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



8008
Mishnah, Gittin, 1.5


כָּל גֵּט שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו עֵד כּוּתִי, פָּסוּל, חוּץ מִגִּטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים. מַעֲשֶׂה, שֶׁהֵבִיאוּ לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לִכְפַר עוֹתְנַאי גֵּט אִשָּׁה וְהָיוּ עֵדָיו עֵדֵי כוּתִים, וְהִכְשִׁיר. כָּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת הָעוֹלִים בְּעַרְכָּאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחוֹתְמֵיהֶם גּוֹיִם, כְּשֵׁרִים, חוּץ מִגִּטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אַף אֵלּוּ כְשֵׁרִין, לֹא הֻזְכְּרוּ אֶלָּא בִזְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ בְהֶדְיוֹט:Any document which has upon it the signature of a Samaritan is invalid, except for bills of divorce or a writ of emancipation. It happened that a bill of divorce was once brought before Rabban Gamaliel at Kefar Otnai and its witnesses were Samaritan, and he declared it valid. All documents which are accepted in the courts of non-Jew, even if those who signed on the documents are non-Jews, are valid except bills of divorce and of writs of emancipation. Rabbi Shimon says: these also are valid; they were only pronounced [to be invalid] when done by ordinary persons.


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

16 results
1. Mishnah, Avodah Zarah, 1.1, 1.5-1.6, 1.8, 2.4, 2.7, 3.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.1. On the three days preceding the festivals of idolaters, it is forbidden to conduct business with them, to lend articles to them or borrow from them, to lend or borrow any money from them, to repay a debt, or receive repayment from them. Rabbi Judah says: we should receive repayment from them, as this can only depress them; But they [the Rabbis] said to him: even though it is depressing at the time, they are glad of it subsequently." 1.5. The following things are forbidden to be sold to idolaters: iztroblin, bnoth-shuah with their stems, frankincense, and a white rooster. Rabbi Judah says: it is permitted to sell a white rooster to an idolater among other roosters; but if it be by itself, one should clip its spur and then sell it to him, because a defective [animal] is not sacrificed to an idol. As for other things, if they are not specified their sale is permitted, but if specified it is forbidden. Rabbi Meir says: also a “good-palm”, hazab and niklivas are forbidden to be sold to idolaters." 1.6. In a place where it is the custom to sell small domesticated animals to non-Jews, such sale is permitted; but where the custom is not to sell, such sale is not permitted. In no place however is it permitted to sell large animals, calves or foals, whether whole or maimed. Rabbi Judah permits in the case of a maimed one. And Ben Bateira permits in the case of a horse." 1.8. One should not make jewelry for an idol [such as] necklaces, ear-rings, or finger-rings. Rabbi Eliezer says, for payment it is permitted. One should not sell to idolaters a thing which is attached to the soil, but when cut down it may be sold. R. Judah says, one may sell it on condition that it be cut down. One should not let houses to them in the land of Israel; and it is not necessary to mention fields. In Syria houses may be let to them, but not fields. Outside of the land of Israel, houses may be sold and fields let to them, these are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: in the land of Israel, one may let to them houses but not fields; In Syria, we may sell them houses and let fields; Outside of the land of Israel, both may be sold." 2.4. Skin-bottles or flasks of non-Jews in which wine of a Jew is kept are forbidden and the prohibition extends to any benefit that may be derived from them, this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say that the prohibition does not extend to deriving benefit. Grape seeds and grape-skins of non-Jews are forbidden, the prohibition extending to any benefit that may be derived from them, this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, when fresh they are forbidden but when dry they are permitted. Fish brine and Bithynian cheese of the non-Jews are forbidden, the prohibition extending to any benefit that may be derived from them, this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say that the prohibition does not extend to deriving benefit." 2.7. The following are permitted to be eaten [by an israelite]:milk which a non-Jew milked with a Jew watching him; honey, grape-clusters even though these secrete moisture the law which renders food susceptible to defilement by a liquid does not apply to them preserves into which they are not accustomed to put wine or vinegar, pickled herring which has not been minced, brine containing fish, a leaf of asafoetida, and rolled olive-cakes. Rabbi Yose says: those olives having pits ready to drop out are prohibited. Locusts which come out of [a shopkeeper’s] basket are prohibited, but if from storage they are permitted. The same rule applies to terumah." 3.1. All images are prohibited because they are worshipped once a year, according to the opinion of Rabbi Meir; But the Sages say: [an image] is not prohibited except one that has a staff or bird or orb in its hand. Rabban Shimon b. Gamaliel says: any [image] which has anything in its hand [is prohibited]."
2. Mishnah, Bava Batra, 10.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

10.8. If a man lent his fellow money by using a document, he may recover the debt from mortgaged property. But if he had lent only before witnesses (and not through a document), he may recover the debt only from unmortgaged property. If the [creditor] brought forth [a loan document] upon which appeared his (the debtor’s) signature as evidence that he was indebted to him, the creditor may recover the debt only from unmortgaged property. If a man signed as a guarantor after the signatures of witnesses, the creditor may recover the debt only from [the guarantor’s] unmortgaged property. Such a case came before Rabbi Yishmael and he said, “He may recover only from unmortgaged property”. Ben Nanos said to him: “He may recover the debt neither from mortgaged nor unmortgaged property.” He said to him: “Why?” He answered, “If a man seized a debtor by the throat in the street and his fellow found him and said ‘Leave him alone (and I will pay’, he is not liable, since not through trust in him did the creditor lend the debtor money.” Rather which type of guarantor is liable? [If a man said], “Lend him money and I will pay thee”, he is liable, for he lent him the money through his trust in the guarantor. And Rabbi Yishmael said, “He who wants to be wise let him occupy himself with cases dealing with monetary matters, for there is no greater branch of Torah than this; for they are like a welling fountain; and he who wishes to occupy himself with laws concerning monetary matters, let him serve [as a pupil] of Shimon ben Nanos."
3. Mishnah, Bava Metzia, 8.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

8.8. If one rented a house to his fellow by the year and the year was made a leap year, the extra month goes to the tet. If he rented it by the month and the year was made a leap year, the extra month goes to the owner. It once happened in Tzippori that a person leased a bath-house from his fellow at “twelve golden dinars a year, one dinar per month”, and [when the year became a leap year] the case came before Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel and Rabbi Yose, and they said: “Let them share the extra month.”"
4. Mishnah, Bekhorot, 4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

4.4. If one who is not an expert sees a first born and it was slaughtered by his instructions, in such a case it shall be buried and he shall make reparation from his own pocket. If a [non-expert] judge gave a judgment and declared innocent a person who was really liable or made liable a person who was really innocent, declared unclean a thing which was clean or declared clean a thing which was really unclean, his decision stands but he has to make reparation from his own pocket. If the judge was an expert [sanctioned by the] court, he is exempt from making reparation. It happened once that a cow's womb was removed and Rabbi Tarfon gave it [the cow] to the dogs to eat. The matter came before the sages at Yavneh and they permitted the animal. Todos the physician said: no cow or pig leaves Alexandria of Egypt before its womb is removed in order that it may not breed. Rabbi Tarfon said: “There goes your donkey, Tarfon.” Rabbi Akiva said to him: you are exempt, for you are an expert and whoever is an expert sanctioned by the court is exempt from reparation."
5. Mishnah, Gittin, 2.5, 9.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.5. All are qualified to write a get, even a deaf-mute, an imbecile and a minor. A woman may write her own get and a man his own receipt [for the ketubah], since the document is upheld only by its signatures. All are qualified to bring a get except a deaf-mute, an imbecile, a minor, a blind person and a non-Jew." 9.8. A get which was written in Hebrew and whose signatures are in Greek, or was written in Greek and whose signatures are in Hebrew, or which has one Hebrew signature and one Greek signature, or which was written by a scribe and signed by one witness, is valid. [If a man signs], “So-and-so, witness,” it is valid. [If he signs,] “Son of so-and-so, witness, it is valid. [If he signs,] “So-and-so son of so-and-so” and he didn’t write “witness”, it is valid. If he wrote his own family name and hers, the get is valid. And this is how the scrupulous in Jerusalem would do. A get given imposed by court: in the case of a Jewish court is valid, and in the case of a Gentile court is invalid. And with regard to Gentiles, if they beat him and say to him, “Do what the Israelites say to you,” (and it is valid)."
6. Mishnah, Kelim, 5.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.4. An oven that was heated from its outside, or one that was heated without the owner's knowledge, or one that was heated while still in the craftsman's house is susceptible to impurity. It once happened that a fire broke out among the ovens of Kefar Signah, and when the case was brought up at Yavneh Rabban Gamaliel ruled that they were unclean."
7. Mishnah, Nazir, 5.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.4. If one vowed to be a nazirite and went to bring his animal [for the sacrifice] and found that it had been stolen: If he had taken the nazirite vow before his animal was stolen, he is [still] a nazirite. But if he had taken the nazirite vow after his animal was stolen, he is not a nazirite. It was this mistake that Nahum the Mede made. When nazirites arrived [in Jerusalem] from the Diaspora and found the Temple destroyed, Nahum the Mede said to them, “Had you known that the Temple would be destroyed, would you have become nazirites?” They answered, no, and Nahum the Mede released them [from their vow]. When the matter came before the sages they said to him: whoever vowed a nazirite vow before the destruction of the Temple is a nazirite, but if after the destruction of the temple, he is not a nazirite."
8. Mishnah, Nedarim, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.5. They release a vow by reference to a wife’s kethubah. And it once happened that a man vowed not to benefit from his wife and her ketubah amounted to four hundred denarii. He went before Rabbi Akiva, who ordered him to pay her the ketubah [in full]. He said to him, “Rabbi! My father left eight hundred denarii, of which my brother took four hundred and I took four hundred. Isn’t it enough that she should receive two hundred and I two hundred?” Rabbi Akiva replied: even if you have to sell the hair of your head you must pay her her ketubah. He said to him, “Had I known that it is so, I would not have vowed.” And Rabbi Akiva released his vow."
9. Mishnah, Peah, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

4.6. A non-Jew who harvested his field and then converted, he is exempt from [leaving] gleanings, the forgotten sheaf and peah. Rabbi Judah makes him liable to leave the forgotten sheaf, since he becomes liable for the forgotten sheaf at the time of their binding."
10. Mishnah, Taanit, 2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.5. It happened in the days of Rabbi Halafta and Rabbi Hanina ben Tradyon that a man passed before the ark [as shaliah tzibbur] and completed the entire benediction and they did not respond, “amen.” [The hazzan called out]: Sound a tekiah, priests, sound a tekiah. [The shaliah tzibbur continued]: He who answered Abraham on Mt. Moriah, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Then [the hazzan called out]: Sound a teru'ah, sons of Aaron, sound a teru'ah. [The shaliah tzibbur continued]: He who answered our fathers at the Sea of Reeds, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. And when the matter came up before the sages, they said: they only practiced in this way at the eastern gates on the Temple Mount."
11. Mishnah, Yevamot, 8.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

8.3. An Ammonite and a Moabite are forbidden [to enter into the congregation of the Lord] and their prohibition is for ever. However, their women are permitted at once. An Egyptian and an Edomite are forbidden only until the third generation, whether they are males or females. Rabbi Shimon permits their women immediately. Said Rabbi Shimon: This is a kal vehomer: if where the males are forbidden for all time the females are permitted immediately, where the males are forbidden only until the third generation how much more should the females be permitted immediately. They said to him: If this is a halakhah, we shall accept it; but if it is only a logical reference, there is a refutation. He replied: This is not so, I am in fact saying a halakhah. Mamzerim and nethinim are forbidden, and their prohibition is forever, whether they be males or females."
12. Mishnah, Zevahim, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

4.5. The sacrifices of non-Jews: one is not liable on their account for piggul, remt, or defilement, and if [a priest] slaughters them outside [the Temple], he is not liable, the words of Rabbi Meir. But Rabbi Yose declares him liable. The things for which one is not liable on account of piggul, one is liable on account of remt and defilement except blood. Rabbi Shimon declares one liable for anything which is normally eaten, but for wood, frankincense and incense, one is not liable for [transgressions involving] defilement."
13. Mishnah, Shekalim, 7.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

7.6. Rabbi Shimon said: there were seven things that the court decree and that was one of them. [The others were the following:]A non-Jew who sent a burnt-offering from overseas and he sent with it its libation-offerings, they are offered out of his own; But if [he did] not [send its libation-offerings], they should be offered out of public funds. So too [in the case of] a convert who had died and left sacrifices, if he had also left its libation-offerings they are offered out of his own; But if not, they should be offered out of public funds. It was also a condition laid down by the court in the case of a high priest who had died that his minhah should be offered out of public funds. Rabbi Judah says: [it was offered out] of the property of his heirs, And had to be offered of the whole [tenth]."
14. Tosefta, Gittin, 1.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

15. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

16. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

10b. דאי לאו דכותי חבר הוה לא מחתים ליה מקמיה אי הכי אפילו שאר שטרות נמי,אלא אמרינן רווחא שבק למאן דקשיש מיניה הכא נמי רווחא שבק למאן דקשיש מיניה,א"ר פפא זאת אומרת עדי הגט אין חותמין זה בלא זה,מאי טעמא אמר רב אשי גזירה משום כולכם,גופא אמר רבי אלעזר לא הכשירו בו אלא עד אחד כותי בלבד מאי קמ"ל תנינא כל גט שיש עליו עד כותי פסול כו',אי ממתניתין הוה אמינא אפי' תרי נמי והאי דקתני חד משום דבשטרות אפי' חד נמי לא קמ"ל,ותרי לא והא קתני מעשה והביאו לפני רבן גמליאל לכפר עותנאי גט אשה והיו עדיו עדי כותים והכשיר אמר אביי תני עדו,רבא אמר לעולם תרי ורבן גמליאל מיפלג פליג וחסורי מיחסרא והכי קתני ורבן גמליאל מכשיר בשנים ומעשה נמי שהביאו לפני רבן גמליאל לכפר עותנאי גט אשה והיו עדיו עדי כותים והכשיר:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כל השטרות העולים בערכאות של עובדי כוכבים אע"פ שחותמיהם עובדי כוכבים כשירים חוץ מגיטי נשים ושחרורי עבדים ר"ש אומר אף אלו כשירין לא הוזכרו אלא בזמן שנעשו בהדיוט:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big קא פסיק ותני לא שנא מכר ל"ש מתנה,בשלמא מכר מכי יהיב זוזי קמייהו הוא דקנה ושטרא ראיה בעלמא הוא דאי לא יהיב זוזי קמייהו לא הוו מרעי נפשייהו וכתבין ליה שטרא,אלא מתנה במאי קא קני לאו בהאי שטרא והאי שטרא חספא בעלמא הוא אמר שמואל דינא דמלכותא דינא,ואב"א תני חוץ מכגיטי נשים:,רבי שמעון אומר אף אלו כשירין וכו': והא לאו בני כריתות נינהו,אמר רבי זירא ירד ר' שמעון לשיטתו של רבי אלעזר דאמר עדי מסירה כרתי,והאמר ר' אבא מודה ר' אלעזר במזויף מתוכו שפסול הכא במאי עסקינן 10b. bas, if notfor the fact bthat the Samaritan was one devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot [ iḥaver /i],the Jew would bnothave allowed bhimto bsignthe document bbefore him.Therefore, one may rely on this Samaritan in this particular case. The Gemara asks: bIf so,that the mishna is referring to that case, then beven other documentsshould be valid bas well,if a Jew signed after the Samaritan., bRather,this is not the case with regard to other documents, as bwe saythat the fact that the Jew signed last does not prove that this Samaritan was a iḥaver /i, as perhaps in signing last bhe was leaving spaceabove his signature bfor one who was older than he isin deference to the elder, and instead, a Samaritan came and signed the document. The Gemara asks: bHere too,in the case of a bill of divorce, perhaps he bwas leaving spaceabove his signature bfor one who was his elder.Why, then, are bills of divorce and bills of manumission valid while other documents are not?, bRav Pappa says: That is to say,in explanation of the difference between bills of divorce and manumission and other documents, that bthe witnesses of a bill of divorceand a bill of manumission bmay not sign one without the other;rather, each witness signs in the presence of the other. A Jew would be aware that a Samaritan was signing with him, and he would not sign unless he knew that the Samaritan was a valid witness. However, with regard to other documents, witnesses are not required to sign such documents in each other’s presence. Therefore, the signature of the Jew indicates nothing about the fitness of the Samaritan witness.,The Gemara asks: bWhat is the reasonthat the witnesses must sign a bill of divorce and a bill of manumission together? bRav Ashi says:It is a rabbinic bdecreeissued bdue toa case where the husband says: bAll of youare witnesses on this bill of divorce. In that case, if any one of them fails to sign the bill of divorce, it is invalid. Therefore, the Sages decreed that the witnesses must sign a bill of divorce together in all cases.,§ Since the Gemara mentioned the ihalakhastated by Rabbi Elazar, it analyzes bthematter bitself. Rabbi Elazar says: They deemeda bill of divorce bvalid onlywhen bjust one witnessis ba Samaritan.The Gemara asks: bWhat is he teaching usby this statement? bWealready blearnedin the mishna: bAny document that has a Samaritan witness on it is invalidexcept for bills of divorce and bills of manumission. This indicates that those are valid only if they have the signature of one Samaritan witness, not two.,The Gemara responds: bIfit is learned bfrom the mishnaalone bI would have saidthat beven twoSamaritan witnesses are balsovalid for a bill of divorce or a bill of manumission. bAndthe fact bthatthe mishna bteaches onewitness is bbecauseit wants to emphasize bthat forother bdocuments even oneSamaritan witness bis also notvalid. Therefore, Rabbi Eliezer bteaches usthat in the case of bills of divorce only one Samaritan witness is valid, but if both witnesses are Samaritans the bill of divorce is not valid.,The Gemara asks: bAndare btwoSamaritan witnesses bnotaccepted on a bill of divorce? bButthe mishna bteaches: An incidentoccurred in bwhich they brought a bill of divorce before Rabban Gamliel in the village of Otnai, and its witnesses were Samaritan witnesses, and he deemed it valid. Abaye saidthat one should bteachthe mishna so that it does not read: Its witnesses, but rather: bIts witness,i.e., Rabban Gamliel deemed valid a bill of divorce that had the signature of one Samaritan witness, as even he would invalidate a bill of divorce that included the signatures of two Samaritans., bRava said: Actually,you do not need to say that the case was concerning one Samaritan witness, as it indeed is referring to btwoSamaritans witnesses, band Rabban Gamliel disagreeswith the opinion of the first itanna /i. bAndthe mishna bis incomplete and thisis what bit is teaching: And Rabban Gamliel deems valida bill of divorce bthatcontains the signatures of btwoSamaritans, band an incidentoccurred in bwhich they brought a bill of divorce before Rabban Gamliel in the village of Otnai, and its witnesses were Samaritan witnesses, and he deemed it valid. /b, strongMISHNA: /strong With regard to ball documents produced in gentile courts, even though their signaturesare those of bgentilesthey are all bvalid, except for bills of divorce andbills bof manumission. Rabbi Shimon says: Even these are valid,as these two types of documents are bmentioned only when they are prepared by a common person,not in court., strongGEMARA: /strong With regard to the ruling of the mishna that all documents written in gentile courts are valid, the Gemara comments: The itanna bcategorically teachesa general ihalakhain the mishna, and it bis no differentif it is a document concerning ba saleand it bis no differentif it is a document concerning ba gift,the document is valid in both cases.,The Gemara asks: bGranted,in the case of ba salethis is reasonable, as bfrom whenthe buyer bgave moneyto the seller in the presence of the gentile judges bhe has acquiredthe property, since he has performed an act of acquisition. bAnd the document is merely a prooffor the acquisition. It must be that he already acquired the property in question, bas if he had not given money in their presencethe court bwould not act to its own detriment and write a document for him,as the document detailing the sale would not be accurate, and writing such a document would reflect poorly on them. Therefore, the document clearly serves as proof that the acquisition was performed in the correct manner., bHowever,with regard to ba gift, by whatmeans does the one who receives the gift bacquireit from the giver? Is it bnot via this document? Andyet bthis document is merely a shard,as a document written by gentiles is not considered a legal document according to ihalakha /i. bShmuel said: The law of the kingdom is the law,i.e., Jews must obey the laws of the state in which they live. Consequently, every form of property transfer accepted by local law is valid according to ihalakhaas well., bAnd if you wish, saythat one should emend the text of the mishna, and bteach:They are all valid bexcept fordocuments that are blike bills of divorce.In other words, the distinction is between different types of documents: Documents that are meant to serve only as proof are valid even if they were produced in gentile courts, whereas documents that effect a legal act, such as bills of divorce, are invalid if they were written in a gentile court.,§ The mishna taught that bRabbi Shimon says: Even thesebills of divorce and bills of manumission bare validif they were written in a gentile court and were signed by gentiles. The Gemara asks: How can Rabbi Shimon rule in this manner? bButgentiles are not fit for this role, as bthey are not subject tothe ihalakhotconcerning scrolls of bseverance.Since the ihalakhotof marriage and divorce in the Torah are stated exclusively with regard to Jews, gentiles cannot serve in any capacity in cases of this kind., bRabbi Zeira says: Rabbi Shimon follows the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, who saysthat bthe witnesses of the transmissionof the bill of divorce beffectthe divorce. In other words, the signing of the bill of divorce is not essential to its effectiveness. Rather, the transfer of the bill of divorce completes the act of divorce, and therefore no attention is paid to who the signatories were.,The Gemara raises a difficulty: bBut doesn’t Rabbi Abba saythat although he considers a bill of divorce valid even without the signature of witnesses, bRabbi Elazar concedes with regard toa document bwhose falsification is inherent in it thatit is binvaliddespite the fact that it was properly transferred. In other words, notwithstanding the ihalakhathat the signatures on a bill of divorce are unnecessary, a document that includes invalid signatures is thereby invalidated. The reason is that there is a concern that people will rely upon these witnesses. The Gemara answers: bWith what are we dealing here? /b


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
abandoned child Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 154
abraham (abram) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
agents Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 226
akiva, rabbi Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 142
animals Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 226
animals food Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
aqiba Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 76, 150, 226
barber Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 154
bath-house Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 154
ben bathyra Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 150
blind person Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 226
border-areas/frontier Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
bread Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 154
buying and/or selling Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 154
canaanite slaves Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 76, 154
capercotani (legio) Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
chancey, mark Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 30, 132, 153
cheese Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 154
children Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 226
children of noah Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
city/town Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 76
cohen, s.j.d. Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 226
corpse(-uncleanness) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
cotton, hannah Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 142
court Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 226
damages (injury) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 76, 154
deaf-mute Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 226
deposit Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
divorce Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 226
divorce document Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 76, 226
dog-(food) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
el lajjun (la leyun) Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
eleazar b. yosi Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 76
eliezer Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55
eliezer b. jacob Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 150
elitsur, yoel Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
emancipation-(writs) Porton, Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta (1988) 55, 76, 226
exaloth (iksal) Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
flavius josephus, t. Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
galilee Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
gentile courts Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
ginae (jenin) Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
hands Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
jacob Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
jewish law Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
jezreel valley Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
kefar othnay (legio) Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
latin Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
maximianopolis Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
r. akiva Katzoff, Law in the Documents of the Judaean Desert (2005) 224
rabban gamaliel Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
rabban simon ben gamaliel Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
rabbis Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
rekem Katzoff, Law in the Documents of the Judaean Desert (2005) 224
samaria Price, Finkelberg and Shahar, Rome: An Empire of Many Nations: New Perspectives on Ethnic Diversity and Cultural Identity (2021) 279
shimon' Katzoff, Law in the Documents of the Judaean Desert (2005) 224
widow Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
γνῶσις Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210
ἀρχή Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 210