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



8006
Mishnah, Eduyot, 1.4-1.6


וְלָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין אֶת דִּבְרֵי שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל לְבַטָּלָה, לְלַמֵּד לַדּוֹרוֹת הַבָּאִים שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אָדָם עוֹמֵד עַל דְּבָרָיו, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֲבוֹת הָעוֹלָם לֹא עָמְדוּ עַל דִּבְרֵיהֶם:And why do they record the opinions of Shammai and Hillel for naught? To teach the following generations that a man should not [always] persist in his opinion, for behold, the fathers of the world did not persist in their opinion.


וְלָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד בֵּין הַמְרֻבִּין, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין הֲלָכָה אֶלָּא כְדִבְרֵי הַמְרֻבִּין. שֶׁאִם יִרְאֶה בֵית דִּין אֶת דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד וְיִסְמֹךְ עָלָיו, שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דִּבְרֵי בֵית דִּין חֲבֵרוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן. הָיָה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה אֲבָל לֹא בְמִנְיָן, בְּמִנְיָן אֲבָל לֹא בְחָכְמָה, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דְּבָרָיו, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן:And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number.


אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אִם כֵּן לָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד בֵּין הַמְרֻבִּין לְבַטָּלָה. שֶׁאִם יֹאמַר הָאָדָם כָּךְ אֲנִי מְקֻבָּל, יֵאָמֵר לוֹ, כְּדִבְרֵי אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שָׁמָעְתָּ:Rabbi Judah said: “If so, why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many to set it aside? So that if a man shall say, ‘Thus have I received the tradition’, it may be said to him, ‘According to the [refuted] opinion of that individual did you hear it.’”


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

8 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Amos, 8.11-8.12 (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE)

8.11. הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה וְהִשְׁלַחְתִּי רָעָב בָּאָרֶץ לֹא־רָעָב לַלֶּחֶם וְלֹא־צָמָא לַמַּיִם כִּי אִם־לִשְׁמֹעַ אֵת דִּבְרֵי יְהוָה׃ 8.12. וְנָעוּ מִיָּם עַד־יָם וּמִצָּפוֹן וְעַד־מִזְרָח יְשׁוֹטְטוּ לְבַקֵּשׁ אֶת־דְּבַר־יְהוָה וְלֹא יִמְצָאוּ׃ 8.11. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, That I will send a famine in the land, Not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, But of hearing the words of the LORD." 8.12. And they shall wander from sea to sea, And from the north even to the east; They shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, And shall not find it."
2. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 20.97, 20.102 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

20.97. 1. Now it came to pass, while Fadus was procurator of Judea, that a certain magician, whose name was Theudas, persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them, and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it; 20.102. And besides this, the sons of Judas of Galilee were now slain; I mean of that Judas who caused the people to revolt, when Cyrenius came to take an account of the estates of the Jews, as we have showed in a foregoing book. The names of those sons were James and Simon, whom Alexander commanded to be crucified.
3. Mishnah, Avot, 1.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.3. Antigonus a man of Socho received [the oral tradition] from Shimon the Righteous. He used to say: do not be like servants who serve the master in the expectation of receiving a reward, but be like servants who serve the master without the expectation of receiving a reward, and let the fear of Heaven be upon you."
4. Mishnah, Eduyot, 1.5-1.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.5. And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number." 1.6. Rabbi Judah said: “If so, why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many to set it aside? So that if a man shall say, ‘Thus have I received the tradition’, it may be said to him, ‘According to the [refuted] opinion of that individual did you hear it.’”"
5. Tosefta, Eduyot, 1.3-1.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

1.3. If a matter was asked to one Master, and he rendered it impure, he should not ask another Master. If there were two, and one prohibited and the other permitted, one rendered it pure and the other impure -- if there is another Master, we ask him. If not, we follow the stricter ruling. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha says, \"In teachings of Scripture, we follow the stricter opinion. In teachings of the Scribes, we follow the more lenient opinion.\""
6. Tosefta, Sotah, 7.11-7.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

7.11. A person might think: 'since the Academy of Shammai declares unclean that which the Academy of Hillel declares clean, one prohibits that which the other permits, how, then, can I learn Torah?' This is way Torah repeats: \"words...the words...these are the words...\" All of the words have been given by a single Shepherd, one God fashioned them, one Provider gave them, Source of all deeds, blessed be God, has spoken them. So make for yourself a heart with many rooms, and bring into it the words of the Academy of Shammai and the words of the Academy of Hillel, the words of who declare unclean and those that declare clean. "
7. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

88b. בן סורר ומורה שרצו אביו ואמו למחול לו מוחלין לו,זקן ממרא שרצו בית דינו למחול לו מוחלין לו וכשבאתי אצל חבירי שבדרום על שנים הודו לי על זקן ממרא לא הודו לי כדי שלא ירבו מחלוקת בישראל תיובתא,תניא אמר רבי יוסי מתחילה לא היו מרבין מחלוקת בישראל אלא בית דין של שבעים ואחד יושבין בלשכת הגזית ושני בתי דינין של עשרים ושלשה אחד יושב על פתח הר הבית ואחד יושב על פתח העזרה ושאר בתי דינין של עשרים ושלשה יושבין בכל עיירות ישראל,הוצרך הדבר לשאול שואלין מבית דין שבעירן אם שמעו אמרו להן ואם לאו באין לזה שסמוך לעירן אם שמעו אמרו להם ואם לאו באין לזה שעל פתח הר הבית אם שמעו אמרו להם ואם לאו באין לזה שעל פתח העזרה,ואומר כך דרשתי וכך דרשו חבירי כך למדתי וכך למדו חבירי אם שמעו אמרו להם ואם לאו אלו ואלו באין ללשכת הגזית ששם יושבין מתמיד של שחר עד תמיד של בין הערבים,ובשבתות ובימים טובים יושבין בחיל נשאלה שאלה בפניהם אם שמעו אמרו להם ואם לאו עומדין למנין רבו המטמאים טמאו רבו המטהרין טהרו,משרבו תלמידי שמאי והלל שלא שמשו כל צרכן רבו מחלוקת בישראל ונעשית תורה כשתי תורות,משם כותבין ושולחין בכל מקומות כל מי שהוא חכם ושפל ברך ודעת הבריות נוחה הימנו יהא דיין בעירו משם מעלין אותו להר הבית משם לעזרה משם ללשכת הגזית,שלחו מתם איזהו בן העולם הבא ענוותן ושפל ברך שייף עייל שייף ונפיק וגריס באורייתא תדירא ולא מחזיק טיבותא לנפשיה יהבו ביה רבנן עינייהון ברב עולא בר אבא:,חזר לעירו ושנה: ת"ר אינו חייב עד שיעשה כהוראתו או שיורה לאחרים ויעשו כהוראתו,בשלמא יורה לאחרים ויעשו כהוראתו מעיקרא לאו בר קטלא הוא והשתא בר קטלא הוא אלא שיעשה כהוראתו מעיקרא נמי בר קטלא הוא התינח היכא דאורי בחלב ודם דמעיקרא לאו בר קטלא הוא והשתא בר קטלא הוא אלא היכא דאורי בחייבי מיתות ב"ד מעיקרא נמי בר קטלא הוא,מעיקרא בעי התראה השתא לא בעי התראה,מסית דלא בעי התראה מאי איכא למימר מעיקרא אי אמר טעמא מקבלינן מיניה השתא אי אמר טעמא לא מקבלינן מיניה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big חומר בדברי סופרים מבדברי תורה האומר אין תפילין כדי לעבור על ד"ת פטור חמש טוטפות להוסיף על דברי סופרים חייב:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר ר' אלעזר אמר ר' אושעיא אינו חייב אלא על דבר שעיקרו מדברי תורה ופירושו מדברי סופרים ויש בו להוסיף ואם הוסיף גורע ואין לנו אלא תפילין אליבא דרבי יהודה,והאיכא לולב דעיקרו מדברי תורה ופירושו מדברי סופרים ויש בו להוסיף ואם הוסיף גורע,בלולב מאי סבירא לן אי סבירא לן דלולב אין צריך אגד האי לחודיה קאי והאי לחודיה קאי ואי סבירא לן דצריך אגד גרוע ועומד הוא,והאיכא ציצית דעיקרו מדברי תורה ופירושו מדברי סופרים ויש בו להוסיף ואם הוסיף גורע,בציצית מאי סבירא לן אי סבירא לן דקשר העליון לאו דאורייתא האי לחודיה קאי והאי לחודיה קאי ואי סבירא לן 88b. The second matter is that in the case of ba stubborn and rebellious son whose father and mother sought to forgive himfor his gluttonous and drunken conduct and decided not to bring him to court, btheycan bforgive him. /b,The third is that in the case of ba rebellious elder whom his court sought to forgivefor his deviation from their ruling, btheycan bforgive him. And when I came to my colleagues in the South, with regard to twoof the cases bthey agreed with me,but bwith regard to a rebellious elder they did not agree with me, so that discordwould bnot proliferate in Israel.This supports the opinion of Rabbi Elazar and is ba conclusive refutationof the opinion of Rav Kahana., bIt is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yosei said: Initially, discord would not proliferate among Israel. Rather, the court of seventy-onejudges bwould sit in the Chamber of Hewn Stone. Andthere were btwoadditional bcourtseach consisting bof twenty-threejudges; bonewould bconvene at the entrance to the Temple Mount, and onewould bconvene at the entrance to theTemple bcourtyard. And all the other courtsconsisting bof twenty-threejudges would bconvene in all citiesinhabited by the bJewish people. /b,If bthe matterwas unclear and it bwas necessary to askand clarify it, those uncertain of the ihalakhawould bask the court that is in their city. Ifthe members of the court bhearda clear halakhic ruling with regard to that matter, bthey saidit bto them, and if not, theywould bcome toa court bthat is adjacent to their city. Ifthe members of the court bhearda clear halakhic ruling with regard to that matter, bthey saidit bto them, and if not, theywould bcome to the court at the entrance to the Temple Mount. Ifthe members of the court bhearda clear halakhic ruling with regard to that matter, bthey saidit bto them, and if not, theywould bcome to the court at the entrance to theTemple bcourtyard. /b, bAndthe elder whose ruling deviated from the ruling of his colleagues bsays: Thisis what bI interpreted and thatis what bmy colleagues interpreted; thisis what bI taught and thatis what bmy colleagues taught. Ifthe members of the court bhearda clear halakhic ruling with regard to that matter, bthey saidit bto them, and if not, thesejudges band thosejudges would bcome to the Chamber of Hewn Stone, wherethe Sanhedrin would be bconvened fromthe time that bthe daily morning offeringis sacrificed buntilthe time that bthe daily afternoon offeringis sacrificed., bAnd on iShabbatotand Festivals,when court is not in session, the members of the court bwould sit at the rampart.When ba question was asked before them, ifthe members of the court bhearda clear halakhic ruling with regard to that matter, bthey would sayit bto them, and if not they would stand for a voteon the matter. If the judges bwho deemedthe item in question britually impure outnumberedthose who deemed it pure, the court bwould deemthe item bimpure.If the judges bwho deemedthe item in question britually pure outnumberedthose who deemed it impure, the court bwould deemthe item bpure. /b, bFromthe time bthat the disciples of Shammai and Hillel grew in number,and they were disciples bwho did not attendto their masters bto the requisitedegree, bdispute proliferated among the Jewish people and the Torah became like two Torahs.Two disparate systems of ihalakhadeveloped, and there was no longer a halakhic consensus with regard to every matter.,The ibaraitacontinues its discussion of the workings of the Sanhedrin: bFrom there,the Sanhedrin bwrites and dispatchesthe following statement bto all places: Anyone who is wise and humble and the minds of people are at ease with him shall be a judge in his city.If he is successful in his city, bfrom there, they promote him to thecourt at the entrance to bthe Temple Mountif there is a vacant seat on the court, and bfrom therethey promote him to the court at the entrance bto theTemple bcourtyard,and bfrom there to thecourt in the bChamber of Hewn Stone. /b,Apropos the appointment of judges, the Gemara relates that bthey sentthe following statement bfrom there,i.e., Eretz Yisrael: bWho isthe one bdestinedto receive a place in bthe World-to-Come?It is one who is bmodest and humble,who bbowsand bentersand bbowsand bexits, andwho bstudies Torah regularly, andwho bdoes not take credit for himself. The Sages cast their eyes on Rav Ulla bar Abba,as they perceived him as the embodiment of all these characteristics.,The mishna teaches: If the rebellious elder breturned to his city and he taughtin the manner that he was teaching previously, he is exempt from punishment, unless he instructs others to act on the basis of his ruling. bThe Sages taught: He is not liable unless he acts in accordance with his ruling, or he instructs others and they act in accordance with his ruling. /b,The Gemara challenges: bGranted,if bhe instructs others and they act in accordance with his rulingthere is a novel element in the fact that he is liable to be executed, as binitially,before he was deemed a rebellious elder, he is bnot liable toreceive the bdeathpenalty for instructing others to perform the transgression, band now,he is btoreceive the bdeathpenalty. bButif bhe acts in accordance with his ruling, initially,before he was deemed a rebellious elder, he is balso liable toreceive the bdeathpenalty for performing that action. The Gemara clarifies the difficulty: bThis works out wellin a case bwhere he ruled with regard toforbidden bfat and blood, as initially hewould bnothave been bliable toreceive the bdeathpenalty; rather, he would have been liable to receive ikaret /i, band now he is liable toreceive the bdeathpenalty. bButin a case bwhere he ruled with regard toa transgression for which one is bliableto receive ba court /b-imposed bdeathpenalty, binitially,he bis also liable toreceive the bdeathpenalty.,The Gemara explains: There is a novel element even in a case where he acts in accordance with his ruling, as binitially,before he is deemed a rebellious elder, bhe requires forewarningin order to be executed; bnow, he does not require forewarningin order to be executed.,The Gemara asks: If the rebellious elder’s ruling was with regard to one who binstigatesothers to engage in idol worship, bwho does not require forewarning, what is there to say?Both before and after he is deemed a rebellious elder he is executed without forewarning. The Gemara answers: bInitially,before the rebellious elder ruled that instigating others to engage in idol worship is permitted, bifafter he instigated others, he bstated a reasonwhy he thought that it is permitted, bwe accepthis explanation bfrom himand exempt him. bNow,after he issued the divergent ruling, bif he stated a reason, we do not acceptthe explanation bfrom him,since he already indicated that he holds that instigating others to engage in idol worship incitement is permitted and that is the reason that he engaged in instigation., strongMISHNA: /strong With regard to the rulings of the rebellious elder the mishna states: There is greater bstringency with regard totraditional brabbinic interpretationsof the Torah bthan with regard to matters of Torah.If bone states:There is bnomitzva to don bphylacteries,and his intention is bin order tohave others bviolate matters of Torah,he is bexemptfrom punishment as a rebellious elder. One who disputes matters written explicitly in the Torah is not considered an elder and a Torah scholar, and therefore does not assume the status of a rebellious elder. If, however, he disputed a matter based on rabbinic tradition, e.g., he stated that there should be bfive compartmentsin the phylacteries of the head, in order bto addan extra compartment btothe four established according to traditional brabbinic interpretationsof the Torah, he is bliable. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong bRabbi Elazar saysthat bRabbi Oshaya says: One is liable only forissuing a ruling with regard to ba matter whose essence,whose basic obligation, bis from matters of Torah and whose explanation is fromtraditional brabbinic interpretationsof the Torah band which includesthe possibility bto addto it, band if one addedto it, bone compromiseshis fulfillment of the mitzva and does not satisfy his obligation. bAnd we have onlythe mitzva to don bphylacteriesthat meets those criteria. bAndRabbi Oshaya’s statement is bin accordance withthe opinion bof Rabbi Yehuda,who says: A rebellious elder is liable only for a matter whose essence is from matters of Torah and whose explanation is from traditional rabbinic interpretations of the Torah.,The Gemara asks: bBut isn’t therethe mitzva of ilulav /iand the other species that one takes on the festival of iSukkot /i, bwhose essence is from matters of Torah, and whose explanation is fromtraditional brabbinic interpretationsthat establish the identity and the number of the four species enumerated in the Torah, band which includesthe possibility bto addother species to it, band if one addedto it, bone compromiseshis fulfillment of the mitzva and does not satisfy his obligation?,The Gemara rejects this possibility: That is not the case, as bwith regard tothe mitzva of ilulav /i, what do we hold? If we hold thatfundamentally ba ilulavdoes not require bindingof the species together in order to fulfill the mitzva, then adding an additional species is inconsequential, as bthesespecies with which he fulfills the mitzva bstand alone and thatadditional species bstands alone.It is as though he were holding the species of the mitzva and an additional unrelated item that does not affect fulfillment of the mitzva. bAnd if we holdthat ba ilulavrequires bindingof the four species together in order to fulfill the mitzva, fulfillment of the mitzva bis already compromisedfrom the outset. The rebellious elder is liable only when the object of the mitzva was as it should be and the addition compromised that object and disqualifies it. In this case, the object was never as it should be.,The Gemara asks: bBut isn’t therethe mitzva of britual fringes, whose essence is from matters of Torah, and whose explanation is fromtraditional brabbinic interpretationsthat establish the number of fringes enumerated in the Torah and the number of threads in each fringe, band which includesthe possibility bto addfringes or threads to it, band if one addedto it, bone compromiseshis fulfillment of the mitzva and does not satisfy his obligation?,The Gemara rejects this possibility: That is not the case, as bwith regard to ritual fringes, what do we hold? If we hold that the upper knot is notmandated bby Torah law,and one fulfills his obligation by placing the threads on the corner of the garment, bthesethreads with which he fulfills the mitzva bare independent and thatadditional thread bis independentand does not compromise fulfillment of the mitzva. The additional string is not considered as joined to the required strings. bAnd if we hold /b
8. Anon., Seder Eliyahu Zuta, 16



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
abot, date of composition Bickerman and Tropper, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (2007) 558
abtalion Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 47
alexander jannaeus Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 47
antigonus of socho Bickerman and Tropper, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (2007) 558
apologetic Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
apostle Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
christianity Sigal, The Halakhah of Jesus of Nazareth According to the Gospel of Matthew (2007) 47
gamaliel (gamliel) the elder, r. Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
greek/hellenistic historiography Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
halakhah/halakhot Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
hellenism, hellenistic Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
hermeneutic Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 216
high (chief) priest Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
hillel, school of Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
historiography Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
israel, nan Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
josephus Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
judas the galilean Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
luke Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
marriage Lorberbaum, In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism (2015) 193
messianic Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
miracles, stories Bickerman and Tropper, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (2007) 558
pharisaic-rabbinic (tradition) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
pharisaic tradition/halakha Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
pharisees, pairs Bickerman and Tropper, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (2007) 558
pharisees Bickerman and Tropper, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (2007) 558
pluralism (hillelite) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
prayer Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
progymnasmata Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 179, 216
prophecy Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
quintilian Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 216
reciting the shema Lorberbaum, In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism (2015) 193
revolt/war, under nero (great ~) Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
sabbath Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 179
sadducees Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
sages, the Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
sanctity and holiness Lorberbaum, In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism (2015) 193
shammai Lorberbaum, In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism (2015) 193
shechemites Bickerman and Tropper, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (2007) 558
shemesh, aharon Lorberbaum, In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism (2015) 193
shimon b. shetah Lorberbaum, In God's Image: Myth, Theology, and Law in Classical Judaism (2015) 193
stam Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 179, 216
sugya, give-and-take' Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 179
sugya Nikolsky and Ilan, Rabbinic Traditions Between Palestine and Babylonia (2014) 179, 216
thematization Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
theudas Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615
yavneh Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 448
zealot, zealots Tomson, Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (2019) 615