tradition that a tribe will not be eliminated entirely, and some descendants will always remain.,§ Rav Huna says that Rav says: With regard to anyone who says that a daughter of the deceased should inherit the estate of her father along with the daughter of the son of the deceased, even if he is a prince of the Jewish people, one should not listen to him, as this is nothing other than an act of the Sadducees, and runs counter to the ruling of the mishna that the descendants of a son inherit before a daughter. As it is taught in a baraita in Megillat Ta’anit, which describes various minor holidays on which it is forbidden to fast or eulogize: On the twenty-fourth of Tevet, we returned to our law, i.e., the halakha was reestablished in accordance with the opinion of the Sages after having been dictated by the Sadducees. As the Sadducees would say: A daughter should inherit the estate of her father along with the daughter of the son of the deceased.,The baraita continues: Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai joined them to discuss their ruling, and said to them: Imbeciles, from where do you derive this ruling? And there was no person that answered him anything, except for one old man who was chattering at him and saying that it is an a fortiori inference: And just as a daughter of the deceased’s son, who comes to claim her inheritance from her grandfather by virtue of his son, inherits her grandfather’s property, so too, with regard to the deceased’s own daughter, who comes to inherit by virtue of the deceased, all the more so is it not clear that she should inherit his property?,Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai recited this verse about him: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah” (Genesis 36:20), and it is written: “And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah” (Genesis 36:24). The first verse portrays Zibeon and Anah as brothers, while the second states that they are father and son. Rather, this teaches that Zibeon engaged in sexual intercourse with his mother and begot Anah, so that he was both Anah’s father and his brother. From the fact that the first verse equates Zibeon and Anah by referring to both of them as Seir’s sons despite Anah being a grandson of Seir, it is clear that grandchildren are equal to children, contrary to the Sadducees’ assertion.,The Gemara interrupts the recounting of the baraita and questions Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai’s inference: But perhaps there were two people named Anah, so that one Anah was Zibeon’s son, and the other his brother? Rabba said: I will state a matter that even King Shapur did not state. And who is this King Shapur? This cannot be a reference to Shapur, king of Persia; rather, it must be a moniker for someone else. He is Shmuel, whose legal rulings were accepted by the public like the edicts of a king by his subjects. Some state a different version, that it was Rav Pappa who said: I will state a matter that even King Shapur did not state. And who is this King Shapur? He is Rabba. The verse goes on to state: “This is Anah” (Genesis 36:24), indicating that he is the same Anah mentioned initially, earlier in the verse. Accordingly, there was only one Anah, who was both Zibeon’s brother and Zibeon’s son.,The baraita continues: The Sadducee said to Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai: My teacher, you dismiss me with this retort? I agree that the son of a son precedes a daughter, as the verse you quoted suggests; I am asserting that a daughter inherits together with the daughter of a son, and the verse you quoted has no bearing on that claim. Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai said to him: Imbecile,''. None |
|
10. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Sigal (2007) 54; Taylor (2012) 171
| 65a. And this is as we learned in a mishna (Shekalim 13b): Petaḥya was responsible for the nests of birds, i.e., the doves or pigeons brought by a zav, a zava, a woman after childbirth, and a leper. These individuals would place the appropriate sum of money into the horn designated for this purpose, and each day Petaḥya oversaw the purchase of birds from that money and their sacrifice in the proper manner. This Sage is Mordekhai; and why was he called Petaḥya, which resembles the word for opening petaḥ? The reason is that he would open, i.e., elucidate, difficult topics and interpret them to the people, and because he knew all seventy languages known in that region at the time.,The Gemara asks: What was unique about Petaḥya? All of the members of the Sanhedrin also know all seventy languages. As Rabbi Yoḥa says: They place on the Great Sanhedrin only men of wisdom, and of pleasant appearance, and of high stature, and of suitable age so that they will be respected. And they must also be masters of sorcery, i.e., they know the nature of sorcery, so that they can judge sorcerers, and they must know all seventy languages in order that the Sanhedrin will not need to hear testimony from the mouth of a translator in a case where a witness speaks a different language.,The Gemara answers: Rather, Petaḥya was unique as he not only knew all seventy languages, but also had the ability to combine various languages and interpret them. This is the meaning of that which is written with regard to Mordekhai: “Bilshan” (Nehemiah 7:7). Bilshan is interpreted as another name for Mordekhai, as he would combine balil languages lashon.,How would they perform the rite of the harvest of the omer? Emissaries of the court would emerge on the eve of the festival of Passover and fashion the stalks of barley into sheaves while the stalks were still attached to the ground, so that it would be convenient to reap them. The residents of all the towns adjacent to the site of the harvest would assemble there, so that it would be harvested with great fanfare.,Once it grew dark, the court emissary says to those assembled: Did the sun set? The assembly says in response: Yes. The emissary repeats: Did the sun set? They again say: Yes. The court emissary next says to those assembled: Shall I reap the sheaves with this sickle? The assembly says in response: Yes. The emissary repeats: With this sickle? The assembly says: Yes. The court emissary then says to those assembled: Shall I place the gathered sheaves in this basket? The assembly says in response: Yes. The emissary repeats: In this basket? The assembly says: Yes.,If the sixteenth of Nisan occurs on Shabbat, the court emissary says to the assembled: Shall I cut the sheaves on this Shabbat? The assembly says in response: Yes. The emissary repeats: On this Shabbat? The assembly says: Yes. The court emissary says to those assembled: Shall I cut the sheaves? And they say to him in response: Cut. The emissary repeats: Shall I cut the sheaves? And they say to him: Cut.,The emissary asks three times with regard to each and every matter, and the assembly says to him: Yes, yes, yes. The mishna asks: Why do I need those involved to publicize each stage of the rite to that extent? The mishna answers: It is due to the Boethusians, as they deny the validity of the Oral Law and would say: There is no harvest of the omer at the conclusion of the first Festival day of Passover unless it occurs at the conclusion of Shabbat. The publicity was to underscore that the sixteenth of Nisan was the proper time for the omer harvest.,The Sages taught in a baraita: These are the days on which fasting is prohibited, and on some of them eulogizing is prohibited as well: From the New Moon of Nisan until the eighth of the month, the proper sacrifice of the daily offering was established, and therefore it was decreed not to eulogize on these dates. And furthermore, from the eighth of Nisan until the end of the festival of Passover, the correct date for the festival of Shavuot was restored, and it was similarly decreed not to eulogize during this period.,The Gemara discusses the baraita: From the New Moon of Nisan until the eighth of the month the proper sacrifice of the daily offering was established, and therefore it was decreed not to eulogize on these dates. The Gemara explains that the Sadducees would say: An individual may donate and bring the daily offering, in opposition to the accepted tradition that the daily offering must be brought from communal funds. What verse did the Sadducees expound? “The one lamb shall you offer ta’aseh in the morning, and the other lamb shall you offer in the afternoon” (Numbers 28:4). Since the verse is in the singular form, the Sadducees maintained that even an individual may donate the daily offering.,The Gemara asks: What did the Sages reply to refute the argument of the Sadducees? They cited the verse: “Command the children of Israel, and say to them: My food that is presented to Me for offerings made by fire, of a pleasing aroma unto Me, you shall observe tishmeru to offer to Me in its due season” (Numbers 28:2). The term: “You shall observe” is in the plural form, which indicates that all of the daily offerings should come from collection of the Temple treasury chamber. Since during that period, between the New Moon of Nisan and the eighth of Nisan, the Sages overruled the Sadducees, it was established as a period of rejoicing, and it was prohibited to eulogize on those dates.,The Gemara discusses the next period listed in the baraita: From the eighth of Nisan until the end of the festival of Passover, the correct date for the festival of Shavuot was restored, and it was similarly decreed not to eulogize during this period. As the Boethusians would say that the festival of Shavuot always occurs after Shabbat, on a Sunday. Their reasoning was that the verse states, with regard to the omer offering and the festival of Shavuot that follows seven weeks later: “And you shall count for you from the morrow after the day of rest hashabbat, from the day that you brought the sheaf omer of the waving; seven weeks shall there be complete” (Leviticus 23:15). Disregarding the oral tradition, the Boethusians interpreted the phrase “from the morrow after the day of rest hashabbat” literally, as referring to Shabbat, not the Festival day.,At the time, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai joined the discussion with the Boethusians and said to them: Fools! From where have you derived this? And there was no man who answered him, except for one elderly man who was prattling mefatpet at him, and he said: Moses, our teacher, was a lover of the Jewish people and he knew that Shavuot is only one day. Therefore, he arose and established it after Shabbat, in order that the Jewish people would enjoy themselves for two days. Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai recited this verse in response to that old man: “It is eleven days’ journey from Horeb to Kadesh Barnea by the way of Mount Seir” (Deuteronomy 1:2).''. None |
|
11. None, None, nan (6th cent. CE - 8th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians • Boethusians (Baytosim)
Found in books: Sigal (2007) 48; Taylor (2012) 178
|
12. None, None, nan (6th cent. CE - 8th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Boethusians
Found in books: Piotrkowski (2019) 345; Sigal (2007) 48
|
