A History of the Mishnaic Law of Purities, Part 10: Parah: Literary and Historical Problems (Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity) 9781597529341, 1597529346

Citation preview

STUDIES IN JUDAISM IN LATE ANTIQUITY EDITED BY

JACOB NEUSNER

VOLUME SIX

A HISTORY OF TBE MISHNAIC LAW OF PURITIES PART TEN

A HISTORY OF THE MISHNAIC LAW OF PURITIES PART TEN

A HISTORY OF THE MISHNAIC LAW OF PURITIES BY

JACOB NEUSNER University Professor Professor of Religious Studies The Ungerleider Distinguished Scholar of Judaic Studies Brown University

PART TEN

PARAH LITERARY AND HISTORICAL PROBLEMS

Wipf&Stock PUBLISHERS Eugene, Oregon

Wipf and Stock Publishers 199 W 8th Ave, Suite 3 Eugene, OR 97401 A History of the Mishnaic Law of Purities, Part 10 Parah: Literary and Historical Problems By Neusner, Jacob Copyright©1976 by Neusner, Jacob ISBN 13: 978-1-59752-934-1 ISBN 10: 1-59752-934-6 Publication date 3/19/2007 Previously published by E. J. Brill, 1976

For

Geo Widengren

CONTENTS Preface Abbreviations and Bibliography Transliterations Introduction XVI. Mishnah-Tosefta Parah. Translation . XVII. Mishnah and Tosefta i. The Relationship between Mishnah and Tosefta ii. The Organization and Redaction of Tosefta . iii. Tosefta as Commentary to Mishnah . iv. Tosefta as a Corpus of Autonomous Materials. v. The Two Sources of Tosefta . vi. The Two Sources of Tosefta: Literary Traits . 1. Forms. 2. Attributions vii. Cumulative Summary XVIII. Forms and Formulary Patterns 1. Introduction ii. Forms 1. Ladders 2. Stories and Narratives 3. Disputes and Debates 111. Formulary Patterns. iv. The Declarative Sentence v. Stylistic Preferences of Mishnah's Chapters Vl. Exegetical Pericopae 1. Use of Attributions . 2. Simple Exegetical Form . 3. Dialectical Exegesis . 4. The Fallibility of Logic . XIX. Mishnah and Midrash Halakhah . i. Introduction ii. Sifre Numbers, Sifre Zutta, and Mishnah-Tosefta iii. Mishnah-Tosefta and Sifre Numbers, Sifre Zutta . iv. Conclusion

XI XVII XXII

1

9 77 77 77 81 83 84 88 89 89 91

93 93 93 93 93 94 98 98 102 104 104 106 107 108 110 110 110 113 117

VIII

xx.

CONTENTS

Attributions i. Attributions and their Probative Value ii. Unattributed Traditions iii. Before 70 . iv. Yavneh v. Usha . vi. After Usha XXI. The Weaving of the Law i. The Thematic Units of Parah ii. The Ash 1. The Cow 2. The Burning of the Cow . iii. The Water. Mixing the Ash and the Water 1. The Utensil 2. The Water. 3. The Mixing iv. Purity Rules 1. Purity in the Rite of Burning the Cow 2. The Uncleanness Imparted by Participating in the Rite and by Mixed Water 3. Extraneous Labor which Spoils the Rite ·of Burning the Cow 4. Extraneous Labor which Spoils Drawn Water. 5. The Purity of Utensils to be Used in the Rite . 6. Sources of Uncleanness for Those Who Participate in the Rite and for the Mixture . 7. Sources of Uncleanness for the Jar Containing Purification-Water v. The Process of Purification . 1. The Hyssop 2. The Sprinkling . 3. Connection in the Transmission of Cleanness ( and Uncleanness) . vi. The Stages of the Law . 1. Yavneh 2. Usha vii. The Problem of Analogies XXII. The Weavers of the Law i. The Role of Individuals ii. Yavneans .

118 118 119 126 126 129 134 135 135 135 135 138 144 144 145 148 149 149 153 156 157 161 163 167 167 168 169 171 172 172 175 180 186 186 187

CONTENTS

IX

iii. Ushans iv. Conclusion XXIII. Assignments, Attestations and Attributions: Reconsiderations . i. Introduction ii. Reliable Assignments iii. Probable Assignments iv. Conjectures: Assignments on the Basis of Concurrent Principles . v. Unassigned Pericopae vi. Conclusion XXIV. Parah before 70 i. The Presuppositions of the Y avnean Stratum . 11. Scriptural Foundations of Parah . 1. Standard of Purity Higher than that Applied to Holy Things . 2. Labor Spoils the Cow, etc. . iii. Other Approaches to the Rite of the Red Cow. 1. The Collections in Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha 2. The Dead Sea Library 3. Philo . 4. Josephus 5. Targumim . 6. The Christian Community in the First Century A. Hebrews B. Epistle of Barnabas 7. Samaritans . 8. Conclusion . iv. Ritual without Myth: The Meaning of the Laws of Parah .

Appendix: Corrections to Parts IV and V . Richard Sarason Brown University Index to Parts IX and X

189 195 197 197 199 201 203 204 205 206 206 207 207 208 209 209 209 210 212 212 216 216 217 218 21 9 220 232

. 235

PREFACE The laws of Parah again illustrate the simple but encompassing fact that Pharisaism proposes to construct a realm of cleanness outside of the Temple. The Written Torah, Numbers 19:1-20, takes for grantot Mishnah LaMelekh. Commentary to Maimonides, Mishneh Torah. Judah Rosannes 1657-1727. For source see KM. MoCed Qatan Macaser Sheni Melekhet Shelomo. Shelomo bar Joshua Adeni, 1567-1625. From reprint of Mishnah, ed. Romm. Mayyim T ahorim. Judah Leb Edel Halevi of Bialystok, 5577 [ = 1817]. From reprint of Mishnah in Babylonian Talmud. Mishnah c;m Perush HaRambam. Defus Rishon Napoli [5]252 (1492) (Jerusalem, 1970). Nazir Niddah Martin Noth, Numbers. A Commentary (Philadelphia, 1968). Numbers Y. N. Epstein, Mavo leNusab haMishnah (Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, 19542). Ohalot Shishah Sidre Mishnah. Ketav Yad Parma DeRossi 138 (Jerusalem, 1970). Mishnah Ketav Y ad Paris. Paris 328-329 (Jerusalem, 1973).

Parah Mishnah Codex Parma "B" De Rossi 497. Seder Teharoth. Introduction by M. Bar Asher (Jerusalem, 1971).

Pesa.Qim Pene Zaqqen. For source, see Ma. Er.

Qiddushin Qol Sofer. I;Iaim Sofer. From Qevu1at Meforshe HaMi.rhnah (Jerusalem, 1962) Vol. VI. Supercommentary to Maimonides, Code.

Rosh Hashanah Asher ben YeJ:iiel, ca. 1250-1327. For source, see Sens. See Strashun. Sanhedrin Samson ben Abraham of Sens, ca. 1150-1230. From reprint of Mishnah Seder Tohorot in Babylonian Talmud, ed. Romm. (Vilna, 1887). Shabbat Shavucot

xx Shev. SifEpstein SifHillel SifHorovitz

SifishShalom SifLieberman SifNe~iv SifPardo SifVolk

SifYasq

Slotki

Snaith Sot. Strashun Strikovsky Suk.

T

T. Ta. Tan.

Tem. Ter. Tif. Jacob Toh. Tos. Reng.

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

SheviCit Y. N. Epstein, "Sifre Zuga Parashat Parah," T arbif 1, 1930, pp. 46-78. Sifre... Cfm Perush. .. Rabbenu Hillel bar Eliaqim, Ed. Shachne Koleditzky (Jerusalem, 1948). Siphre d' Be Rab. Fasciculus primus: Siphre ad N umeros adjecto Siphre Zutta. Ed. H. S. Horovitz (Leipzig, 1917). Page and line references are to this edition. Sifre deve Rav. cJm Tosafot Meir CAyin. Ed. Meir IshShalom (Friedman). (Vienna, 1864. Reprint N.Y., 1948). Siphre Zutta (The Midrash of Lydda). II. The Talmud of Caesarea (N.Y., 1968). Sifre ... CEmeqHaNefiv. Naftali $evi Yehudah Berlin. (Jerusalem, 1960). Vol. II. Sefer Sifre deve Rav. David Pardo (Salonika, 1799. Reprint Jerusalem, 1970). I-II. Sifre... CJm Hagahot. .. HaGRA vecim Perush Keter Kehunah. $evi Hirsch HaKohen Volk. Ed. YaCaqov HaKohen Volk (Jerusalem, 1954). I-II. Sifre Zut{a leSeder Bamidbar ... ;Ambuha; deSifre. Yacaqov ze;ev Yaskovitz (Lodz, 1929. Reprint Bene Beraq, 1967). I-II. Israel W. Slotki, Parah, Translated into English with Notes, in I. Epstein, ed., The Babylonian Talmud. Seder Toho,-oth (London, 1948: The Soncino Press) pp. 299-354. N. H. Snaith, Leviticus and Numbers (London, 1967). Sotah Samuel ben Joseph Strashun, 1794-1872. From reprint of Mishnah, ed. Romm. Arie Strikovsky, "Red Heifer. In the Talmud," Encyclopedia fudaica 14:11-13. Sukkah Sidre Mishnah. Neziqin, Qodoshim, Tohorot. Ketav Yad Yerushalayim, 1336. Ketav Yav beniqud lefi Massoret Teman. (Reprint: Jerusalem, 1970). Introduction by S. Morag. Tosefta TaCanit Y. N. Epstein, Mevo;ot LeSifrut HaTanna;im. Mishnah, Tosefta uMidrashe Halakhah. Edited by E. Z. Melamed (Jerusalem and Tel .Aviv, 1957). Temurah Terumot Tiferet Yacaqov. Jacob $evi Shapira. From reprint of Mishnah, ed. Romm. Tohorot Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, ed., Rabbinische Texte. Erste Reihe. Die Tosefta. Text, Vbersetzung, Erklarung. Herausgegeben von Gerhard Kittel und Karl Heinrich Rengstorf. Band 6. Seder Toharot. Text, Vbersetzung, Erklarung. Kelim, Ahilot. Edited by Walter Windfuhr. Toharot-Uksin, edited by Gerhard Lisowsky, Giinter Mayer, Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, and Emanuel Schereschewsky. (Stuttgart, 1953-1967). T. Par is the work of Gerhard Lisowsky.

ABBREVIATIONS

Tos. Zuck.

TR T.Y. TYB TYT TYY

Uqs. V

y.

Y.T. Yad. Yev.

ZA Zab. Zev.

AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

XXI

Tosephta. Based on the Erfurt and Vienna Codices, with parallels and variants, by M. S. Zuckermandel (Repr. Jerusalem, 1963). See Lieberman, TR. Tevul Yorn Tiferet YismJel, Boaz. See TYY. Tosafot Yom '{ov. Yorn Tov Lipmann Heller, 1579-1654. From reprint of Mishnah, ed. Romm. Tiferet YisraJeJ, Yakhin. Israel hen Gedaliah Lipschutz, 1782-1860. (With supercommentary of Baruch Isaac Lipschutz = TYB), from reprint of Mishnah, ed. Romm. cuq~in Seder '{ohorot c;m Pe111sh ... Moshe bar Maimon. Nidpas ca/ yede Daniel Bomberg Bishenat 5282 [= 1522]. Venezia. (Venice, 1522. Reprint: Jerusalem, 1971). Yerushalmi. Palestinian Talmud. Yorn Tov Yadayim Yevamot Zerac Avraham. Seder Tohorot. YaCaqov Binyamin ZeJev Kahana Yakimovsky (Vilna, 1913). Zabim Zeval:iim

Brief bibliographies for special problems are given below, Chapter Twenty-Four, section iii, pp. 209-219,

TRANSLITERATIONS ~

::i

l

., :, , T

n t, ~

=B - G )

=D =H =W

- z

= I:I =T - y

1 =>= K 1,

-

L

ti

1 t)

:s7

~= l=

M N

- s

-

C

'1 El= p l" ~= ~ i' - Q

., v; ft1

n

-

R

-

T

s - s

INTRODUCTION The Mishnaic law of purities reveals two separate sorts of history, and these are to be carefully specified. The first, accomplished in the several chapters entitled, "The Weaving of the Law" and "The Weavers of the Law," as well as those devoted to the state of the law before 70, is the history of legal rules, the temporal sequence of details of law. That history may be called a history of laws or even a history of (trivial) ideas. It is accomplished primarily through the effort to correlate, first, the details of the laws, those which, logically, must precede and those which, logically, must follow and depend upon an earlier conception, with, second, the sequence of authorities to whom laws are attributed or who gloss or otherwise appear in delimited units of tradition, chiefly Yavneans and Ushans. It seems clear that where two laws exhibit a clearcut logical sequence, earlier, then later, and where authorities cited in the pericopae likewise come in sequence, earlier, then later, there we have an incontrovertible, if small, "history." It is the history of the development of the law on a given detail from earlier to later times. Establishing a fair amount of evidence on what is earlier, that is, Yavnean, we may further propose that laws which conform to the principles certain to have characterized Yavnean materials but which lack named authorities are likely to derive from Yavneh, in substance if not in formulation. Those laws which raise issues and present principles systematically investigated by Ushans and not considered by Y avneans are apt to belong to the later stratum, in substance if not in formulation. That is the first kind of history before us. I believe its foundations are firm. But a second sort of history is not to be ignored, history of religions. In the present work an issue important in the history of religions is worked out, one relationship between ritual and myth. I believe the data before us show that ritual, without mythic verbalization, encapsulates and works out a transcendent conception, the discernment, in the world of the secular, unclean, and profane, of the lines of structure which converge upon and emanate from the Temple. The laws of a ritual of sacrifice not done in the Temple but outside, in the world of the profane, set forth, without verbal formulation, profound conceptions about the character and potentialities of that secular and unclean world. The structure of the ritual, I shall argue, contains its meaning,

2

INTRODUCTION

with form and content wholly integrated. The rabbis think about transcendent issues primarily through rite and form. To be sure, we have sayings of a theologico-mythic character, on heilsgeschichtliche matters of eschatology and soteriology. These lack all reference to ritual. They are mythic sayings without ritual forms; to be sure, it may be argued that, in a general way, ritual-laws and salvific sayings exhibit a rough correspondence. What is important is that for the investigation of this second sort of history, the first kind, the history of the temporal sequences of ideas, is not interesting. Investigating the structure of our laws, the structure of being and the shape of reality created and delimited by them, we derive no rich or penetrating insight from knowledge of what came first and what came later on. The map of the logical paths, from first principles to final refinements in details of law, is subsumed within the geography of the boundaries of the sacred-a much larger enterprise in cartography. For when we see the law whole and complete, interpret its largest and predominant traits, details lose visibility; no longer autonomous, they now contribute to a whole which is larger than, different from, merely the sum of the parts. I try to present two maps, therefore: one. with its markings, but on transparent paper, laid over another, opaque map. The first, and less important map, presents the large outlines. It is laid over, and shows the major traits of, the second, the detailed and concrete map of details and their and chronological sequences. For example, we have a serious difficulty in determining which Eliezer or Eleazar holds, at M. 4:1 and M. 4:3, that the rules of the cult do not govern the source of funds from which the cow is purchased, on the one side, and the rules of correct intention determining the efficacy of the act of sacrifice ("done for its own name" or "not for its own name") on the other. T. 4:4 seems clear that the fundamental conception belongs to Eleazar b. R. Simeon. The Eleazar/ Eliezer of M. 4:1 and 4:3 is apt to be T. 4:4's Eleazar b. R. Simeon. The evidence of Mishnaic MSS, as always in difficult matters, is ambiguous. Now if we knew for sure that Eliezer b. Hyrcanus, shortly after the destruction of the Temple, came to the conclusion that the rite of the cow is subject to rules fundamentally different from those of the cult and is not analogous to the cult of the Temple, then we should have interesting information on the thinking of a major Yavnean about the meaning of the destruction of the Temple ( and other formidable questions). If we knew for sure that Eleazar b. R. Simeon,

INTRODUCTION

3

at the end of Ushan times, came to such a conclusion, then, it follows, our knowledge of some rabbis' thought on the meaning of the Temple, now that hopes for restoration of the Temple were disappointed in the aftermath of Bar Kokhba's fiasco, would be enriched. So the characterization of the state of rabbinic Judaism in Yavnean and in Ushan times is made problematic by the difficulty in securely assigning the several pericopae to the right authority. But the nature of those laws which decisively reject the analogy to the Temple and set out to legislate on the basis of a quite separate conception of the rite of the cow, and of the consequent thought on transcendent issues on how there can be cleanness outside of the Temple, is not problematic. The ruling is before us. Its meaning is clear. Its implications can be worked out. Accordingly, the absence of secure historical facts does not prevent the work of interpretation and the search for understanding characteristic of history of religions. In the present part of the work, my own interests are in five questions. These are as follows: 1. The interrelationships between the compilations of pericopae in Mishnah and those in T osefta ( Chapter Seventeen). Tosefta is composed of two sorts of materials, kept distinct from one another by the redactor, and exhibiting distinctive formal and attributive traits. The one, about a third of Tosefta, is a corpus of pe..-icopaequite autonomous of anything in Mishnah. The other, about two-thirds of Tosefta, forms a commentary on Mishnah's pericopae, treated discretely, a reworking of Mishnah's laws in one way or another. It is Mishnah's first Talmud. 2. The traits of forms used for the formulation of the discrete pericopae of Mishnah-Tosefta and of the exegetical compilations, Sifre Numbers and Sifre Zutta (Chapter Eighteen). Form-criticism is important primarily for exegetical and redactional studies, not for historical inquiry, for reasons by now abundantly clear. Yet, it goes without saying, the history of the formulation of traditions is an important component in the history of the traditions themselves, and the results, whether negative or constructive, are to be considered. Later on, if and when we turn to redactional questions, form-criticism is going to constitute a primary investigative tool. 3. The development of the law in logical and chronological historical sequence, from the period before 70, to Yavneh, Usha, and the period after Usha (Chapters Twenty and Twenty-One). This history of small legal details, of the growth and broadening of the agendum

4

INTRODUCTION

of inquiry, and of the traits of the law at the end of clearly demarcated periods in the pre-history of Mishnah, is accomplished in great detail. Yet, since it depends upon the exegesis completed in Part IX, it is conservative, precise, and accurate, always within specified limits. We are able to describe the law of Parah as it was at the end of the Yavnean period and so determine how Ushans carried forward inherited themes and established principles, on the one side, and how they contributed to the definition of new topics for legislation, on the other. 4. The contribution of named authorities ( Chapter Twenty-Two). This part of the work is somewhat difficult, since Parah, unlike Negaim, Ohalot, and major elements of Kelim, does not depend upon the massive and integrated conceptions of cAqiva. While Negaim is preoccupied with the development of the opposite of cAqiva's principles, and major elements of Kelim and Ohalot spell out the implications of his conceptions, Parah contains not a single determinative law or suggestive conception attributed to cAqiva. If we knew for certain that Eliezer b. Hyrcanus is the Eliezer/Eleazar of M. 4:1 and 4:3, then we should call the fundamental issues and generative principles of our tractate the work of Eliezer. But that cannot be the case if Eleazar b. R. Simeon stands behind the specified pericopae and their many paralleJ.s. If it is Eleazar, and if we then add his dominant conception, that the analogy to the Temple is to be rejected, we find that our tractate's agendum of themes and underlying conceptions must be the work of Ushans, rather than Yavneans. In any event named authorities, as before, have given us much less than anonymous ones, the collectivity of the rabbinic movement as a whole. 5. The suppositions of the Yavneans and how they reveal a considerable antecedent heritage, one in which the analogy to the Temple was important and spelled out in complex ways (Chapters Nineteen and Twenty-Four). This is the final major interest of the present work. It is accomplished in three aspects. First, we specify the established, therefore inherited, suppositions of Yavneh. Second, we ask whether these may have been the product of exegesis of Scripture, exegesis supposed to have been accomplished long before 70 and to have generated the law. Sifre Numbers and Sifre Zutta contain little to suggest that this is the case (Chapter Nineteen). To be sure, they do provide an exegetical basis for one of the most important principles of our tractate, that an act of extraneous labor

INTRODUCTION

5

spoils the rite, the cow, the water, and much else. But that specific exegesis is unknown in the several Targumim. No authority available to us before from the period before 70 has heard either of the exegesis or of the principle allegedly discovered through said exegesis. Third, this leads directly to a brief consideration of other Jewish approaches to the red cow and to Num. 19:1-10. I see no important results. We find that the Samaritans burned the red cow for many centuries after the destruction of the Temple; Philo used the laws of the cow to make his usual philosophical points; the author of the Letter to the Hebrews in his great essay on Christology referred in passing to the ashes of the cow; Josephus refers to the rite not at all; the Letter of Barnabas allegorizes the rite of the cow; and the red cow drew little or no attention in the library of Qumran, on the one side, and the writings collected in R. H. Charles' Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, on the other. All of this is routine and confirms the observation of The Idea of Purity in Ancient / udaism about where and why the symbolism of cleanness becomes important on the one hand, and the dubious importance of the absence of references to cleanness, on the other. That is, in general we find cleanness an issue in Palestinian sectarian writings before 70, with the Christians' showing some interest in the specific subjects treated by the Pharisees; in Philo for Philo's usual purposes; and in the later rabbinic law. I have rapidly reviewed the Targums' treatment of the relevant verses in Scripture, again seeing only what we knew before, which is that the so-called Palestinian Targum cites Mishnaic law, sometimes verbatim, and cannot be asked to testify to the state of affairs in the centuries before 70. The other Targums, as I said, know nothing of issues of primary concern to Mishnah-Tosefta. The conclusion then turns to the issues adumbrated earlier, questions important to history of religions. I have no contribution to make to the definition of such questions or to the provision of answers to them but only off er some interesting data for the consideration of historians of religion. At Chapter Twenty-Three I have repeated the procedure of Part VIII, pp. 206-220, in reassessing the nature and value of the procedures employed in working out the history of the law (its "weaving," its "weavers"). Assigning some traditions to Yavneh or to Usha is based upon firm and incontrovertible considerations. Specifically, the correlations between logical and attributive sequences seem to me absolutely beyond doubt. Other traditions are located primarily by means

6

INTRODUCTION

of the names mentioned in them. They do not relate in principle or detail to prior or posterior rule. To be sure, their substance also does not conflict with the substance or implications of what is reliably assigned to a given authority or even to a given stratum. Still other pericopae can be given a particular place only on the basis of a fair measure of conjecture, principles shared with, and congruent to, those of reliably assigned pericopae. A very few pericopae contain no names or principles relevant to those in materials we are able to assign. I suppose some will still want to argue that these pericopae, in particular, derive from those long centuries in which, it is postulated, authorities all agreed with one another and therefore refrained from placing their names on rules. But the corpus of unattributable materials before us will give those people slight satisfaction, for, if we grant their claim, we come up with an "'Oral Torah" of episodic and trivial items. I believe we do know the principles inherited from authorities before 70. They are not episodic and trivial but encompassing, integrated, and fundamental. At issue, in any event, are unattributed and random pericopae of no consequence. Once the exegesis of Mishnah-Tosefta is properly done, there is no problem in recovering the history of most of its law. In studying the first three tractates we took seriously the claim of rabbinic myth that Mishnah constitutes the Oral Torah revealed along with the Written Torah to Moses "our rabbi" by God at Mount Sinai. We made the effort to work out our analyses within the structure of that myth and so spoke of the law of Mishnah in relationship to the law of Scripture: the Oral and the Written Torahs and their correlations. I have not bothered to do so in the present work for two reasons. First, so far as Mishnah and Scripture are related, it is because the one holds views diametrically opposite those of the other. Scripture -Leviticus and Numbers-takes for granted cleanness is a dimension of the Temple. The Oral Torah-Kelim, Parah-takes for granted cleanness is a dimension of the world even outside of the Temple. Scripture assumes that the priest is in charge, the Oral Torah-Negaim -assumes the sage is in charge. Scripture speaks of tents, Mishnah mostly of the Tent. In other words, while Mishnah does much with the themes of Scripture, it always rejects the simplest suppositions of Scripture. Why then ask ourselves to believe that the two Torahs are meant to correlate with one another? And there is a second consideration. Mishnah-Tosefta is not a work which claims to constitute Torah. We have yet to come across a single

a

INTR:ODCCTION

7

sentence in Mishnah-Tosefta Kelim, Ohalot, Negaim, or Parah, in which Mosaic or Scriptural authority is claimed to generate a rule. True, once in a while, particularly in Negaim, we have exegeses in which Scripture provides a proof-text for a proposition. But said proposition also is established without proof-texts. In any case that is not impressive evidence either that lav,'s were created by looking into Scripture (Negaim is a special case, for reasons already spelled out in Parts VII and VIII), or that Mishnah-Tosefta for the trnctates before us was conceived within the scheme of the two Torahs of Moses our rabbi. That conception probably comes after the completion and promulgation of Mishnah and does not stand at the outset of the process of the formulation of the law. But the history of the myth of the two Torahs and the (subsequent) association of that myth with MishnahTosefta in particular are separate, if intertwined issues. \"'\lemay simply observe th,1t our tractates are remarkably uninterested in Moses our rabbi and in his dual Torah. Indeed, it becomes clear that the definition of what Mishnah is must be undertaken. The established framework of argument concerns whether Mishnah is a law-code or whether it is a school-book, '.vhether it is assembled for judges or for teachers, for both, for one, part of the time, and for the other, part of the time, and so on interminably. In fact when we ask, What is Mishnah? we take up the search for an appropriate analogy. When we say, ''Mishnah is a law-code," we mean, '"Mishnah is like a law-code, like other law-codes." And the same is so far the analogy of the school book. Neither analogy seems to me suitable. Our definition of what Mishnah is--the work as a await at least the results of our study of the present whole-must Order. At that time, we may take up an inductive inquiry, lasting perhaps for as much as a paragraph, on what Mishnah itself suggests that Mishnah is meant to be. In any event the c1uestion presently seems sterile. The sole reason I discern for its urgency is to phrase, in "secular" terms, the issue of analogies raised in mythic terms when Mishnah is made into part of Torah, called the Oral part. That too is an analogy, an effort to define and explain the character of this strange and curious document, in terms of Torah. for the present, we may simply state as fact that Mishnah Parah is like no other document in which its subject, the red cow, is discussed, either in a major way as in the eighth chapter of the Letter of Barnabas and in Philo's Special Laws, or in passing, as in Hebrews. To put it differently, the red cow is discussed here in modes of thought and

8

INTRODUCTION

expression simply without parallel in other documents deriving from the first and second centuries. (The ideas of our tractate likewise are without parallels, and the intersections, in Philo, Barnabas, and Mishnah, of details not originating in Scripture are few and far between.) Since there are no formal and few substantive parallels, there can be no compelling analogies. Whatever Mishnah, as represented by Mishnah-Tosef ta Parah, may be, whatever functions it is meant to serve, whatever the purposes of those who created the law and who compiled it-these have to be discovered wholly within the limits of the tractate itself. Certainly, no court enforced or considered these laws after 70, when they were made, so we do not have a law-code. True, people studied the laws-that is why we have them. But for what purpose? What shall we mean by school-book or a text-book, when we can scarcely demonstrate there were schools for this purpose? And why should students who were not priests planning to burn the cow have studied such a document? The two choices under debate seem singularly inappropriate, indeed impoverished, though for different reasons, as I said. The later Ushans seem to have wondered aboul the same matter, not in relationship to Mishnah as a document, but in relationship to unpracticed laws of cleanness: A house afflicted by plague has never come into existence and is never going to come into existence. If so, why was [the law concerning the house afflicted by plague] written? To tell you, Expound and receive a reward [ for the exposition]. T. Negaim 6:1 (Part VI, p. 233)

To be sure, Eleazar b. R. Simeon and Simeon b. Judah allege that there really were ruins which were called 'quarantined' or 'leprous.' But the viewpoint of the anonymous saying is clear and a propos: in the exposition is the reward.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN

MISHNAH-TOSEFTA PARAH TRANSLATION The Mishnah-translation is given in large type. The related Tosefta is indented and printed in smaller letters. I have deleted nearly all additions to the translations presented in Part IX, including transliterations, interpolated comments, and, in most cases, even language intruded to clarify the sense of the law. The purpose of the following translation is to give an accurate and slavishly literal version of the Hebrew words, their order and sense, to lay the foundations of the several studies to follow. Since I have already explained the meaning of each passage, there is now no purpose in including the interpolations of the shorter commentary in Part IX, which here would impede the work. Chapter One 1:1

A. R. Eliezer says, "A heifer-a year old. B. "And a cow-two years old." C. 1. And sages say, "A heifer-two years old, and a cowthree years old, 2. ''or four years old." D. R. Meir says, "Even one five years old. E. 1. "The old one is suitable. 2. ''But they do not keep it waiting, lest a hair turn black [GRA: and] it should not [ otherwise J become unfit." F. Said R. Joshua, "I heard only shelashit." G. They said to him, "What is the meaning of the language, shelashit?" H. Said he to them, "Thus have I heard plain [without explanation]." I. Said Ben cAzzai, ''I shall explain." J. "If you say shelishit, [it means the third in relationship J to others in sequence. K. ''And when you say shelashit, [it means] three years old."

10

TRANSLATION

In like manner have they said [ or: did he sayJ, M. A four-year-old vineyard ( kerem revaci). N. They said to him, ''What is the meaning of the language, revaci?" 0. Said he to them, "Thus have I heard plain." P. Said Ben cAzzai, "I shall explain. Q. "If you say rev6, [ it means the fourth in relationship J to others in sequence. R. "And when you say revaci, [it means] four years old." S. In like manner have they said, T. He who eats in a house afflicted with plague-a half-loaf [the size] of which is three to the qav. They said to him, "Say, 'Eighteen to a se,ah.' " U. Said he to them, "Thus have I heard plain.'' W. Said Ben cAzzai, "I shall explain. X. "If you say from three for a qav, the dough-offering does not apply to it. Y. "But when you say 'from eighteen for a se,ah,' its doughoffering diminishes it.'' M. 1:1 L.

1:2-3

A. R. Y ose the Galilean says, "Bullocks-two years old. B. "As it is said, And a second [year] bullock (PR SNY) of the herd you take for a purification offering (Num. 8:8)." C. And sages say, "Even one three years old.'' D. R. Meir says, "Even one four years old, E. "even one five years old are suitable. F. "But they do not bring old ones, because of the honor [ of the altar]." M. 1:2 Lambs-one year old. And rams-two years old. I. And in all cases, [ the year is reckonedJ from [birth} day to [birth J day. J. One thirteen months old is not suitable either for a lamb or for a ram. K. R. Tarfon calls it Palges. L. Ben cAzzai calls it Noqed. M. R. Ishmael calls it Parkharigma,. G. H.

PARAH CHAPTER ONE

11

N. [If} one did offer it up, one brings on its account the drinkofferings of a ram. But his sacrifice does not go to his credit. 0. One which is thirteen months and one day old-lo, this is a ram. M. 1:3 A. A bullock twenty-four months and one day old-lo, this is a fully grown bullock (PR SLM). B. And R. Leazar says, "They give it thirty days after the twentyfour months. C. "For every place in which A bullock of the herd is said, [the reference is to one which is] two years old." D. [But] bullock (PR) plain [without further explanation] is three years to five years old [ = Meir, sages]. E. R. Yose the Galilean says, "Bullocks are two years old, as it is said, A (bullock) two [years old] bullock of the herd will you take for purification-offering (Num. 8:8) ." F. They said to him, "It does not say two [years old], but second [ in ordinal relationship} to the first. G. "Just as the first is not eaten, so the second is not eaten." I. Said R. Simeon, "To what is a purification-[offering} likened? To a paraclete, who enters in to appease [the judge]. Once the paraclete has accomplished appeasement, then the gift is brought in." T. 1:1

J. Rabbi says, "Why does Scripture say, A two [year old} bullock of the herd will you take for a purification-offering (Num. 8:8)? K. "If it is to teach that they are two {bullocks], lo, it already has been said, And he will prepare the one as a purification-offering and the one as a whole-offering (Num. 8:12). L. "Might one think that the purification-offering takes precedence over the whole-offering in every aspect of the rite? M. "Scripture says, And a second bullock (PR SNY) of the herd will you take for the purification-offering. N. "Or A second bullock of the herd will you take for a purification-offering0. "Might one think that the whole-offering should take precedence over the purification-offering in every aspect of the rite? P. "Scripture says, And he will prepare the one as a purificationoffering and the one as a whole-offering to the Lord (Num. 8:12). Q. "How so? The blood of the purification-offering takes precedence over the blood of the whole-offering, because it appeases [the Lord]. [ = Simeon.] The limbs of the whole-offering take precedence over the pieces of the purification-offering, because they are wholly burned up in the fire."

T. 1:2 R. R. Simeon says, "Why does Scripture say, And a second bullock of the herd will you take for the purification-offering (Num. 8:8)? S. "If it is to teach that they are two, lo, it already has been said, 2

12

TRANSLATION

And he will prepare the one as a purification-offering and the one as a whole-offering to the Lord (Num. 8:12). If so, why is it said, And a second bullock of the herd will you take for a purificationoffering (Num. 8:8)? T. "Might one think, the purification-offering is consumed by the Levites? U. "Scripture says, Second. V. "Second to the whole-offering. W. "Just as the whole-offering is not consumed, so the purificationoffering is not consumed." T. 1:3

X. In like manner: Y. Said R. Yose, "They that had come from the captives of the exile offered up whole-offerings to the God of Israel, twelve bullocks for all Israel, ninety-nine rams, seventy-seven lambs, and, as a purification-offering, twelve he-goats-all this is a burnt-offering for the Lord (Ezra 8:35). Z. "Is it possible that the purification-offering is a burnt-offering? AA. "But just as the burnt-offering is not eaten, so the purificationoffering is not eaten." BB. And so did R. Judah say [that] they brought them on account of idolatry. T. 1:4 A. R. Simeon says, "In every place in the Torah in which heifer is mentioned without further specification, it means one year old, and a heifer and a lamb [are also to be] one year old (Lev. 9:3). Of the herd-two years old, as it is said, Take for yourself a heifer of the herd for a purification-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering (Lev. 9:2). B. "Perfect-in respect to years. "And perfect-free of every sort of blemish." C. R. Yose says, "Three atonement-offerings (KPRWT) [come] from the bullocks, and three from the rams, and three from the goats. D. "Three [come] from the bullocks: (1) A bullock which comes with the unleavened bread, (2) "And the bullock of the Day of Atonement, (3) "And the heifer whose neck is broken. E. "Three [come] from the rams: ( 1) "A guilt-offering because of a certain sin, "and (2) a suspensive guilt-offering, "and (3) a female sheep of the individual. F. "Three [come] from the goats: ( 1) "The goats of the festivals, "and (2) the goat of the Day of Atonement, "and (3) the goat of the prince." T. 1:5

13

PARAH CHAPTER ONE

A. "Lambs a year old which are mentioned in the Torah are three hundred and sixty-five [ days old], one for each of the days of the solar year," the words of Rabbi. B. And sages say, "From the first of Nisan to the first of Nisan, from the ninth of Av to the Ninth of Av. [If it] is a leap year, it is a leap year for it."

T. 1:6 A. A year which is stated with reference to the houses of cities encompassed by a wall and years said with reference to the field of possession and the six [years] spoken of with reference to the Hebrew slave and all other references to years with respect to the son and daughter-all are from [birth] day to [birth] day. T. l:7A

1:4 A. (1) The sin-offerings of the congregation [Lev. 4:14] their whole-offerings. ( 2) the sin-offering of an individual. (3) and the guilt-offering of a Nazir [Num. 6:14], ( 4) and the guilt-offering of a leper [Lev. 14:12], B. are suitable from [the time that they are] thirty days old upwards, C. and even on the thirtieth day. D. And if they offered them up on the eighth day, they suitable. E. ( 1) Vow- and freewill-offerings, ( 2) the firstlings, (3) the tithe [of cattle, Lev. 17:32], ( 4) and the Passover-offering, F. are suitable from the eighth day and upward, G. and even on the eighth day. M.

and

and

are

1:4

B. Required whole-offerings of the individual are suitable from the thirtieth day and onward, and even on the thirtieth day. C. And if they offered them up on the eighth day, they are suitable.

T. I:7B A. R. Eleazar says, "The Passover is suitable only from the thirtieth day of its birth and onward." B. This is the general principle which R. Eleazar stated: C. "Any animal concerning which a year old is said is acceptable from the thirtieth day and onward.

14

TRANSLATION

"But if one offered it up on the eighth day, it is suitable." With reference to a firstling on which, at the moment of birth, a blemish appeared, one may slaughter and eat it even on the very day on which it is born. D. E.

T. 1:8 Chapter Two 2:1 A. R. Eliezer says, "A cow for purification which is pregnant is suitable." B. And sages declare unfit. C. R. Eliezer says, "It is not purchased from the gentiles." D. And sages declare fit. E. And not this alone, but: F. All community and private offerings derive from the Land and from abroad, G. from what is new and from what is old [produce], H. except for the comer and two bread [loaves, Lev. 23:17], I. which come only from what is new and from the land. M. 2:1

A. R. Eliezer says, "It is not purchased from the gentiles." B. They said to him, McSH W: "They purchased it from gentiles in Sidon, and it was called Romah (Alt.: Dumah)." C. R. Judah says, "They guard it with care that one not do with it any sort of labor at all." D. Said they to him, "If so, the matter has no limit. But it is presumed to be suitable." T. 2:1

2:2 A. A cow whose horns and hoofs are black-let one chop (K, C: YGWR) [them] off. B. The eyeball and the teeth and the tongue [ which are blemished] do not render unfit in the [case of the] cow. C. And the dwarf is suitable. D. [If] there was on it a wen, and one chopped it offE. R. Judah declares unfit. F. R. Simeon says, "Any place from which it was removed and which place did not put forth red hair-it is unfit." M. 2:2 E. R. Meir says, "A cow whose eyeballs are black, if there is no other cow which is like it, is unfit (GRA: fit)."

T. 2:1

PARAH CHAPTER TWO

15

A. [If] its horns and hoofs were removed and the marrow with them, it is unfit. T. 2:2A

2:3-4 A. ( 1) A [ cow born of Caesarean birth} from the side, · ( 2) and the [harlot's J hire and ( 3) the price [ of a dog]-it is unfit. B. R. Eliezer declares fit, C. since it is said, You will not hrin g the harlot's hire and the price of a dog to the house of the Lord your God (Deut. 23:18). But this one does not come to the house. D. All blemishes which render unfit in the case of Holy Things [sanctified animals} (Num. 19:2) render unfit in the case of the cow [M. Bekh. 6:1-12]. E. [If] ( 1) one rode upon it, ( 2) leaned upon it, ( 3) suspended [ something} on its tail, ( 4) crossed the river on it, (5) doubled up its leading rope, ( 6) placed his cloak upon itit is unfit. F. But: [ if} ( 1) one tied it with a rope, ( 2) made for it a sandal so that it should not slip, ( 3) spread his cloak over it because of the flies-it is fit. G. This is the general principle: \X'hatever [is done} for its need-it is suitable. For some other need-it is unfit. M. 2:3 One [born by Caesarean sectionJ from the side is unfit. And R. Simeon declares fit. D. The hire [of the harlot] and the price [of a dog] are unfit. E. R. Eliezer declares fit. Since it is said, You will not bring the hire of a harlot and the price of the dog to the house of the Lord your God (Deut. 23:18). F. This one does not come to the house. T. 2:2

B. C.

H. I.

( 4) [If] a bird rested on it, it is fit. [If] a male [bull] mounted it, it is unfit.

J.

R. Judah says, "If [people] brought it up [upon the cow], it is unfit. But if [the bull did so} of its own account, it is fit.

M. 2:4

16

TRANSLATION

A. Any sort of labor on account of which they are liable in connection with Holy Things is unsuited [better: renders unfit] in the case of the cow. B. [If] one brought it in to the [threshing] team [to suck], and it [ accidentallyJ threshed with its mother, it is fit. C. And if it is so that it will [both J suck and thresh, it is unfit. D. This is the general principle: Whatever is for its own necessity is suitable, and for some other necessity [than its own J is unfit. T. 2:3 A. The yoke renders unfit whether it is used for actual work or not for actual work. B. It may be redeemed for any blemish whatsoever. C. [If] it died, it may be redeemed. D. [If] one slaughtered it, it may be redeemed. E. If one found another more beautiful than it, it may be redeemed. F. If one [already] had slaughtered it on its wood-pile ( = properly], it may not ever be redeemed. G. If its price comes from the heave-offering [appropriation} of the chamber [of the Temple treasury}, [if the beast is redeemed, the funds} go to the heave-offering of the chamber [of the Temple treasury}. T. 2:4 A. A more strict rule applies to the cow than to Holy Things and to Holy Things which does not apply to the cow. [B. Supply, following Sens to M. 1:1 and TR III, p. 214: For the cow is suitable only when red, and any sort of labor renders it unfit, which is not the case with Holy Things. And more strict is the rule applying to Holy Things, for Holy Things are 1·edeemedonly on account of a permanent blemish, and do not go forth for secular use, (for example) to be sheared, and to be worked, and the person who shears them or who does work with them incurs forty stripes, which is not the case with the cow. More strict is the rule concerning the heifer ( whose neck is to be broken) than that which applies to Holy Things, and ( more strict is the rule applying to) Holy Things than that applying to the heifer], C. for as to a heifer, age [Lit.: years} renders [it} unfit, D. and labor renders it unfit, E. which is not the case with Holy Things. F. For Holy Things are redeemed only for a permanent blemish, and never go forth for ordinary use, to be sheared, and to be worked, and the one who shears and the one who works them, lo, this one is smitten with forty stripes, which is not the case with the heifer. T. 2:5

G. [More strict is the rule} concerning the cow than applies to the heifer, and [ more strict is the rule} concerning the heifer than applies to the cow:

PARAH CHAPTER THREE

17

H.

for the cow is suitable only if it is red, and blemishes render it unfit. J. And [if] one did work with it, it is unfit, K. which is not the case with the heifer. L. More strict is the rule applying to the heifer, M. for as to the heifer, age renders it unfit, N. which is not the case with the cow.

I.

T. 2:6

2:5

A. [If] there were on it two black hairs, or white ones, inside a single follicle, it is unfit. B. R. Judah says, "Even in one hollow." C. [If] they were in two hollows, and they are opposite [ adjacent to} one another-it is unfit. D. R. cAqiva says, "Even four, even five, and they are scattered about-let one uproot them." E. R. Eliezer says, ''Even fifty." F. R. Joshua b. Betera says, "Even one on its head and one on its tail-it is unfit." G. There were on it two hairs-H. their root is black and their head is redI. their root is red and their head is blackJ. "All follows that which is seen," the words of R. Meir. K. And sages say, "[All follows the condition of] the root." M. 2:5 A. [If] there were on it two black hairs or white ones in one follicle, it is unfit. In two follicles-it is fit. B. R. Judah says, "Even in two follicles, and they are opposite [adjacent to] one another, it is unfit." C. [If] there were on it two hairsD. their root is red, and their head blackE. R. Yose ben HaMeshulam says, "One shaves the top and does not reckon with the possibility that he is liable on account of shearing." T. 2:7

Chapter Three

3:1 A. Seven days before the burning of the cow, they separate the priest who burns the cow from his house, [bringing him] to the chamber which faces the northeast corner of the Temple building, and it was called the stone house.

18

TRANSLATION

B. And they sprinkle on him all seven days [ with a mixture J from all the purification [waters] which were there. C. R. Yose says, "They sprinkled on him only on the third and seventh [days] alone." D. R. J::Iananiah Prefect of the Priests says, "On the priest who burns the cow they sprinkle each of the seven days. E. "And on the one of the Day of Atonement, they sprinkled only on the third and seventh [ daysJ alone." M. 3:1 A. What is the difference between the priest who burns the cow and the priest of the Day of Atonement? B. The priest of the Day of Atonement-his separation is in a state [ or, for the sake] of sanctity, and his brothers, the priests, touch him. C. The priest who burns the cow-his separation is in a state { for the sake} of cleanness, and his brothers, the priests, do not touch him, D. except for those who help him, E. because he sprinkles. T. 3:1

3:2

A. There were courtyards in Jerusalem, built on rock, and under them was a hollow, [which served as a protection) against a grave in the depths. B. And they bring pregnant women, who give birth there, and who raise their sons there. C. And they bring oxen, and on them are doors, and the youngsters sit on top of them, with cups of stone in their hands. D. [When] they reached the Siloam, they descended and filled them, and mounted and sat on top of them. E. R. Yose says, ''From his place did he let down and fill [the cup, without descending)." M. 3:2 A. Courtyards were in Jerusalem, built on top of stone, and under them was a hollow because of the grave in the depths. B. They bring pregnant women, who give birth there and raise their sons there, C. until they are seven or eight years old. D. And they bring oxen, E. and on top of them are doors. F. And the children sit on top of them.

PARAH CHAPTER THREE

19

G. R. Judah says, "Oxen with broad bellies, so that the feet of the youngsters should not protrude and become unclean by reason of the grave in the depths." H. And all agree that the youngsters require immersion. T. 3:2 A. They said before R. cAqiva in the name of R. Ishmael, "Stone cups were suspended from the horns of the oxen. When the oxen kneeled down to drink, the cups were filled up." B. He said to them, "Do not give the Minim a chance to cavil after you." T. 3:3

3:3 A. They came to the Temple Mount and dismounted. (B. The Temple Mount and the courtyards-under them is a hollow against a grave in the depth.) C. And at the door of the courtyard was set up a flask ( QLL) of [ ashes of} purification [ rites done in the past J. D. And they bring a male sheep, and tie a string between its horns, and they tie a stick or a bushy twig on the head of the rope, and one throws it into the flask. E. And one hits the male, and it starts backward. F. And one takes [the ashes spilled onto the stick} and mixes as much of it as could be visible on the surface of the water. G. R. Yose says, ''Do not give the Sadducees an opportunity to cavil. But he takes it and mixes it." M. 3:3 A. They came to the gate which opens out from the court of the women to the rampart. B. And stone flasks were set up along the wall of the stairs of the woman's court, and [with] their covers of stone visible to the rampart, C. and in them were ashes of every cow which they had burned, D. as it is said, And it will be for a testimony of the children of Israel (Num. 19:9). T. 3:4 A. One hits the male and it starts backward. B. And ash was poured out. C. He takes and mixes from that which is poured out. D. "These rites they did when they came up from the exile," the words of R. Judah. E. R. Simeon says, "Their ashes went down with them to Babylonia and came up with them."

20

TRANSLATION

F. They said to him, "Was it not made unclean m the land of the gentiles?" G. He said to them, "They decreed uncleanness on the land of the gentiles only after they came up from the Exile." T. 3:5

3:4

A. They did not prepare one purification-offering [by virtue of the preparations made J for another purification-offering, nor one child for his fellow. B. i B.rliner, J\., X 212-13 Berlin, ~aftali ~cvi Yehudah, blemished heifer, IX 229, 232, 235, 238; cedar, hyssop, wool. thrown into heifer, TX 238-39; red heifer defined. IX 226, 229; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 226, 232; slaughter of heifer, IX 2 3 5; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 244, 247; utensils, purity of, lX 247; water, drawing of, IX 2-'i-1 Bertinoro, ash and water, mixing of, IX 9:i; blemished heife1·, IX 39, -i I • sla11ghtu- of heifer, IX 59; sprinkling. rules nf IX 199, 202; uncleanness and pllrifiu,tion rite, IX 164, 166; water, drawing of, fX 105, 107, 113; water used in rite, IX 152, 271 Blackman, Philip, purification of priest, IX 51, 53, 55 Blemished heifer, IX 1-5, 17, 37-4:\, 22731, 249-53; X 11-17, 110, 112, 120, 124, 126-28, 13032, 1;'5-38. 176, 182, 187, 190, 192, 199, 203-20,l, 208-209, 225-26 Bowtrnrn, John, X 209, 218 Brand, rx 86 Bruce, Alexander Balmain, X 216 Bruce. F. F., X 217 Buchanan, George Wesley, X 217

Cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 6, l 7, 60, 237-'.\9, 2'15-48, 258-60,

248

INDEX 1'0 PARTS IX AND X

266-67; X 23, 111, 120, 124, 133, 13839, 141, 173, 200, 207 Charles, R. H., X 5, 209 Colson, F. H., X 210 Cross, Frank Moore, Jr., X 209 Danby, Herbert, purification of priest, IX 219; red heifer defined, IX 22-23, 28; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 69-70; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 184 Dead Sea Sect, X 209-10 Deaut, R. le, X 212 Donaldson, James, X 217 Dupont-Sommer, A., X 209 Eleazar, R., ashes, disposition of, X 24; purification of priest, IX 253-56; pyre, IX 237; red heifer defined, IX 30, 34, 226; X 13, 90, 99, 120; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 67-68, 70, 232, 253-56; X 200, 226; slaughter of heifer, IX 231-32; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 185-86; X 64, 89, 95, 106, 123; utensils, purity of, IX 7-8, 74, 84 Eleazar HaQappar be Ribbi, R., ashes disposition of, IX 243; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 243; X 105, 127 Eleazar b. Jacob, R., ashes disposition of, IX 262, 264-65; purification of priest, IX 254-55; X 98, 106, 140, 194; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 68, 254; X 26, 90, 131, 141-43, 231; slaughter of heifer, IX 231; X 23, 90, 96, 101, 124, 133, 141, 224-25; sprinkling, rules of, X 170-72, 201; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 262, 264-65; X 155; water used in rite, X 54, 93, 100, 130 Eleazar b. R. ~adoq, water used in rite, X 53, 90, 97, 122, 129, 147 Eleazar b. Shammuca, R., ashes dispos.ition of, IX 264; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 264 Eleazar b. R. Simeon, R., cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 259; X 100, 141; pyre, IX 207, ?.59; rites of sacrifice, law governing, X 2-3, 8, 26, 90, 96, 104, 134, 141-43, 187, 226, 230-31; slaughter of heifer, X 204 Eliezer, R., ashes disposition of, IX 243, 245, 263; blemished heifer, IX 4, 37-

39, 41-42, 251-52; X 15, 17, 89, 94, 104-105, 124, 127-28, 136-38, 176, 199, 202-203, 226; purification of priest, X 21, 94, 99, 150-53, 191-92, 194-95, 204; red heifer defined, IX 4-5, 22-24, 26-28, 35-36, 226, 251-52; X 9, 14, 89, 93-94, 105-106, 126, 135, 137, 187, 199; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 60, 63-64, 70-71, 225, 25355; X 2, 4, 25, 28, 94, 106, 121, 124, 134, 141, 181-82, 187, 226; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 13, 190-92; X 66, 89, 99, 123, 127, 168; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 12, 163-69, 171-74, 177, 183-85, 190, 243, 245, 263; X 5860, 64, 89, 93, 95, 102, 106, 123, 127, 130, 164-67, 188-89; utensils, purity of, X 32, 95, 127, 161-63; utensils used in rite, X 89, 99, 121; water, drawing of, IX 9, 102-104, 132-35, 138, 270; X 46, 83, 89, 95, 100, 102, 122, 127, 15758, 160-61, 187; water used in rite, IX 11, 150-57, 159; X 53-57, 89-90, 95, 99-100, 102, 122, 127, 129, 145-46 Eliezer b. Hyrcanus, R ., cites of sacrifice, law governing, X 2, 4, 142, 187 Eliezer, Priest, rites of sacrifice, law governing, X 26 Elijah hen Solomon Zalman (GRA), ash and water, mixing of, IX 94; blemished heifer, IX 252; purification of priest, IX 48, 222; red heifer defined. IX 22-23, 34, 36, 252; X 14; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 243; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 191, 197; sprinkling, rules of, IX 197, 199, 202, 208; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 176, 222; utensils, purity of, IX 7677, 80, 82; water, drawing of, IX 109, 136; water used in rite, IX 157 "Elijah Gaon": see Elijah ben Solomon Zalman Elyehocenai b. Haqqof, R., purification of priest, X 20 Ephraim Isaac of Premysla, ash and water, priest, IX 48, 51; slaughter of heifer, mixing of IX 96, 97; purification of IX 59; sprinkling, rules of, IX 202, 206, 211; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 165, 173, 187; utensils used in rite, IX 90; water, drawing of, IX 100, 106, 112, 125, 130, 136; water used in rite, IX 156, 159

GENERAL INDEX

Epstein, Y. N., ashes disposition of, IX 261-62; ash and water, mixing of, IX 266; blemished heifer, IX 42; purification of priest, IX 54; red heifer defined, IX 25; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 260-61; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 192; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 260-66 Etheridge, J. W., X 212 Extraneous matter, X 47-51, 111, 131; 156-57; IX 10-11, 18, 138-46 Finkelstein, Louis, purification of priest, IX 57-58 Freedman, H., IX 100, 174 Gamaliel, R., purification of priest, IX 223; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 181-82; X 63, 123; water used in rite, X 55, 99, 122, 127, 146 Gaster, Moses, X 219 Gentiles and red heifer, IX 36-3 7 Ginsburger, Moses, X 212-13 Goodenough, Erwin R., X 210 Halkin, Abraham S., X 219 Hanam'el the Egyptian, R., purification of priest, X 20 I::Iananiah b. Aqavya, X 56, 89, 122 I::Iananiah b. Gamaliel, R., X 28 I::Iananiah Prefect of Priests, purification of priest, IX 5, 48; X 18, 99, 149 I::Ianina, R., purification, of priest, IX 253, 255; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 253, 255; X 98, 105; sprinkling, rules of, IX 267 Heller, Yom Tov Lipman, ash and water, mixing of, IX 94; purification of priest, IX 51; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 72; sprinkling, rules of, IX 202; utensils, purity of, IX 80; utensils used in rite, IX 89-90 Hillel, ashes disposition of, IX 262, 264; purification of priest, IX 254-55; X 89; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 225, 254-55; X 27, 121; Sifre ... Hillel: see Koleditzky, Shachne; sprinkling, rules of, IX 210, 212; X 75, 9495, 126; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 262, 264; X 95, 155-56; utensils, purity of, X 31 Hoffmann, David, purification of priest, IX 51

249

Horovitz, H. S., ashes disposition of, IX 263; ash and water, mixing of, IX 266-67; blemished heifer, IX 232, 234, 249-53; X 136-38; cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 259-60, 267; extraneous matter, IX 140; purification of priest, IX 216, 253-55, 258; pyre, IX 259; red heifer defined, IX 229, 249-53; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 224, 226, 240, 242, 25358, 260-61, 265; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 267; sprinkling, hyssop for, X 132; sprinkling, rules of, IX 206, 267; uncleanness and purification 1·ite, IX 25367; water, drawing of, X 158 Isaac, Ephraim of Premysla: see Ephraim Isaac of Premysla Ishmael, R., ashes, disposition of, IX 6, 242, 261; X 24, 94, 106, 124, 12829; cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 237, 239, 248; X 95, 105, 120, 139, 207; purification of priest, IX 44, 50, 55; X 19, 89, 128, 149-50; pyre, IX 237; red heifer defined, IX 26, 28; X 10, 99, 120, 128; rites of sacrifice, law governing, X 96, 139; sprinkling, hyssop for, X 96; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 167-68, 242, 261; X 59, 89, 93, 164; utensils, purity of, X 148; water, drawing of, X 95, 203; water used in rite, IX 11, 147; X 52 Ishmael b. Phiabi, purification of priest, X 20, 81, 89, 96, 131, 140, 150-51 Ishmael b. R. Yol;ianan b. Beroqah, sprinkling, rules of, IX 213; X 76, 170; X 33, 132

IshShalom, Meir, blemished heifer, IX 229; red heifer defined, IX 229 Issi b. cAqavyah, blemished heifer, IX 227-29; X 105, 136, 182, 199 Jastrow, Marcus, water used in rite, IX 148

Jonathan b. HaMeshulam, R., purification of priest, IX 253, 255; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 253, 255; X 98, 105

Jonathan b. Uzziel, R., X 213-16, 119 Joseph the Babylonian, rites of sacrifice, law governing, X 26, 90, 96, 133, 14142

250

INDEX 'fO PARTS IX AND X

Joshua, R., blemished heifer, IX 251-52; X 105; purification of priest, X 150, 192; red heifer defined, IX 23-25, 251-52; X 9, 93, 127-28, 135; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 8; X 27; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 12, 163-69, 173, 175, 177-79, 183; X 58-60, 62-63, 89, 93, 95, 99, 102, 127, 134, 164-65, 167, 178, 188-891 utensils, purity of, IX 7-8, 74, 84; X 32, 95, 127, 161-62, 200; utensils used in rite, X 89; water, drawing bf, X 160; water used in rite, IX 11, 150, 155-57; X 55-56, 95, 127, 146 Joshua b. Betera, R., blemished heifer, X 17, 94, 105, 124, 128, 136, 176, 182, 192, 199, 203; red heifer defined, IX 251 Joshua b. PeraJ:iiah, R., purification of priest, IX 2 54-5 5; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 254-55 Josiah, R., blemished heifer, IX 228; X 105 Judah, R., ashes disposition of, IX 24445; ash and water, mixing of, IX 26667; blemished heifer, IX 4, 37-39, 4143, 229, 253; X 14-15, 17, 89, 96, 100, 105, 131-32, 137, 176, 199, 204; cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 237-38, 246, 259, 267; X 105; extraneous matter, IX 11, 141-43, 14546; X 49, 51, 90, 97, 100, 131; purification of priest, IX 44, 50, 52, 56, 58; X 19, 89-90, 94, 96, 132, 140, 152-53, 179, 190, 192-95; pyre, IX 237, 259; X 120, 141; red heifer defined, IX 4, 30, 35-36, 253; X 12, 14, 89-90, 126, 131, 137, 187, 199; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 7, 63-65, 68, 73; X 25, 29, 90, 96, 100, 121, 131, 139, 141-43, 200, 201, 231; slaughter of heifer, IX 231; X 22-23, 90, 96, 124, 131; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 13, 192-94, 197, 267; X 67-68, 90, 97-98, 132, 168-69; sprinkling, rules of, IX 198-200, 206, 213; X 69-70, 72, 76, 97-98, 100-101, 123-24, 132, 16971, 201-202, 204; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 183-84, 186, 244-45, 265; X 100, 123, 154-55, 164; uten~ils, purity of, IX 7, 74-76, 79, 84-85; X 29, 32-33, 90, 96-97, 121, 127, 13132, 1 34, 145, 148, 162-63, 177; uten-

sils used in rite, IX 86, 89-90; X 33, 35, 90, 97, 99, 121, 127, 193; water drawing of, IX 9, 131-35, 270; X 4546, 90, 95, 100, 127, 157-58, 160-61, 189, 193-94; water used in rite, IX 11, 146-48, 154, 157-58, 271; X 51-53, 55-56, 90, 97, 100, 122, 132, 147, 177 Judah b. Beterah, R., blemished heifer, IX 227-28, 251 Judah b. Sim~on, purification of priest, X 90 Katsh, Abraham I., purification of priest, IX 64, 70; utensils, purity of, IX 80, IX 51; rites of sacrifice, law governing, 83; water, drawing of, IX 127, 133 Kennedy, A. R. S., IX 2-3 Kippenberg, Hans Gerhard, X 219 Koleditzky, Shachne, ashes, disposition of, IX 243; blemished heifer, IX 22932, 234-35, 238; cedar, hyssop, wool, thrown into heifer, IX 238; red heifer defined, IX 229-30; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 234-35, 240-41, 243 Kraft, Robert A., X 217 Leazar, R., red heifer defined, IX 28, and purification rite, X 66, 95, 166; 30; X 11, 90, 94, 133; uncleanness utensils used in rite, X 35 Leazar b. R. Simeon, R., ashes, disposition of, X 24, 90, 96, 100, 124, 13334; sprinkling, hyssop for, X 68, 90, 98, 134, 169 Lieberman, Saul, ashes disposition of, IX 262-64; ash and water, mixing of, IX 95, 99, 265-66; blemished heifer, IX 40, 43, 234-35, 251-53; X 16; cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 259-60; extraneous matter, IX 140, 143, 145; purification of priest, IX 49-50, 55, 57, 221, 223, 254; pyre, IX 237, 259; red heifer defined, IX 22, 30-31, 35-37, 251-53; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 67-69, 73, 254; slaughter of heifer, IX 60, 237; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 197; sprinkling, rules of, IX 197, 200, 204, 206, 211, 213; X 75; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 169, 174, 180, 183, 185, 187, 246, 259-60, 262-64; X 61; utensils, purity of, IX 76-79, 81-82; X 30; water, drawing of, IX 99, 101,

GENERAL INDEX 108-109, 116, 127-28, 130, 136; water used in rite, IX 147, 149 Lipschi,itz, Israel ben Gedaliah, ash and water, mixing of, IX 94, 97; purification of priset, IX 49, 53; red heifer defined, IX 24, 36; slaughter of heifer, IX 59; sprinkling, rules of, IX 199, 202, 207, 214; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 164, 174, 176, 178, 186; utensils, purity of, IX 80; uten• sils used in rite, IX 86; water drawing of, IX 112, 129, 135-36; water used in rite, IX 151-52, 154, 156, 271 Lisowsky, Gerhard, Tosefta Rengstorf: see Rengstorf, Karl Heinrich Loewe, H., purification of priest, IX 51; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 64, 70; utensils, purity of, IX 80, 83; water, drawing of, IX 127, 133 Lowrie, Samuel T., X 217 Lowy, S., X 217

MacDonald, John, X 129 Macho, Alejandro Diez, X 212 Maharam: see Meir ben Barukh of Rothenberg _Maimonides, ashes disposition of, IX 265; ash and water, mixing of, IX 93-94, 96-98; blemished heifer, IX 38-39, 41, 43; extraneous matter, IX 138, 140-41; purification of priest, IX 21, 48, 51, 53, 56, 219-22, 269; red heifer defined, IX 35; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 66, 69, 71-73, 265; X 229; slaughter of heifer, IX 60; sprinkling, rules of, IX 198-99, 202, 205, 207, 211; uncleanness and purification rites, IX 160-61, 166-67, 169-70, 172-73, 175, 182-83, 186-87, 222, 265; utensils, purity of, IX 76, 80-83; utensils used in rite, IX 86-87; water drawing of, IX 98-100, 104-106, 108, 110-13, 124-26, 128-30, 132; water, drawing of, X 161; water used in rite, IX 146, 14849, 152, 157-59 McNamara, Martin, X 213 Meir, R., ashes disposition of, IX 264; ash and water, mixing of, IX 8; X 37, 90, 97, 130; blemished heifer, IX 4143, 252; X 17, 96, 120, 130-31, 137, 184, 202; cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 260; extraneous matter, IX 11, 141, 145-46, 270; X 49, 51,

251

90, 97, 100, 131; purification of priest, IX 5, 44, 54-55, 254, 269; X 96, 98, 106, 131, 140, 179, 191-92; red heifer defined, IX 4, 22, 24-27, 30, 37, 226, 252, 268; X 9, 11, 14, 89, 96, 100, 105, 130, 137, 199; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 67-68, 254; X 26, 90, 96, 104-105, 131, 141; slaughter of heifer, IX 231; X 184; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 13, 191-93, 271-72; X 67, 90, 97, 127, 168; sprinkling, rules of, IX 200; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 12, 172, 181, 187-90, 264; X 60, 65-66, 90, 97, 100, 165-66, 178; utensils, purity of, X 90, 145, 148; utensils used in rite, IX 82, 89; X 33, 97; water, drawing of, X 90, 97; water used in rite, X 132, 147

Meir hen Barukh of Rothenberg, red heifer defined, IX 22; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 72; sprinkling, rules of, IX 211; utensils, purity of, IX 80; water, drawing of, IX 130 Mishnah Codex Parma "B", purification of priest, IX 51; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 64, 70; water, drawing of, IX 133 Mishnah c;m Perush HaRambam, purification of priest, IX 51; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 64, 70; utensils, purity of, IX 80, 83; water, drawing of, IX 133 Mishnah Ketav Y ad Paris, purification of priest, IX 51; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 64, 70; sprinkling, rules of, IX 198, 205; utensils, purity of, IX 80, 83; water, drawing of, IX 127, 133; water used in rite, IX 153 Montefiore, Hugh, X 217 Montgomery, James Alan, X 219 Nairne, Alexander, X 217 Nathan, R., ashes disposition of, IX 242; purification of priest, IX 47, 216; X 120, 140, 151-52, 179, 194-95; pyre, IX 237; slaughter of heifer, X 100, 105, 184, 207; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 242; X 124, 165-66 Nel,iemiah, R., purification of priest, X 180; utensils, purity of, X 121, 163 Neophyti, X 213-16 Nusa.l].: see Epstein, Y. N.

252

INDEX TO PARTS IX AND X

Onkelos, X 213-16 Pardo, David, blemished heifer, IX 229; red heifer defined, IX 226, 229; rites of sacrifice, laws governing, IX 226, 246 Philo, X 210-12; Special laws, X 7 Purification of priest, IX 5-6, 17, 44-58, 215-13, 253-58; X 11, 17-22, 110-12, 120, 126, 128-29, 131-32, 140-43, 14953, 173, 176-80, 189, 191, 193-94, 202, 204 Purvis, James D., X 219 Pyre, IX 5-6, 17, 58, 236-38, 258-59; X 22, 120, 126, 138, 141 Qumran Sect, X 209-10 Rabin, Chaim, X 209 Rashi, sprinkling, rules of, IX 202 Red heifer defined, IX 4-5, 17, 22-37, 224, 226, 249-53; X 9-14, 110, 112, 120, 124, 126-35, 137-38, 172, 176, 187, 199, 204, 206-207 Rengstorf, Karl Heinrich, ashes, disposition of, IX 61-62; ash and water, mixing of, IX 95, 97, 99; blemished heifer, IX 37, 39-41, 43; extraneous matter, IX 141-45; purification of priest, IX 49-50, 52, 55-57; red heifer defined, IX 29-34, 36; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 65-68, 70, 72-73; slaughter of heifer, IX 59-60; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 191-94, 197; sprinkling, rules of, IX 199-200, 203206, 208, 210-14; utensils, purity of, IX 76-79, 81, 85; utensils used in rite, IX 89-91; water, drawing of, IX 99, 101, 108-109, 114-17, 127-28, 130, 13233, 136; water used in rite, IX 147-49, 152-56, 158 Rieder, David, X 213 Rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 6-7, 17-18, 63-73, 225, 232-37, 240-41, 246, 253-58, 260-65; X 25-29, 110-12, 121, 124, 130-31, 133-34, 139-43, 157, 173, 177, 181-82, 187, 200-202, 226 Roberts, Alexander, X 217 Robinson, Theodore H., X 217 Samson hen Abraham, ash and water, mixing of, IX 94; ashes, disposition of, X 24; blemished heifer, IX 40; X 16;

cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 239; purification of priest, IX 49, 56; X 94, 131; sprinkling, rnles of, IX 202, 205, 207; X 72; undean.ness and purification rite, IX 160, 166, 172, 178, 184; X 60, 62; utensils, purity of, IX 77, 81-82; water, drawing of, IX 101, 107, 113-15, 126; X 160; water used in rite, IX 152; X 146 Sanders, James A., X 209 Shammai, ashes disposition of, IX 262, 264; purification of priest, X 89; sprinkling, rules of, IX 210, 212; X 210, 212; X 74-75, 94-95, 126; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 262, 264; X 95, 155-56; utensils, purity of, X 31 Shelomo bar Joshua Adeni, ash and water, mixing of, IX 97; purification of priest, IX 52; sprinkling, rules, of, IX 202; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 166, 175; utensils, purity of, IX 80; water, drawing of, IX 105, 126 ShemaiCah, uncleanness and purification rite, X 58 Sifre ... Hillel: see Koleditzky, Shachne Sifre ... Nesiv: see Berlin, Naftali Sevi Yehudah Simeon, R., ash and water, mixing of, IX 8, 267; X 37, 90, 97, 130; ashes, disposition of, X 24; blemished heifer, IX 37-39, 268; X 14-15, 89, 96, 130, 132, 137, 176, 184, 190-91, 199; cedar, hyssop, wool thrown into heifer, IX 259, 267; X 101, 124; extraneous matter, IX 141; X 49, 90; purification of priest, IX 254, 269; X 19, 96, 106-107, 132, 152-53, 179, 191, 19495; red heifer defined, IX 29-31; X 11-12, 90, 104, 130, 137; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 67-68, 72, 254, 260;, X 26, 28, 90, 93, 100, 105, 121, 130-31, 139, 141, 200; slaughter of heifer, IX 231; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 13, 192-93, 197, 267; X 67-68, 97-98, 100, 123, 132, 168-69; sprinkling, rules of, IX 205; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 183-84, 187, 260; X 63, 65, 90, 100, 130, 155-56, 16566; utensils, purity of, IX 75-76, 78, 81-82, 85; X 29, 31-33, 90, 96-97, 145, 148, 163; water, drawing of, IX 101, 104, 115, 117, 125; X 38, 41,

GENERAL INDEX 90, 95, 97, 100, 122, 124, 127, 130, 157, 160-61, 194; water used in rite, IX 247; X 54, 90, 100, 122, 130

Simeon b. Gamaliel, R., ash and water, mixing of, X 121, 204; sprinkling, hyssop for, X 90; sprinkling, rules of, X 70, 72, 98, 100-101, 133, 170, 202; utensils, purity of, X 32, 90, 97, 100, 145; utensils used in rite, X 97 Simeon b. 1;:Ianina, R., purification of priest, IX 255-58; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 255-58; slaughter of heifer, X 96, 105, 182-83 Simeon b. Judah, utensils, purity of, X 31 Simeon b. Kahana, sprinkling, rules of, X 70, 100 Simeon the Righteous, purification of priest, X 20 Slaughter of heifer, IX 5, 17, 58-60, 23132; X 22-23, 110-12, 124, 131, 138,

253

144-45, 148, 161-63, 200

Utensils used in rite, IX 8, 18, 85-91; X 16, 33-36, 111, 121, 127-29, 193

Vermes, G., X 209, 213 "Vilna Gaon": see Elijah ben Solomon Zalman Water, drawing of, IX 9-10, 18, 99-138; X 11, 37-47, 122, 124, 127, 129-30, 157-61, 177, 182, 187, 189, 193-94, 203 Water used in rite, IX 11-12, 18, 14659, 247; X 51-57, 111-12, 122, 124, 127, 129-30, 132, 134, 145-47, 164-65, 177, 200-202 Weiss, purification of priest, IX 48; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 260 Whitaker, G. H., X 210 Williamson, Ronald, X 217 Wolfson, Harry Austryn, X 210

141, 143-44, 173, 182, 200, 204, 207

Slotki, Israel W., purification of priest, IX 58; sprinkling, rules of, IX 198; utensils, purity of, IX 80; water drawing of, IX 105, 107, 112, 125, 131, 135

Smith, Robertson, IX 2 Sperber, Alexander, X 213 Spicq, X 217 Sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 13-14, 17-18, 190-97, 266-67; X 66-69, 111-12, 123, 127,130,132,134,

168-69, 178,201

Sprinkling, rules of, IX 14-15, 18, 197214, 267; X 69-76, 111-13, 123-24, 126, 128-29, 132-33, 169-72, 201-204

Tarfon, R., ashes disposition of, IX 244; red heifer defined, IX 26; X 10, 99, 120, 128; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 192; X 123; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 244; X 66, 89, 95, 164, 166; water used in rite, X 93 Tiferet Yisrael: see Lipschutz, Israel ben Gedaliah Tosefta Rengstorf: see Rengstorf, Karl Heinrich Uncleanness and purification rite, IX 1213, 17-18, 160-90, 241-46, 260-65; X 57-66, 112, 122-24, 127-30, 132, 134, 154-57, 164-67, 173-75, 188, 201 Utensils, purity of, IX 7-8, 17-18, 74-85; X 29-33, 112, 121, 127, 131-32, 134,

Yaqqim of Haddar, uncleanness and purification rite, X 167 Yol;tanan, R., purification of priest, IX 2 55, 269; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 255; water, drawing of, IX 100

Yol).anan b. Gudgeda, R., purification of priest, IX 220, 221-23 Yol).anan b. Nuri, sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 196; sprinkling, rules of, IX 209, 211; X 74-75, 99, 123, 129, 171-72; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 161-62; X 57-58, 89, 95, 99, 123, 129, 132, 154-55, 177

Yol_ianan ben Zakkai, purification of priest, X 22, 89, 93, 126, 150-51; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 225; X 27, 90, 93, 106, 121, 124, 139; uncleanness and purification rite, IX 167; X 58, 93, 164, 166 Yol;tanan the High Priest, purification of priest, X 20 Yose, R., blemished heifer, IX 43; extraneous matter, IX 11, 145-46; X 51, 90, 97, 100, 131; purification of priest, IX 5, 44, 46, 48-50, 52-53, 56-57, 255-58; X 18-19, 21, 96, 149, 152, 179-80, 189-90, 192, 195; red heifer defined, X 12, 90, 99, 104, 129, 187; sprinkling, hyssop for, IX 13, 192-94; X 67-68, 97, 100, 168-69; sprinkling, rules of, X 75, 94; un-

254

INDEX TO PARTS IX AND X

cleanness and purification rite, IX 12, 164, 171-72, 182-87, 244-45, 264; X 60, 64-65, 90, 97, 100, 127, 130, 155, 165-67, 177, 188, 201; utensils, purity of, IX 75-76, 78-79; X 29-31, 90, 96, 121, 145, 163; utensils used in rite, X 33, 36, 90, 99, 121, 128-29, 193; water, drawing of, IX 9, 100, 105, 129-30, 135-36; X 44, 46-47, 90, 97, 99, 122, 129, 157, 160-61, 187, 189, 193; water used in rite, IX 11, 155-57; X 55, 90, 93, 95, 129, 146-47 Yose ben HaMeshulam, R., blemished heifer, X 17, 89-90, 100,137,184,202 Yose b. R. Judah, R., purification of priest, IX 254; rites of sacrifice, law

governing, IX 254; X 26, 90, 96, 105, 131, 141; slaughter of heifer, IX 23132; utensils, purity of, X 31, 90, 134, 163 Yose the Galilean, ashes disposition of, IX 244-45, 264; .purification of priest, X 20, 94, 107, 129, 140, 149; red heifer defined, IX 22, 25-28, 30-31; X 10-11, 90, 94, 104, 128; rites of sacrifice, law governing, IX 67-68, 255-58; X 26, 90, 99, 105, 121, 139, 201-202; slaughter of heifer, X 96, 105, 107, 182; sprinkling, rules of, IX 211-12; X 89, 95 Yosef b. YoCezer, R., purification of priest, IX 220, 223