The Iggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon [Unstated Hardcover] 0940118602, 9780940118607

Citation preview

The lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon translated and annotated by

Rabbi Nosson Dovid Rabinowich

Rabbi Jacob Joseph School Press - Ahavath Torah Institute Moznaim Jerusalem 5749 / 1988

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

ALJ>

BM

With appreciation to my brother and sister in-law

lf1~

Joseph and Lydia Rabinowich

.t1q 13

for their support of the research for this project

1q1i

Copyright 01988 by Rabbi Nosson Dovid Rabinowich All rights reserved. The book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the author la Israel: Rabbi Nosson Dovid Rabinowich Rechov HaKablan 33 Har Nof, Jerusalem 93878

Tel. (02) 538444 i■

Aaerica:

1529 56th Street Brooklyn, N.Y., 11219 Tel. (718) 8515243

Typcseting by Vagsal Ltd. Mishor Adumim Printed in Israel

Digitized by

Go gle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ,;

I

To my wife Chavie ,,nn~

Original from Digitized by

Google

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS Cbapcer

Paae

Approbations Preface Introduction A. Structure of the Iggeres B. Our Edition of the Iggeres C. The Commentary and Notes D. Rav Sherira Gaon: A Short Biography

6

11 15 15 17 20

I.The Questions/ The First Generations of Tannaim 2.The Oral Law Before Rebbe 3.The Mishnah 4.The Tosefta 5.The Braissos, Sifra, and Sifrei 6.The Talmud 7.The Development of the Gemara 8.The Work of the Savoraim / From Babylonia to Rebbe: Chronology 9.The First Generation of Amoraim IO.The Amoraic Period (1) 11.The Amoraic Period (2) / The Savoraim 12.The Geonic Period (I) 13.The Geonic Period (2) 14.The Geonic Period (3) Selected Bibliography Index (I) Index (2)

Digitized by

Google

1

12 20 34 40

52

70 82 90

98 110 124 136 156 163 165 167

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

OVADIA YOSS!P 11a,111 n111-i:::1,, •■n■• I ■H . . . . .~ IIAa. . -~ tellASI. ._r:.Ji>) . . - ......... •W•"lft :l"lft l1•S',

11••······· --

J'"llt~II ~'}I' l,'lt?'n/17 /"'~ /,-,,-,~ l'n JI~/,

~frto -.:ttq

"'llflll ~WJ;'\I

'Z-"

./llrJJ >l~i'J;' pl•~ ~7::,J

J.,~ •/ll'lr.ll

0J ')J?•/17 Kl I

"'v, ~,~ ~:::, :'>el1jJ/I 'l!' ~p l.l'JW 'l" )·,n

~"mn ~ 1~1i7M /JJI-'

J"J •n ;:_~? 1111 '2}11' 11tfG 111e. ;nll' ~f

,,•...,.,,,. "lff?

f)'if

l"l""ltlion Jtl••f1;1 , , :71

"'t'J l"J,_,>il I'

j

1•~• "lf/, ,

,oi.J,., "'"' ~6 '21~?

kll~

1;,/J•~')

....~,.,/;) ,0 1':'IIA

.~y•-,1/d ,""l i•~ n.••1, ;-in l'Jl'l,n1 ~r..NI •;y,:,117 •~' 1

-Ydlt' .,?.,

r.,B," ,~,..,, Lj ,.)• ,q,,, """''"';) H r"' ~~. ,.,_,.,~ 1w,e !J>U •J J ;\, ,M) ittt .,..,, , :rtl'!)'' i,0-.., I'''" ~J'' ,wt· pi# ()"l~fi.)11' ,Y~!J' J-;'q;~ --

. :",~Ji jllcc"J 7'0.!/'i)

,.. )

1

V,"

"lVr /l'!t''1,':l

,17

),.-;'.,_'_r__

Digitized by

Go gle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

119."I

HaGaon HaRav Ovadiah Yossef, shlita Former Chief Rabbi of Israel 14 Tammuz, 5748

How honored is today, when the hidden has been revealed: the Epistle of Rav Sherira Gaon in a new edition, clarified and scrutinized closely by the precious and distinguished scholar, an exceptional individual, sharp and knowledgeable, whose learning is clear and pure, whose name is like the finest oil, who possesses judgment and reasoning - Rabbi Nosson Dovid Rabinowich, ~hlita. He possesses much knowledge of history and has proved his merit with other important works, prepared with much taste and sense, illuminating and full of splendor. In this composition, too, he has been able to do the same through much wisdom, understanding, and breadth of knowledge. To this accomplishment I declare, "More power to him, for the sake of the Torah!" I bless him that his work will find favor with Hashem, and that he will merit to see the finished product of his efforts, and may his wellsprings spread outward for the magnification and strengthening of the Torah, with length of

days, and years of life, in all goodness and pleasantness. May the author's fame match that of the great ones of earlier generations in splendor and glory.

Ovadiab Yossef

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Rabbi CHAIM P. SCHEINBERG KIRYAT IIATl'BRSDORI' PANIII IIBIROT a JBRUSALBII, ISRABL

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

HaGaon Rabbi Chaim P. Scheinberg, shlita Rosh Yeshivas "Torah Or," Jerusalem 13 Tammuz, 5748

The holy and famous Epistle of our teacher Rav Sherira Gaon was brought before me. In this Epistle he clarifies and explains the basic principles upon which the chain of transmission of the Oral Law is founded. This is practically the only source for these matters. Unfortunately, this Epistle is like a closed book, due to its Aramaic language, and it has remained without a •redeemer' until now. And now the distinguished Rav and Gaon, Rabbi Nosson Dovid Rabinowich, shlita, Rosh Yeshivas Ahavas Torah in Jerusalem, has come before me. He already has established a reputation through the learned works which he has published with the approbations of the Gedo/ei Yisroe/ who greatly praise him for his great talents and the high level of his works. Now he has wisely decided to publish anew this holy Epistle, with an English translation and a commentary on its words, which are the words of a Gaon, requiring research and study in depth. Although I usually refrain from giving approbations, I cannot but express my great admiration when I glanced through the book and observed the great, important, and honest work that the author has created. He has presented this "closed" Epistle like a "well-set table" in front of the learners, with an all-encompassing and thorough commentary. Much thanks are due to him for this. Certainly the Gaon, zatzal, will speak well on his behalf so that he will merit to continue to spread and disseminate Torah in Yisroel, with fulfillment and ever-expanding knowledge and with all the best. It is proper and fitting for every hen Torah to bring the blessing into his home and to savor the wisdom of our teacher, the Gaon. Written and sealed for the honor of the Torah and her wise men, and awaiting a speedy redemption, Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

EDITIONS OF SOURCES FREQUENTLY USED IN THIS WORK Primary Sources: I. Mishnah and Talmud: Vilna ed. (Babylonian and Jerusalem) 2. Toscfta: Vilna ed. 3. Midrash Rabbah: Vilna ed. 4. Seder Tannaim V'Amoraim, ed. by A. Neubauer, Oxford, 1877, vol. I, pp. 179-184. Secondary Sources: I. HaLcvi, Y.I., Doros HaRislwnim; Jerusalem, 1967; six volumes. This work was originally published in Prcssburg and Frankfurt a.M., 1897-1918, and in BcrlinVienna. 1920-1922, in three volumes. The following table shows the relationship between the volumes of the original editions and the volumes of the Jerusalem edition: Original ed. Vol. 1 (Kerech 3) Vol. 1 (Kcrcch 5) Vol. 1 Vol. 3

Jerusalem ed Vols. 1 and 1 Vols. 3 and 4 Vol. 5 Vol. 6

2. Hyman, A., lggeres Rav Sherira Gaon, Pashegen HaKtav; London, 1911. 3. Levine, B.M., lggeres Rav Sherira Gaon; Jerusalem, 1972. Contains two versions of the lggeres: French and Spanish. (The terms "French" and "Spanish" refer to the origin of the manuscripts. Both versions arc, of course, in Aramaic.) 4. - - - , "Addenda and Corrections" (to the original ed. of the previous entry); Haifa, 1921. - - - , MiTekufat HaGeonim: Rav Sherira Gaon; Jaffa, 1917 [reprinted in Jerusalem, 1972]. 5. Maimonides, Moshe, Mishnah im Peirush R. Moshe ben Maimon; edited and translated into Hebrew by J. Kafach; Jerusalem, 1963. 6. Avraham lbn Daud (Ra'avad), Sefer HaQabbalah; translated and edited by G. Cohen; Philadelphia, 1967. 7. Zacuto, Abraham, Se/er Yuchasin; edited by Z. Filipowski; second edition with an introduction by A.H. Freiman; Frankfurt a.M., 1925.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVE SITY OF VIRGINIA

PREFACE It is no doubt through the merit (zchus avos) of my revered forebears, saintly tzaddikim who sacrificed their lives to protect authentic Jewish tradition, that I have been granted the privilege of making the first complete English translation of the lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon, the indispensable guide to the Mesorah chain and the transmission process of the Oral Torah. In addition, the present work includes the first sentence-by-sentence commentary on this great classic. Though complete translations have been published in Latin,• French,2 and Hebrew ,3 they have been of very poor quality, especially the two Hebrew versions.' The few translations of good quality that have appeared have dealt with only a small section of the lggeres.s This, coupled with the fact that the Geonic writings, until recently, were relatively unknown, especially to the yeshivah world, contributed to the cloud of obscurity that has covered Rav Sherira Gaon (hereafter RSG) and his great epistle. The truth is that RSG, like his son, Rav Hai Gaon, was among the most prolific writers of Geonic responsa. The lggeres, a classic in Jewish historiography, is still today,one thousand years after its composition, the 1.

2. 3. 4.

.S.

J. Wallerstein, Scltoirae QIUle Dicitur Epistola (lnterpretatione Lativa A.dvolationilnu et Criticis et Exegeticis lnslnlcta); Krotochini, 1861. L. Landau, Epitre Historique du R. Scherira Gao11. (Traduite de r hebreu moderne - arameen et commentee avec une introduction); Antwerp, 1904. A. Kahanc, Sif,vt HaHistoria HaYisraelit; Warsaw, 1922, vol.I, pp.73 ff. This translation was copied, word for word, in the the 1%0 edition of Shem HaGedolim (fel-Aviv), without mentioning Kahane. In Sefer HaYucluJsilt HaSluJ/mt, London, 1857, p.38 (and again in Sefw M~d Moadim. London, 1868, pp.39-57), Z. Filipowski published what he claimed was a new critical edition of the lggeres based on the first published version in the Constantinople, 1566, edition of Sefer Ha Yuchasin, and including variants from the following sources: a. B. Goldberg's edition in Chafetz Matmonim; Berlin, 1845. b. A British Museum manuscript that he published in Shomer Zion HaNe'eman, Altona, 1851-1852, nos.106-117 (not 116, as stated by A. Neubauer, Medina/ Jewisl, Clrronic/es, Oxford, 1895, Vol. I, Introduction, p.XI, note 7). c. Other manuscripts from Oxford. In actuality, what he published was basically a poor Hebrew translation ofthe Constantinople edition. See B. Goldberg's sharp critique of Filipowsti's work in Otzar HaSifnu, Jaraslau, 1887, pg. 73. For an English translation, see David Goodblatt, Rabbbtic lnslnlction in SasalUIIII Babylonia; Leiden, 1975, pp.22-27. (See also Solomon B. Freehof, A Treasury ofResponsa, Philadelphia, 1962, p.6, in which the author translated a few paragraphs.) For a Hebrew translation, see Jacob Bodek, Yerushalayim, L'vov, 1844, pp..53-83. Bodek tells us (p.83) that he plans on publishing the complete lggeres, but unfortunately it seems he never bad a chance, since he died ten years later.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of Rav Sllnira Goon

foundation for all study of the Talmudic period. RSG was the first postTalmudic authority to deal with the question of how the Mishnah, Tosefta, Braissos, and Talmud had been compiled. He also answered the fundamental question as to what role the Men of the Great Assembly and the 'Pairs' of the Second Commonwealth period played in the formation of the Mishnah. As a practical and accurate historian, he is the first6 to present a detailed discussion of the Savoraim, including their activity in revising and finishing the Talmud. His systematic chronological list of the Babylonian Geonim down to the year of his writing, classifying each authority in relation to the others as teacher, disciple, or colleague, is a classic demonstration of the authenticity of the Rabbinic tradition by tracing its chain of transmission. RSG speaks with the authority of one of the Jewish people's greatest scholars. He ruled over world Jewry of his day through the power of his supreme knowledge of the Torah. He had unlimited access to the archives and oral traditions of the Yeshivah of Pumbedisa, reaching back in an unbroken chain to the time of the destruction of the First Temple. The result, highly compressed into a few thousand words of Geonic Aramaic, is a historiographic work of tremendous sweep, painstaking detail, and unchallengeable authority.'

*** It is with much praise to the Almighty that I present this work in time for the one thousandth jubilee of the writing of the lggeres in 987 (4747). May it merit to be a fitting tribute to RSG and his magnum opus. A new Hebrew translation, with extensive commentary and notes, is now in the planning stage, as is a dissertation, "Studies in the Iggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon. " 7 Among the important basic issues to be dealt with there, and which will no doubt concern the reader of this work, are the following: 1) How do RSG's views on major controversial pointss compare with the 6.

7.

8.

This is true since one of the questions put to him by the elders of Kairouan dealt specifically with the Savoraic period, and RSG therefore offered much detailed information in bis answer. In reality, however, Seder Tannaim VeAmoraim (published by Rabbi Kalman Kahane, Frankfort, 1935), written in the late 9th century C.E., is the first work to discuss, though only briefly, the Savoraim. Surprisingly, Rabbi M. Z. Bergman in his Gateway to the Talmud, N.Y., 1985 (a translation of the Hebrew edition which first appeared in 1964), which be describes as an "introduction to Oral Law dealing with its history, development, principles, terminology and chain of transmission," omits the Iggeres when listing bis primary sources on p.13 of bis Introduction. He obviously did not have access to an edition of the lggeres as his comments on pg. 73 also seem to indicate. Jacob E. Epbratbi, The Savoraic Period and its literature; Petach Tikvah, 1973, in bis appendices does compare RSG's chronology of the Amoraic and Savoraic periods with that of the Seder Tannaim VeAmoraim (sec Neubauer, above, note 4), while G. Cohen, The Book of Tradition (Se/er Ha-Qabbalah) by Abraham Ibn Daud; Philadelphia, 1967, compares the lggeres with the Raavad's work, whenever applicable. See also J. Neusner,

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Preface

views of his contemporaries such as Nissim hen Yaakov of Kairouan,9 the son of the scholar whose questions prompted the Iggeres; Rav Shmuel bar Chofni Gaon;•o and, of course, Rav Saadia Gaon?11 2) To what extent is the lggeres based on sources, both written and unwritten, and how much is pure logic or conjecture? 3) To what extent was the lggeres used by the Rishonim, especially the Rambam (Maimonides)? 4) In what ways did RSG utilize his knowledge of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds? 5) What conclusions can be drawn from a consistent stylistic and-even more vital-linguistic analysis of the lggeres? In the meantime the present work, with G-d's help, should be appealing to both scholar and layman. It is hoped that also the rabbi, mechanech, and yeshivah and university student, will now be aided in appreciating RSG's work in all its aspects and integrating it" into their programs of study. The lggeres is an excellent guide to the serious study of Jewish history and for a deeper insight into the transmission process of the Oral Law.

***

I would like to thank a c:,n i,c',n, HaRav Aaron Feldman, sh/ita, for reviewing parts of the present work in manuscript, and Rabbi Dr. Yisrael Meir Kirmer, shlita, for always being available with sound advice. Y. Gafni's article, "Talmudic Chronology in the lggeres of R. Sherira Gaonn [Zion (52), 1987) was extremely useful, as is any conversation with him. My very dear friend Shlomo Fox-Ashrei was consistently a tremendous help through his excellent editing and endless efforts to attain thoroughness and truth. To two pillars of Torah and chessed, Dov Friedberg and Mahir Reisz, M:::1:-rn ,,ru~ ,,n 'll"t, I owe much appreciation for their initial support A History of the Jews in Babylonia; Leiden, 1970, Vol. 5, pp. 144-5, for a chart comparing data on the mid-founh to the mid-seventh centuries from RSG, Seder Tannaim VeAmoraim, and Se/er HaKabbalah; and see D. Goodblatt (above, note 5), pp.37-38. 9. The Sequence ofthe Recipients ofthe Torah (Se/er Seder Mekablei HaToralt; no longer extant); see S. Poznanski, Esquisse Historique s,u /es Juifs de Kairouan [in Hebrew]; Wanaw, 1919, p.38. According to G.D. Cohen (above, note 8), pp.174-186, and Poznanski, the Seder HaKabba/ah of R. Nissim, cited by R. Menacbem Meiri in his introduction to Avos, is identical with the above work. They also believe that the Seder Mekablei HaTorah was an epitome of the lggeres of R. Sherira Gaon. S. Abramson, Rav Nissim Gaon (Five Books; Jerusalem, 1965, p.16) claims the citation in the Meiri is actually to the Se/er HaMafte'ach of R. Nissim (J. Goldenthal, Vienna, 1847). 10. E. Roth, ..A Geonic Fragment Concerning the Oral Train of Tradition,. [in Hebrew]; Tarbitz 26 (1956- 57), pp.410 ff; and S. Abramson, ..R. Shmuel bar Chofni's Introduction to the Talmud" [in Hebrew]; ibid, pp.421 ff. 11. A. Harkavy, ZicJ,ron LaRislronim; Berlin, 1903, Vol. V, pp. 152-3, 194, 268 ff; and H. Malter, ..Saadia Studies;" JQR, N.S.3 (1912-13), p.491 and 497.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggn-es of Rav Slrerlra Ga""

of this project. Mordechai Friedman tn~n, Michael Hasten, Yechiel Michael Karfunkel, Yehoshua Leiner, Moshe Neiman, and Shavy Weinstock have been true friends, always encouraging me with my various endeavors. I am very grateful for their friendship. My deeply felt thanks go to a remarkable man of chessed and a great Torah activist, as loyal as a friend can be, Dr. Marvin Schick, President of Rabbi Jacob Joseph School Institutes, for the basic grant, through the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School Press, which made this project, after somewhat of a delay, a reality. I would also like to express my appreciation to Mr. Chanoch Vagshal of Moznaim Publishing Co. for bis contagious enthusiasm about this project. And to Dov and Micha, for making this a technically beautiful work.

*** To my dear wife, Chavie 'Wlll, I dedicate this work. It is inconceivable that the power of the written word could ever convey my profound gratitude and appreciation to her. May we merit to raise our dear children ,~nT, according to the Torah, strictly adhering to the Rabbinic tradition that RSG so staunchly upheld.

Nosson Dovid Rabinowicb

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

INTRODUCTION A. Structure of the lggeres

By way of introduction, RSG first presents the five• questions posed by Rav Yaakov ben Nissim of Kairouan. The lggeres itself, constituting a book-length responsum to these questions, can basically be divided into two parts. The first part, until p.84, deals primarily with the methodological aspects of the development of Rabbinic literature. There is one short historical digression (p. 70-72), where RSG presents a chronological list of the Talmudic sages, beginning with the last of the Tannaim and continuing through half of the Amoraic period, in both Babylonia and Eretz Yisrael, up until the middle of the fourth century C.E. The second part of the lggeres, beginning on p.84, is the historical section of the work. Though RSG introduces this section with question number four, regarding the Savoraic period, he takes the unclarity surrounding this period as a starting point to discuss the earlier history of Torah learning both in Babylonia and Eretz Yisrael. The first half of this section (pp.00-00) deals with the Second Commonwealth and Talmudic periods, while the second half (pp.00-00) deals with the Savoraic and Geonic periods. Here we find a basic difference between the treatment of the Geonim who headed the Yeshivah of Pumbedisa and those who headed the Yeshivah of Sura. The listing regarding Pumbedisa is more exact and detailed than that regarding Sura. The reason is that Pumbedisa was RSG's own yeshivah, where he had more direct access to both written archives and oral traditions. Unfortunately, this same difference between Pumbedisa and Sura holds true in RSG's treatment of the Amoraic period. Here he lists seventeen Roshei Yeshivah of Pumbedisa as opposed to eleven for Sura. This, too, can be attributed to the richer availability of source materials regarding Pumbedisa.

B. Our Edition of the Jggeres Modem scholarship•• has clearly established that two basic versions of the lggeres are extant: the Spanish and the French. Until the middle of this 1.

This is according to our division of the questions. We have also subdivided question number one into four parts. See p.1-2. la. The first to make this distinction were S.C.Z. Halberstam in 3- letter to Shadal in 1865 [later published in Kevod HaLevanon, Beilitz (10), 1874, p.10]; and, four years later, M.Y. Chazan, Teshuvos HaGeonim. Shaarei Teshuvah, and lyei Ha Yam, Leghorn, 1869, sec. 187, p.77.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of RaY Slterlra Gaon

century,2 the consensus had been that the Spanish version was more reliable.1 It was Y. N. Epstein4 who first reversed this consensus, convincingly proving that the French version is the more authentic. His thesis was soon reinforced by M. Baer, who, by tracing RSG's sources, claimed that the French version was in many ways closer to these sources than was the Spanish version.s At present, Epstein's view is the one accepted by modem scholars. For the purpose of the present translation, however, the Spanish version has been used as the basic text. The reason is a practical one. It is the Spanish version that until now has been available to the interested layman and yeshivah student, primarily through its publication in Se/er Yuchasin.6 In truth, the two versions are on the whole quite close to each other, and yet both are important, as S. Y. Rappaport already realized 140 years ago. He writcs:6a The clear truth is that both have advantages and disadvantages, as is the case with all versions of ancient sources, and we need both [versions]. Therefore, whenever it seemed advisable to adopt the French version, I have done so, explaining my reason in a gloss or footnote. (The most crucial point of diversion is, of course, the question whether Rebbe's arrangement7 of the Mishnah was written or oral.)8 In addition, I have tried to point out the significant differences between the two versions. In most instances, I have also noted the variations in the Talmudic texts quoted by RSG as compared with

2.

Already in 1929, however, one scholar had questioned the accepted preference for the Spanish version. See I. Elbogen, "Wic Stcht cs um die zwci Rczcnsioncn des ScheriraBricfes?" Festsclrrift nun 75 Jalvigen Bestelten des Judisclr-Tlteo/ogischen Seminllrs, II, Breslau, pp.61-84. And sec S. Assaf, Tekufas HaGeonim VeSifrutoh; Jerusalem, 1955, pp.152-3. 3. See the long discussion, proofs, and summary of scholarly opinion in B.M. Levine's edition of the Iggercs; Haifa, 1921, Introduction, pp.24-36. This edition was reprinted in Jerusalem in 1972. 4. In an appendix to his Mevo'ot uSifrut Ha.A.moraim; Tel-Aviv, 1963, pp.61~15. 5. "Iyunim Beiggcres Rav Sherira Gaon;" Bar /Ian Yearbook, 4-S (1967), pp. 181-196. One of the main arguments in Bacr's thesis is that the Seder TaMaim Ve.Amoraim wu probably RSG's main source; it can then be shown that the French version of the Iggeres is much closer to this source than is the Spanish version. Ephrati (/oc. cit., p.32) has attacked this thesis by showing that the opposite is true. He claims that the Seder TOIUlaim VeAmoraim (Neubauer ed.), upon which Baer built his thesis, actually utiliud the French version of the Iggcres as a source! 6. First published in 1566; at least five different editions have since been published, and the latest Eshkol (Jerusalem) reprint has gone through at least ten printings. Further impetus to the widespread use of the Spanish version of the Iggcres was given by its publication in the back of some editions of the Talmud, beginning with that published in New York, 1955. A. Kahanc (see Preface, n.3 above, pJCI) in his translation also U9cd the Spanish version. li t::ii nin, "N:,t p pn,, 1::1,, Ncii ":l1 ?"11' "Cl n,n, 7N"70l 1litC "Cl "l"inN, Cl"::,in 1::1 n":l l":l Nn;i,7£) n,n C"lituN1 ,n,"N1 Yl'Ni .77it n,:i, "NC?t' il":l:, n:,,n ;:,; iU7:lpli tu"::l pi ,tu ,,,,::i Nru,;s, nn"i1 ":li l":l C"1MN C"i:l1:l 7N"?Cl l'tuiil" ,,, ,n,ott' nin, it1'"7N ."N:::lt p pn,, pi "1"07 n tilN1

of Hillel. Rav Sherira is referring to these two founders themselves. On the relationship between Shammai and Hillel and their respective Houses, see my work, Binu Shnos Dor V'Dor, Jerusalem, 1986, p.32 Detar: This was the stronghold during Bar Kochba's reign of two and a half years (see Sanhedrin 93b). did not sene the sages sufficiently: The intricate details of the law and of the Rabbinic enactments were not studied thoroughly enough with the teachers, and some laws were even forgotten. Rabban Y ocbanan hen Zakkai: He had received the complete tradition through a long and steady personal association with Shammai and Hillel. He was the last of the great receivers and transmitters of the entire Torah tradition. Thus, the Talmud (Sotah 49a) states: "When Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai died, the luster of wisdom ceased." (Rashi on Exodus 31:3 defines "wisdom" as "that which a man learns by hearing from others.") Therefore, only after he died, did the disputes become numerous. Rabban Gamliel: This is Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh, who became nasi and the leading Torah authority after Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, about ten years after the Destruction. Rabbi Dosa hen Hyrcanus: He lived through the Second Commonwealth Period,20 so he certainly must have been acquainted with the earlier, clear and undisputed traditions. from tlae earlier period: This refers to other senior sages who had lived through the pre-Destruction period and must have had access to the earlier, undisputed traditions. Sbamuti: The term can mean either one who is in cherem, excommunication, or a

Digitized by

Go.ogle.. . . .Ti :rr

Original from

~

ERSFPf-8f-V+RG-l NtA-

7

The Questions

these sages were former students of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai. • During that same generation, there were also Rabbi Yosi HaGallili, Rabbi Elaz.ar ben Azarya, Rabbi Yochanan bcn Nuri, Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka, Rabbi Channina ben Teradyon, Rabbi Elaz.ar ben Teradyon,:zs Rabbi Elaz.ar Chisma, Abba Chalafta, and Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma. Serving them were Shimon bcn Azzai, Shimon ben Zoma, and many other sages who lived in that generation. Second to them,• [in] that they were [first] students but [later] became related to them both as students and as colleagues,26 were Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Eliezer HaModai, Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava, and Rabbi Yishmael. Moreover, at that time Rabbi Yehudah* was in Netzivin. • Although he was there during the Temple period,2s he was also there after the Destruction.29 The reprieve• after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash• was an important time, for the sages then convened in order to retrieve the laws that were nearly lost in the turmoil and persecutions and as a result of the strife between the Houses of Shammai and Hillel.

,c,, ,:,., Hi, Hinn:,. "0l ,,n, ,:,.,, n..,n, l:l itl1'?H ..:,.,, """?lM Hpi,:i t:i pn,....:i,, ..,,l t:i tlMi" itl1?H ,,, t,..,,n p Hl"ln ,,, N:lNi NCCn itl1?N ,,, 1,..,,n p CM"l!)?, .Heep l:l ..c,.. ,,, Nl'\E>;n Meir l::l til1Ctt"I "Ntl1 l:l 1,110ft' Hinn:,. ,,n, "tt'"E)l "l"iMN p:i,, .Nii

c .., ..c,n ,,ntt' en, C""ltt'i ,, TU:l CM"C":l , ..n, C"i:,.,n, ,,, "l1i,cn itl1?N ..:,.,, N:l"Pl1 .?Nl1Ctt'" ,,, N:l:l p Mi1i1" n,,n....:,., n"n Ml1tt' nn,N ,,m n,,n....:,., M"Mtt' E>'l1Hi t":l~l:l iMN l"",l1 M"M n,:,.n TCT:l T"::l"':itl:l .ctt- n":in 1:1,,n iMN Nintt- """ :iitt-M tot, 1cr ,n,N:i, n,:,.n 1:1,,nc 1n~"Ptt' ,,N:i ,,ntt- cn..n,,,n tinN? i:ltt-" np,,nc, ictt-ni tt-utt-:i ni,:,.H .??"M l'\'1:li "NCtt' l'\°':l

follower of the house of Shammai.23 It is unclear why RSG mentions this point of information. One might suggest, perhaps, that because he was from the school of Shammai, he tended to take controversial stands on various issues; see Bava Metzia 59b and Shabbos 130a. students of Rabban Yocbanan ben Zakkai: The disputes developed even though these sages were students of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, who had been an outstanding transmitter of the tradition. Tlaem: The Tannaim just mentioned. Rabbi Yehadah: Rabbi Yehudah bcn Bcsayra. Netzirin: A city in the northeast corner of Mesopotamia.27 reprie•e: RSG might be specifically referring to the 14 year period beginning after the Destruction until 84 c.e. which culminated in the important and decisive confercnce at Yavneh (cf. Berachos 27b).

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Slterira Gaon

8

There were many sages at that time. Some of them had seats in the House of Study and others sat before them.• On the day when Rabbi Elazar ben Ai.aryah was inaugurated as nasi, we say in Tractate Berachos:'30 "That day, many seats were added to the House of Study. Rabbi Yochanan said: 'Abba Yosi ben Dustai and the sages disagree. One says that four hundred seats were added, and one says seven hundred.'" If so many were added, certainly many more were there originally.JOa

Kl1l1 Kinn:i p:li "tt'"!)l ,,n, ,n, l"l"K1 Kl"IW:li M:,"K yinlc ,,n:i ":ln", Ktt'i1C l"l":l '1',C!)C ,:in.., "l"inM ll:li K:l"M yinlc, ,, cp,nM, Kc,..:1, y,n..c,p Kinn ll"iCM it"itl1 p itlhM ":l "'C!)O nc:, ,!)o,nM Mc,.. n:i "l"?!) pn,.. ,, iCKi .Mtt'i1C in l):lii "Ml"lcii l:l "Ci" K:lM

Rabbi Akiva sacrificed his lifeJ1 after the death of Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma; and then Rabbi Channina ben Teradyon was executed.• The wisdom of the sages decreased after the passing [of these great men]. Rabbi Akiva had trained many students, but there was a persecution against the students of Rabbi Akiva [and they died].• Thus, the authority over Yisrael was entrusted to his latter students, as the sages teach:34 "Rabbi Akiva had twenty-four thousand students extending from Geves• to Antipatris,• and all of them died between Pesach and Shavous. The world remained desolate until the students came and studied under the sages of the south, who taught [the Torah] to them. And it was they who revived [the Torah] at that time: Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yosi, Rabbi

.,p11n n,n nc:, ":lit qc,n"M

iCK ini "?C!)C i1MC '1 iCM i:ii .ni:li:l:l MM"K1:I i1KC 11:le'

,ci11 nM M:l"i'l1 ":li ,cc, "Ci" ":li i10£lltt' inM i1l"iit?

Kl"ln ,, linl, - MCCi' T:l nc:inn n10wru, 1,.. y:i

,,n

M:l"i'l1

,,

1"Cl1m

.Ci1"inM

?lJ Kictt' mm n:i,n C"1"C?l"I n,ni M:l"i'l1 'i ?tt' C"i"C?l"lit C"1"0?l"li1 ?lJ ',Mitt'"i M:ICC l):li iiCM1 K:l"i'l1 'i ?tt' C""le' ,, , ..n C"1"C?n ti?K itt'l1 C"le' Ci10!)"10lK ,.in n:uc M:l"i'l1 ,,, n"n, n,i11 ,.in nc!)c ,nc c,:,, ?!M iK:ltt' ,11 CCtt' C?ilJn

,,,n,

en, nKltt'i c,,,:itt' cn"n,:i, ,,, n,,n.. 'i "Ci" ,,, i"KC ":li

reprieve... Beis HaMitdas•: As opposed to the catastrophe at Betar when there was no reprieve until a long time afterwards. before them: As students. was execllted: The Talmud in Avodah Z.Orah 18a seems to indicate that R. Channina bcn Teradyon's death followed immediately after that of Rabbi Yosi bcn Kisma. But RSG is also relying on Tractate Semachos 8:9, which states that Rabbi Alciva was executed before Rabbi Channina.32 [and they died]: The Talmud (Yevamos 62b) states that they died as a punishment for not showing respect for each other.33 Geves: a city in the territory of Dan, the southernmost portion of Eretz Yisrael.JS A■tipatris: This city was located where Kfar Saba in Israel now stands.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

9

The Questions

Yehudah, Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua." Rabbi Meir was the most learned, sharp, and incisive of all these students, and despite his youth, was ordained by Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva's other disciples were ordained afterwards by Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava, who also ordained Rabbbi Meir again, as we say:36

cm lm~tt'

p

it1'?N ,,, TU70tt' NJi"'N,, itW nn,N:l mi"'01'it .n,c:,.,:,.

c,,,n, ,,o;i mn i"'NO ,:i,, ,, ,,oo, 1,n,,c "'E)~ ,,nc, iitl"',oo, .n,n i'"'l"'i l"1'N N:l"'i'1' n,,n, ,, N:l"'i'1' ,, ,n:i NiNtt'? i"'NO ,:i,, n,,oo ,,n, N:l:l 1::1 iCN n,,n, :li iCN Tl"'iCNi :i,~; tt'"'NM iniN ii,t Ci:l :li N?C?Ntt' ictt' N:l:l p Miiil"' "':lii ?Nitt'"':l n,olp "'l"'i ,,~:i Nm it1'tt'iM n,,,c Mitl nnN C1'E)tt' liM"' 10,on ,,tt' ?Nitt'"' ;i, T"',o,ott' ,,i,, liit"' 1C0lit ,,, ,:i 1,,0,ott' c,nn, :i,nn it:l p itiiit"' ,, ittt'1' itt) ?ii'1'"' c,,n "'ltt' T"':l ,, :ltt'"'i ,,n ;N:l:l n,,,,;i n,,,i, ,n~ t"':,., c,;,,;i Ctt' 100, C1'iE)tt'? Ntt'iN T"':l "':lii i"'NC "':li ...C"'li't Mtt""CM ,:i,, 1,110~ ,:i,, ,o,, ,:,.,,

Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: "May that man be remembered favorably, and Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava is his name. Were it not for him, the laws of [that category of civil cases known as], Kenasos• would have been lost to Yisrael. One time the wicked kingdom• had decreed that whoever pcrformed an ordination should be put to death; whoever received ordination should be put to death; the city in which the ordination took place should be demolished, and the boundaries wherein it bad taken place should be uprooted. What did Rabbi Yehudah hen Bava do? He went and sat between two great mountains that lay between two large cities; [i.e.], between the Shabbos boundaries of Usha and Shefar'am, and he ordained there five elders: Rabbi :c,,o,c N"'iN :i,, ,mctt' 1::1 itl7?N Meir, Rabbi Yehudah, Rabbi Yosi, Rabbi NM"'Ni, Tl"'~i'Ci .M"CMl "':li C,N Shimon, and Rabbi Elazar ben Sbamua; i:l i:l it:li iCNi1i ..,T"'iiitlO:l Rav Evya adds Rabbi Necbemiab [to the "':li ,c,Nit , , pn,, ,, iCN Nln list]." il"'N N:l"'i'l7 "':li ,,co N? i"'NC The Talmud in SanhedrinJ1 asks: Did Rabbi Yebudah ben Bava ordain 'i it"',CO P"'iCNi ?it1'i~ N?N Rabbi Meir? Hasn't Rabba bar Chana said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: "He who asserts that Rabbi Akiva did not ordain Rabbi Meir is certainly in error?"

;,,,n,

ke■uos:

A Kenas is a fine or penalty, as distinct from direct damages. For example,

in certain cases a thief must return double the value of the stolen article. The "laws of kenasos" include, among others, cases of theft, embezzlement, personal injury, and some types of property damage. Wicked Klagdom: The Romans (cf. Binu Shnos Dor V'Dor, pg. 250).

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Shuira Gaon

,,ni

[The Gemara] answers: "Rabbi Akiva had n,n p,l,, ni,:ip K?i K:l,i'l1 indeed ordained him, but it was not recognized ,n,;:ip, K:l:l p n,,n, ,, n,~oc because [Rabbi Meir] was too young; afterwards Rabbi Yehudah ben Bava ordained him and it was accepted."

Notes to Chapter 1 I.

We have basically relied on the London ms. version (that appears in Levine's edition on pg. 3) which mentions Rav Hai and his beis din, unlike some of the other mss. According to Levine (n. 3 there), the questioners wanted to compliment RSG and make him proud of his son who just recently (see lggeres p. 160) bad been appointed av beis din. See further chap. 14, p.158 re: Channina. la. We also find that the Raavad uses this term regarding the Talmud. See his Se/er HaQabalah, Gershon Cohen ed., Philadelphia, 1967, p.33. 2. Sanhedrin 86a. 3. Eruvin 46b. 4. Cf. Shabbos 31a and Rambam in the Introduction to his commentary on the Mishnah. 5. It seems that RSG was the first to use this term for Tractate Beitzah. See Raavad, Hasagos on Hi/chos Kilayim 10:17; Y.N. Epstein, Mavo'ot LeSifrut Tannait; Jerusalem, 1965, p.991. 6. See Rabbi Yitzhcak Aizik HaLcvi, Doros HaRishonim, vol. 3, pg. 1 ff., where it is shown that the reference here is also to the second Ravina, called Ravina Zuta (see Kesubos 100b). The second Ravina was a nephew of the first Ravina, who was the colleague of Rav Ashi. 7. The root is also found with referencc to the formation of the Talmud: iUWDl iic'IIY •.r,n0 mn "!'111'1 """ i::,•n:,M "" (lggcres, Chapter 8 pg.84) Here, too, the meaning is to put in proper form and order. 8. 64b. 9. The term ipn• (so it appears in most Talmudic texts) is extremely close to See the Jerusalem Talmud, Shekalim 5: I: •n,,lKl i'UW w,110 l'i,nn ll""l"; Tosefta 5: 1: ,,00 ll""l M'mt'Y

,.,n•

,,c.

."0'1'0',n', ni::,',n

10. Our text in Yevamos, however, reads: •::,, ,ypn 11e0 y•n•.in0 -,::,0. 11. The word "'CV has been explained by Shadal, Kerem Chemed, Vienna, 1836, vol. 2, pg. 178 (and not p.176 as in Levine, p.7 n.2) as follows: Since they used to learn all the halachos and all the mishnayos by heart, the students would express many statements, one after the other, with their lips, over and over, to impress them on their memory. As a result, they looked like a man who is chewing and grinding something tough; hence the term "Mc-u· (lit., ..to grind It certainly is not referring here to reading in a book as J. Bodck, Jerusalem, 1845, pg. 55, n.10, understands. The proof he offers is also based on a misunderstanding of RSG. 12. 66a. 13. President of the Beis Din (Av Beis Din); sec S.Y.L. Rappaport, Erech Milin, Warsaw, 1914, vol.I, p.4. The Pairs mentioned in Tractatc Avos, ch.I, were Nasi and Av Beis Din respectively. 13a. Bodek's thesis (op. cit., pg.56, n. 12) that RSG's intention is to talmidim (students) has no basis and also contradicts his remarks on pg. 58 n. 19. 14. Bava Basra 134a. 15. Sec Rashi ibid s.v. Gematrias. 16. See Chagigah 16a. 17. Sltabbos 14b. The ..Houscs of Shammai and Hillel, on the other hand, had many disputes. 0

).

0

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Questions

11

18. It would seem that RSG is following the Jerusalem Talmud (Taanis 4:5), which indicates that most of the sages believed in the Messiahship of Bar Kochba and supported him. Likewise, Rambam writes: "It seemed to all Israel and to the great sages that [Bar Kochba] was King Mashiach." (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Melachim 25:23). The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 93b) seems to express a contrary view. 19. RSG's view that the disturbances began only after the Destruction is contradicted by the Talmud (Sanhedrin 88b) which states: "When there were many disciples of Shammai and Hillel who had not studied sufficiently, many disputes arose in Israel." This indicates that the period of disputes began with the Houses of Shammai and Hillel, even before the Destruction. Thus, the beginning of the period of disturbances would coincide with the massacres and vicissitudes brought on by Antipater and Herod (47 B.C.E - 4 C.E., 3714-3757). An even earlier cause of disputes occurred in 57 B.C.E. (3704), when, at Antipater's request, Gabinius, the Roman proconsul of Judea, abolished the Great Sanhedrin. Henceforth, there was no supreme authority which could resolve halachic controversies. 20. See Yevamos 16a. Cf., however, R. Zvi Chayes, Kol Kisvei Maharatz Chiyes, " lmrei Binah," Jerusalem Ed., 1958, pg. 51I. 21. RSG seems to be of the opinion that the Houses of Shammai and Hillel began their disputations after the Destruction. In Binu Shnos Dor V'Dor, Jerusalem, 1986, pg. JOO, n.63, I offer proof to the contrary. 22. See Pesachim l l4a and Jerusalem Talmud Berachos 4,1. 23. SeeShabbos 130bandRashitheres.v. "Shamuti." Tosafos, s.v. D'RebiargueswithRashiand understands the term to mean a follower of Shammai. He brings conclusive proof from the Jerusalem Talmud, Terumos 5,2. 24. See, for example, B.M. 59b. 25. He is mentioned only in the Jerusalem Talmud, Gillin 1, 4. Rambam does :1ot mention him in his Introduction to the Mishnah. 26. Fr. version. 27. Cf., however, Raavad, Se/er Ha'Kabbalah (Cohen Ed.), Philadelphia, 1967, pg. 20 who places Netzivin in Babylonia. 28. See Pesachim 3b. 29. See ibid 109a and Rosh Hashanah 29b. 30. 28a. 30a. This understanding of the passage seens to contradict the Gemara's sole pupose in bringing the passage: to show that only that day were new talmidim admitted. 31. See Berachos 6lb. 32. Therefore, there is no contradiction between the Talmud's version and that of RSG, and, consequently, no need for Hyman's emendation (pg.23, n.24). 33. Hyman's suggestion (pg. 23, n.25) that RSG had a variant text is not supported by any manuscript. It is possible that RSG is merely pointing out that the deaths of the students during the persecutions was a punishment for their sin. 34. Yevamos 62b. 35. See Rashi on Kiddushin 57b s.v. B'Geves. 36. Avodah Zarah 8b. 37. 14a.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I

I I

I I

Chapter 2: The

Oral Law Before Rebbe

During that generation,• Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was nasi. R. Nassan came up from Babylonia and served as av beis din, as is stated in Horayos:i Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to R. Nassan: "Although your father's belt• helped in appointing you av beis din, will it help you to become nasi?" It also mentions thereJ that R. Meir was Chacham Hador, [the wisest sage• of the generation]: When R. Meir and R. Nassan entered the house of study, the entire mesivta stood before them.• That generation also had many great sages constantly promulgating Torah, sages such as: R. Yishmael the son of R. Yochanan bcn Bcrokah,

R. Elazar bcn R. Shimon, R. Yaakov of Kefar Chatya,

R. Yehoshua bcn Karcha, R. Elazar bcn Yebudah,

R. Preidah, the earlier R. Pcdas,4

R. Shimon bcn Yebudah,

R. 2.echariah bcn HaKatzav.

N"'tt'l l":ltt'i n,n Nii t"'in:i, :lN n,n, ..,:i:in 1ru ,:,.i nr,m :n,,i,n, Nicl:i tt'illci:, l"'1 l"l"':l "'Ml llil "':l1? l":l'e'1 M"'? 1CN ,,,i'e'? 1i:lN1 N1Ci' 1? "'lMNi "'lMN "'C N"''e'l ,,nc, l"'1 r,,:,. :lN ,,,n c:,n n,n ,,Ne ,:,.,, .,,, ,, ,,,..lJ ,,n i:, cnn Tt'illci:i n,n Ntt'11C ":l? 1"NC ":l1i TN Jit"bi'C Nn:l"JiC N?i:, NC"P

,,ni

Minn:,. c ..,,,l c,c:,n "Cl 1u:, N,..,n Nn..,,N "l":l11 Nii l:l pn,, '1 ?ft' il:l ?NlJC'e'" '1 '1i Nnip p lJ'e'iM" ,,, Npii:,. p tilJC'e' ,,, n,,n.. p 1TlJ?N ,,, tilJC'e' 1i:i 1TlJ?N ,,, n,,n.. ,, n,..,E> ,, N"?On iE>:, Tt'"N :li'lr' :i~pn 1:i n,,:,, ,,, nNcip n,~

that generation: The second generation of TaMOim after the Destruction.

your father's belt: According to RSG in a responsum,2 R. Nassan's father was an exilarch. The exilarchs used to wear a special ornamented girdle or belt when they were called to appear before the Persian king. R. Shimon b. Gamliel is basically saying to R. Nassan that he should not think that his father's position as exilarch will help him become nasi. wisest sage: The title "Chacham " has of yet, not been properly defined. The most probable solution is that the Chacham judged ritual cases while the Av Beis Din dealt with monetary issues. A Chacham would, therefore, be associated with the term: mc,,i1 while an Av Beis Din would be involved with: t,,. See Sanhedrin Sa: (•i1i,, n,,.,. (nmcc 'l'"T) - ,,,, T,,.,. ,(il'l'm ,,c"lt) -, and Bamidbar Rabbah (chap. 10): nnww T"i" 1~ l'\'lr::,.i ill'\WW c:,n ,T'"T' "" 1~ l'\'lr::,.,. Ja before them: RSG is probably referring to the beginning of this passage wherein R. Meir is called "Chacham".

"il,,,""

12

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

13

The Oral Law Before Rebbe R. Masya ben Charash, Elazar bco Yirmyah, Chanan ben Pinchas, Abba Chanan, Plimo, Sumchus, R. Shimon ben Elazar, R. Cbanina ben Gamliel, R. Yehudah ben Gamliel,

R. Elazar bcn Tadai, R. Pinchas ben Ya'ir, R. Akiva ben Dosa, Isi ben Yehudah, R. Chanina ben Chachinai, R. Ycshcvav the Scribe,s

R. Elazar HaKappar, R. Reuven Ha-ltztarubli, and other sages.

Throughout his life, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel trained his son, Rabbeinu HaKadosh, in the study of Torah, as we say in Bava Metzia:6 When Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua hen Karcha were sitting on benches,• Rebbe and R. Elazar hen Shimon sat in front of them on the ground presenting difficulties and reconciling them. They• said: "We drink of their waters,• yet they sit on the ground." They had benches built for them and brought them up [from the ground]. Rebbe studied under the sages, as he recalls: When we studied Torah under R. Shimon in Tekoa.. .7 He also learned the laws of the Mishnah from them, as we say in Yevamos:s Rebbe said: "When I went to study Torah under R. Elazar hen Shammua, his disciples combined against me like the cocks of Beis Bukya• and did not let me learn more than this single thing in our

M"Oi" p it1'?Ni i,in p N"nO ,,, ,o,!li pn N:lNi cnl!l ?:l pn, ,,, it1'?N p ti1'ott' ,,, o,~o,o, p n,,n.. ,,, ?N"?Ol p Nl"ln ,,, "Nin l:l it1'?N ,,, ?N"?Ol No,, l::l N::l"P1' ":l,, ,"N" l::l cnl!) "Nl"~n p Nl"ln ,,, n,,n.. p "CNi iE>pn it1',N ":lii i!licn ::l::ltt'" ,,, C"O~n, ..,:::i,,~iNn p,N, ,,, .Ci"'101'tt'

?1l J•:::ii,i ',i, i"O" ?~i n,,n ,,o,n, il:::i i,iipn il":li ":ln" ,,n ,~ :N1"'m:l P",oNpi Nnip 1:::i 1'tt'in" ,,, J•:ltt'i ":li ,n..op ":ln" ,,n "?C!lCN "tt'PO ,,n ti1'ott' ,,:::i it1'',N ,,, C"n,i, UN Ci"'l"O"O ,,oN ·"Pillo, ,n, u:::i .1'pip ":ll ?1' l"::ltt'i" en, .inl"PONi "'0!>0 ioN, C"o~nn cniN ,, wi,, ?tN n,,n t"io, il""Mtt'~ ,, Nn~;n, .,~, 1'ipn:::i ti1'ott' ,, P",oNi iol 1inlo t"n"lno, ,,o,, "n~;ni,~ ,, ioN nio::l":l 1'iOtt' p it1'?N ,, ?tN n,,n ;i, l"'Ulin~ ,.., ..o,n "'1' ,,:in N?N ,o,, "l,n"li1 N?i N"P:l n":l

sitting on benches: The halachah required that the teachers sit (see Rambam, Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:2). Rashi explains that in this instance many other scholars were also sitting on benches, but only Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and R. Yehoshua ben

Karcha are mentioned because they were the leading sages of the generation.

They: The other scholars who were also sitting on benches (Raslu). waters: Water is used as a metaphor for Torah (see Bava Kamma 17a). Reis B■kya: A town in Gallilee notorious for its expert and fierce cocks who do not allow the intrusion of a sttange cock among them (Raslu).

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I I

14

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

Mishnah: 'One is liable to the penalty of stoning for [having relations with] a hermaphrodite just as [one is liable for having relations with] a male."

ClU".lii1lN :U'INft'C:l 1MN i:11 .,:n:, il?"i'O , ..,l1 T":l"n

When Rebbe succeeded his father [as nasz], he was accompanied [in his studies] by the sons of the [earlier] sages, such as R. Yishmael ben R. Yosi, R. Yosi ben R. Yehudah, and R. Yaakov of Kefar Chatya,9 as well as other sages, such as R. Chiyya who came up from Babylonia, R. Chanina bar Chama, R. Afas, and the [two] sons of Rabbeinu Kakadosh - Rabban Gamliel [III] and R. Shimon 10 and R. Yannai. [All these sages] greatly disseminated the Torah.

'11il:l il"il ili:lN iJ1:l 170 1:::,i 'i y,.:i:, C"C:>nil yn,N 7ft' 41ilU:l 'i:l "Ci" 'ii 410i" i":l ?Nl10ft''I N"tOn i!):) tt'"N :li'l1" 'i il11i1, N'l'ln 'i TU:, C"iMN C"1'1C?lii Non i:l ill"ln 'ii 7:l:lC il?l1tt' til1Ctt' 'ii ?N"?CJ pii O!lN 'ii en, "Nl'I 'ii tt'iipn iJ'l:li ?ft' ,,l:l .il:liil niin it":liil

n,,,,n

itt'i!lN i?Ni'T C"ltt'i'T 7::l:li ;:::,:1 ,,ntt' n,::i,nn ;:,

During all these years [the sages] clarified all the laws which had been left unresolved in the academies due to the great loss that took place because of the Temple's destruction and the unresolved halachic questions that had arisen during those troubled and confused times. All the halachic disputes that had come into existence during those three generationsr 1 were decided. The individual and majority opinions were made known after our sages had diligently and completely analyzed and investigated them. They thoroughly examined all the traditions and mishnayos in order to establish the correct version. They did not add to the earlier teachings of the Men of the Great Assembly. But they toiled mightily and examined the material until they understood what the earlier masters had said and had practiced. Thus they finally resolved all their doubts.

?ii;i 1Cl£)ilil "1n£)C liitt'i1Cil n,pE)on, l'\'l:ln T:lin:l n 41n~ ;:,, n,c,ncn tniN:l en, i41ntt' niii, 'J:l ,i;utt' n,p,,nn Ci'T"l":l il1iu, Ci'T:l n:::,,n ilj:)OE)l c'l:1,,cn 'li:11, c,,'IM"il "i:li "MilO iil:l fl:li '1Mil01 il'\:l ili:l1 Npii Ni'T:l ipii 'lft'"!)l nu,ictt'n ,::i M:lin ,pip,, Np,, i!)'IOin N?i .flpli? lii"ltt'Ci'Ti liOl:) "~lNC "N0p1 NiC"C ?l1 'lft''IE)l "nilO inilO N?N n,,,.:in ip"ClN1 11' 'l:li:li ,p,ipi ipii C"litt'Ni -µn T'liCN ,,n, "NC ilO"ft'E)Ni ii, T'l1:llJ ,,n, 'INci .,n, li"N1 "i'E)O ;:::, yin,

None of the early sages had written anything; [and this continued to be the case] until the last years of Rabbeinu HaKadosh. Nor did they recite the laws in a uniform version or wording. However, they knew and unanimously accepted the same underlying principles, and there was no dispute over

C"litt'Niil TO ,n n,n N?i U":li1 "Ci" r:,io 1l1 ClJ1C :lli:)1 "Oi.l nn N7 "Cl p, .~,,pn inN yitt',, inN M£l:l ,n,,:, 1m, T'll11" ,in ,n,cl1l0 N?N N?i yin:l n,n nnN ni,, yin;:,,

., ,..,..

..

,,,n

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Tlae Oral Law Before Rebbe

the substance of their material. Thus, they knew which opinions were unanimous and which were in dispute; which 'belonged to an individual and which belonged to the majority. They did not possess any prepared text or set Mishnah which everyone knew by heart. Despite the unanimity among the sages in their underlying principles and teachings, each sage taught his students with whichever order and whichever method he preferred. Thus, some chose a short form, as we say:12 The teaching of R. Eliezer ben Yaakov is small in quantity but well sifted.

15

,i,,,,

"KC Kru,;13 ,n.,.,c,,l:i n,n n"K1 "KC, '7:)il .. il"'n"'K1 , ..n .., il"'n"K1 "Kc, Kru,;13 il"':l en, , ..n K'7i c ..:i,, il"'n"K1 "Kc, n11,,.. illtttei C"lPU"\C c,,:i, inK illl:l cn,K J"l,~ '7:)il~ C"'C1'10il yn,K K'7K inK y,~,, 13•11K ?"'1',,.. , ..n~ nii,,c~n, ',:) cn:i ?"',~ , ..n f?:) C"'C:)nil~ "'K:l ,,,"'C;n; "'lnc inKi inK , , , ill "'K:li ni,,~ ,,:in ill niip ,,, m,K~ ~.. .ni,..~ l:l iT1"''7K ,, ru~c fl"'iCK1:) ill~" C'7il7'7 fl"'ir.:>Ki "i'li :li' :li'1"' n"'Ki niip ,,, i"'i"'0'7n, ciK

,:i,

We also say: One should always teach one's student in concise terms.13 Some taught general rules; others added n,K, l"10i!), n"Ki n,;;:) "'lni details; and others expanded and offered , ..,o,, ....,0, ?"10~En y,n,,,c, many, many examples and analogies [to their "'ln p:1,0 in, in ',:)i ....,0,, students]. Kn', 0"1i'0 "Kil il":li il""lnK ,: Each of the sages taught as his master taught 10"'"i' "Kil n, inKc "Kili Kl"\'7"'0 him. One would place a certain topic at the "'Cl n"'Ki .il"'? n,,,0 "KMi M"l~"'' beginning [of the exposition] while another Kn'7"0 i0Ki , ..n .. il"':lii ?KO would place it later. One would treat [the il"'' 1'"'1"1 l•1'K Kcnc:i il; "ll'l topic] succinctly, while another would expand :l"'"'n ?l"'ir.:>Ki Kin , ..n .. Kinn, at length. Sometimes a sage even taught his teacher's dictum without mentioning opposing K:)"'Ki ,:i, ti~,:i ir.:>K? C1K views, although he knew that the majority Kin M"'' Ki:ll'\C0i TKO "'ln0i ruled differently. Indeed, we say:14 .Kll"\ "Kil "':) Kin, Kln "Kil ":) A man is obliged to use the same wording "'lt.:> Kil nicl:l "~I) ":)il c,w, as his teacher. Kln ?KC ?l"icK, K"il "'li?El ,, Others taught what seemed reasonable to "':) TKO:) ,,:), fl:11 Uni Kil'i them; one passage like a certain Tanna and "'n:)ii il0:):l fl"ir.:>Ki Kll'\ "Kil another passage according to a different Tanna. This is why the Talmud uses such expressions as: Whose opinion is this? It is R...

Or: Who is the author of this which our sages taught?

Or: Whom does [this law] follow? It follows [the opinion ot] this Tanna. [The Talmud, in fact,] states in certain places:

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

16

The one who taught this passage did not ll"i'1i'10i it illttl N'i it illttlttl 't0 teach this passage. ill"O Nn'io, Nn?O:l Nn"lnC:l We investigate every single word of a NE)ic, Nln ,n:i NW"1 ll"Oi'io, Tannaitic teaching, and sometimes even ,n,:> Nn""lMO -µn, .NlM 1M:l establish the first part of a single mishnah 1M:l Nn""1:l l""1PC as following the view of one Tanna and the .Nl?"1 Nn""i:l concluding passage as following the view of a different Tanna. Once Rebbe had formulated1s the Mishnah, i11Wl7 n,n, "NOi' l"10N ,in, all these teachings came to be known as t"n"lMC:l ll:l1 "l":l l""iil "!)lN P"C1l1:) yin,,:> 1"0l ,, n,n, braissos.16 The early masterst6a used to say that thirteen ,c,n 1"0l iliil ,, :C"11l M:)CC:l approaches• to the Law are found among N""M '1? i1"10lN NM:>?il "E)N the teachers of our Mishnah, and Rebbe had il"l"O ,,i'l7Ni ,, w,n iil"lO l7:ltt' mastered them all, as it is taught in Tractate -µn, il"Oi' l7:lttl N""M ,, 11i1N Nedarim:11 When Rebbe had mastered thirteen Niilil iliil ,n, ,,,N "l"1nN n"tt' approaches to the laws, he taught R. n,n i:> ,n, 110w mn, Nixp Chiyya seven of them. Rebbe took ill and "OP iill"10li N""M '1 ?lN C"'1l forgot them. R. Chiyya restored the seven, iil.l"11i1Ni N""M '1 NnNi N1XP but the other six were forgotten. There Niilil'i '1 "ln iliil i:>i .'1 "OP was a launderer who had heard when Rebbe used to recite them. R. Chiyya ..n,N i1M"Wl7 nnN il"? 10N N1'!P went and learned them from the launderer. 10N "=>il "'10N1 N~"Ni N"'"M nNi [R. Chiyya] then went and repeated them N""ni N""n nN M"ttll7 ilMM il"? before Rebbe. When Rebbe used to see ."MiN i1Wl7 this launderer, he would say to him: "You made me and Chiyya." According to some, N"ilW N=>"N1 "':l1 Ntn1 ti":>i he would say: "You made Chiyya, and l"l7N p:l11 ""ilM:l "Nil ,;,:::, Chiyya made me .., wn l"P?C NM?"O Nin, iil"O~, Because Rebbe saw such diversity in the Nl"O N1"C!) "MNi tzl"E)l N'i, teachings of our sages, even though they all shared the same underlying principles, he t0l700 Np, Ntni ?"Nin Nn,o, feared that these teachings would not endure no:>nn l"l70 cnco Npi N:l? and proliferate, and loss would ensue. He ,, ioN, N"nn "'=> n,,n Ni'?Mcoi saw that the heart• was diminishing, the C"'liWN1 ?tt! p; l":li1"l7:l pn,, wellsprings of wisdom were being blocked up, and Torah was disappearing.ts As R. Yochanan says in Eruvin:t9

,, r,n,

approaches: Lit., "faces.., the heart: The capacity to understand and remember.

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

17

The Oral Law Bejore Rebbe

The hearts of the early ones are like the entrance to the main hall [of the Holy Temple] and the hearts of the later ones like the entrance to the antechamber. Who are the early ones? R. Akiva. Who are the later ones? R. Elazar ben Shammua.• The heavens bequeathed and fortified Rebbe with Torah and majesty. Everyone everywhere was subservient to him all his years, as in a passage which we say in Gittin:M Rabbah the son of Rava (some say R. Hillel the son of Vallas) said: "From the days of Moshe until Rebbe, we have not found Torah and majesty combined in one person." During Rebbe's lifetime, the sages were spared all persecution due to the friendship between Rebbc and Antoninus.21 • [Rebbe] then decided to arrange the laws in order that our sages would recite and teach uniformly, rather than each one in his own style. The earlier sages - prior to the destruction of the Temple - did not need this, because they were involved with the Oral Torah. They did not spell out the reasons for well-known matters, as is done in written Torah; rather, they knew and thought over their rationales in their hearts, and each one taught these to his students as a man teaches his companion, using whatever words he chooses. When they assembled in the Hall of Hewn Stone• and in the houses of study, they

C"liinH ,wi c,iH '"' inl'\!):::) THC P"iCHi ?:::l"il '"' inn!):::l 'i C"liinH H:l"Pl1 'i C"liWHi .mew p ,rn,H mn, H"CW ye ,,, inucnHi ii"' T"El"":::l "iili n,iili n,in n"' H"nn ":::l "lit' in?:::l n"il'\H ?:::lC n"i:l nJi iCH T"l!)"l:l P"iCHi 'ii n"'i:l ;;n 'i HC"l'\ "Hi HJii H? "Ji ,m nwc nic"c c,Hi .inH cipc:l n,i,.:n n,in il"~ ,:::ic ":lii "Ci":l p:i il!)pr,,i T":l H:::l"Hi Hl'\ilCMi ciw Hier,, "TliJ"l? C":::)CHi .":lii CU"lil!)lH p:li "Cil?i ":::l"n 'I:) Hn:::i,n H,i inH yiw,i inH n!) in,:::i n"lt'!)l? Hllt'"? ,n, ,n ,:::i ciil"? pin "Op, C"liWHi -µn, ciwc ?"Hin ":::)n? i:::l"il!)JH H? J"l"Jn ,,cnH H?i Hin ii!) ?l1JW n,,n, iiiin TU:) C"l'i," C"iJi: in"Cl'l!) "Cl11!) "'iCli "l1i" H?H H:l"l'\:::)i iii, iClC ,ni ,n ,::ii yin::,: ii:ln', iE>Ccn CiH~ ii"i"C?n?, ti":::li .ii'li"lt' yir,,; iit"H:l iic,ci "n:1:, J"l"tln n:::iw,: T"!)l:::lci

R. Elazar bea Sllammaa: One of the teachers of Rebbe. A11toai■111: Antoninus Pius was the successor of Hadrian as Roman emperor (138-161 C.E.). In many stories in the Talmud and Midrash, he is described as being in the company of R. Yehuclah HaNasi. The Midrash22 makes reference to more than one emperor; it distinguishes between Antoninus senior and Antoninus junior. Modem scholarship,23 however, has difficulty fitting these accounts into the historic framework of the period of the Antonines, especially since Rebbe thrived mainly at the end of the second century. Hall of Hew■ Stoae: This chamber was situated partly within and partly outside the

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

18

were prepared to say [their teachings] 1"':l 1,0,K'? 1,,,,00 en n,w,,c immediately. The sages enjoyed sovereignty, Kl'lp1' K'?:l in'? l1"'K Mn'?~, without distress or fear, and the heavens T"'l"'"'C'O ,,n K'l'OW 10, K,n!) M',:li helped them. The underlying principles of n,,n "''OlnO tin'? ti,,:l ,,n, tin'? Torah were as clear to them as the Law given to Moshe at Sinai. There was no confusion or in:l n,;, "'l"'C'O nw; n:,;n:, ll",'OK1:) KN,'?!) in:l qi'?n dispute among them, as we say::u Rabbi Yosi said: "Originally there were no np,,n0 il"il K'? n'?nn:l ..c,, i•K disputes among Yisracl; rather, the Beis 0"'1':lW '?W 1":l K',K ',KiW":l Din of Seventy-One [members] sat in the n"tln n:,w'?:l T":lwi"' , ..n inK, Hall of Hewn Stone; and two courts of :iw,.. ,nK l":) '?W T"l"', "11:l "'ltt'i twenty-three sat, one at the entrance of the Temple Mount, and one at the door :lwi" inK, r,,:in ,n nr,!) ;11 of the Temple Courtyard. Other courts T"'l"'1 "11:l iKwi nit1'il nr,!) ;11 of twenty-three sat in the Jewish cities. If ,,11:i T"':lw,, nw;w, C"iw11 ;w a question arose [the local Beis Din was ,:,, ;,Mw'? ,:i,n ,,~n '?Kiw, consulted. ff they had a tradition, they "K'OW "1'1'0'?11 i:li'OW 'll1 Kl'\"i:l stated it; if not, they went to the beis din of nn:li p,i ;:, ,ww M'?W ,.,n, the closest city. If they had a tradition, they stated it; if not, they went to the beis n,,n nTl1li '?KiW":l np,;n0 .n,,,n ..nw:, din situated at the entrance to the Temple mount..." [And so on, until they reached ;;n ~,:,, "':)n in:,, p:i,, the Beis Din of Seventy-One, where a final decision was rendered.] "But when the "'?PW Mp "l'\:)K U:l TU1'0W T:lii disciples of Shammai and Hillel increased "'Klni Krui'?E> T'l'O"'..P in number, disputes multiplied in Israel, ,n; 1WE>"M M'?i '!'lil:l because these disciples had not studied ."TMM 1,w;, "TMM il!):l ,ru..C1l"C" sufficiently. As a result, the Torah became as two Torahs. The sages after this, during the days of Rabban Gamliel• and his son Shimon,~ continued to debate the law. Disputes among the Tannaim prevailed, and it was impossible to teach the laws in a uniform wording.

l'I"",

,,ni ,,10, ,,,n

actual Temple area (see Yoma 25a). It served as the meeting place of the seventy-one members of the Sanhedrin. Rabba■ Gamliel: This is Rabban Gamliel I, who lived until the Destruction.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Oral Law Before Rebbe

19

Notes to Chapter 2 13b. See A.ruch Hasha/em (A. Kohut Ed.) Lcmberg, 1878, Erecl, Komar. Cf. Znachim 19a where Huna b. Nassan, who was most probably an exilarcb (See chap. 11, pg. 111), also wore a special belt. 3. Horayos loc. cit,. 3a. See Rashi in Moed Katan 22b s.v. c:in: •nac,,n ucc C"ll'p:mw 1•»n 'J» l"IJ'ICD". See also Se/er Yuchasin, pg.14: m'J cw '1'1"141 ,c:in 1"'40 •::11 :l'l,.,,nl 101"'1 c:in 'Jw ru1-mn 'J::IM. 4. See Se/er Yuchasin, p. 76, s.v. Popus. S. See/ Chronicles 24:13 for the correct pronunciation. 6. 84b. 1. Shabbos 147b. 8. 84a. 9. He apparently was prominent in two generations, since he is mentioned above as belonging to the previous generation. 10. See Kesubos 103b. 11. See Rashi, BOYa Metzia 33b, s.v.-c•::i and see ch. l, p. 5-9 where RSG delineates the three generations. 12. Eruvin 62b. 13. PelOchim 3a. 14. Eduyos 1:3. 15. See ch. I, note 7, pg. 10. 16. See Mss. 16a. Levine in his Introduction, pg. 9, claims that this term is always used by RSG when quoting an Aggadic passage from the Talmud. 17. 41a. 18. Cf. Sotah 49a: " When R. Akiva passed away, the wellsprinp of wisdom were blocked up.., R. Akiva lived in the generation before Rebbe. And compare the following passage from Medieval Jewish Chronicles, vol. I, p. 173: "One hundred seventy-two years after the [destruction of the] Second Temple, the two millenia of Torah [which had begun with Avraham] were completed and came to an end, and the angel of Torah departed. The wellsprinp of wisdom diminished. This is what we say: 'R. Yocbanan said: The bean of the early ones is like the entrance to a great hall and the heart of the later ones is like the entrance to a chamber." 19. 53a. 20. 59a. 21. Sec Sanhedrin 91 a-b. I.

2.

"°'

22. Kohe/es Rabbah 10,S. 23. The most likely identification of Antoninus in the Talmudic and Midrashic passages is that ofS.Y.L. Rappaport, Erech Millin, Warsaw, 1914, pg. 219 with Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (161-180 C.E.) who is known to us, from secular sources, as a righteous ruler, a lover of knowledge, and an admirer of wise and spiritually gifted men. 24. Sanhedrin 88b. 25. We have followed the French edition, which reads, " ... during the days of Rabban Gamliel..." as this is more correct in the chronological context.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 3:

The Mishnah

The days of Rebbe, the son of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, were an opportune time.• Rebbe arranged• and wrote the Mishnah. • The words of the Mishnah can be compared to the words of the Almighty to Moshe:• they were like a sign and a wonder.• Rebbe did not produce these words with his own mind; rather, they were the teachings of the early sages who preceded him. •2

Y:lttti ?ttl il: ,,, 'l'ICi":li ii1l"tin, M"n?"C MlJ""liCM i1tt!C::) "'lnc, "?"C ,,..,, ii1l":ln::,, n!lic::,, niM::,i ticM n,,11n "l>C M?M ii1l"i:ln i1":l"?C iM?i l""Ci C"litttMi ii1li1 "0-il iini "?C iilli1 i1ttllJC pn,c l' Klei .i1"Ci'?, C"lMn ~pilJ:l "M::)t l:l pi:li

R. Sherira Gaon next proceeds to develop in detail the theme that Rebbe did not "produce f the words of the Mishnah] with his own mind," but simply perpetuated the teachings of the earlier sages.

How do we know this?• The Mishnah says: 3 It once happened that Ben Zakkai examined [witnesses] regarding the stems of the fig.• opport■ae time: Lit., "the opport■ae time... aad wrote

••

matter was aided." tile Mishnah: It would seem that RSG is referring to the end of the persecutions in Rcbbe's days and that this passage is a continuation of his statements in chap. II, pg. 17 concerning Rcbbe's opportunity to arrange the Mishnah. 1• to Moslle: R. Shcrira Gaon is probably referring to Eruvin 54b: "Since Moshe learned from the mouth of the Omnipotent, the matter was aided."iCJ ni,:lln ,.,c nw, r,,=>") "i'T'n'?'c Klr'nDC). R. Sherira's intention might be that no word of the Mishnah is superfluous. a sign and a wo■der: The phrase refers to confirmation of prophecy (sec Deuteronomy 13:2 and Rambam, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 9:1). In this phrase and in his use of the term, "the matter was aided" which the Talmud applies to the prophecy of Moshe Rabbeinu (sec the two preceding glosses), R. Sherira Gaon is drawing a parallel between the divine inspiration of Moshe and that of Rcbbe. To what extent the parallel is to be taken literally is a matter of conjecture. sqes wllo preceded ldm: This refers to the sages mentioned in chaps. I and II. tlds: How do we know that Rcbbe did not create the Mishnah himself, but only perpetuated earlier teaching.,? tlae stem of tlae fig: Witnesses testified that someone bad committed murder under a certain fag tree. To test the validity of their testimony, Ben Zakkai questioned them about the appearance of small details llUCh as the stam of the fag tn:e. 20

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

21

The Misluulh

The Talmud suggests:• This reference is probably to a different Ben Zakkai;• for if Rabban Yochanan bcn Zakkai were meant, would Rebbe have called him merely Ben Zakkai? [The Talmud now refutes the above statement by quoting a braissa which parallels the mishnah and which includes the title, "Rabban:"]

"M:)t pi M1:1l'\CC M1Cl:1 '"iCM1 "M:)t p pn," pi 1"0 "M1 MC',lM ,.,p M:,ni "N:)t T:1 M"', ,.,p M:,n "'t:pc, "M:,t p pn,.. 1:1, n"r, T:1 pn,.. p, p,:1, Mtt'l1C M"ll'\n, M',M Tl"PCH1 C"lMl'\ "lP1l1:l "M:)t icM, n,n "lllr, :lt:i"n 1"cr,n M":li', M"ClJtO i:ll'\CMi Nl'\',C Minn TC Mti',Mi M"Ctt':l M"l1:lpi Mtt'l1C Tl:li 'Ul'\1 "Met:, r,r,n, TCt M""ll'\ C"lHl'\ "lpil1:l "M:)t p pi:li .M""ll'\C M',i l"l'\"ll'\C:l ":)M ":li

,:i,

Yet has it not been taught: It once happened that Rabban Yochanan bcn Zakkai examined witnesses regarding the stems of the fig? The Talmud now finds a different way to reconcile the mishnah and braissa: t"i:lW ir:, pill pnic iil1i tt'"l"H M:)"N ,, 'CMi C"il1n l'\M He [Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai] must therefore have been a disciple sitting before "P'l'I,, n,,n.. "l:lr, ,nr, ""Mt:',i his master• when he made this suggestion. t"i:11'0 iM fll'\ t"i:lMC Mlt:"', His reasoning was so acceptable to his ni,n, M"!)U '1:),r, NC',Mi Tll'\ master that he [the masterJs perpetuated fll'\ ":)"M it"', Mp!)CC l"l'\"ll'\C', [the incident] in his [the disciple's] name.• Thus, from the time of Hillel and Shammai, our sages had already taught this mishnah with the plain name " Ben Zakkai," and Rebbc also taught it this way, without modifying it. Here is another proof:• The Mishnah asks:1 How are the [Shabbos boundaries of] towns extended? The Gemara states:s Rebbc said: "Is there someone who would inquire of the Judeans, who are good grammarians, [how the word for "extend" is spelled in this Mishnah, i.e.] do we learn it, mabrin o~i:iKc) or m'abrin 00 C,Ni "::li ii"7 i0Ni'10 "::lii il"t)i'O J•:J.tt'i7 il"7 NC".l TN "::li7 i"NC n,, n .., , T"tpilJ::i ".ll'\ Ml'\!) ?tN1 "Ntt'ii' j::l ::li'lJ" 'i::l iltt'lJCi nin, Nl'\"71'1 Nrm:> ,,n, ::i,n,, i"tpu, N.lrn Oil Y::ltt'i n::i ::i,n, N:>"N "N J•:J.tt'i iCN Nll'\i Oil ::l"il" T"tpilJ::l 7"Ntt' Npi jNt)

The story continues:12 R. Yaakov hen Karshai went and sat by the upper room where R. Shimon hen Gamliel was studying, and he recited [Tractate] iil::l C,"OiN1 Nl'\:>ii N:l"Ni Uktzin again and again. R. Shimon ben C"l::lii lll'\1 Nil TU:> "tt',i.E) 'i Gamliel thought: "Is someone asking C"l,t:l C":>70 ".l::li C"itt'i'::l l"Nt,, questions about Uktzin?" He turned his attention to it and studied it. C"litttNi1 NCU.10 '"ll'\C nin ":>it There are places where Rebbe added ;:,, :il::l tt'"i!>i "::li il::l C,"CiNi commentary. For example, the mishnah says: 1J Boys may go out with garlands and royal children may go out with bells.• This is the way the mishnah was taught by the early sages.* Then Rebbe added the following explanation:

and others recited it that way: Obviously, Rebbe was dealing with earlier Mis/mayos,

of which differing versions had arisen in the course of time. R. Meir told R. Nassan: These two TaMaim lived one generation before Rebbe. According to this Talmudic passage, they wanted to challenge the authority of R. Shimon ben Gamliel. may go out with bells: The Mishnah concerns the prohibition of hotzaah, carrying from the private to the public domain on Shabbos. Since garlands and bells are usual items of clothing for boys, their going out while wearing them is not considered carrying. the early sages: Those who first formulated the ha/achos of the Mishnah.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I ,

The Mishnalr

23

Everyone else [likewise may go out with bells]; but the sages spoke in terms of the usual situation.•

ni,n:l c,0,n ii:litt' M?M ciK ,0,,:l, n,0,":l J"lnM, ,,c 10 1:l? illtt'C n ll"i0Mpi, i1"il'\:l1 Until now, R. Sherira Gaon has developed ,,cM Mli,nM itltt'C Mlitt'Mi the point that the Mishnah consists of M0p,n,M, n,,,,i, n,00 1,, ,,,, material that Rebbe received, word/or word, M"it11 J:l itlJ?M ,, cp,nMi M0,,:l as traditions dating from the earlier sages. n"ltt'l c,,:l i:l n,,,,11 qM ll"iCM1 He now proceeds to mention exceptions. ni:ll'\iM, Mc,,:l c,,:l i:l ,, U"ltt'i An exception is those things which were .i1:l"tt'":l M"itlJ l:l itlJ?M ,,,

taught in his day* and in the days after him, as we say:1 4 This is [what is taught in] the early mishnah; but the later mishnah [on the

"?0 ,,n il'\:l MU:l ,, l' Mln, ,c,M ,c,,, ,, 1il:J ,,:lM "0":l unM,

same subject] says...

R. Sherira Gaon has established that a few Mishnayos were formulated in Rebbe's own day or later, although the bulk of them were already formulated by the Men of the Great Assembly. He now goes on to mention other exceptions: Mishnayos which originated in the generations immediately preceding Rebbe. Likewise, Eduyos was established• on the day that R. Elai.ar ben Azarya was inaugurated,• as we say:1, Eduyos was also learned that day. And we learn:16 The term, uthat day" always means the day R. Elazar ben Azarya was seated• in the yeshivah. Rebbe afterwards included material which was taught in his father's time;• for example:•a

••al

tllle sitution: Since it is usually royal children who go out with bells, the sages put the Mishnah in these terms. taaglat ia Ids day: Teachings which were formulated as Mishnayos only in Rebbe's day. In fact, there are Mishnayos which incorporate decisions by his sons (cf. Makkos 3:15, Avos 2:2) and even by his grandson (cf. Avoda Zarah 2:6 and Tosafos Avodah Zarah 36a s.v. Asher). ·· establisllled: This could mean that the Mishnayos were given their final fonn at this time; or that the individual Mishnayos were first organized into a tractate. iuagarated: He was inaugurated as nasi.17 sated: As Rosh Yeshivah, Head of the Academy. i■ Ids fatlller's time: R. Yosi and R. Yehudah were contemporaries of R. Shimon hen Gamliel, Rebbc's father.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

24

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

R. Yosi says, "In six instances Deis Shammai hold the lenient opinion while Deis Hillel hold the stringent opinion." Another example: 19 R. Yehudah said: "G-d forbid that Akavyah ben Mehallalel was ever excommunicated; for no man of Yisrael is a better example of a bastion of wisdom and fear of sin than Akavyah ben Mehallalel."

..,o,no, ft'•:i ..,,po C"i:i, n~~ ,,,n n,,n.. ,, ioH 1u:i, ,,:,, n•~ l"Htt' it1llil ?H??MO p H":lPlJ~ H?Jn nNi":i, no:in:i n?lJll nitlJ p H":lylJ:l ?H1tt'":l C1H ;:, ?lJ .?H??itC J"lJH Hn""l1nH Hn"":lCO ?:lH

"HOP p:i, ,n, un ,,n tiM"OlnOi ,n"lO li"H Hn:i,n, TU"':f1li ,,

Until now, R. Sherira Gaon has discussed tractates which already existed as such from r,,H, titt'H1i1 titt'?:l ,n, "ln Miiti .Hrn,:i ,n, "ln nin, ,n"lC earlier times - most of them from the Men of the Great Assembly, but some from later times. Now he adds that certain Mishnayos , l10H H?i 1"NO ,, '"ll"\O enc, came down to Rebbe in a less finished form. i1"10J, Nn,,N N"i1i1 H?H ,:i,o ,n,N:i, ,, 1"0.l n,n 1"NO ,,,

However, with other tractates, even though their basic principles had already been taught by the early sages, Rebbe arranged their halachos - some of them he taught in the original wording, and others he worded as he saw fit.

,,,..o,n, 1"HO ,, "lno nin, ,,, ""UnH? MlJ:ip, ,, tnN H10J nnn~ 111 TMN 1"H0 ,,, .HO?lJ ,;,:,; ,,, ,:i, i1:l"PlJ '10 ,,tt' N10Jit C"litt'H1i1 , ..n,:i,o n,:ip H:l"PlJ

R. Sherira Gaon's questioners had asked '"lno enc pn," ,, ioH ll"10Hi about the rule that if the author of a mishnah is not mentioned, we should assume that it was taught by R. Meir enc) (1~D,, iU!t'D. (See Ch. 1, question la.) They were disturbed that this seemed to contradict the premise that the Mishnah originated with the Men of the Great Assembly; for it seems to imply that all the anonymous (stam) mishnayos originated with R. Meir. R. Sherira Gaon now deals with this aspect of their question.

Every anonymous Mishnah is [the teaching of] R. Meir. But he did not create them from his own heart. Rather, R. Meir had a certain way of teaching the mishnayos• to his disciples; and Rebbe chose and established this way• to teach [the mishnayos] to everyone. R. Meir had received his way of learning [the Mishnah] from his teacher, R. Akiva; and R. Akiva had received it from his teachers, the earlier sages. Thus, we say:20

way of teaching the Mishaayos: Each Tanna had his own style and order of teaching the mishnayos. See above, pp. 15 ff. Rebbe chose... this way: R. Meir was Rebbe's teacher. (See Eruvin 13b; Yevamos 93a.)

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

25

The Mishnah

R. Yochanan said: "An anonymous il"Cnl ,, Nru:,o,n cno i"NC ,, Mishnah is R. Meir. An anonymous ,, "iE:lo enc n,m, ,, Ni!:lO cno Tosefta is R. Nechemiah. An anonymous .N:l"P.V ,,, N:l"?N ,n,:), 1,.vcttt Sifra is R. Yehudah. An anonymous Sifrei is R. Shimon. And all of them taught Ni£)Oi Nl"l£)Oini Nl"l""i:l "lMi in the way of R. Akiva." un nil iii?:) Nl"l""i:l l"'"" .,,s:,o, These braissos of Tosefta, Sifra, and ,,, n,,n, 'i inN, "Ncp p:i, ,n, Sifrei were all taught by the earlier sages. Then R. Yehuda, R. Nechemiah, and R. Shimon ?:) lU"toip,,, 1,.vcttt ,,, M"Cnl came, and each made his own compilation il1ii1" 'i Ni!:10 :M"?"1 iil"lC 1il of [the baraisos]. Sifra [was compiled by] 1,.vcttt 'i 'lj!)C il"Cnl 'i Nl"l£)0,Z1 R. Yehudah; Tosefta, by R. Nechemiah; and 'i1 N:l"?N iit?:)i i"NC 'i '"ll'lCi Sifrei, by R. Shimon; and the Mishnah, by R. N:l"P.V 'i .,,,c,n C?:) ":) N:l"P.V Meir. And all of them follow the method of .Cit R. Akiva, for all were disciples of R. Akiva. But other braissos• do not interest us, because these [just mentioned] were selected and compiled by leading sages• who were the foremost disciples of R. Akiva. Thus, R. Shimon told his students:21

N? Nl"l""linN Nl"l""i:l ?:lN

l"in:i,c "lili citt'C iit:i l' l'll:l:)"N iitl"i:in, iill"top,, ,,it p:i,, ":l"tttn .,,,c,n ,m iitlili ti.Vcttt 'i iCN 7:)i .N:l"P.V 'i ,n,,cttt ,n,,c uttt u:i ,,,.,c,n, ,,n,,c n,c,,nc en n,c,,n p; ll"iCN Nili N:l"P.V 'i ?ttl c,,N ?ttl ,nns:,:) C"litttNi ?ttl Np, '?:)"it ?ttl ,nl"\£):) C"liinN .N:l"P.V 'i im C"litttNi :p"tttil:lC

,ttt

My sons,22 learn my principles (midos);* for my principles are the cream of the cream• of R. Akiva's principles. We say:•23 The hearts of the early ones are like the entrance to the great hall [of the Holy Temple] and the hearts of the later ones like the entrance to the antechamber.• C1N i?"!:lN1 p:li "ttliE:lC Npi And [the Talmud] goes on to explain: ,nc:)n:l ncttt titttNiil "The early ones" means R. Akiva. Our sages explain24 that even Adam, the first man, rejoiced in the wisdom

, ,ttt

other braissos: This refers both to individual braissos and to other compilations. leading sages: R. Yehudah, R. Nechemiah, and R. Shimon. (midos): The basic hermeneutic principles by which the Oral Torah is derived from

the Written Torah. cream of the cream: Lit., "the terumos of the terumos." The terumah is considered the

most holy of all the tithes. We say: Using the following passages, R. Sherira Gaon describes the greatness of R. Akiva and his disciple, R. Meir, in order to explain why Rebbe chose their way of teaching the Mishnah over that of other TaMaim. great ball...: See above chap. II, pg. 17.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

26

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

of R. Akiva when the Holy One, Blessed is He, showed [Adam] the sages of each generation. And in [Tractate] Yevamos2s R. Dosa ben Harkinas said to R. Akiva: Are you Akiva ben Yosef, whose name goes from one end of the world to the other? The greatest of all R. Akiva's students was R. Meir, as we learn in [Tractate] Eruvin:26 R. Acha b. Chanina said: "It is revealed and known before Him Who spoke and the world came into existence, that in the generation of R. Meir there was none equal to him. Then why was not the halachah fixed in agreement with his views? Because his colleagues could not fathom the depths of his mind, for he would declare the ritually unclean to be clean and the ritually clean to be unclean and he would supply plausible proof." Therefore R. Akiva was fond of him and ordained him in his youth.27 In his halachos• Rebbe chose the way [of teaching] of R. Meir, which was the way of R. Akiva, because Rebbe saw that R. Meir's way was succinct and easy to teach.• His statements were well composed, each topic [placed] with that which was similar to it. His teachings were more exact• than any of the other Tannaim, without superfluous language.• Each word makes a vital point without unnecessary exaggeration. Nothing was missing or extra,• except in a few instances. The way [of presentation] was concise.• Great and wondrous things

,,, ,,, n•::1pn inKinw:, K:l"P1' Dl":,,n l:l Kc,, ,, Cli .,.,c:,n, Kin nnK K:l"Pl1 ,,; ,; ,cK qicc ,;,n icwtt' qc,., 1::1 M:l"P1' .n,c:J":l ,m,c ,m c;,11n K:l"Pl1 'i .,,,c;n ;:,:ltt' '?iilni t"::1,,.,11::1 P"1CK1 n,n 1"KC ,, m,.., ..,;: Kl"ln 1:l KMK ,, 1CK l"Ktt' c;ii,n n,n, icKw '10 "lm; "lE>ci ,n,c:, ,.,KC ,, ;tt' "E>; ,n,c:, n:,;n 111::1p K; nc ,n11, q,c ;11 ,.,,::1n ,,011 K;tt' ;11, ,,nio Keto '>11 ,c,K n"ntt' · citt'ci .C"lE> ,; nKic, Keio ,,nio K:l"Pl1 ,,; n,; :l":ln n,n ,:,n .n,n,pl"C n,:,cc,

,,,,:::1

,,, KM1K Kn:,',n:J ,, topli ,,, KM1K n,n K"m 1"K0 '11 KM1K1 '1 Ktni ti":, K:l"i'1' n,,::1,, ,c;r, n::1,,p, n,-sp , ..KC ,::1,, ,::1, ;::, nE>" ,,::in c.,,::1,nc t"pip,,c, ,; nc,itt' nc C1' p::11 ,n;::,c ,n,, n::1,n nE>tt' 1n::1 l"Ki "l"1MK "Kln Kpcc Kn;,c, Kn;"c ;::,, ,n, 'l;'lt) M:l 1"CK K;,::i Kew; K1CMC K;i l":,"1'S K',1 Kl"'l)itoi Kn:,,,::1 K',K Cl11C K1n'l0 K'?i ',:, r,;::,::1, K1Q""P KniK, Knto11"10 ,K,,, n,K,,mli ni'?iil nr,c, n',c

,.,,:1,

balacbos: I.e.• in his Mishnah.28 succinct and easy to teach: This is a general statement which RSG proceeds to explain in detail. exact: All the implications of each statement were taken into account. without saperflaous langaage: In choice of words. missing or extra: In choice of topics. concise: The arrangement of topics was efficient.29

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Tire Mishnah

27

were included in every single word.• Not everyone who is learned knows how to create such a composition, as it is said:30 "A man may arrange his thoughts, but what he says depends on Hashem." All the Rabbis shared the same underlying principles; nevertheless, since R. Akiva possessed a broad heart• and his disciple R. Meir also possessed a broad heart, they arranged [the material] in an excellent manner, and they were preferable to all the other Tannaim . Therefore Rebbe gathered• [their arrangement]. To it he added [ha/achos] that were [formulated] in his time. He arranged it• as he saw fit. He also explained the essence and the main principles behind disputes• of the Rabbis. Since there were Rabbis that had heard from great sages a different opinion [than that in the Mishnah] or who taught minority opinions anonymously,• if someone heard about this he could become confused [when studying the Mishnah]. [But] when Rebbi explained the matter,• no doubt [regarding the halachah] could set in. Thus we learn in the Mishnah:31

,,,::,.n, ym'i l'i" C":lni TNC ,:i :l'i ":l1l'C CiN? :l"rl:li:l ":lil ,n,:i, J"l'Ni .y,'tt'? illl'C '!#'le, N:l"i'l' ,,, ?1":l "Cl'~:l t"i'tt' p::,.i

il"i"c'in ,,Ne ,,, :l'i ::,.n, il"il liilrlt"1rl Ni"E>tt' n,n :l'i ::,.n, "Cl ,"l"inN ,Nlrl ,n,:i,c NE>"il'1

n::,. q,cu,n ,, il~i''i ,:in ci'tt'c ."tni:i niin, n..c,..::,. n,n, "NC ,..,pm "E>in ,n,:i "Cl n::,. 'tt'"i!:li p::,.ic n,n, y,,:i, p:i,, Nru,,E>, "Cl "N "l"?E)i Nn,,::,.,c "l'Ctt'i

,n,,c..c un, "l"?E>i c,,,n,, yin'i l'C'tt'i 'tt'l"N N:l"N "N NCrlC mn ,:in 'tt'i£lc ,:i, "1'~0, "MN icN pn, NpE>c p,ncc Nrl'i"C ,.,n, ,,::,., ,,:inn nc, n,,n., ,, icN" CN'tt' c,~::,.; c,:i,,cn T":l NC'tt' 1? l"lC 1'i iciN 1:l CiN y,,c,N 1:i "lN ,:i,pc en, icN" .rll'Ctt' "li?El tt'"N "i:li:l NC'tt' 17

R. Yehudah said: "Why is the opinion of the minority recorded along with the majority? In order to nullify it, so that if a man says this,• [one can] say to him: 'Where did you hear this?' If he replies: 'I received it [as a tradition from my teachers],' one can say to him: .. Perhaps what you heard was the opinion of so-and-so."•

Great... word: This may be a general summarizing statement. Or it may refer to the esoteric content of the Mishnah. broad heart: Great capacity to understand and remember (see ch. II, pg. 19, note 18). gatllered: He gathered infonnation from many sages to make sure be had the authentic version of R. Akiva's and R. Meir's Mishnah. it: The whole Mishnah. disputes: Opinions of those sages who disagreed with R. Akiva and R. Meir. anonymously: Thus implying that these opinions were the accepted halachah. tbe matter: I.e., that there were minority and majority opinions on the halachah in question. this: The minority opinion. so-and-so: I.e., the minority.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

28

When everybody saw the fonn of the tui,i"::C toec,1' ";,.:, nn ,,, Mishnah, the truthfulness of its teachings and nncM, l"l'\"lnc, Mn~,ni the exactness of its words, they abandoned -µn ,p:i~ n,,c, 'pi,, C"i:i,n their previous formulations and compilations. These ha/achos were disseminated throughout l"'M l"~~!), "ln n,n, "l"ln the Jewish people32 while the other y'l'li,n, ?M1~" }'iM ;.:,:i Mn:>?M halachos were shunted aside and became like• ip":in~N ,n;.:, Mn:>,n iMtt' a braissa. They are utilized as a commentary l""1'Ci TMCi Mn""i:l JU:> y'l'li,n, or for their more elaborate style. However, iM "~i"!):l l'l'IWi ?MC:> in:1 the Jewish people gave [only] these halachos• ?Mitt'"i M:>CC ?:lM "M"ii "ltt'"?:l [binding] authority. They accepted it faithfully inl"?:lpi n,n Mn:>,n l"'M ,11 when they saw it, and no one has disputed its M::)"?i i1liCM:l JU"tn i:, ?Mitt'" authority. .tin:i l"?!lMi tt'l"M Using this approach [of R. Akiva and R. Meir], Rebbi arranged the six orders of the ,, inl~in MMiM l",n ?1' Mishnah. This does not mean that the more ip:i?t'i iM?i i1ltt'C "iiC Ml'\tt'? numerous earlier sages were abandoned for M? "MCp M?M "Min:l? M:lii "MCp the later ones.• Rather, the earlier sages had ycilci "'"c, "ii:in, ":>"i~ ,,n no need for compiled material and the things ll:liC in, in ;.:,, TU"M i1!) ?1' that we learn by memory. Every single one of the [earlier] Rabbis knew these things ":>"i~ ,,n M,, n,:ip:1 ,n, "1'," through a chain of transmission. They had i1' ,n"l":l :1n.:,c;, inl"i,:in, no need to compile them and write them -µn, yin"i"c,n ,cp, n•:i :l"ini down• among themselves, until the Temple's ,,n, yinni:, "l7i" ,,n M,, "Mcp destruction.• Then came [these earlier sages'] 1:i iTlr'?M ,, Mn, ",,:in, l"=>"i~ students, who were not as knowledgeable, T:li ","C,n tt'"i nin, cup,,n and found it necessary to make compilations. (We see this]• from R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanos, -µn i1"l"C "'""ft' i.:, "M:>T 1:i Jlni" who was the greatest of R. Yochanan b. Zakkai's students. He was asked

these llalacllos: Rebbe's Mishnah. like: This word is difficult, since RSG has already told us (see ch. II, p. 16) that once Rebbe had formulated the Mishnah, all previous teachings came to be known as braissos (in addition, of course, to the braissos discussed further in ch. IV, p. 36). later ones: RSG is now referring to question le posed to him by the elders of Kairouan (see ch. 1). write them down: The French version, which consistently never mentions the writing of Rebbe's Misbnah (see Levine, Intro., pp. 48-50, and the Iggeres ch. II, p. 14, ch. III, p. 20, and ch. IV, p. 35) here, too, omits the expression, "write them down."33 the Temple's destruction: See ch. I, p. 11, note 19. [We see tllis]: The importance placed on an exact oral tradition.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA .

-

The Misluwh

29

various questions mentioned in Chapter Shnei Se'irei Yom HaKippurim34 [and symbolized by the mnemonics] "sick; so-and-so; lamb; bastard; house; guilty."• He did not answer them at all, but pushed the questions aside. And we learn in a braissa:Js [His evasion was due] not to any desire to divert [his questioners] with words, but because he never said anything that he had not heard from his teacher.• Therefore• Rebbe had to compile and arrange the six orders of the Mishnah after a respite of two generations• from the persecutions that took place during the Temple's destruction. As for the tractates, about which you have observed* that some come before others: When Rebbe arranged the Mishnah, he did not place the tractates in a specific order, one after another. [Rather] he arranged [and taught] each tractate separately in whatever order was convenient for him. We do not know which he taught first. However, the ha/achos• [in each chapter] and the chapters of each tractate were arranged in a specific order. Thus R. Huna said:J7 In one tractate we do not say, "There is no order to Mishnah," but regarding two tractatcs we do say, "There is no order to Mishnah."

,,,w

,ltt'::J ltt'i!lci ,;,c Ctt'N n,::J itcc ntr::J:::i ,l,?!l n,n N?H ,,c 7,n, ,,nH N?i yc,o jl,?!)Mtt' ,l!)C N? H,ln, 1uni N',tt' i::Ji icH H?tt' N?H c,,::Ji::J il"'

.c',ilJ? i:ii ,!)C ilJCtt'

,,,::Jn? ,, ,,,10iH ,:,n;, i.n::J Mltt'C ,,io Ml"l,tt' ,r,,n;i

Hinn TC n,,,, '::J NC?lJ nli .n,::Jn t::Jin ?tt' Nictt' n,N, y,.n,mi H.n,,:,oc Y,llJ?i i.:, ,, - iniNci c-rp,c 1,n:1 yu,,,o N', ,,lnc, inl,iin nn,:in ,.n:i Hin Nn,,:,oc, il"tt'!)l ,!)N::l il,,ll'\ Nin N?N

C"ipc ..c,ipN', il"? Nn"li THC ,,,nN? il"? Hn"li lNCi n, "ln "il 7u,i,i, N;, n, inNc "Pi£li Nn:::i,n ',::JN Ntt'"i:l ,, lU"ti.n ":in Nn:::ioc, Nn:::ioc ;:, :i, icHi Nin ,n::1 Hin ,, ll",cN H? N.n:::ioc Nin::1 Nlin ..n,n::J ',::JN illtrc', ,io l"N nltt'C; ,io y,N p,,cN Hn,.,:,oc

"sick... guilty": Each word stands for a halachic or aggadic topic which is discussed in the Talmud there. ■ot lleard from his teacher: This proves the efficiency and exactness of the oral tradition which existed during most of the Second Commonwealth Period. Therefore: Due to the persecutions during and after the Temple's destruction, which caused a much lower level of scholarship among the Rabbis, as discussed above. two generations: Rebbe lived in the third generation after the Temple's destruction, as shown by RSG in ch. I. The Mishnah, then, was written after a respite of two generations. 36 you llave observed: RSG is now referring to the question asked concerning the order of the tractates (see ch. I). llalac•os: Mishnayos within a chapter.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

30

/ggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

One could say about either of [the two N:,"N iit"lC Nini Nin ,:n tractates] that Rebbe might have taught it .Ntt'"i:l it""lli ,, Nt)'i"i ic"O', first. i:, inN, enc yn:itt'Ni N:i"n, Sometimes38 we find a mishnah [on a certain P"iCN Nn:,oc NiM:l npi',nt) halachic topic] which gives only one opinion (stam) without attributing it to a specific :,"nN, npi'inc, ,el'\c:, n::i'in T"N Tanna or mentioning any Tanna who disagrees. n:,'in P",cN Nn:,oc Nin:i enc Later in the same tractate we may find another N'i Nn":,oc ..n,n:i 'i:lN enc:, Mishnah [on the same topic] which presents :i,, .,ic en, T"Ni citt'c P"10H the opinion of the earlier Mishnah as subject iit"Ci it"7 Ni":lO ":,it "Cl r,c, .. to dispute. In such a case, referred to as Nin iit'i::i, e"P"tli ":l:l:l ,c,H "stam and later disputed,,, the halachah does not follow the earlier (stam) Mishnah. On the other hand, if the reverse situation is ,c..ipit lO"C ,n..,cN Np,, found within one tractate - "disputed and later stam" - we say that the halachah lil"lliN ":,it PK ,e..'iptt''i e. ,u,:, follows the stam Mishnah. However, if the e ..,u,:, :,"nN, e"'ii'tt' p:i, "::l two Mishnayos in question are found in two :i,10 e,.. "Ci' it::lO "Nii 7::lH different tractates, the above rules do not illtt'it tt'Ni "Nii ":,il in::ii .Nl"lli apply; for [the tractates] have no order.* R. .~i,n:i yin, TU"lni itt'!l"H, Yosef also agrees* [with these rules], except e"ii'il'i tt'"tt' ic"C7 Ji"N iit"0 he saysJ9 that the three Bavas* of Order :l"tt'ni , ..N,it it'inn n::itt' n:,co Nezikin are to be considered one tractate.40 As for your question* why [Tractate] l":l,i"1' n:,oc itin::i, it::m~ Ji::ltt' Kippurim• was placed before Shekalim: We iliit Nl""l1' Nin, it'i "Cii in our beis midrash study Shekalim before Kippurim, but certainly we study Sukkah before Yom-Tov.* This is followed by Rosh HaShanah. However, perhaps [in Rebbi's day] they studied them in the opposite order.• However, it can be reasoned that Shabbos should be first, since it is so important,• followed by Tractate Eruvin which is similar to [Shabbos] and on the same subject. Then follows Tractate Pesachim, since Passover is the first of all the festivals; [this is] have no order: There is no way of verifying which was arranged first, the disputed or the stam opinion, and therefore we cannot establish preference. agrees: with the distinction between one and two tractates. Bavas: Tractates Bava Kamma, Bava Metzia, and Bava Basra. These three names mean: "First Section." "Middle Section," and "Last Section." yoar question: See ch. 1. Kippurim: Yoma. Yom-Tov: Beitzah. in tbe opposite order: I.e., first Rosh HaShanah and then Sukkah and Yom-Tov. important: Because it explains the thirty-nine forbidden types of labor on Shabbos.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

31

The Mis/mah

followed by Shekalim, [whose subject matter] comes [directly] before [that of Pesachim]* and is one of its aspects.• After Shekalim we study Seder• Yoma, which is similar to Shabbos. • After Seder Yoma we study Tractate Sukkah because it follows Yorn HaKippurim and is a major• festival. After Tractate Sukkah we study Tractate Yom-Tov because it is on the same subject.• After Yom-Tov we study Tractate Rosh HaShanah so that we can study Tractate Taanis right after it, since after Rosh HaShanah is the time of the first rainfall and the time of sowing, and it is like the same subject.•

MCl)nttf C"MCI) n:>cc n,n:::i, C"lnn, C"i:uicn r,:,r, titt?Mi Min Q'l',pr, n,n:::i, nltt?n r,:, r,r, i"l"lW ,nM:>i ,'IJl)',C Minr, Mei" ,,c ll"ln C"r,pr, ,n:::i, Mc,.., cir,c t":::i,,..:u, n:::ir,r, "c,, iiC iM:::li "Ci MM:::lttf', "iU):>i

n"" ,n:::i, n:,c n:>cc ll"ln Mc,,. n:,cc ,n:::i, .Min r,,,l lni Min Ml"l1' ,n, 10"" n:,cc tl"ln n:ic tt?Mi n:>cc ll"ln 10"" ,n:::i, ,Min n"iM:::l "lM"',i ":>"n ":> nltt?n tct n"i inM, cir,c "'l1'n n:>cc ...c, Ml"l1' ,n, n1"'it tct, n1'":::li

This is how the rabbis usually study; but if someone finds it convenient to follow a different order, he may do so - even though "Mi "lMC', TJ:::li """li ":>n we see in certain tractates that we say: Now "iinM',i "CiipM', n"r, MM"li M"M that the Tanna finished Tractate...

ll"tn, l"1'Hi .,,..: :i n,r,,n

For example, in Tractate Sotah:'• Now that the Tanna has finished [Tractate] Nazir ... And in Tractate Shevuos:'2

Hln "i:>C '"iCHpi HM"":>CC

n:,cc til:, P""D n"l,,,_, n:,ccc Hln ",:>c HiCl:::l ll"iCMp, n10,c n:,cc 1u:i, P""D Hi' i"tl n:iccc

comes before [that of Pesachim]: The reference is to Shekalim 1:1, "On the first day of Adar [the month before the month of Pesach] they give warning of the Shekel dues." aspects: Perhaps RSG's intention here is that the holy shekel every Jew paid had to be given before the first of Nissan, the month of Passover; and from that day on, the public offerings (including all Passover public sacrifices) may be bought only from the newly paid shekel dues. Seder: Tractate. The term is due, perhaps, to the fact that most of the tractate deals with the specific order (Seder) of the High Priest's functions on Yom Kippur. similar to Shabbos: In that the punishment for forbidden work on these two days is death, which is not the case for other festivals. major festhal: RSG might be adding this reasoning in order to explain why Sukkah precedes Rosh HaShanah. The word "major" probably means "long" (see French version). the same subject: Both deal with the laws of the festivals. subject: The subject of Tractate Taanis is the laws of public fasts, which are proclaimed mainly due to lack of rainfall.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

32

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

Now that the Tanna has finished [Tractate] Kln .,,:>c P"iCKpi nim:itt' Makkos... .,,c en, tt'"1 Kc,K P"'C ni:,cc [These passages] prove that there is a specific order.• order: RSG seems to understand that these two examples are exceptions to the rule.43

Notes to Chapter 3 I. See ch. 1, note 7 on pg. 10. la. J.N. Epstein (see our Intro. p. 22) pg. 614, has claimed that the opening sentence of chap. 3 is actually a continuation of the last discussion in chap. 2 and is not referring to the arrangement of the Mishnah but to the clarification of disputes and doubts that took place in Rcbbe's days as was discussed earlier in chap. 2, pg. 14. This original theory of course, can only be valid according to the French version which omits any mention of an arrangement of the Mishnah. 2. This might seem to contradict the idea that Rebbe's divine inspiration was comparable to that of Moshe Rabbeinu. It may be that the teachings and, as we shall see, even the wording, of the Mishnah were passed down from earlier sages, but in the task of properly selecting and recording them, "the matter was aided by heaven." 3. Sanhedrin 40a. 4. Ibid 41a. 5. RSG Shcrira has ..he" which matches the version found in the Munich manuscript of the Gemara (Dikdukei Soferim); our text reads ..they." 6. This passage can be useful in determining the chronological relationship between the mishnayos and the braissos. 1. Eruvin 5:1. 8. Eruvin 53b. 9. This passage appears earlier on Eruvin 53a, with slight changes. 10. Horayos 13b. 11 . Our text reads, "°'l', meaning "to reveal, expound" instead of R. Sherira's reading, Tine', "to open, begin." 12. Horayos, /oc. cit. 13. Slrabbos 66b. 14. Gillin 55b but more probably Clragiga 2a. I5. Beraclws 28a. 16. Ibid. 17. See, however, my Binu Shenos Dor V'Dor, (see ch. 1, n. 21) p. 238, where it is shown that he may only have been appointed Rosh Yeshivah. 18. Eduyos 5:2. 19. Ibid, mishnah 6. 20. Sanhedrin 86a. 21. Gillin 67a. 22. The Spanish text must be emended. 23. Eruvin 53a. 24. Sanhedrin 38b. 25. 16a. (This should be corrected in the Levine ed. pg. 28, n. 7). 26. 13a. Levine's note, p. 28, note 5, must be emended. 27. See ch. I, p. 9.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Misllllah

33

28. Sec A.A. Harkavy, Zichron L'Rishonim, Berlin, 1887, Section 4, Ch. 262, p. 135: KM,'!M"

-me, n,'Jnw wn,p:,

'll'::11 m,n, UNW tni.

29. Levine's interpretation: "iln1ll4 '!vi mn0 civ0 nc1Din H'M is very difficult to accept both contextually and linguistically. 30. Proverbs 16:1. 31 . Eduyos 1:6, with variants. 32. French version. 33. Levine (Introduction, p. 48) has omitted this passage in his list of differences between the Spanish and French versions regarding the writing of the Mishnah. 34. Yoma 66b. 35. Ibid. 36. When RSG mentions three generations, in ch. II, p. 14, he is specifically referring to halachic disputes, which existed in Rebbe's generation also. There is no contradiction here and therefore no need for Hyman's solution (see Hyman, p. 35, note 29). 31. Bava Kamma 102a. 38. The following paragraph is rendered in a somewhat free translation for the sake of clarity. 39. Bava Kamma /oc. cit. 39a. French version. 40. Certain Rishonim understand R. Yosefs position to be that all tractatcs of Order Nezikill are considered one tractate. 41. 2a. 42. 2b. 43. Tosafos, s.v. ein, Bava Kamma 102a, has a completely opposite understanding. According to Tosafos, the Mishnah's arrangement was according to a definite plan and the proof is our two examples. The principle, ..There is no order to Mishnah" applies to Rebbe's teaching to his students, according to Tosafos.

Digi~

~y

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 4:

The Tosefta

Concerning the Tosefta:• Certainly R. "Mi, :M""n ,,, 'E>cin l"l1''?i Chiyya arranged I it, but there is no definite Hn'?"C l'i MC""liC M,, nt1l'l Min indication whether he arranged it during '?:lM n"1n:1 iM n11n '1i "C,":l "K Rebbe's lifetime or afterwards. However, l"li~'?i1 l11l'lMi 1l'l:l p!>C M'?:l it undoubtedly was arranged after the halachos of our Mishnah. It is clear that the "7"Ci Ml"l£)0Ui i1'!1l'lM UNtn) teachings of the Tosefta are based upon our '"lnc 1n:1, ?1"1:l Mnl)c,r1, Mishnah and teach about [its ha/achos]. t? to"tt'El H?i T""ll'l yin"?l1i TU"K We do not know whether R. Chiyya died M""n '1i n"ft'!)l nl '1i n"C,":l "K during Rebbe's lifetime or after him. In ',31 MWn:l ll"ncnci i1"1l'l:l iK Chapter HaNoseti Rebbe* instructs that: :l~" Men 1:1 Ml"ln :'1 nin,, Channina bar Chama shall preside.• '1 M~"M Mni "1CM Hpi tt'M1:l The Talmud asks: Was there not R. Chiyya, who was greater nl l'1l'lCi n"l"C i:ri11i M""" than him? ll"tt'Pc, l•11Mi M""n '1, n"tt'E>l The reply is: ;~ ,1:1p "n"M1 "lM M""n 1·M Mn, R. Chiyya had already died. i•M Mn, n,11c, '""1' "n,,,n, ":l'1 Regarding this reply, the Talmud now offers il?lO:l '1 l'lC?t' Ci"ii il"liH H""n a series of three proofs that R. Chiyya in fact K""n 11 Cl~l '1 n,ntt'~ ,r1, nlin~ outlived Rebbe: But R. Chiyya said: "I saw Rebbe's tomb KC"M n"l1:l "M ll"1CHi ,,~, iip:l; ,,, ti"~ MC"H n"1'::l "'Mi ,,£)"K and shed tears on it." Moreover, didn't R. Chiyya say: "On the day when Rebbe died, priesthood (Kehunah)3 ceased"? And elsewhere: When Rebbe took ill* R. Chiyya entered to visit him ... The Talmud now presents two possible solutions to the difficulty: First, it suggests: Reverse the names.• Tosefta: RSG will now deal with question no. 3 presented to him. Rebbe: On his deathbed. preside: He shall replace Rebbe as head of the yeshivah. took ill: With his final illness. Reverse the names: Thus, these passages would read: "Rebbc said: 'I saw the tomb of R. Chiyya..."' "Rebbe said: 'The day R. Chiyya died ... "' "When R. Chiyya fell ill, Rebbe entered to visit him ..." 34

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

The Tosefta

35

Alternatively: [Rebbe thought:] "Since R. Chiyya is engaged in mitzvos, I shall not encroach upon him."• Thus, we see from the Talmud that it was doubtful who died first. Our sages maintain, however, that the Tosefta was arranged during Rebbe's lifetime,• and from that time• it was taught in Rebbe's beis midrash. This is seen from the episode cited in Tractate Chaggiga4 concerning two deaf-mutes who lived in Rebbe's neighborhood. They were the sons of R. Yochanan ben Gudgeda's sister; some say, the sons of R. Y ochanan ben Gudgeda's daughter: Whenever Rebbe would enter the beis mitlrash, they would come and sit before him, move their lips and shake their heads. Rebbe prayed for them and they were healed. It was found that they were well versed in halachah, Sifra, Sifrei, Tosefta,• and all of the Talmud.• As for your question, "What was R. Chiyya's reason for writing the Tosefta, and why didn't Rebbe write it?": Had Rebbe sought to writes down and order all the material extant during his lifetime, it would have been too lengthy and would

N? ,::ic mil .n,ic::i j:)cu, N""n .t? Nj:)ElCC NC?N il"1lElN ,,, "C1"::l1 p::ii "iCN iil"C N1ilil TC l""l.nc, N.nElc,.n 7i,.nN "tn.nci ,,, il"tt'11C::l NlCt itl"ln .n::,cc, N1C"C N"itilC '11 il".ni::l::ltt'::l i"iltu "C?N iillilC N1l1il p pn,, ,,, it".nnN "l::l

pm" ,,, il"n,::i "l::l n, ,,cN, '""1' nin, .nc"N , ::,, Niliu 7::1 "::ln", "'""1' ,,n Ntui,c 11::1, ,, "1"lci ,n11ni£ltu ttttnic, il"Ci' ,n,,;i, ,, ,en, Nl7:l 1il"ttt"1 "1'1" ,n::,ntu"Ni iN"CnN,

,,n,

NnElcin, "1ElCi N1ElCi N.n:J?it

.Niic,n ,;,::,, N""n ,, MNi nc ,n,,cN,, 7"::l1 n::in::, N? "NCNi il::l.n::,;

;::, ,:in,, ::iin::,; ,, ttti'::l ,,N P"1N i"C"::l "ilttt il"ilttt nc ..,i'l7 ,, N?N , T1i'l7l'1Ni "?"C

.n,,i' 1u::,, :in:,, 7pn C"i::lin Nine 1?"ElN1 N~""i' Nltu?1 have been forgotten. Instead,

Rebbe prepared6 and wrote7 the essential topics and the general rules in an

abbreviated language, in which even one word can be the source for a number I shall not encroach upon him: According to this second answer, R. Chiyya did outlive Rebbe, but Rebbe did not appoint him Rosh Yeshivah because the responsibilities of the post would have prevented R. Chiyya from performing mitzvos. daring Rebbe's lifetime: Although RSG has just stated that "it is not certain whether he arranged it during Rebbe's lifetime or afterwards," he apparently meant that there is no explicit statement about this. He now brings implicit proof. from tbat time: From the time when the Tosefta was arranged. Tosefta: This implies that the Toscfta existed during Rebbe's lifetime. the Talmud: This of course does not refer to the Jerusalem or Babylonian Talmuds, which were redacted 200 and 300 years later, respectively. The term as used here has already appeared in Chapter l, p. 4. See also Rashi on Sukkah 28a, s.v. Gemara.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

36

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

of fundamental principles and an abundance of profound and wonderful halachos and agados; for the Mishnah was composed with divine aid.s Then R. Chiyya came and, in the braissos,• set forth the particulars and the various aspects of these essential topics and general rules. Most of the principles which are prolifcrated and elaborated in the braissos have their root in the Mishnah, and rely upon it as their basis. Thus we say in Taanis:9 Ufa balanced himself at the top of the ship's mast and declared: "If anyone asks me a question regarding a statement of R. Chiyya and R. Oshaya•10 and I am unable to answer it from our Mishnah, I will throw myself from the mast and drown." Thus we see that any teaching of R. Chiyya and R. Oshaya can be derived from the Mishnah.

The Talmud passage about //fa is evidence for RSG's point. He now goes on to discuss the passage in more detail.

"OW no:, ilOO iolo MJi',"C niilm n,.:,;n ?t: "'?"l'l M"Ott'1 Mn1'"0:l1 l'liM?!)li ni,iil M""M '1 MJiMi "'lJiO nioMJiM "!)lMi "lOi!) Mt\""1:l:l 10t:!,i "CWi .,,p11 ,rnn,

.,,n,

.,::i,,, ,;;.:,,

ipl1 Mt\"1:l:l T"Miiioi l"r!)l1 '"ll'l01 1pl1 ',17i "'ll'lO:l tin?"1 M!)',M l'li"ll1l'l:l 'CMi.:, TU":lCC MJil"!)01 M"1i'CM:l n"tt'!)l K', n "Ml"C '"Mtt'1 tt'l"M M.:,"K ,M ioM '1 ":l1i K""M '1 ":l1:l KJi',"t) '"llt\00 n"? Ml10"tt'!) K?i '"lr'tt"IM MC?K .Mll1:l10i nipCMC Ml?"!)l ,,, M""M ,, "::l1:l M:l"M1 ,MO ;.:, .'"ll'lCC 10tt'!)C'i T'i tl"M '"l1tt"IM c,w ,no.:,n niMin, M!)',K K::i, pn,., ,, .,,n:l n,,.,, nt:w Kinn n"? Kll'li K::lC Kinn Kl'lK ,.:,, en, n::it:::i ,l::i'i 'iptt' un ,c,Mn en; f"lll'lU l1'i0 Cit? z,n; T""iKi 1"KO ,,.:, nopiK, "lO Kn ,.:,, l1'iC .non .,,::i, c,.,p; mio ioK,

Ufa wished to exhibit his wisdom, because of the incident• with R. Yochanan. [In response to Ufa's challenge,] a certain old man came and recited a halachah from the Tosefta: "If a man says,• 'Give my sons one shekel a week,' but they need to be given a sela, • we give them a sela..." Ilfa replied,"Whose opinion is this?" And he proceeded to show that it is the opinion of R. Meir, who said,* "It is a mitzvah to fulfill the wishes of the deceased." braissos: This means those braissos which were written by R. Chiyya and which constitute the T osefta. As we shall sec below, other braissos were written by R. Oshaya, but are not included in the Tosefta. R. Chiyya and R. Oshaya: They composed the braissos under the guidance of Rebbe, their teacher. 10 R. Chiyya's braissos comprise the Tosefta. the incident: He and R. Yochanan were in competition for the post of rosh ycshivah. If a man says: In his will. a sela: This is more than a shekel. who said: In the Mishnah.11

Digitized by

Goo le

Original from

-

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

37

The Tos~fta

RSG now explains further how the Tosefta Kl'r1JJ K""M ,, KnK ,,,K, is subordinate to the Mishnah. (Since the ?"Wit: l"M ,,, M"?1' ";n',!)M', passage is complex, we have adopted a freer n:,r,n ,, "tn, Mn,o yu:, ,, translation.) M:l 'l,n, l·l1M "'lnO:l Kone, We do not follow the opinion of R. Chiyya, M""M '1 KnM i:,i K1i'W Mn:i,',!) as expressed in a braissa, if he disputes with M1P"W M"M Mrui?!)i t:1EO Rebbe. For example, let us suppose that a certain halachah had originally been a matter '"lno:, PM "'lnO:l MO"l"\Ci l•1'M of dispute between R. Meir and R. Yosi; but 7; l'l"K, "'.1,c P"toPl M,,, P"i::111 Rebbe decided to record in the Mishnah only "Ci" 'ii 1"M0 'ii :p::11, Mrui?!)O R. Meir's opinion. R. Chiyya then came, in "Ci" ,,:, n.:i,n ,n"iin "J"?E ".:l the Tosefta, and stated that the halachah had "'lnO:l 1"'K0 '1.:l '1 C"nci M:)"i1 originally been a matter of dispute. Now, .P",:l1' ii"Onc:, the Talmud•2 gives us a rule about disputes among the sages: Mrui',!) ,, tt'"1!)i M.:l"M ?:lM When R. Meir and R. Yosi disagree, the til:, Ko',.i,i r.1ic:, ll"1::ll1 "'lnoi halachah follows R. Yosi. • Nevertheless, ,o,M ,c,, ,,, 1.:i ,o,M 1"M0 ,, since in the Mishnah, Rebbe mentioned ."c, .. ,,:, n.:i,n 1.:i only R. Meir's opinion, we follow R. Meir. RSG now gives the reverse example. Or, let us suppose that Rebbe in the "Ci" ,, '"in:1 .l"'E n,n, 1"MO Mishnah records a dispute between R. Meir 1"KO '1.:l Mn"1:l:l "One, '"lnO:l and R. Yosi. However, R. Chiyya prefers M"l"O "l1::l1:ii M"l"O ll"?:li'O M', R. Meir's argument, and therefore records it ,n:1M ,,, M"1'0t: cinl nio:l":l in a baraissa without mentioning R. Yosi's np,,no, "'lne:1 enc ,n:1M '10 opposing view.• In such a case, we do n.:i,n ;,,; 10M "MO Mn"1:l:l not accept [R. Chiyya's] decision. Thus, in '"ll"\O:l l'li'i,ne , '"ll"\O enc:, Yevamos,n R. Abbahu's servant asked him: "If only one side of a dispute is given ,:,, '"M "MO Mn"1:l:l enc, in the Mishnah, and a braissa gives both sides, which do we follow?" He answered: "We follow the Mishnah which presents only the one view." [He asked:] "When the Mishnah records both sides of a dispute and the braissa records only one side, which do we follow?" He answered:

R. Yosi: Thus, by recording the dispute in Tosefta, R. Chiyya implies that the halachah should follow R. Yosi. witbout mentioning R. Yosi's... view: Thus in effect Rebbe follows R. Yosi (according to the Talmud's rule mentioned above), while R. Chiyya follows R. Meir.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

38

"If Rebbe did not teach it, how would R. Chiyya know about it?"• For R. Chiyya was Rebbe's student. He said what Rebbe taught him. Thus, R. Chiyya had no infonnation that Rebbe did not also have. Even an implication in a mishnah overrules an explicit statement of a braissa. Thus, there is a dispute about an alleyway (mabul) whose walls have openings.• The total area of the openings is equal to the total remaining area of the walls.• The TalmudI 4 states that R. Pappa's opinion is refuted by a braissa, and that the halachah follows R. Pappa. [The question is asked:] He is refuted, yet the halachah follows him? The answer is: Yes, because a mishnah implies what he should not exceed* its remaining area."

i':i T"lt:) M""M ,, MMltt' M':i ,, ,,, i1"1"t:)';,r, M""M ,,, ci~ ,t:)M n,n ,, M",t:)lM1 "Mt), n,n "Mt) M':iM M""M ,,r;, M"':i Ji"',i Mpii i?"£)Mi ,,r;, M"? Ji"Mi Ml'\""i:l:l i,i::,t:) "'lJit:)1 "?"Ci "i:lt:)1 Mrui';,£) M"i1i1::) M"iM:l

:i,, Mn:l,"Ji ll",t:)M it:)ii,::, r,,£) :i,, M"n,::, n::,;n, Mn:i,.,Ji MElEl ll"P,£)t:), !MJi::)?Mi Mn:i,,n .ME)!) n,n,::, T"N"nt:) Mp..,, c,w ,T"M niiJi" n,x,,£) ,,n.. M':itt' "ln Mpi ·l"l:lM ?l7 said. It teaches: "Its openings

how would R. Chiyya know about it?: If Rebbe did not know which opinion should be preferred, how should R. Chiyya know? (See Rashi on this passage in the Talmud.) openings: Windows, doorways, and the like. walls: The alleyway adjoins a house. The question is whether one is permitted to carry things from the house to the alleyway on Sbabbos. For carrying to be permissible, the alleyway must be adequately enclosed. Solid walls would certainly be sufficient. Walls which consisted mostly of open space would certainly not be sufficient. The Talmud discusses the case where there is as much solid wall as open space. R. Pappa rules that one is permitted to carry. should not exceed: This implies that carrying is forbidden only if the open space exceeds the solid space. But if the two are equal, carrying is permitted, as R. Pappa said. Thus we see that a mere implication in a mishnah overrules an explicit braissa.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Tire Tosefta

39

Notes to Chapter 4 1.

See ch. 1, note 7.

2. 3.

Ktsubos 103b.

Our text of the Gemara has "holiness,. (nrlii)) instead of "priesthood,. (Mil,). This probably parallels the Misbnah in Sotall 49a: "When Rebbe died, humility and fear of sin ceased.•• This perhaps also sheds additional light on one of the names by which Rebbe was known: Rabbeinu HaKadosh. And see Tosafos on Ktstlbos, foe. cit., s.v. ,rmc, where R. Chaim Kohen claims that "holiness ceased0 (nri,p i'fflll) actually means, "the priesthood ceased0 n',!)::i) (Mn:,, since from that day on Kt

'l1111:,.p K? Kl"1'11i:,. 1li1 iM?:>i ti11:,.pK1:) KO?l1 11?i:> iMl'CilO? N"l'tttiK 'ii K""n ":,.ii Kl"l"11i:,. K11ll"\ K?K i"l"I ii111"l0 '"'iON K?i .Klil"I Kll"li M?nl"\O iN? 110) "lj!)C, Ki£)c,

U11l"\ltttO:) iii:l p:,.1 i~tttE) ?Kittt11 ;:,:,. i1~ttt£) 'lPl"I l"\l1ttt01 nio:,.":,. p 11,0K1:> 11,p 11?p K'iK 11l"l"Ki ttt11p? ttt"i? pn,"I 'i ?"K MtttO:) tttiiii :lttti"ttt l"\1£) p? i1111 111 iK? ?"Ki .Mii:llil "E)O i1? 11ll"\ K:)"i1i K"i1 Kl"l'll"IO K11M

R. Yochanan said to Reish Lakish: "I observed that the son of Pedas was sitting 11 and making expositions like Moshe from K""ll"I pn, 'i PE)l .C"lil:) n,,n:,. •11 ni" Kl"\?l"\:). Ki:lCi 110, 11 Kl"\7l"\:). the mouth of the Almighty." And [Reish Lakish] replied: 11 11 "It [his exposition] is not his, it is a i£)Ci KiDC ti11:,.pK :>M il"l:,.i braissa; and where was it taught? In Toras 111, TJ:li in? 11 Cil1 Kl"\!lCil"\i Kohanim [Sifra]." R. Yochanan went and Cl"\i1 iOKi:,i Kl"lli'l"l l11 =>i1 Kl"\ttti1 learned it [the Sifra] in three days, and :).j Km KlK Ki1 :1onl :li analyzed• it for three months. Afterwards,• Sifra, Sifrei, and Tosefta became established so as to be studied by the sages, and this remains the ordinance• until the present day, as R. Nachman said• there:2J

Rabban Yocbanan hen Zakkai: He lived mainly before the Temple's destruction. Tanya: "It was taught." Of course, braissos from the Tosefta are also sometimes introduced with "Tanya." However, "Tannu Rabbanan" is used only when introducing material from Tosefta the Sifra, and the Sifrei. Tanna Tuna: "The Tanna taught."21 analyzed it: Engaged in making deductions and drawing conclusions. afterwards: After these collections became more widespread. ordinance: It was agreed and established that these collections should be studied in every beis mitlrash. said there: This phrase is difficult, since there has been no immediate preceding reference to Tractate Shevuos.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

44

Here are I and R. Sheshes, who have studied ha/achos, • Sifra, Sifrei, Tosefta, and the whole Talmud. These braissos have no limit.• Each sage studied them from the mouth of his teacher. Thus we say in [Tractate Shevuos]: 2" R. Pappa bar Abba2s found Rabbah bar Shmuel and said to him, "Have you studied anything about a hired laborer?" He replied, "Yes. 'We are taught• (Tannina) ..."' The Amoraic sages who [lived ]after Rebbe greatly needed these braissos, because from them they derived [understanding of] all the deep matters which were stated in the Mishnah in succinct language, through hints, and in general principles. From these [succinct statements, hints, and general principles] there go forth branches,• new ideas (chiddushim) and halachic derivations; for Rebbe only compiled the main principles [of the halachos,] but did not draw their parallels. The sages also needed to use dialectics (pilpu/) and analysis. There were some among

"iE)C, NiE)C) Nl"\:l?il Nl"ln, ntt'tt' .Ni,c;n ..,,:l, NnE)c,n, l'i' in; n"N N? Nl"l""i:l -µni ,n, C"il ll:li JC ,n, ,n ;:,, :l"lu,i:ltt':l ll"iCNi:l il":li c,E)c il:li? N:lN i:l NE)E) :li il"M:)tt'N .., ..c iC "ln il"? iCN ?Hiett' i:l .Nl"ln il"? iCN i":ltt':l ":li ,n:1, "NiicN 7l:1,, Nl"l"",:1 l";n; N:1,~ l":l"il ,,n Nl"lj:)"C1' .., ..c ;:, li'E)lC 1inlc, N~""P Nltt'"?:l t"n"lnc:, ?l"iCNi l"E)l1' CilC l"Nli", ..,;:):,, "l"Ci:li 1,n, i:,n N? ":l n,,,,n, "'tt'iin, ~tt'E) N?i tin;, T"ii'1' N?N ,, p:,, T":l"il 7,n; l"l"Ni ....,c, tiillC "Cl n,n, Ni::lCi N?iE)?E) "Cl Nn,c il"? N:)"ili l NC i1? "Cii "NC '):) Nl"\?C ""iCi'J ll",cN, il?tt' ip11::1 ilN"::ln;, i:l ntt'tt' Hien l":lii"1':l 11n,c Nicn ,,n:, "1'l£3 ,,n ntt'tt' ntt'tt' il"l"\"Jncc .Nicn n ..,u,,E3c 11n,c

,,m

,,,i,

::i,,

::i, ::1, . ::i,,

them who needed to know something [a particular halachah,] and [in order to discover it] they had to draw all the relevant parallels and relate them to their underlying principles. As we say in Eruvin:26 Whenever R. Chisda and R. Sheshes met each other, R. Chisda trembled at the [extensive] teachings of R. Sheshes and R. Sheshes trembled at the keen dialectics of R. Chisda. •

::1,,

::1,,

halacbos: I.e., Mishnah. See pp.3 and 17. have no limit: There is no fixed number of them or established collection, unlike Rebbi's mishnayos. we are taught...: The point being made here is that even a limited subject matter like the laws of a hired laborer was dealt with by braissos and they were so well known that Rabbah bar Shmuel could quote them impromptu. branches: Developed issues. at the keen dialectics of R. Cbisda: The passage is cited to show the importance of dialectics and analysis.

Digitized by

Goo le

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA it. . ¢ .

4

45

The Braissos, Sifra and Sifrei

The sages praised one who has studied N:m~ ,,cJ, tNc'i p:li in:lttti many [braissosJ,21• because the explanations 1,,~, n,,n "Cl1to n,, t""'iJci of the Torah• become revealed to him. Since Nli'iC "lli "l"lli nc~ 11,,, ,,cJ, he has learned and knows many teachings, n,, ni,,c, Nli'ic, n,, to""P, he has learned things which were [presented] succinctly and things• which were elaborated. n,,,:l it MltttC:l NP"Cl11 Nl'\'ic, Hence something• which is deep• in one t"i1Ml01 N"MM~ ninN MltttC:l mishnah• is clear [to him] from a different ,, ,cN Nl"lM i:l NMN ,, icN, mishnah. This is in accord with the passage "NC pn,, ,, it:)N "CN ,, 't:)N "t:)N in [Tractate] Sanhedrin:u , , nttt11n rn'ii:lnli:l ,~ :l"n~, R. Acha bar Channina said in the name i1lit:)M'ic Ntic i1liN "C:l i1t:)M'ic of R. Ami29 that R. Assi said in R. Yochanan's name: "What is the meaning ni'i":lM ,,":l ttt"ttt "C:l n,,n 'ittt of the verse,30 'With strategems (tachbulos) :i1"ttt.DlN Z:,Ci" :li "ip i1ltttC 'ittt .iittt M~:l liiNi:lli :lii you shall make war'? It means, in whom do you find [the skill to conquer in] the war of Torah? In him who possesses 111" N'ii "lli1 tNC1 J"l1Ni 'bundles• and bundles (chavilos chavilos)' ,;u ilT "Ni tttiin ilT "N ,;,E);.E); of Mishnah." R. Yosef applied to himself T"li"lliC:l "lli N'i1 i1"l"t:) "liN the verse:31 "Through the strength of the "j:'i.DN'ii ""it:)17 111" N'ii i1"1i1:l ox [comes] much [increase of] grain."* Z:,"111 ~"Ell1N '"lliCt:) i1"7"1 ipl1 Even though one who has learned [a large icJ N'ii ,,:lei 'iE)'i.Dt:)1 TNt:)t:) number of braissos] may not know how to engage in dialectic in order to derive a new ?O"C , iCN1 "Nt:) N'ii "lli1 "NC halachic fact or a corollary which was not [explicitly] stated in the [mishnayos and braissos],• and does not know how to compare [subjects] and to cull main principles from the Mishnah; even so, he is superior to the one who is a dialectician and analyst but has not learned the things that were taught• and said* [by the earlier sages]. Why so? Because braissos: Lit., "teachings." explanations of tlae torah: I.e., secrets. thiags: Statements and issues. something: A term or halachah. deep: Difficult. misllnab: I.e., teaching. bandies: The exegesis relates the word, "strategem" (tachbulah, it'n::inn) with the word "bundle" (chavilah, i'l'r'::in) as having the same root. gnu■: The above passage was cited as an example of the "praises of the sages" which RSG had mentioned in the previous paragraph. [lllisllnayos aad braiaos]: Lit., "Mishnah." ta-cllt: Mishnayos and braissos. said: Independent statements of the sages, not included in any collection.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

46

,,,N.,

','1:)'1 1"Cli Ninn, the one who has learned [a large amount inln .... of braissos and mishnayos] can decide Mtt'3JC? n:,',n TU"Wtt'i "l3Jic authoritatively on matters concerning which NC3J~ "NC '','1:)'1 t(', , ..:le, Ninn, he has heard practical decisions; while the "i'Ell TNC Niel M"', l"\"',i JNCi analyst cannot. And why is this? Because one who has not learned - How can he derive i1"? M"Ni TNC ',,:)N .N1:lCC i1"', [practical decisions] from pure analysis?• But N,, Nin ,,cN, "NC cu,, N1Cl one who has a store of learned material can [give practical decisions] in the light of what has been said• [by the halachic T""lic, "NiicN "l"',!>1 N:l"Mi authorities,] and need not derive [decisions] N"lni yinlc in:, NC',3J:l from reasoning.J2 Moreover,33 where there is a dispute between N"MM:l M"ni:, "'ll'lC N""lni Amoraim, and an anonymous Talmud passage M"i:l pn~" :ii C"M:lt:l Tl"icNi rules according to one of them, while a braissa rules according to the other, we follow ,.c,, M"Ci' n":,tt' n,n n,,n,. :lii the one supported by the braissa. Thus we say :iii i1"Ci'', ?tNi i1"i':ltt' NCM 1:l i1"? 1CN i1":l 3Jl!) ,n Ne,.. ntt'tt' in Zevachim:34 R. Yitzchak the son of R. Yehudah used 1":l T~i'l Nn!>p',N NCM i:1 "Ci to attend [the lectures of] Rami bar M?tNi citt'c , ..c,, , , "l'lN Nn.., Chama. He left him and attended [the :ii:, , , n",n ntt'tt' M"Ci'' lectures of] R. Sheshes. One day [Rami bar Chama] met [R. Yitzchak] and said: ":li1 citt'c iN, M"? icN .ntt'tt' "The nobleman• has taken us by the hand i1"l"C Nn',c Nl"1':l ":J ic N',N and his scent has come into the hand.• NlM:)tt'C "Ni Ki::icc "" ~"rt'!> Because you have gone to R. Sheshes, you "N "" nicN n, N:)1!>1 NM"lMC are like R. Sheshes?" [R. Yitzchak] replied: "It is not because of that. Rather, whenever I asked a question of the Master,• he answered me from reason, [and] if I found a braissa [to the contrary,] you• told me, 'If it was taught, it was taught.'• [But]

:1,,

from pure analysis: A logical analysis sometimes can easily be refuted. bas been said: A decision based on such evidence can be authoritative even if contradicted by a different Tannaitic statement. nobleman: The Aramaic word a/kafta or askafta indicated a high Persian dignitary. See Shevuos 6b. tl1e nobleman... band: A proverbial taunt against those who cultivate high acquaintances, thinking that they have thereby enobled themselves. tbe master: Rami bar Chama. you: This pronoun should actually be in the third person. taught: My answer has been refuted by the teaching, and I must accept it.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Braissos, Sifra and Sifrei

47

when I ask a question of R. Sheshes, he 'Hi ''lMCC ,,, O'tt'!) Nn'?c M"l'C answers it from a braissa, so that if I find icH M'? H:li!), HM'lnc HlM:ltt'C a [braissa] which refutes him, he says to me, icH H"M l"M"lnc, Nn"lnc ..,, 'This is a [braissa] and that is a [braissa]!"* 10,e,.,,N, Nn',c 'Nl'C "l7:l j1'1', [Rami bar Chama] said to [R. Yitzchak]: "Ask me a question and I will answer you• in M'l'C Nl7:l l'M"lnc:, Ni:lCC ,,, accordance with a braissa."35 He asked him, "'?:in "£) 1,w ,,,:, nipc:1 '?w:1 "If one boiled (a sacrifice) in [the bottom] icN 1,w U'N iN j1£)'110Wi ;,p,,c part of a vessel docs the top part of the MNTMN n,n, .., ..c y,w U"N M"'? vessel require scouring and rinsing• or docs Hn',:l:l "ln K'? NMi M"'? ,cH it not require [them]?" He told him: "It does 7,w ,r,:, nipc:1 r,e,:1 N'lni ,:,;, not require anything [since] it is similar to the spurting [of blood]."* He said: "But this l'NW nc n1>,10w, np,,c "'?:in ,., is not what was taught in a braissa, as we .N"ln H"ln 'IN jt'I', 1CN nNTn:l t:i learned: 'If one boiled in part of a vessel, scouring and rinsing are required, which is H"l7:l"H ,:, n,,,,n:1 "=>M eie,ci not so in the case of spurting.'" He said to enc nT '" e,,n ,pun 'l'C in'? il:li'? NC'?l7 1',10!"H i:, qtti17 him,"If it was taught, it was taught."• The problem was raised in Horayos:'J6 Who n,n, qc,, :1,,,, e,,n ,p,11 Hin, is superior, the well-read [scholar] or the :lii M"tt'EllH ,,pi "'iCN Nili "l"C dialectician? The question came up when the "l"C enc ,nr,e, ,,w n:i:1 niNi:ln world*37 needed [the leadership of] Rabbah, who was an "uprooter of mountains" [a brilliant dialcctician] and R. Yosef, who was "Sinai" [a scholar of encyclopedic knowledge]; For R. Yosef applied to himself the verse:38 "Through the strength of the ox [comes] much [increase] of grain." Because of this• [matter discussed above]

brais.u: There is a dispute between two braissos and I may still adhere to the first one. answer you: Based on logic. scouring and rinsing: See Leviticus 6:22 for the background of this halacbah. spurting of blood: When the blood spurts on part of a garment, only that part must be washed. it was taught: In the above passage, RSG is showing that the Halachah follows the ruling of a braissa, or other Tannaitic teaching, against the opposing view of an Amora, even though the opinion of the Amora may be based on keen dialectical analysis. the world: Specifically, Pumbedisa, where a leading scholar was needed to fill the position of Rosh Mesivta. See ch. 10, p.102. this: The superiority of knowledge over reasoning power.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of RaY Sheriro Goon

48

they replied from There:• '"Sinai' is superior, K"~M "it:l':' T":,"i'I ',:,ni :ri11 for all are dependent on the owner of the wheat" - that is, on the teachings. R. Chiyya realized this principle,• and tU"'lin, K""" ,, nKi t":in therefore made his braissa [collection,] which -µn Kntt'n TU"Ki n ..; .., Kn""i:lr, is now the only one studied in the batei ,Tl:li ":l T"lnt:i, ,,n'):l K""n ,,, midrash39*, because those• earlier ones were ,,n ,nr,:, Mn""t:li' 1JMi c,w all [too] lengthy* in their discussions and "Mt:ii tinn""ln, tinn....,~ Tft"lgJ teachings. Whatever the sages needed [from those 't:l.l:l "it:lK tiMlt:l p:li i:,",~'ltn earlier braissa collections] they recorded* in ,n""t:l1'~ ,n::1 ,p..gJn, ,n::1 the Gemara, and they analyzed them carefully .,n, p:,..,i M':'i n:,ntt'M MiMwi and derived from them general principles. The rest• have been forgotten, since they were not ':'Kit:ittti :Jii Mn""i:Ji l~Mi K'l"in, Mi'", ?:l:J:l n,n, needed. The braissos of the beis midrasl,40 of ii) ?1' Kt:ii" iic::1 ll"it:iMi Mar Shmuel,* which were available to K:Ji it:iK f'IM::l Mtt'1'li1 ,,w, the Babylonian [sages,4 '] were accurate ,, iM M',M Mn'l,nt:l nn:,tttt:) M') and well-arranged. Thus we say in Seder'2 Yoma,•J [where the Talmud speaks] M::l"i'1' ,, iK ?Kit:lttt ":Ji it1'"',M about the bullock offered up as a bumt- 1n Ki'"::lntttK :,•1)11M, Mnl)o,n, offering, and the he-goat sacrificed on the "MMCU ll"M:)tt'O i:,i ':'Mit:ittt 41:Ji outer altar:• Rava said: "There is no correctly arranged version44 except [the view of] R. Eliezer [as taught in the braissa] of the beis midrash of Shmuel, or [the view of] R. Akiva [as taught] in the Tosefta." Even so,• these [braissos] of the beis midrash of Shmuel have been

,p,p,,

there: Eretz Yisrael. this principle: R. Chiyya realized the importance of learning as many braissos as possible, as RSG has discussed in the previous paragraphs. batei midrash: Lit., "the houses of the Rabbis... those: The early and reliable ones discussed previously in this chapter. too lengthy: And therefore not suitable for long-term memorization. recorded: Lit., " said... the rest: Other braissos from these collections. the braissos... of Mar Shmuel: Of all the braissa collections mentioned earlier in the chapter, RSG singles out this particular one - perhaps because it is the only one to which the Talmud applies the term, "correctly arranged... outer altar: The Talmud there discusses the question at what time of day each of these two sacrifices was offered. even so: Even though they were "correctly arranged ...

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

49

Tise Brais.sos, Sifra and Sifrei

abandoned. And [now] ,•s when• we encounter versions of braissos, we do not rely on them, because they were not taught• and we do not know if they arc authoritative• or not. The same applies to other braisstrf, [collections] which the rabbis have called•1 "the small ones,"48 such as• Hilchos Derech Eretz• and other aggadic works. These [too] are not authoritative.

N7i ,n""71' Tl":lCO N7 Nn""i:li til"N NtO~i' "N tlr'i" N',i l""lliC ,,n,:J. N""M ,,, -µn N7N N7 "N "Cl nin""i:J.:1, .p:1, ":l lD"il iN,, nilrlOp ,n, ni,nN ,,, n,:i,n yu:i '"""lC , ..,,,N, .n,,nN niiln, riN

,,p,

,,n

wlaen we encoa■ter: It has been suggested that RSG's statement is directed specifically to the Karaite threat (Levine in his Introduction, p.14). The Karaites based themselves, among other things, on early, unknown braissa collections which they brought forth. Many of these were probably forgeries. tlley were ■ot ta111llt: In the academies of the halacbic authorities. aatlloritative: Lit., "truthful." sacb as Hilcllos...a■d otber agadic works: RSG is perhaps, arguing that just as these tractates, which he calls braissos, on the basis of their contents can certainly not be considered authoritative Tannaitic literature, the same is true of the other "braissos," which were not taught. Hilcllos Derecla Eretz: A tractate dealing with the laws of courtesy.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

50

/ggeres of Rav Slrtrira Goon

Notes to Chapter 5 Sec. however. the work Talmudic Terminology, Jerusalem, 1988, pg. 36, n. 4c, where two Talmudic citations arc shown to refute this thesis. In these two instances, although the introductory phrase: TaMu Rabbanan appears, the braissa is not from the beis midra.sl, of R. Chiyya and R. Oshaya. la. Cf. Soralt 22a; Mtgillalt 28b; Chullin 15a; and especially S. Lieberman, Hellenism in Jewish Palestine, N.Y., 1962, p.88. Ib. Btracltos J4a. 2. Ibid. 3. Ko/rt/es Rabbah 6:2 and Jerusalem Talmud, Horayos 3:5, where the collections of R. Chiyya, R. Oshaya, and Bar Kappara are called "Mis/mayos Gedolos." 4. See Yoma 24a. Hyman, p.40, n. 7 should be emended accordingly. 5. French version. 6. Bava Basra 52b. 7. Sec Rashbam on Bava Basra, loc. cit., s.v.: ., ii'nll' 'ltl:) .,'J ,-rel' f'l"l"ri' n:,cc, Kn"iD• f'l"l"ri'~ I.

8. 9.

~" ,,, """· Yevamos 16:7. 32b.

JO. Deuteronomy 16:20. 1J. Sanhedrin, loe. cit. 12. 22b. 13. loc. cir. , 23b. Sec Ras/ti in Sanhedrin, Joe. cir., s.v. rmJ'J who bas Abbayc (cf. Fr. version) identifying Pumbcdisa as Go/alt and then concludes: DI' '>D ro"I" iv•W". This last piece of information might have been taken from this chapter of RSG. 14. See Pesacltim 66a. 15. French version. Sec Temuralt 16a. 15a. "Mar" is a term of affection and respect. In association with Shmuel, it is found often in the Talmud, but never in the lggcrcs except for here.Perhaps RSG felt the term was especially appropriate in a passage praising the Babylonian scholars. The title, also found in the Talmud in connection with other Babylonian scholars and the cxilarchic family, might have been especially applied to Shmuel because of his closeness to the Exilarch, Mar Ukva (sec below, ch.9, p.91), and his personal acquaintance with King Sapor. Moreover, after Rav's death in 247 C.E., Shmuel was recognized by all the Babylonian sages as the pre-eminent authority (sec below, Joe. cit., p.96). An alternative suggestion is that since be did not receive ordination (see Bava Merzia 8Sb) and hence could not be called "Rabbi," he was given the tide, "Mar" as a sort of consolation. See also RSG's discussion of the word, "Mar" in bis second letter to the Kairouan community (Levine, p.126). 16. Sec S/rabbos 35b, Eruvin 86a. 17. Beracltos 19a, 32a. 18. Sec Beracltos 32a, Eruvin S4a. 19. 19a. See Ra.sJ,i, s.v., •~'T~. 20. Sec above, cb.3, p .25. 21. We have followed the understanding of Rabbeinu Channa.net (Bava Mttzia 3a, 4a) and the Aruclr. Ra.sl,i, on the other band, interprets the word, "TIIIIQ" as "our TQIUIQ," so that "TOIUUI TWIil" would mean, 'The author of our mishnah (rr, Klll) teaches.'' This is difficult, since "TOMa Tuna" is also found in reference to braissos. (See Kiddu.sltin 24b, Temuralt 14a, etc.) It can also be found introducing a different mishnah (sec Yevamos 58a and Kiddu.sltin 65a). Rasbi's interpretation is also problematic from the grammatical perspective. Sec Festsc/rrift non Siebzigsten Geburtstag David Hoffman's; Berlin, 1914, p.216. Heb. Sec., for R. Betzalel Ashkcnazi's understanding of the term.

"ill'I.,,

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

51

171e Braissos. Sifra and Sifrei 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

28. 29. 30. 31. 32.

33.

72b, with variants. Sltnuos 41b. 45b. Our texts have "R. Shcshcs," as docs the French version of the lggercs. 67a. French version. 42a. Sec Rashi there s.v. ni,n "'1 nncn'?c who, perhaps, might have relied on RSG. An original reading not found in any extant text. Proverbs 24:6. Ibid, 14:4. We have followed the French version: "lnC:lD TD' instead of the Spanish: "Ki0.10". Hyman's understanding of the Spanish version (p. 43, note 34) is forced. B. Goldberg (in his second edition of the lggcres, Mainz, 1873), p. 19, n. 20, also has much difficulty with the Spanish version. Hyman (Joe. cit.) is incorrect in claiming that it is misleading to begin a new paragraph (as Levine, in fact, docs). In addition, Hyman's claim that RSG is offering two separate explanations as to why the knowledgeable scholar is superior, as a balachic authority, to the dialectician, has no support from the text. 96b, with slight variants. French version.

34. 35. 36. 14a. 37. RSG docs not hesitate to use the hyperbole, "world," since Pumbedisa was in that period the only functioning mesivta. 38. Sec above, n. 31. 39. French version. 40. French version. 41. Sec above, p.42. 42. See our gloss above, ch.3, p.31. 43. Yoma 10a. 44. This reading (and interpretation) of the Talmud passage is unique to RSG, except for one other manuscript (sec Dikdukei So/rim on Yoma Joe. cit., n. 200). Our text has, acrupnc, meaning that it is difficult to find a proper arrangement for the day's service (sec Raslri on this Talmud passage, s.v., ac->). However, Tosafos on this same passage (s.v., inMi), while accepting the reading, MNynD, seems to understand it as RSG docs, i.e., as referring to the accuracy of the braissos, not the Temple services. 45. French version. 46. Mss. 47. The earliest mention of "small ones" is to be found in the Be/rag (Venice, 1548; p.143b), whose author lived approximately 200 years before RSG. It probably became widespread in the later Gaonic period, i.e., in RSG's time, and he is referring to " the rabbis" of his own day. 48. French version.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Talmud RSG will now deal with the fifth question put .,n,,11 t"n'JN~, "Cl ,,c,n, Chapter 6:

to him by the elders of Kairouan, regarding the development of the Talmud.

n"N

e"litt'Ni

"litt'Ki

,,.,~N

n"Ki P",cK Kn, ,,c,n yin, ,.,,oK, yin, TC"i.1i Kn:,,n ,n, "tp,11:l "K:)t T:l pi:li n~w ,c,.:i ,n;:, iK,, .:i•11K, .e"lKn ?:lK inK yitt',, inK il~:l y,,~ en~ en e,11i,., e"Cwn "lno ,n, ,n ;:,, ,n yin,:,, nt C"l,~ c,,,:in n.,,.,o,n, il":li M"ic.nci:, ,n, in ;:, nm ~•l7N y,,~ en,cw, en,ni:,;n, .me m p,,nc enDiltt'

Regarding your question about the Talmud: Even the earliest• sages possessed a Talmud; for we say [in the Gemara] that they possessed halachos• which they studied.2 Thus we say3 [in the Mishnah]:4 It once happened that Ben Zakkai questioned witnesses regarding the stems of the figs.• Even though [those early sages] did not recite the laws in a uniform version or wording, nevertheless it is known that the underlying principles [of the laws] are one and the same, and all [the various ways of expressing them] e,,,cn, f"?P in,.,, rip11,,ni are equivalent. Each one [of the sages] taught his students a compilation [of the laws]. Each [compilation] was different from the others, every [sage teaching] as his teacher [had taught him]. The laws and their underlying principles were the same, even though there were stylistic differences among [the sages]. Their principles [included]: inference• from minor to major;s letter

earliest: In a previous discussion of the early formulation of the Mishnab (see chapter 3, p.20), RSG uses the same "Ben Zakkai" passage as here, and proves that as early as the teachers of R. Yochanan ben Zakkai - i.e., Hillel and Shammai - the Tannaim were teaching specific halachos. These might be the "earliest sages" to whom he is referring here.I possessed Halacbos: Hence they must have had an accompanying Talmud. stems of the figs: Witnesses testified that someone had committed murder under a certain fig tree. To probe the validity of their testimony, Ben Zakkai questioned them about the appearance of small details such as the stems of the figs. Inference from minor to major: Logic dictates that if a lenient (minor) case entails a certain stringency, the same stringency must certainly apply to a stricter (major) case. Another way of putting it is that laws can be dcriwd from lea obvious situations and applied to more obvious ones. 52

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

53

The Talmud

transformations and numerical computations n,~i,c ',~ C"l!')i n,,,ioc.li of letters,6 and various methods of exegesis. n,n~ n,,c n,~11 ~"~ yinlci Among them were the thirteen hermeneutical c,,:3, yinloi ~,,, '7MW~" ,, principles used* by R. Yishmael [to expound ,,n,, Mipo c,,c yu:, c,,nM the Torah], and other methods, such as:• ( 1) Reversing the order of words in a verse;7 r~iiii rioiwi T""i:lii Mipc T"M:ln y,:1,n:, "l~ ~pn, y,:,,cc (2) A superfluous verse;s (3) Inclusions• and exclusions;9 ti"'71' ict;,,, C"ic'7c T"M inM:, (4) Explaining the juxtaposition• [of two M'7 n:i,,c n~!')n, tinnnc verses or passages in the Torah];•o (5) Connections;• 11 (6) If two separate verses both state an identical law, we cannot generalize• from them;12 (7) Later• passages illuminate earlier ones; 1J

med by R. Ylsltmael: These were an extension of the seven principles of Hillel. Both systems are mentioned in the introductory chapter of Sifra. R. Yishmael's thirteen principles were generally adopted as the authoritative rules of Rabbinic interpretation. s11elt as: We have numbered the items for convenience. l11elmioas a■d exclasiom: According to this method, certain particles and prepositions employed in the Torah were intended to indicate that additional elements should be included in the meaning of the verse, or that certain elements should be excluded. Precisely what these elements were, tradition indicated. The words, Cl ,rue ,qH, and ,~ were especially regarded as inclusors, while, p, ,'10, and OH were regarded an exclusors. jutapositio■: A verse or passage is sometimes expounded based on the fact that it was placed near another verse or passage. Co■nectioas: A particular kind of analogy, based on the close connection of two subjects in one and the same Torah passage. The underlying principle of this particular analogy is that where two subjects are connected by a common predicate, the provisions made regarding one of them are, under certain circumstances, applicable to the other. if...ca■■ot generalize: When a law is stated regarding two particular items in the Torah, we sometimes infer that the same law applies to all similar items. This kind of inference is called a " generalization.. (binyan av) based on two items. To make such a generalization, it is first necessary to show that the two items are not identical but that they differ in some aspect. If they are so identical that one of them seems superfluous, as it could have been derived from the other by way of analogy, then no binyan av is permissible. Wer...ealier o■es:stated When a verse dealing with a new subject begins with the prcm, , ("and"). this indicates that a connection can be made with the previous pnna,:. and tbe law stated in the earlier passage also applies in the later.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Slterira Gaon

54

(8) Ir you seize much, you cannot hold it; ntt'Eln ~.me ntt'Eln ntt'Eln if you seize little, you can hold it;14 Kipc ClnO C"lJ::ltt' Mtt'"ii'I (9) Interpreting• the reason of the text;is CK tt'", T"tt'i,,, T"El"c,c, T"lJiu, (10) We detach,* add, and then expound;16 TK:) ,cKl CK tt'"' Kipc; (11) The source• of the law is in the way the Torah is read; 17 the source of the law is ,..l!)., tt'iil Kipc T.,M., icKli ..,.. KJ'I" Kipc T"Ki i"l!l "l!l?i in the way the Torah is written;1s 1 (12) Here• it is said...There it is said; 9 iniKC T"K, c,p,c T"K ,~,tt'E) ( 13) A verse is interpreted by means of "l::l titt';:, n,,n n,:,,, n,,n:,, its precedent• and by means of that which m:,,, nt:,, icKltt' ,:,,, C1K precedes its precedent;21 (14) The plain sense of a passage must ,,..:,,n-, T"llJ in"lM ,., T"llJ il"Ki always be taken into account;22 (15) There is no certain chronological order to the verses of the Torah;23 (16) The Torah uses the ordinary• language of men;24 (17) When two verses are similar, and a certain detail doesn't fit into one of them, apply it to the other;25

n,,00.,

if...can bold it: When a verse implies two or more possible inferences, choose the one that yields the smallest number, size, or measure. Interpreting...text: This method involves deducing the underlying reason for a particular law. Once this reason is discovered, the law may be extended to other cases where the same reason applies. we detacb...and then expound: Prefixes and suffixes may be detached from words and added to others, resulting in a new interpretation of the text. the source... written: Tradition tells us that certain words in the Torah should be pronounced differently from how they are written. Sometimes these differences affect the meaning of the verse. In such cases, one opinion holds that the written version (the Mesorah) should be the main basis of exegesis, while another opinion holds that the pronunciation should be the main basis. bere...there: RSG is probably referring to the gezerah shavah, an analogy based on the occurence of identical or similar words in two disparate Torah passages. Alternatively, he might be referring to the mah matzinu, which is a simple generalization from one law to another.20 its precedent... precedent: A verse may be interpreted as bearing upon the preceding subject and the one before that. ordinary language: Since the Torah adopts the ordinary parlance of men, no special weight can be attached to its turns of speech and repetitions, so customary in human language. This principle, advocated by R. Yishmael, was the basis of his system of thirteen hermeneutical principles (sec above, s.v. "used by R. Yishmael" ). Relying on this principle, R. Yishmael rejected most of the exegeses which R. Akiva based on seemingly redundant words, syllables, or letters.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ~

.. . . . . .

I

55

The Talmud

( 18) A verse whose meaning is proven by

i:li ,,,,11 n,:::,,c ,,,:intt' ,:1, ,,,:in, l"1i1 Kin, Mt:l icKltt' l'\'llft'l K'i l'\"ltt'li nicKltt' Mtt'ill M:l tt'1MNtt' i:11 ?":ltt':l K?K "PiKi Ml"C yii ,Ml"Ci Ml"C tii n,,n, y,,n ye K:l'i ,,,, KinK:l i::, .nr,K::, n:i,n C"i:lii yiil:::, r,:::, yinn:::,r,n C"litt'Ki ,,cK ,,n ,,,c t""'"K y,n.., c,,.:i,:::, ,n, ,n "ClJ10 ..,,,.:i.., 7,n,,, ,,cr,n r,,n icK l":l,i"lJ:l P"icKi:::,, n,,n ,,cr,n pn,, ,, icK ,n:1K ":li c,:::,c,c, , ..KC .. M"n ,nK ,:i,, ,:1, ;::, ",lJ ,c,K M"Mtt' ictt' "ClnO Mlictt'i C"lJ:liK nKci10 'itt' 'itt' ,:i,, ,:i, ;::, ,m MKc,10 .n,n10 "ClnO n"c n,n10

means of another verse; (19) Something which is stated in one verse and applies also to a companion versc;u (20) If a passage is stated and then repeated, it is repeated only for the sake of adding something ncw;21 (21) Deduce• from it, and again from it;28 (22) Deduce• from it, and leave [the rest of] it in its place;29 (23) An inferred law cannot be stricter than the source• from which it was derivcd;30 And there are many similar rules.31 WhenJ2 the early sages taught their laws, each one in his own style, these principles• were their Talmud,• [which they used] to reveal the underlying principles of the Torah. Thus we say in Eruvin:33 R. Akiva said in the name of R. Yochanan: uR. Meir had a disciple by the name of Sumchus who, for every rule concerning 'll'\'linK "lllK ,n.., l'\"K "Cl 1:::,, ritual uncleanness, supplied forty-eight T"tuiin "tnc'i ,n,,, ,,c,n, reasons• for its uncleanness, and for every rule concerning ritual cleanness, forty- tiM"l"1 .'1:)'IM n,,..,,n, l"llllJi eight reasons for its cleanness." Their Talmud also took on other forms, [which they used] to make new balachic discoveries; to sec the corollaries and implications [of basic principles], and [to understand] how these are derived; [to perceive]

:i,.., ,. ,

Ded■ce...a■d again: When provisions of law A are 'to be applied to law B by means of a gezuah shavah (see above, s.v. "Here it is said...There it is said"), the question arises whether all particulars found in A are applicable to B, or whether the analogy is restricted to law A's main provision. The opinion dubbed, "Deduce from it, and again from it," holds that all the particulars of the analogy are applicable, not just the main provision. ded■ce•••a■d leaYe: After having applied the main provision of law A to law B (see previous gloss), law B is allowed to retain its own character, and the provisions expressly connected with it remain unafTected by the gezerah shavah. cannot be stricter...soarce: When we draw an inference from minor to major (see above, s.v. "inference from minor to major"), the stringency transferred to the stricter (major) case must never be applied more strictly than it was in the minor case. prilldples: The ones just listed and others like them. Talm■d: This word is a noun meaning literally, "study." reuo•: Such as the various types of exegeses listed above.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

56

lggeres of Rav Slterira Gaon

1,.,. .

,0,, "E)lH "::,"m the rules of comparisons; and [to see] how a "::,"m corollary relates back to the main principle .1,.,,.., ,p.. r:µ11 ll"i,nc [from which it was derived]. How do we know that they• possessed a 7Niio,n 1,n, mn, l' Nloi Talmud?* Because they• said34 of Rabban ,,cN "N::,t l:l pn,.. t:li ?l7 Kn, Yochanan ben Zakkai • that he even studied i"Cl n,n N:li, '1'1:lNi N..,,M il7i the discussions of Abbaye and Rava. We alsols ,,.nt ..,., ,o,N ":l1 prn learn• [in a mishnah]:36 R. Yehudah says: "Be careful with n,,11 ,,o,n Nl'e''e' ,,0,n::1 Talmud; for an error in Talmud Nipo:l pc,11n Nl7"JO:l ,•n, tiit is considered tantamount to willful n,o MlW:l n,o Ml"H'e' n,c transgression." l"K ,,o,Ji:l i:,'e' M"?l7 T"?:lPCtt' Moreover, our sages teach in [Tractate Bava] .no n,iil n'i0 ,; Metzia:31 If one occupies himself38 with [the study "'lno, Nn::,,n ":li T"Pn, in:li of] the Bible [alone] - this is a rank T"tt',E)O ,,.,, Niio,n mn Mi"i which is no rank; with Mishnah - this ..,;::,, ,.10,1n "'lno, K"pii n::1 is a rank for which one is rewarded; with ctet p:li pni:, "tt'iio "OWi Talmud - this is an unsurpassed rank. ..,n After Rebbi arranged [many] halachos39 and ,,c,nn 10 ,n,,. MlW? his Mishnah, there [also] was a Talmud,* nioH H"'e'p ME)'\l NM M?l7 ..,oN, in which [the sages] interpreted the precise itc n,,,l n,o ,, T"H ,,o,n:l implications of our Mishnah,42 the specific "0"::l lln,.. ,, 10N ,,::,, l'\10H ,,m details and general categories,43 and the reasoning of the exegeses. Thus the sages taught [in a braissa] there:44 Run always to the Mishnah more than to the Talmud. And [the Gemara] says about this: Now, this is self-contradictory. First you say, " ... Talmud - this is an unsurpassed rank;'' and then you say, "Run to the Mishnah more than to the Talmud!" R. Yochanan explained: "In the days of Rebbi, the following

11,

n,,.,..

r,

they: The early sages. possessed a talmud: Though RSG mentioned at the beginning of this chapter that the early sages had a Talmud, he offered only deductive proof. Now he is interested in textual evidence for this claim. they said: In a Tannaitic teaching, a braissa. of Rabban Yocbanan ben Zakkai: Who was one of the early sages. learn in a mishnah: A Tannaitic teaching. there [also] was a talmud: RSG is now saying that even after Rebbe's formulation of the Mishnah in a standard and uniform text, much discussion was required in order to comprehend its halachos..o As proof for this thesis - that a Talmud existed

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

The Talm11d

57

mishnah45 was taught: ' ...Talmud this is an unsurpassed rank.'46 [As a result,] everyone forsook the Mishnah and went after the Talmud. So then he taught them: 'Run to the Mishnah more than to the Talmud.' "How was that• inferred? It is as R. Yehudah bar Ila 'i expounded: "'Show my people their transgression, and the House of Yaakov their sin. '47 'Show my people their transgression' refers to scholars, whose unintentional errors are counted as deliberate sins. ' ...and the House of Yaakov their sin' refers to the ignorant; for them, even their deliberate sins are counted as unintentional errors. And this is what we learned [in a mishnah]:48 'R. Yehudah says: 'Be careful with Talmud; for an error in Talmud is considered tantamount to willful transgression.'"

,, l"N ,,c,n::i :it nltt'C li"ltt'l 'i Nc,11 ..,,~ ij:)::ittt nc n,,,;i n,c ,,n Ni,c,n ,n::i ,,,N, Nli""lliC ini" nltttc? ri ,.,n in; tttii "NC .,,c,nn TC "Cl'? i;in, :"N1'?"N ,::i n,,n.. ,, i.ln ;el'\NlOM :lj:)1'" li":l?i e1'tt'E) e"c~n ..,,c,n ,,N C1'tt'E) "01'? nu,,,~ en, nittt1'l nmtttttt "Cl' ,,N enN10n :li'1'" n"::1,, en, nitt'1'l nu,,, ,;,E)Ntt' fiNn ,c,N n,,n.. ,, pn, U""n, nmttt~ ,,c,n rwtttttt ,,c,n::i ..,n .1,,t n,,11 e"litttNin nc~n Nin ,,c,n, ,,,n, nltttc "ClJtO n":l t"i::ic, ,,c,ttt ,::i, N? ,,cNtt' ,::i, ettt N?N Nij:)c ,,c,ttt ,::i, N?i Mltt'C un, H~"Hi .,,c,n ,,c,tt' ,::i, ,n ,n,.,.,,n, .nc~n ,ic?tt' ,::i,

ttt,,,~ w,,

,,n,

The Talmud• is the wisdom of the early sages. In it they discussed* the underlying principles of the Mishnah. Thus the sages taught [in a braissa] there:49 When they said,• "his teacher," they did not mean his teacher who taught him Mishnah, nor his teacher who taught him Scripture, but his teacher who taught him Talmud; or, according to another version, his teacher who taught him wisdom. Both* ["Talmud" and "wisdom"] are equivalent terms, as it is taught:so after the Mishnah's redaction - RSG cites R. Yochanan's statement that even in the days of Rebbe, Talmud was considered on a higher level than Mishnah. According to RSG, then, the teaching about the higher level of Talmud learning applied to both the generation before Rebbe, as stated previously by RSG, and during Rebbe's generation. This will also be RSG's understanding of R. Yochanan41. tllat: The statement of R. Yehudah mentioned earlier ("Be careful with Talmud... "). Talmud: RSG is still referring to the Talmud that existed prior to and just after Rebbe's redaction of the Mishnah. discassed: But not in written form. tlley said: In the previous mishnah of Bava Metzia, where the topic is the obligation of returning a lost article to one's "teacher." botlt...terms: The following proof is based on RSG's text of Bava Metzia, where one can deduce that the sages identify "Talmud" with "wisdom."

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sllnira Gaon

58

"When they said, 'his teacher,' they did iicHtt' i:::11 "ll"lpi til"H HOW not mean his teacher who taught him ,:::i, H,, Hipc ,,c,tt' ,:::1, "" Scripture, nor his teacher who taught him ,,c,tt' ,:::1, """ itltt'C ,,c,tt' Mishnah, but his teacher who taught him i"HC ,, niiit" ,, ,.,:::i, ,,c,n Talmud!'" Those are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Meir says: "[the teacher] ,, UCO inc::,n :::iiitt' ;::, iciH from whom [he learned] most of his i"l"1' 1"Hit H', i',"l)H iciH "Ci" wisdom." R. Yosi says: "Even if he ,cH, ,:::i, ,m nnH itltt'C::l """ enlightened his eyes about only a single .., 1::lCHi Hi,nc :::i, tu::, H::l1 mishnah, he is his teacher." And Rava .tii!)c, 'C nu said: "An example is R. Sechorah, who explained to me the meaning of: 'zochamei i1' "Hep 13n, tin, nin M,, listron.' "* it"" t"C1.li ::1in::, ,,::in "::l11!)1lHi Those first sages, until the passing of Rebbe, ,n, "::l"n::, "tt',11) tu::, """ Ml) ,1' did not have a written compilation• which they learned by heart. Rather, they had in .., ..c,n, HlnlH Hl"ltt'it '"tt'1E>Ci writing something like the explanations by "Hiti it"', T"CLl tin;:,, Ml;", which we nowadays interpret [the Talmud] ::1in::, "Hiti Hin Hl)lH::l ::1in::, to our students, and which all [the students] t"tt'1!)C iin ":)it ."1nH "'lllM::l learn, one writing it down in one style and ,,n..tt',i£l, in, ..,p, tinruw another, in another style. In this same way .,,c,n they would interpret their Mishnah, and they called these interpretations: "Talmud. "s2 There was a great capacity for learning and itltt'C 'C"l"IC"M ,::,, ,'"1P"1' """ remembering• [among these early sages], and H::l', !)"1'CH "::l1i it"tt'Ell nli they needed [to write down for themselves] only general principles.• However, when the ,n,..,ic,n !)p;c; ,:,,,!)'!Hi Mishnah was concludedSl and Rebbe died, no:, it"::l iEl"CiM, it"01.lC'n the capacity for learning lessened, and they 13n it"::l U"pl"li Hl"l"l1nH Hnn,H had to collate their [various] Talmuds, to recite it [in a uniform version,54] and to add to it a number of other methods.•

zochamei listron: This is a utensil mentioned in Kilayim 8:2, in reference to the laws of ritual defilement; a soup-ladle with a spoon for removing the scum of soup on one side and a fork on the other. compilation: Of the "wisdom," or Talmud. a great capacity...remembering: Lit .• "The heart was expansive." general principles: RSG is probably referring to the rules listed above on pp. 52 ff. methods: To penetrate to the meaning of the Mishnah.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

59

The Talmud

They incorporated [the systems of exegeses NlC" TJ"iCNi:, C"litt'N1 "litt'Ni of] those earliest sages• in it,• as we say [in the il"j:)l'li "Nip "tt'iii """"C "'lM Talmud]: "From what is this derived?" and Nn';,c Nn';,c n,,.,,n, ,vi,n ,n::i we answer by expounding verses. They also "'C"::l n,n, "::J"'il ,:::, 'tt'iDci:::, included in itss new [ha/achos] and halachic derivations, each one properly explained, as N?i "NC "Cl il"'::l U"'j:)n, C"'lic,p til::J "'NCj:) 1,lil M"'::l f"':l"il iin it was in the days of the previous ones.• They [the later sages] also included in "'Ncp -µn, f"p,011 c,,::i, tt'ii"D [their Talmud] some things which had been l"'::J"'it ,,n N? ::in, C:l', il"iltt' unnecessary for the early sages: for example, nc:::,nn cn",nN to11cru, .ytt'i£l', the explanation of deep concepts. Those ,, nc~ ntoic i:,,c::1 p::1, ilni early sages, whose capacity for learning was great• had not needed to have these concepts l'ICtt'C n,,n i£lc tlll 1l1'"'"N explained. But after [the early sages], wisdom M::ltt'nc, n~11 M?to::l 1'tt'1M" ,, decreased, as we learn [in a braissa] at the end n,,n ..11,,t ,,to:i N::l"'i'1' ,, nctt'c of Sotah:56 "Cl "::Jiii ,nc:,nn l'IU""W ,encl, Since R. Eliezer died, the Torah scroll has been hidden away.• Since R. Yehoshua died, counsel and thought have ceased.• "l"iMN ,p,,p, n::l U"j:)l'li Since R. Akiva died, the arms of the Torah N"ll'IN "NC', Nl'l',C ,n::i, Nn',c have ceased and the wellsprings of wisdom ,0 -, Nn n,', Nln ,,:,c Tl",cNi have been blocked. This same situation existed also in the days• of Rebbe. 57 They included in [the Talmud] other methods of precise examination, item by item,• [to determine] why [each thing] was taught. Thus we say [in the Gemara]:

earliest sages: The reference is specifically to the sages who lived up to and during the Second Temple period. (See below, s.v. "previous ones.") in it: In the uniform version of the Talmud, as skeletal as it was at this period. previous ones: RSG is referring here to the system of learning that originally existed up until the end of the Second Temple period, as he stated in the beginning of chapter 5. He therefore chooses a new term; " previous ones." The only difference between the ..halachic derivations" of these "previous ones" and those of the later sages was that in the earlier period, the Talmudic derivations did not have a uniform, standard formulation. capacity for learning was great: See above, s.v., "A great capacity...remembering." hidden away: A tribute to R. Eliezer's great learning. counsel and thought have ceased: R. Yehoshua defended Judaism against the attacks of heathen philosophies. days of rebbe: I.e., after his death.SB item: Word, sentence, or balachah.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

60

,n

nJno, ,; Since the Tanna taught that, why did he H':!i K::,,n, Kn have to go on and teach this?• lH::l n,0:1,::i P'iCH n'!'lil'\? ;,:,, And where no solution is possible we say:s9 n::,,,i nl'Htt' iiltt'C '::li nltt' Here Rebbe taught a superfluous Hl'l?C r;,::,, Hn::litN P'P~o, mishnah.i1l7 Kl'l""1:l0 Kp?C N?i l"r\"lJiC n,,:, l"l'l"lMO P"n, K1:l00 r:,K, pico n,,n~:l P"lni K"iiii 41:, p 4110K, , ..l~ tn~!:l ,~ ~"P' ~,, pn,41 ":l1 r,,nn::1 4110N1 il:J~O ill"K n ,n....

Remove from here such-and-such. Examples can be found in [Chapter] Oso Vees Bno, where we say:sJ R. Chiyya bar Abba said that R. Y ochanan said: "The 'red heifer'• does not belong in our mishnah. The 'beheaded catr• does not belong• in our mishnah."

Thus, [because of a difficulty], we removed [a statement] from the mishnah and not from the braissa. • Sometimes, even an entire mishnah is rejected because of [its inconsistency with] logic. An example* is that [mishnah] which we learn in Taharos:ss A flax comb with missing teeth ... And we say in [Chapter] HaCho/etz:86 R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish both say [about the above mishnah in Taharos]: "This is not mishnah, and we do not follow it in practice.

,,?OJ~

,,n

support: The support is indirect, in that it only proves that the mishnah represents an individual opinion. in a braissa: In this case, the Talmud has adopted Shmuel's opinion, backed by a braissa, even though it contradicts an anonymous mishnah. red heifer: Lit., "the heifer of purification," whose ashes were used to remove the ritual impurity resulting from proximity to a corpse (see Numbers, ch.19). beheaded calf: If a dead person was found in the area outside the boundaries of nearby cities, the ritual of the beheaded calf was required. See Deuteronomy 21:4. does not belong: The mishnah discusses the prohibition against slaughtering a calf and its parent in the same day. It states that the "red heifer" and the "beheaded calf'' do not fall within the purview of this prohibition. and not from the braissa: Though all versions of the lggeres arc extremely unclear here, our interpretation is contextually most appropriate. R. Shimon's statement in the mishnah is contradicted by his view in a braissak and is, therefore, removed in defcrence to the braissa's version of his view. example: From the quote supplied by RSG, it is not evident that this mishnah was rejected on the basis of reasoning. However, the Talmud passage in Yevamos begins by using reasoning to question the validity of the mishnah. Another likely approach

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA -

. l

65

TIie Talmud

Why? Because painstaking scholars add "0""001 "KOC nn,i:> TJ"1:ll' K':ii the conclusion:• 'This is the ruling of R. _,,:,, "lpi,, Shimon.'" If we find it necessary to declare that a Niion, t"n"lnC N:,,,i "N, mishnah has words missing, we do so. And if ..~,n, n:,,,i "Ni n, p,,cnc we find it necessary to interpret [a mishnah,*] l"l'l"ll'lC:l M:l n"N "Ni n, Tl"!inc we do so. Ml"C N!l"1l1 Nn""i:li Kl'l~:ltt' If there is a defect in a mishnah and a n":l pni:, tcn,c, Tl",i:lc braissa is preferable,• we clarify the matter ,tc,~" MlC" K? c,,c,M "MCtt' [accordingly]. Thus, we learn [in a mishnah]:B7 Deis Shammai say: "A non-kohen may not ,,n n":li ,,:,:in ?l' 1n:,n cl.' be designated to share a firstling• with n,l.' Tl",cK, "U ,,..!)Mi t"i"nC a kohen;" but Deis Hillel allow this, and M"M Mn"i:l1 l'W, 1"l'l"ll'l01 M":l even [allow] a non-Jew [to share it]. 1r, ,etc, K:l"P1' ,,:, n:,;n, And we say [in the Gemara] about [this .N? C"U ?:lN C"1f 1?"!)N mishnah]: [The opinion of] Deis Hillel in our mishnah is [actually that stated by] R. Akiva in a braissa. • And the halachah follows the [opinion of] Beis Hillel in the braissa, where they say [that] non-kohanim [are allowed to share with the kohen], but not• non-Jews.B9

n,

would be that the "painstaking scholars" made their crucial addition based on their own reasoning. conchlSion: To the mishnah in Taharos. interpret a mishnah: Interpret it in a way which on the surface would not seem to fit the words of the mishnah. preferable: I.e., the braissa contains a more accurate rendition of the halachah in question. fintling: The first-born (firstling) of a domestic animal which would be suitable for sacrifice (such as a cow, sheep, or goat) must be given to a kohen, and can only be eaten by a kohen. Our mishnah discusses a firstling which has contracted a blemish that would render it unfit for sacrifice. R. Akha in a braissa: The braissa states: "Only a group, all of whom are kohanim, may enter for a share of a firstling." Those are the words of Beis Shammai. But Beis Hillel permit even non-kohanim. R. Akiva permits even non-Jews. The Talmud is thus making the point that the view of Beis Hillel in our mishnah is actually R. Akiva's interpretation of Beis Hillel.BB The Talmud rules in favor of the view referred to by the braissa as "Beis Hillel." ■ot ■on-Jews: Thus RSG has illustrated his point that the Talmud sometimes overrules a mishnah in favor of a braissa.90

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

66

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

If Tannaim disagree, we ask, "What is the essence of their dispute?,, And we explain the reasoning of each of [the Tannaim involved]. And we search for a known• braissa which clarifies the matter,• or from which we may deduce the solution to the problem. We cite [the braissos] from wherever we can find them, as we learn in [Chapter] HaShole'ach in Tractate Gittin:92 R. Yirmiahu said to R. Zeira: "Go out and look through your notes."* We* probe and examine the wording of [the mishnayos] very exactingly. We draw conclusions about them, one by one, regarding their underlying principles and their halachos. One by one, [we determine] who said it, and whose view he followed. In addition [we discuss] the disputes of the Amoraim, the difficulties they raised and the solutions they proposed; their refutations,93 replies, rebuttals, and specific applications. It would take much space to write about the ways of the Talmud,

"NC::l TJ"iCN "Nll'l "l"',£l "Ni r,:,i NCl1lO l)"iCNi "l',£lc Np

,11 ll"~Emc, tinlc in, ,n Nn,cr, n,,,::i, NM":,~, NM"",:l N"l1::l N"i1i1 tinlc lO~ElC? iN ,n, Tl"M~~ci N:,"n ,n, ll",cN, T"lO"l n~DC::l n,,~ni N"nn:, T""l1 pill ~,'If ,,, i1"C,., ,, ,.Ni .inr,,:,c::i n:l Nin TJ"pcc, ,n::i Tl"i'""i pie, Nin, n"n:,r,nr,, n"cwr, Nin TNCi N:l"',Ni nicN TNC Nin "Ni,cNi NN,r,£) TC ,::i, inl"l

tin"n::li"n, 7irt"",l"~, tirt""~ip, 1,nncpiN, 1,nn"ni, tin"p,,£), Niicr,ni "MiN ::in:,c,, "~iElNr,, for they are very numerous.

known: What RSG means by a "known" braissa is unclear. Perhaps he means that if it is widely known, it probably came from the beis mi•ii ru"ttW ruw •:li Mllll' tM::>, Yevamos, loc. cit., s.v. ruw, does not follow RSG's. Tosafos there, s.v. ru111 is, however, in complete agreement with RSG, although he does not mention him. It is incorrect to end the paragraph here as Hyman (p.48) has done. Yevamos lOSb. 97b. 0

42. 43. 44.

45.

46.

41. 48. 49. SO.

51. 52. S3. 54.

5S. S6. S7.

S8.

S9. 60.

61. 62. 63.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Talmud 64. Bava Basra 156b. 65. Yoma 59a. 66. Smthedrin 2a. 61. Yevamos 101b.

68. French version. 69. Chui/in 85a. 70. Smthedrin 86a. 71. See above, ch. 3, p.24. 12. Pesachim 48b. 73. See Eruvin 46b. 74. Pesachim, Joe. cit. 75. Hyman (p.49, n. 12), probably disturbed by this last completely unclear phrase in RSG's citation ("and a braissa also supports this"), mss. transfers it, without any Mss. proof, to p.50, where it certainly is superfluous. 76. French version. 77. French version. 18. Beitzah 31a. 79. Mss. 80. Beitzah, Joe. cit. 8 I. Our texts do not have this reading. 82. See Shabbos 14b, 52a. 83. Chui/in 82a. 84. See Chui/in, Joe. cit. 85. Ke/Im 13:8. 86. Yevamos 43a. 81. Bechoros 32b. 88. As R. HaLevi has shown in Daros HaRishonim (vol. II, pp.569, 736) from many other examples, the Talmud will discuss R. Akiva's statement as if it is an independent statement, when he actually is only presenting his understanding of Beis Hillel's position. 89. French version. Our understanding of the text can also be reconciled, though more difficultly, with the Spanish version. 90. RSG's ruling in favor of the braissa's version of Beis Hillel agrees with the view of Behag as cited by Tosafos on Bechoros, Joe. cit., s.v.. p01>. However, this view is not accepted by Tosafos there, nor by the Rambam, Hi/chos Bechoros l :3. It is an open question whether the Rambam knew of RSG's ruling. 91. See L. Ginzberg, Geonica (New York, 1909; vol.2, p.39). 92. 44a. 93. Sec Bava Kamma 14a.

Di9itized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 7:

The Development of the Gemara

So it was in the times of the earlier sages; just as we• offer our explanations, so each one of the masters [explained] as he saw fit and taught each one of his students according to need and ability. There were those• who were told the basics and [general] principles and the rest was understood by the student on his own, while others required broader and expanded explanation with analogies and compansons.

"NCi' p::lii Nli"lJ::l n,n -.:,n, "tt"li"t, Nl"\tt'M NlMlN Nltt'it,ci:, "tni:, Nn,,::l, TC in, in;:, T'"i ,-.i-.cn,t) in, in ;:,; ,t).lt)i MC cit,;, , .. "NC Ci£)? ,n, ..,oNi N:)"N tiMlC ;-.:,,i niNtt'i rip"lJi C"i::li "tt'Ni -.:,-.,n N:)"N tinlc, iru,it) T"::lt) tin, ""it)i;, tin, "ni,,N, ~tt'l)t)? ...,,t),i

,n

This is what we have said:• that until Rebbe passed on, each student studied [according to] "::li i~t,Ni il1i Tl"it)N NMi his own teacher and until the Mishnah was in ;:, "i"t)?n ,n,:,i 1,n..,c.l arranged each [teacher's] studies were based on his own Mishnah.• After the Mishnah was "t)i', .nin ,::i, "l!)? i"t)?l"\ in, arranged, and while Rebbe was still living, in, in ;:, T"l"l"ll'lt) r"il'INi each [teacher] presented our Mishnah, • giving in::li .M"M irutt'c "!)? ,i,c,n his own explanations of the halachos.1 After in ;:,; ,::i,i "Ci" ;:, ,n'!C,nNi Rebbe passed away, they had to collect [the ,n, ic.li '"ll"lt) tin, ~"tt'!) in, various versions of Rebbe's Mishnah]* and nli in::li .M"?"i Nn:,;n "t)lJlO teach it in a uniform style and language. After Rebbe there were Tannaim from there [Eretz Yisrael] like R. Yonasan,1 R. Shimon• and R. Gamliel, the son of Rebbe;2 and from here [Babylonia], like R. Yoshia of Hutzal. •

M"~i'?t)', i:,,,~~N "::lii M"tt'!)l .,nN titt',, ,nN Ml)::l M"C-Ut),, cnn ft) "Nln ,,n "::li in::li ?N"?C.l t::li, tiWtt' ,,, tru ,, 1u:, i!"tt'N" ,, TU:, N:)M ft)1 "::li::l

we: In the Geonic Period. those: Students. we laave said: What follows is a concise summary of the main ideas of the previous chapters.

bis own Mishnala: Collected traditions that he had received from his teacher. our Misllnall: I.e. Rebbe's Mishnah. [various versions of Rebbe's Misbnab]: This is clearly RSG's intention as can be seen from his comments in the previous chapter, pg. 58. R. Sllimon: The son of Rebbe. 70

Digitized by

Go gle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Tise Dnelopmtnt of the Gtmara

However, they did not teach anything [new] in our Mishnah• only what had already been taught before them as is explicit in the Book of Adam:• Rebbe and R. Nassan conclude the Mishnah.J There were other Rabbis who were both Tannaim and Amoraim like R. Chanina, R. Yannai there3aand Rav thereJb who was4 a student of Rebbe and studied under both Rebbe and R. Chiyya as we say in Chullin:s R. Yochanan said: "I remember when I was sitting seventeen rows behind Rav who was sitting before Rebbe* and sparks of fire were leaping from the mouth of Rebbe into the mouth of Rav and from the mouth of Rav into the mouth of Rebbe and I could not understand what they were saying." And in some places we say:6 Rav is a Tanna and can dispute• [the statements of other Tannaim]. There were other Rabbis• who were only Amoraim like Shmuel, R. Shila, Rabbah bar bar Chana, R. Kahana the first, and R. Assi.1 At the end of their days [lived] R. Ada bar Ahava and Rabbah bar Avuhah our elder. He was a member of the Patriarchal family because we have a tradition that we descend from the Patriarchal family and from the children of Rabba bar Avuha. After R. Chanina and R. Yannai, [lived] there7• [in Eretz Yisrael] R. Yochanan, R.

71

"1"?:l "lrl N? ii'T41t:l .?'!fin fC1 N"lrl nin, Ninn N?N l"M"ll'\CC iiE>o:l wiiE>c,, ..,n n"Ci' q,c l N ,,, ":l, :tiwN,n C1N

,w

.nlWC

lil"J"l"N1 "l",nN p::1, "Cl ,,n, ,,, Nl"ln ,, ti.l, "NiicN, "Nln ,::1,, ..,,c,n nin, ::1,, "'Nl" p,,cN, N""n ,,, ":lie n 41,t:ili , , Nli"nl pn,, ,, icN l"?,n:l niwi, 1':lW ,,,nN l":lrl" Nl"in ":li, n"Ci' ::1,, ::1,, ,,,nN 1,,w n,t:i,E)C ,u, l"i',i'T l"i'E>l ,,ni ::1,, n"ciE>ci :lii n,c,E>? ":lii "NC Nl1'1" n,n N?i ":lii n"CU:l? ::1, P"it:iN ,n,,, nc,::1, .",t::>Np J"?E), Nin Nln ,,n, "l"inN p:1, "t:ll ,,ni ,,, ?Nice, 7u:, ,m,::i "N11CN Nln, ::1,, Nln ,::1 ,::1 n::1,, N?"W :li CE>iC:l Cn"C":li ."ON :l1i NCp ni:lN ,:1 n::1,, n:lnN 1:l N1N NlnlN1 n,n N"Wl J"l":l1 10, ,npt nN"Wl Ji":l yci n?:li':l NllO"i'l .n,:lN ,::1 n::1,, n"1'itc, NlnlN ,,, cnn Nl"ln ,, n,n ,,n in:li W"i'' p y,ww ,,, pn,'I ,,, "Nl"

H■tzal:

A Babylonian town between Nehardea and Sura but nearer to the latter. in ou Misllnall: Their teachin~ never appear in the Mishnah. Book of Adam: This is a book which G-d showed to Adam containing the genealogy of the whole human race including its leaders and scholars. (It is quoted in B.M. 85b, and Vayikra Rabba, chap. 15 among other sources). sitting before Rebbe: This statement is proof that Rav was a student of Rebbe. The following quote proves that Rav was considered a Tanna. Ca■ dispate: An Amora cannot dispute the statement of a Tanna. otller Rabbis: In that same generation.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeru of Rav Slterira Gaon

72

Shimon b. Lakish, R. Yehoshua b. Levi and n,n, itlJ',N ,,, ,,., p. w,n, ,,, R. Elazar who served them• and who also .,N,c'e"I :i,, NW'e"I 1,n"Wttl served Rav and Shmuel in Babylonia. Even ,::1::1::1 nc:)n ":)n ,;,13Ni ,:i:i:i so,• there was more wisdom in Babylonia. After their generation [were] R. Nachman, R. Yehudah, R. Huna, R. Chisda and R. Sheshes in Babylonia and other Rabbis who traveled back and forth [between Babylonia and Eretz Yisrael], like Ulla,7b R. Chiyya bar Abbas and R. Shmuel bar Nachmani;9 as well as the Rabbis from there [Eretz Yisrael], who had gone up there from here [Babylonia]: R. Ami and R. Assi. 10 Afterwards [lived] Rabbah and R. Yoseph in Babylonia and the Rabbis that traveled back and forth like R. Abba, the last of these early ones, R. Yitzchak Nafcha, R. Zaira, R. Yirmiyahu, R. Avahu and R. Chanina bar Pappi. And afterwards [lived] Abbaye and Rava. Persecutions became widespread in Eretz Yisrael• and teaching• became greatly diminished and every Babylonian there came down• to Babylonia like Ravin, and R. Dimi and the other traveling scholars. In each of these generations there existed traditions studied by the Rabbis and constantly reviewed* by them• as we learned:11

."13to Nttl"E3l n,n :i,, lCMl :i, 1,n,,, ,n:::1, :i,, Nicn :::1,, Nlin :i,, n,,n, ,,n, "l"1nN p:n, ';,::1::1::i nww N""n ,,, N'7i.v TU:) t"nru, l"i'?C "lCMl i:i ?NiC'lt' ,,, N:lN 1:l "CN ,, N:)i1C ,p,,c, cnn, ll:l,, ."CN '1i ,:i:i:i c,c,, :i,, n:i, ":)M ,n:i, ,, til:) rnn1, l"i''C ,,n, 11:i,, pnr ,,, C"li'lt'Ni ,n.. Nin, N::lN ,n:iN ,,, n"C1" ,,, N1"t ,,, NM!)l •"!)I) i:i Nl"lM ,,, 'ft'"E)li .N:l1i ""::lN ":)M in:ii yen nN,,n N'tO"WNi ""N:l N1C'e' ye 1cn nin, ye n"nli N:iic ,n,:), "0"1 l"::l1 TU:) "N?::l::l .N:)M? ,n..ru, ..n,n1 l"?"N lC Nii, N11 ?:)::li "C1l1 Nnnl1Cttl yin, Ji"N ..,, ,,,n 1,n, t"i,cc, p:i, 1,n, N""M ?l",cN,:) , ..,n

:i,,

,:i

:i,

them: R. Chanina and R. Yochanan (Cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol. 5, p. 329-330.) even so: Even though there were such great scholars in Eretz Yisrael in this generation. in Eretz Yisrael: During this period the new Roman Emperor Constantine I declared Christianity the state religion (323 C.E.). The once persecuted Christian minority turned into persecutors and the situation of the yeshivos became impossible. teaclliag: The word "Horaah" in our context must be understood differently than its use at the end of this chapter and beginning of chap. 8. came down: For the last time never to return to Eretz Yisrael. Cf. Doros HaRishonim. vol. 5, chap. 35, pp. 234ff. traditions: Interpretations of the Misbnah. reviewed: Lit., ordered, organized. them: The members of the Yeshivos.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

73

The Development of tlte Gemara

R. Chiyya bar Abba used to reV1Se

his study in the presence Yochanan 12 every thirty days.

of R.

And we also leamed:13 R. Sheshes used to review his studies every thirty days. He would lean at the side of the doorway and exclaim, "Rejoice, 0 my soul, for thee have I read the Bible, for thee I have studied the Mishnah." And these traditions that were studied by everybody, were explained differently by each teacher to his students. [The teachers made] additional inferences; they introduced [new material] by [offering] halachic decisions on practical questions that were asked; they had intense, thorough discussions and there [came about] disputes between contemporaries.

;:, n,i,c,n ,,nc n,n N)N n~ )i "Cl Tl"icN, y,n,n T"C'" t"n,n ;:, n,,,c,n ,inc iCNi Ntt'Nii Nii)l1) ,,nc, ."Nll'I 17 "Nip 17 "Nft'!)l "Nin

re,,

tin, T"C-U ,,n, Nl'll'\l1Ctt' "lili tt'"iDC n)ii n)i ;:, NC?l1 ,;:, "l"iMN "tt'iiE) n"i"C?l'\? ,n; "i)l1i "Cl "tt'inci ,,,n, ,piivii "?i'tt'i n"l"C il1)i ""1')) "i)il1 ,n ;:, T") Nru,,E) ,n, n,n, i,~i .n"lit i)? iMi tin, T"~ft'!) i,n, .,,,c 1lili N)? ,n,i,c,n, yin, "ft'iE)i C"litt'Ni? ,:,,,i N?i "tt''i"E) 1Jn tu:, ,ini inll1)pc,i ,nl"CilC? NC?l1 ,;:,

Along came the next generation and the heart• became diminished. Certain matters had been clear to the earlier sages and had simply been explained to the students, with Nii Ninn) Nl'\tt'n ,in NiCl) no need to recite them and establish their NiCl) inl"l1)pc; T":)"iTI "i'"E)C exact wording in the Gemara;• now, in this yinn" in, T"iCNi NCil)i generation these matters became subject to NiCl) in; T"l1)pi Nl'\)"l'\C) doubt and they had to establish them in Tl"iCNi:, p)i NiCl) in; T"Ci.:n the Gemara with an exact wording. ~ey N""M ,, )"l'\" T?"N) urutt' )ii"l1 therefore presented them before the Mes1vta and established them in the Gemara, 14 and the Rabbis studied them. As we sayis concerning an eruv deposited on a tree:• heart: the capacity to understand and remember. in the Gemara: The term "Gemara" here means the official collection of mishnaic interpretations accepted and sanctioned by the mcsivtos. There is no evidence that this Gemara was in written form. To the contrary, it would seem from the following few passages that all teaching and learning took place orally. eruv deposited on a tree: The Mishna discusses an eruv techumim which is placed in a tree. It states that the eruv is invalid if placed above ten handbreadths (tefachim) from the ground but valid if placed within ten tefachim from the ground. The Amoraim became doubtful whether the tree discussed by the Mishnah might be in the public or the private domain. After logical analysis, R. Chiyya bar Abba and R. Yochanan conclude that the Mishnah could only be referring to a tree which is in the public domain.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

74

lggeres of Rav Slwira Gaon

R. Chiyya bar Abba and R. Yochanan tt>nl :ii ::l"l'\"i tln,., ,,, K::lN i::1 sat [at their studies] and R. Nachman sat l'"K "KM "it>Kpi "::ln"l iM"":U beside them. They sat16 and said: "Where nitt1i::l "Ki'1 KC"'"K K:)"M "Ki'i could the tree have been standing? If it iM, icK Km,0::1 "'icK, ,,,, i"n"n be suggested . ,, that it stood in a private ,Nit>tt? icK t.:li ittl"" 1cnl ::1, domam... "KM M"' ,n,inE) ,; ,,cK and we learned at the end [of this passage]: R. Nachman said to them: "Well spoken. M::l ,n,il"\E) "Cl lll'\K it>K Shmuel reached the same conclusion." ll'\"1'::li' lM', it>K ".:lM K'JK K::1110 They said to him: "Do you find it such .Mit>l:l "'Cl M'? a useful explanation?" He said to them: "You too have explained much with IQ"'WC Kii in:li Kii ',:)l it." They said to him: "Did you also l":lli"'1'::l tlnl"' 'i it>K1 K:l', incorporate it into the Gemara?" ,l'\"i'1D 'IOnC:3 :li'l il:l', ilKi In each succeeding generation the heart became diminished as R. Yochanan said in Kiil:l Kl'\:l"'D:) pKi "":lK it>K KM1':llK.:l lJKl K:li it>Ki Kit>l', Eruvin:11 And our [generation] is like the eye of a llKl "'tt!K :li iCKi Ki:lD? Ki"i':l fine needle. Abbaye said: "And we are like .Kn:)tt,', Kti:l:l KM1'::lJK:) a peg in a wall* with regard to Gemara." Rava said: "We are like a finger in wax• as ,,,.,nKi K:l', 'IO"WK1 Mt>.:li regards logic." R. Ashi said: "We are like C"litt?KiM "tt?liE) -µn , "i'1'D a finger in a pit as regards forgetfulness."* l"1':li'C jlM"'Cl":l l"1'":li' nn K?1 As the heart diminished and doubts arose, 1lM "1:l1'1 "1::ll1'i l"DilCl Kl'\tt?il the explanations of the earlier sages which had not been established in their days, now .KiCl:l Kl'\tt?M "ll'\C "'KCp ll:li became established and were studied. And Kn,c, Ml1'Ctt? ll:liC ,n'i.:l "'Kl the practical halachic decisions of early sages C"'1i'1 l KC K.:l",, K1n.:l n,,cK, were now studied 18 in the Gemara. RSG, after discussing why "Gemara" "iCK jU.:l Kt>MD Kit>Kl'\C ili0Ki became expanded and was the accepted MiCKl M1'0tt?1 C"'ii' Mlil ,n "Ki form of study, now explains some of the "ll?E) 'i icK i1"'0tt10 Ki0Kl'\t> stylistic principles of" Gemara." i,;p"K K',111 C"'nDE):l ll"'i0Ki If all the Rabbis heard a teaching and taught it at the same time with no one first, the teaching was cited anonymously [in the Gemara]; for example: "They said." If someone had taught it first, it was cited in his name; for example: "Rabbi so-and-so said," as we say in Pesachim: 19

.,,,:i

,n,

peg in a wall: It is as difficult for us to understand as it is to drive a peg into a very narrow hole in a wall. (Rash,) finger in wax: It cannot penetrate hard wax. It only depresses it very slightly. as regards forgetfuJness: As it is easy to insert a fmger into the mouth of a large pit, so easy was it for them to forget what they had learned. (Rash,)

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

TM Dne/opmtnt of tl,e Gemara

Ulla visited Pumbcdisa. R. Yehuda said to his son, R. Yitzchak: "Go and take him a basket of fruit and observe how he recites havdalah." He did not go, but sent Abbaye. When Abbaye returned, he reported [that Ulla had said]: "[Blessed is He] Who makes a distinction between holy and profane." He [R. Yitzchak] came before his father and told him: "I did not go myself, I sent Abbaye and he told me [that he recited]: ...'Who makes a distinction between holy and profane'". Said he to him: "[Your] pride and haughtiness• are the cause that this halachah will not be cited in [your] name." The more careful a sage is in repeating a teaching exactly as he heard it from his own teacher and not from someone else, the better• the teaching, as we say:2()

75

:i,, n,,n, :i, ,•N Nn,,:ic,E? N?~?~ n,, "'IOCN , .., M"i:l pn~" n,,,tt' ?tN ;,,:ic ,:,,n ,rn, ,,,E, T":l ,,,:icn ?·N Nl'\N 'I:) ''1'1:lN? ,•Ni NnN .icN, Nin ,,n, tt'ip Nin '1'1:lN? 'l?fN N? N.lN n,:lN? T":l , ..,:icn "' icN, n ..,,tt', M"? icN icN, Nin ,,n, tt'ip ,c, M"nil::,.i, ,c, n ..n,iitt' Nl'\::)?ii NicNnc N?i M"? NC-U .n'IOft'C

icN, c:in P"..,, nc:i, N?i jj'I::,.,, NCiEc Nl'\nlJCtt' crii,

'IE'IQ

,.l,.inNi

NCiEC

ycnl ::,., ,cN Tl",cN, M'lnlJCtt' n"ntt':ltt'? N?ilJ ni,::,.p pnJ.. ,::,. ,, n::,. "Mn nE" ,:i y,c..l:i ,,:, n~" i::,. l"C,l:l ,, l"llJ no "~, Ni"t i:l N,."M ,, N:lN i:l N",n ,, ?IN NCiEc Nl'\l'\lJCtt' , ..cl, p,.., N:lN .N7 nE, i:i f'IC'll:l 1ii n":lii n:i, ,n, Nc,~c icN ,:,, ,,m ,, P"?C ,:, p"iCNi t1"ilJ 'IE'IO ,?Nictt' ::,.ii Nnc..,l,c ;:,N Ni,,

R. Nachman bar Yitzchak said, "Ulla established an erroneous teaching by [accepting the word of] R. Binyamin bar Yefes." R. Zaira expressed astonishment, "How can you mention R. Binyamin bar Yefes along with R. Chiyya bar Abba? R. Chiyya bar Abba was very careful to get the exact teaching of R. Yochanan his master, whereas R. Binyamin bar Yefes was not careful [to do so]." :,.ii ii"inNc N?i n .., iicNi Furthermore, when one transmits [all his teachings] from a single teacher it is better, as we say:21 When R. Zaira went up [to Eretz Yisrael] he ate of [an animal which was slaughtered in that part of the throat which was regarded as] a deflection• by Rav and Shmuel. They said to him, "Are you

pride and haughtiness: R. Yitzchak had sent Abbaye because he had been too proud to do the errand himself. the better: The more authoritative and reliable. also: Another proof. deflection: The cut was made in one of the incomplete rings of the windpipe, which according to Rav and Shmuel is not a kosher slaughtering.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

/ggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

76

not from the area of Rav and Shmuel?"* He replied, "Who taught it [in their name]? Was it not Yoseph b. Chiyya? Well, Yoseph studied from everyone.•" When Yoseph b. Chiyya heard of this he was annoyed and said: "What! I take my tradition from everyone? I received my teachings from R. Yehudah who taught even the doubt as to his authorities, as R. Yehudah [once] said: "R. Yeremiah b. Abba said-[but I am in] doubt whether he* reported it in the name of Rav or in the name of Shmuel: "Three ordinary people may declare a firstling permitted* where there is no expert available." When all the Rabbis teach the same thing then it is quoted with the introductory term: Kedi. • After a brief digression RSG is continuing from the points he made on pg. 73 about the need for an enlarged "Gemara."

MiON TNO ,n; iON nN ;N,olt' ..,:,o N"'"'" ,:i r.,c,.. N"'"" ,:i r.,c,.. 1!)pNi r,ci"' ::li 1'0lt' i"'Ol N0?1' Nli"'Ol N0?1' "'?i:,o NlN iON i;"'!)N1 Nli"'Ol i11iM"' :liO NlN n,,n .. ::li iON1 C"'il "i::U1 "i'!)C i'!)D N::lN i:l M"Oi"' :li iON ;NiOlt'1 M"Olt'O p!)C :li1 M"'Olt'O c,po:i ,,:,:in nN T"'i"'no Mlt'?lt' .nno,o T"Nlt' "'iON Np l)::li in,i:,i N:l"'Mi ...,::, i1? "'iON Nn;,o Nin Ni,o,n r,,c::i N"?"O T?"'N:l ;::,, Niono nin Nii ,n:i, Nii Ni,o,n:i M"':l l"1':li' Ni,, Ni1 ,n; tlt'inno, "'i'"'!)C 10 "'?"'C "':l ,,n; ,11:ino, ""'1'::li C"lt'1'oi :li "1i0N1 l"'i1i1l0 n::,co, Niiiii l"'i1Ml0 ,n; un Ni!)C :i,, Nlii:i Non ,:i "'::li ,n:i 1'l!) n:i, "':l l"'i1i1l0::l ,n..,r.:iN "NO ,n, iON Tl"'ir.:lN "'Nr.:i, i1"'? "'iON M:li ":l1 .'J"\1'7.:ltt' N?i:,i Nn1"iJ l"'i1Ml0:l

With these matters did the Talmud become enlarged22 generation after generation, because every generation [of sages] incorporated into the Talmud the new conclusions that resulted from the doubts that arose and from the practical questions and theoretical problems that were asked of them, as in the passage in Sanhedrin where we say:23 R. Kahana and R. Safra were studying [Tractate] Sanhedrin in the school of Rabbah. When Rami b. Chamma met them, he asked them, "What have you said on Sanhedrin in the school of Rabbah?..." 24 and so on to the end of the passage.• of Rav and Shmuel: And therefore within their jurisdiction. studied from everyone: and also taught in their name. be: R. Yeremiah b. Abba. firstling permitted: Usually, the first born male of cattle was sacred and was offered as a sacrifice. If, however, an expert decided that it had a permanent defect it could be slaughtered and eaten by kohanim. Kedi: fttn::in~, as is; an anonymous statement without an author. tlae end of tlae pasage: The proof offered here is that we see it was expected by Rami that new points about the " Gemara.. in Sanhedrin were discovered. In fact, in

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

77

Tlte »~elopment of the Gemara

[The Amoraim] also studied the new insights T"'D"'tm~, ,,,n, "'"'i',, "'Ol ,i',, and discussions that the later Rabbis had iN,, iN,, "'Nin::l TJ::li T"'Tt'ino, originated. Not that the earlier Rabbis were N?N "NOi' TJ::li n,; T"'1'1" iin unfamiliar with these; but they left them so 7,n,,n:::1 "'nN, Nii, inl"'i'::lTt'i that the generations that came later could distinguish themselves thereby, since it wasn't 1"'il0l"'N N,, tin:,, ,,,,:mN? necessary [to expound on these matters] in the TJ::li 'ON1::) CM"C"::l in; N0?1' ,,on 7::,, y,,, p 1'Tt'in, ,, ,,z,n earlier days, as the Rabbis say:is R. Yehoshua b. Zeruz, the son of R. 'i ?1' ,::,,i "'lg; i"NO 'i ?Tt' Meir's father-in-law, testified before Rebbi TNTt' Ji"::l::l i'i"' M?1' ?::)NTt' i"NO that R. Meir ate a leaf of a vegetable ?l) ,;::, TNTt' s,,::,, nN "::li ,,nn, in Deis Shean.• On the basis of this ,,::,,N n,::,,, ,,nN ,,;1' ,,:::in ,,,, testimony, Rebbi permitted* the entire territory of Beis Shean. Thereupon, his ni::1Ni ,,n,::1NTt' c,po ,; ,,oN brothers and other members of his father's nnN, ,,c,N ,::,, UMl ,,n,::1N family joined together against him in Nipo ,n, Tt'ii inn i::,, linln protest, saying, "Will you exempt the iTt'N nft',nln Tt'Ml nn::,, :nm place which was regarded as subject to cnn C"O"'M 11' 'I:) MTt'C MTt'lJ tithes by your fathers and your fathers' fathers?" He expounded to them the iNii'"', ,, C"i!Opo ?NiTt'" "l::l ,,n following verse: "'And he [Chezkiah] N,, NON N::l iTt'&.,"'N ynTt'nl ,, broke in pieces the brazen serpent that Nr,m ii1'"::l N,, IQE)ft',n"I N::l ,,i,,::,, Moshe had made; for until those days the IQE)Tt'in,, NCN c,ilJ::lTt' t"l) ;::, children of Israel sacrificed to it and called ,, ,n"lM cij:)o N?N ,C,il)":l it Nechushtan. '26 How could it be that Asa "Ol "lN t'JN ,::,, i1lnn, ,,n,::,,N did not destroy it, that Yehoshafat did not destroy it? Surely Asa and Yehoshafat i::,, i1lnn, ,n,::,,N ,; ,n,ln cipo destroyed every idol in the world. It ,::1, iONTt' c::,n ,,o,n, 7N::,o must be, therefore, that his ancestors left "'iONi ,n,N T"M"'ltO T"'NTt' n::,,n him something with which to distinguish n, "'iONi ,n,N l"'M"'lO l"'N n, himself, so also in my case my ancestors l"N iON1 TNO .iniN l"'M"'ntO l"N left room for me to distinguish myself.,. From here we learn that whenever a Torah scholar reports a decision,• be should not be ignored. Some say he should not be made to move from his teaching.21 Some say he should not be regarded as arrogant. the continuation of the passage, to which RSG refers us, Rami bar Chamma points out a possible difficulty. i■ Beis Sllean: Upper Galilee. permitted: The fruits and vegetables were free from tithes because the rule relating to tithing fruits and vegetables, being a Rabbinic injunction, only applied to Eretz Yisrael proper. a decision: However simple it may be.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

78

lggeres of Rav Slierira Gaon

The one who says, "He should not be rejected" [bases it on the verse]: "For the L-rd will not reject forever."28 The one that says: "He should not be made to move from his tradition [bases it on the verse]: "And the breastplate shall not be moved. "29 And the one who says, "He should not be made proud" [bases it] on a statement in the Mishnah:JO"When the arrogant increased, disputes increased in Yisrael." This is the answer to your question as to why the Talmud is silent with regard to the earlier sages who were far more numerous than the later ones. (See above, p. 2.) If you were to find a wonderful statement said by the later ones, [it is because] the earlier sages left it for them to distinguish themselves and to expand on those matters that make the Gemara grow every generation, as we say:31

Mll" N'7 ,::, :l".n::,1 iniN J"M"ltC T"M"lC T"N icN, TNC ,'M TNCi T~nn nt" N?i :l"l'l::>1 ,n,N pn, ,n,N T"M"MlC T"N icN, n,p,,nc i:li ::1,n ,n,nt ,::1,~c

c,,11,

.?Ni~":l

iz,,,cNi "NC?· n::1,~nn l"INt ,"Nil"l:l'7 N:lii "NCp ip:l~ ~'C '?!lie ,:n iz,,n::,w Nni ip::1ttt "Ncp, "N1l"l:l ,n,icN, "Cl ..~,E)lN'7i 7,n::1 ..,,,lnN, 7,n, Niic';,n M:l r:,c,nN, .., ..c l'"N:l N::,"N N:li~, Nii il'l:l1 N11 N1':l ""1':l MNC 1':l~ '"10N1::> n,,E)M ?ilC:l ?E>ili"nN, lNi, N1':lC? Nl'\i1:ll N:li icNi 1,iN:l ,n;::, n,,n.. ::1,, M""l~:l Nm ""1':l Np TJN i?Ni T"i'"ll:l iin ""ill'\ ::1, ,.,N, ..,,c 'i "'ll"IC p, .. l"l~:l,:ittt M~NM "~C n,n ,::, Tttt:l::>ttt C"l'l"t nc, ,,cN, ni,p::1 ::1,, N"iM 1CN c ..,,n~ TM"E)1~:l TlN ,.,N, N:m Tl"tn Np ';,Nicttt,

n,,n..

Doeg and Achitophel propounded four hundred problems with respect to a tower flying in the air* and Rava observed: "Is there any greatness in propounding problems?" In the years of R. Yehudah the whole study was confined to [Order] Nezikin while we study four orders,• and when R. Yehudah came to the law, "If a woman preserves vegetables in a pot," or as others say, "Olives which were preserved while their leaves are ritually pure (tabor)"* - he observed, "I see here the discussions of

tower flying in tbe air: This can refer to: 1) the ritual impurity (tumah) of one who enters the land of heathens in a tower-shaped conveyance. 2) the suspension of a tower in the air by means of magic. orders: Of the Mishnah. are ritually pure (tahor): I.e. if their stalks came into contact with anything impure, the vegetables or the olives themselves are unaffected. discussions of Rav and Shmuel: Rashi interprets: He did not know why they should be clean, i.e., he considered these subjects extrememly difficult, like the discussions of Rav and Shmuel.

Digitized by

Go gle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

79

T1le Dnelopmnrt of tl,e Gmuua

,,,K,

Rav and Shmuel,• whilst we, on the other :1, Kl'\:1411'\0 ,c,r,n ll"ll'\O hand, have studied UktzinJ2• at thirteen KnK n"lKCO q,r,tt' n,n ,~ n,,n, mesivtos. "33* R. Yehudah merely took off T"tt'l)l ll"ilrm KP pK, Ki?)O his shoes• and the rain came down while Ktt'iip K',K T:l nltt'Ki K~,r,, we cry out in supplication and there is not ."1':l K:l"', Kin 1"i:l one to heed us; but it is because the Holy One, Blessed is He, requires the heart. nKiin Kmc,n"K ,~n c,!)r,, In this manner, Talmudic halachic determination• expanded generation after in:1, Kl":11 i1' Kii in:1 Kii generation until Ravina.• After Ravina it '7NiOtt' KtMi~ Np"Cl)"K Kl":li ceased as Shmuel, the astronomer,35 had seen titt'Kin c,K, n,,,mc:i nKl"n,.. written in the Book of Adam: q,c Kl":lKi "tt'K n":l :i,n~ n,n, R. Ashi and Ravina• are the conclusion of the era of Talmudic halachic detennination.37 Uktzi■: Name of a tractatc of the Mishnah belonging to the sixth order. The above questions arc related to this tractatc and were, therefore, solved in Rava's generation. at tlairteen meshtos: According to Rabbi HaLevi (vol. 6, pg. 192) there were thirteen mesivtos in the generation of Abbaye and Rava. However, more likely and in greater consistency with the term as used by RSG in chap. 13, pg.137, would be the defmition: sessions.34 took off Ids slaoes: When special prayers for rain had to be offered at which the shoes were removed, (Cf. Taanis 1,6) R. Yehuda merely had to make resort to this self-humiliation in preparation for prayer, and he was immediately answered. Ranna: According to Rabbi HaLevi, vol. 6, chaps. 4-7, the intention here is to Ravina b. R. Huna (d. 475 C.E.) and not to Ravina the colleague of R. Ashi in the fifth generation of Amoraim who died before R. Ashi. His main proof is from RSG himself in chapter 11, pg.116. Talmudic balacbic determinatio■: lit., "decision." The term "Horaah" as used by both RSG and the Talmud is extremely unclear. Our understanding is based upon Rabbi Y.I. HaLevi, Doros HaRishonim vol. 5, pgs. 589-593. According to him, with the end of the Amoraic period, subsequent generations accepted the Amoraic traditions as authoritative and binding. They no longer felt free to change even the literary forms in which the legal views of the Amoraim were handed down. These developments constituted the conclusion of the Talmud, which was the main expression of the end of the Amoraic period. As Rabbi HaLevi puts it:36 Therefore, while until those days [of the conclusion of the Talmud], the authority of horaah possessed by the sages of each generation was based on the principles of the oral tradition which they had received... now, with the conclusion of the Talmud, since all this [i.e. literary and legal questions regarding Talmudic sources] had been clarified, determined and fixed... by this very fact in itself ..there was no longer any horaah [cf. beginning of chapter 8]" i.e., horaah by individual decision, but rather [there was] horaah based on what was already explicit in the Gemara just as we do today. Sec chap. 11 pg.116 gloss s.v. ..end of Talmudic halachic determination."

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

80

Notes to Chapter 7 1.

2.

3. 3a. 3b.

4.

s.

6. 7. 7a. 7b. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

IS. 16. 17. 18. 19.

20. 21. 22.

The French version: "R. Yonasan.. is correct since R. Nassan lived in Babylonia. Rambam in his IntrodllctiOII to the Misluu,J, includes him in the eleventh and final generation of TOIUUlim. In a previous passage (p.14), RSG lists Rabban Gamliel the elder brother (cf. Keswbos 103b) first. It would seem that here RSG is trying to show that there still were TaMaim long after Rebbe's death and R. Shimon is the best example since he lived long after his brother's death and most of his nephew R. Yehuda Nesia's lifetime. Cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol. S, chap. 16, pg. 63. This passage and the one on pg. 79, both refute Epstein's claim (Mavo'o L'Sifrus HaTOIUUlim, Jerusalem, 1957, pg. 200.) that: "Rebbe and R. Nassan conclude the Mishnah.. is an anonymous Talmudic statement and not a quote from the Book of Adam. French version. French version. Hyman's use of the plural "were.. referring to the three names aforementioned is inconsistent with the two passages cited as proof by RSG. 137b with slight variants. Kesubos Sa, Eruvin SOb. Not to be confused with the R. Assi who was Rosh Yeshivah in Eretz Yisrael several generations later. We have followed the French version, since according to the Spanish version: "And afterwards lived R. Chanina and R. Yannai... ,.. their mention is superfluous as they were discussed in a previous paragraph. Cf. Kesubos 11 la. Cf. Berachos lSa and Rosh HaSluutah 21a. Cf. Midrash Tehillim (3,3). Cf. Moed Katan 25a. Chui/in 80b. French version. Pesachim 68b. This, according to some scholars, is the only certain occurrence of the word "Gnnara" in the sense of "Talmud" found in the Talmud itself (cf. W. Bacher "Gemarah.. , HUCA, 1904, pp. 26-36). The question then really was: "Have you included it as a fixed element in the Talmud?.. Thus a confirmatory amoraic tradition is added where in the name of Shmuel, Rav Nachman interprets the Mishnaic passage under consideration in the light of that explanation. The "establishing it in the Gemara" referred to here is the inclusion of this explanation in that official organized collection of mishnaic interpretations accepted and sanctioned by the mesivtos. This account, which dates from the beginning t>f the Amoraic period in the Academy of Nebardea, sheds much light on the first stqes of the redaction of the Talmud. E1'11Vin 32b with variants. This verb appears completely superfluous but can be resolved according to Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah, chap. 4, halacha 2 and Lechem Mislutal, there. Op. cit. 53a with variants. The statement of R. Yocbanan quoted is the conclusion of his statement, the beginning of which was mentioned earlier by RSG on pg. 17 when discussing the earlier Tannaitic generations. It is notewonby that RSG here does not use the term ~ , c i , "was established" as in the previous paragraphs. 104b. Berachos 38b. Chui/in 18b. French version.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

8/

The Development of tire Gemara

23. Sanhedrin 41b. 24. The Spanish version here seems to be needlessly quoting an additional passage from Sanlledrin ibid. 25. Clad/in 6b. 26. II Kings 18:4. 27. The difference between the versions is merely textual, each version supporting its reading by a verse from the Bible or by a passage from the Mishnah. 28. Lamentations 3:31 . 29. Exodus 28:28. 30. Sotah 47a.

31. Sanhedrin 106b. 32. French version. 33. French version. 34. See E.S. Rosenthal, "Lemillon Talmudi-Birurei V'iyunnei Nusach", Tarbitz 40(1971-2). pg.

196. 35. See Bawl Metzia 86a. 36. Vol. 5, pp. 591-592 and sec also p. 524. 37. B.M. loc. cit.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Work of the Savoraim / From Babylonia Until Rebbe: Chronology Chapter 8:

Afterwards,• even though there certainly nNiin "Nii, l"1'N "::,n ,n:i, was no more Talmudic halachic determi "~i£101 "Nii:ic ,,n ,n,n N'J nation, there were [sages] who provided ..,pNi nNiin'J ":lipc, ,.~,,"El explanations of the Talmud] and [who] were close to halachic determination.• These "NC ',,::,, "Nii:ic p:i, ,ruN sages are called the Savoraim. Anything left :i, 1u::, n,~,EI "Npi "'-'n n,n, undecided [by the Amoraim] was explained "NMN :i,, qc,,. :i,, n:i,, "0,n, by them. m N":lcn:i Tl",cN, C"nn ":le Examples [of Savoraim are] R. Rechumi ":li .,::,, l'Jprt C"M N"100 and R. Yosi,• and R. Achai from Bei Chasim, ,N11,,rn ":l":lD:l , ..11 N"M C"nn as it says in [Chapter] HaMevi Get MiMedinas HaYam:,3 "And Ziklag," etc.• And Bei n::,cc:i ~,1.i0, :i,,0 "N:li ::i,, Chasim is a city on the outskirts of Nehardea. • liM"'-' Nrl"M ,, '0N1 t"i,ruc And R. Revai from Rov offers an explanation ..,::, nli:l'J '-'~ ~,,p ,n,N l"PW in SanhedrinN ,,n Nn',i:, did not have Heads of the Mesivta and ."' in:,., itt'N c,pcn lt:> Sanhedrin because they concluded that the Torah requiresI9 this• to be in "the place• that G-d will choose. "20

,,n,

p,,,

parasaq: Of either of these synagogues. A parasang is a Persian mile, about 4000 yards. other pairs:For many years during the Second Temple period, each generation in Eretz Yisrael was led by a pair of sages. (See Avos 1: 3-12). enlarcm: The supreme civil heads of the Jewish Community, invested with authority by the Persian king. tlil: 1be Mcsivta and Sanhedrin, which served as the supreme center of Torah imtructioD wl judgement.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Iueres of Rav Sllerira Gaon

86

Until Rebbe* passed away they had [only] the institution of exilarchs in Babylonia. They did not have Heads of Mesivtos. Nor did they have nesiim; for these [the nesiim] were the heads of the Sanhedrin21 in Eretz Yisrael, as is set forth in [Tractate] Avos22 until Hillel and Shammai.• After [Hillel], his son Shimon [was Head of the Sanhedrin]; after him, Rabban Gamliel the Elder;23 and after him, Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel the First, who was executed prior to the Temple's destruction, he24 and R. Yishmael b. Elisha, the High Priest.• These four generations span the hundred years mentioned m [Chapter] Yitzios HaShabbos:26 Hillel and Shimon, Gamliel and Shimon were Nesiim during one hundred years while the Temple was still standing. After Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel, who was killed with the "Martyrs"21• there was Rabban Yochanan b. Zakkai. He was [nas,]• during the period of the Temple's destruction. He was taken to the Emperor Vespasion and requested of him [that he spare] the dynasty

,,n Nni?l ~",::l 'i i10E)Ni im Nli::l"liC "~Ni::l N?i ?::l::l:l l"l"Ml t"i,nlc "~Ni lUNi C"N~l, ;;n ,11 ni::itc::i ~,l)c,:, ,,n ""N:l 1::i, M"in::i, u::i 1,w~ '"il"l::li l::li M"il"l::li il::l li'li1 ?N"?Cl ?"10i'Ni NCi' ?N"?Cl l::l tiW~ p ?N1'C~" ,,, l"l"::ln 1::i,n "Ci' .,,,l 1n:, n,n 11r,N inln ;;:,::i ,,n ..,, 'i t"?Ni :n::l~n niN"'!l"::l ll"iCNi "l~ 'i' unl 1i11c~, ?N"?Cl 1i11ctt'i ;;n .nl~ nNC l"l"::ln "ll)::l ll"l,N"tt'l "liin::l ?"10PN, J•::ltt'i

,n::i,

Nin, "N::>t l::l tlni" t::li n,n n,:,;c ,n,pl)N, n"::ln 1::i,n 1,11::i n,n ucc tt'i'"::li ,c..p Cil"CE)CN n,. , nl::l"i ?N"?Cl ?::lii Mn;~,~ of Rabban Gamliel• as well as

the place: The Temple in Jerusalem; cf. Avodah Zarah Sb; Sanhedrin 98b. Rebbe: According to Doros HaRishonim (vol. 5, p. 406), the reference here is to R.

Yehudah Nesiah, the ninth nasi of the Hillel family and the grandson of R. Yehudah HaNasi: Rebbe. He was the last nasi to lead the Sanhedrin and the central Ycshivah in Eretz Yisrael. until Hillel and Sbammai: RSG's intention is unclear. He might be saying that a cursory reading of the names listed there proves that they thrived in Eretz Yisrael. Perhaps he is simply referring to the fact that the Heads of the Sanhedrin are enumerated in Avos. he and the High Priest: Were killed together.2s Martyn: See gloss to next paragraph: "Ten Martyrs... [Nasi]: Though RSG somewhat alters his style and terminology when presenting Rabban Yochanan, and many scholars are actually of the opinion that he was not a nasi, it is clear from a different responsa of RSG that he considered Rabban Yochanan a nasi.28 dynasty of Rabban Gamliel: The intention may be to Rabban Gamliel the Elder,

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

87

Tlte Work of the SaYorim

Yavneh and her wise men.•29 When Rabban 1~

tln,-. 1~, ,op~ ,~, .n"c~n,

Yochanan b. 1.akkai and the Rabbis settled 1tt'lJ ,n'J il"PM nl~"::l l)::li, "N::)l in Yavneh, they instituted ten3 1 enactments,• ~,pen n"::l ::lin~c llJ"\1 nilpn as we studied in our Mishnah:32 ."N::>l l::l pn,,. l::l1 l"i'J"\n After the Temple's destruction Rabban Yochanan b. 1.akkai enacted... '7ft' U:l 'JN"'70l l::l1 i1"1l'\::li After him [the nasi was] Rabban Gamliel, i11tt'lJ ClJ l1i1ll'1 li'ln l•::lft'1 the son of Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel the Elder who• was killed with the "Ten 'JN"'JCl pi ,n,N, ni::>'Jc "liin Martyrs."• This Rabban Gamliel was the ::lN lJtt'iM" ,,, Ml::l"::l N"tt'l M"i1 nasi in Yavneh and R. Yehoshua was the av 'JN"'JCl t::li n,,~, 1,,.::>, 1"1 J"\"::l beis din.33 When Rabban Gamliel embarrassed ni1::llJ "lCl Nl'\'Jl'\ lJ?t'iM" '1'7 R. Yehoshua• three times they [the Sanhedrin] i1"1llJ l::l 1llJ'JN '1'7 n,cpiN, removed him• and installed R. Elazar b. N1llJ'J "1"tt'1' nin, 1"tt'1' n,n, Azariah who was wealthy and the tenth iE>icn - generation descendant of Ezra the Scribe. nii,ntci M"C""E> [Rabban Gamliel] then secured the forgiveness ":l1'J iti1::llJ N'Ji 'JN"'JCl l::l1'J of [R. Yehoshua] and they re-instated Rabban 'JN"'JCl l::l1 N',N i1"1llJ l:l 1llJ'JN Gamliel. However, they did not [completely] M"1llJ l::l 1llJ'JN ,,, NJ"\::ltt' "J"\1J"\ remove R. Elazar b. Azariah; rather, Rabban N1Cl::l ft'1£)01::> NJ"\::ltt' Nin Gamliel [would lecture] two weeks and R. Elazar b. Azariah one week, as is explained in the Gemara of [Chapter] "Tefil/as HaShachar".JS

,,n,

the grandson of Hillel, who was nasi during the generation prior to the Temple's destruction. "His dynasty" would then refer to his grandson, Rabban Gamliel, and his children. The reference might also be directly to Rabban Gamliel the grand-son, requesting his life since he was heir to the position of nasi. The latter understanding is preferable since references to Rabban Gamliel the grandfather don't usually omit his title. cf. Tosafos Nidah 6b s.v. B'shifchta. YaT•II and ber wise ••: Scholars have offered two interpretations. Either Rabban Yochanan requested permission to establish the Sanhedrin in Yavneh; or the Sanhedrin was already there and he requested permission for it to continue.30 teD enactments: Halachic innovations aimed at coping with the new circumstances after the Destruction. wllo: Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel. Tea Martyn: These were ten great Tannaim who were murdered during the Hadrianic persecutions. Cf. Midrash Mishlei (1,13) and Breishis Rabbah chap. 4,16 (A/beck Ed., Jerusalem, 1965). embarrassed R. Yebosbaa: Rabban Gamliel publicly disciplined R. Yehoshua. remoYed him: From the context it would seem that he was no longer nasi. There are views,34 however, that only his position as Head of the Mesivta was taken from him.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Slterira Gaon

88

n,n u::i 1u,ct: 1::i, n,,n::i, n,,::i t:i,pn u,::i, n,,n::i, ,H"t:l .c,,11t: n,::i, ,,urs::i M"i'W

After him, his son, Rabban Shimon, was nasi; and after him, his son, Rabbeinu HaKadosh, who was in Tzippori and Beis Shearim.•36

and Deis Shearim: It is unclear why RSG mentions these two places of Rebbe's

residence. See our comments in note 36.

Notes to Copter I French version. Levine (pg. 70, n. l) proves the veracity of this reading. In Menacltos 33b he is, in fact, mentioned with R. Rechumi, and in Ta't111u 18b with R. Acbai of Bci Chasim. RSG also says (chap. 11, pg. 118) with regard to Pumbedisa, that the period of Horaah ended there during the time of R. Yosi, and it is clear that he is the same person mentioned here. 2. Doros HaRW.onim, vol. 6, chap. 12. 3. Gittin 7a. 4. Joshua IS:31. S. RSG had "Bci Chasim" instead of "Bci Cbozaah." RSG's reading, however, can be found in the Aruch s.v. Ziklag. Perhaps these are variants of the same name. Sa. A similar instance is found below, where, according to the French version, RSG refers to "our Yeshivah" in Nehardea. 6. French version. RSG probably never used the term "tractate" and it, in fact, appean only in the Spanish versions, most likely insened by a copyist. Cf. Levine, Intro., pg. 32. 1. Sanhedrin 43a. Here, too, RSG has his own reading, which seems to be that of Rabbebu, Clumanel as well. But our version of the Talmud does not mention R. Revai of Rov. 1.

8.

Proverbs 31 :6.

9. Sanhedrin Joe. cit. 10. RSG is referring to the Gemara from Kidduslwt 2a to 3b. 11. Our version of the Gemara has a different wording. The French version of the lggeres omits " whence do we know?" I la. Our understanding of this term: 71:,::1 1i0,ac.,. can also be found clearly in the Rambam's

Introduction to Misl,nel, Torah. 12. 14b, with variants. 13. Exodus 34:27. 14. Psalms 102:IS. IS. 29a, with variants. 16. This expression conveys the primary importance given to Ezra's and Zerubavel's personal Aliya. Cf. Megilla 16b concerning Ezra's Aliya. 17. Hyman (p. 62, notes 6-7) introduces an understanding of this passage that is not compatible at all with any extant version. His claim, too, that the "pairs" were all originally from Eretz Yisrael has yet to be proven. 18. RSG is clarifying a historical point that can actually be derived from the Talmud (Cf. Yoma 3Sb and Pesacltim 66a); that Hillel came to Eretz Yisrael twice, the tint time during the reign of Shmaya and Avtalyon, i.e. during the period of the " pairs." 19. French version. 20. Deuteronomy 17:8.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Work of the Savorim

89

21. Cf. Rambam Hilchos Sanhedrin, chap. I, halacbah 3 who also makes the point that the nasi was the head of the Sanhedrin. It is unclear from RSG, however, whether the ,uu; was also the head of the Mesivta. Many scholan arc of the opinion that this was a separate position. (See H. Mantel, Studies in the History of the Sanltedrin, Jerusalem, 1969, ch. 1, and also footnote below, n. 34. 22. Ch. 1. 23. Avos, ch. I, Mishnah 16 might be a reference to him. Except for the Gemara in Yetzios HaSlrabbos cited below by RSG, we have no other references to him. 24. French version. There apparently was a scribe's error in the Spanish version's omission of the word: °K'IIT which, in tum, caused the inclusion of~- (See Levine's mss. variants on pg. 74.) 25. The source for RSG is Sanhedrin I la. The translation by A. Kahane (see our Preface n. 3) "And R. Yishmael... was the High Priest" is unaoceptable and based on a faulty 26. Shabbos I Sa. 27. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is counted among these martyrs even though be was not their contemporary. Cf. S. Zeitlin, "The Legend of the Ten Martyrs", JQR, 36 (1945), pp. I ff. about the difficult chronology in the "Ten Martyrs" episode. 28. Cf. Levine pg. 126 and 128. It is surprising, however, that G. Alon, 7M Jews in Tlteir La,uJ in the Talmudic Age, Jerusalem, 1980, vol. I pg. JOO docs not cite RSG's chronological list of nesiim in our text as proof to his thesis developed there. 29. Cf. Gittin 56a where three requests are mentioned. 30. Cf. Alon, op. cit., pg. ~99 and n. 25 on pg. 97. 31. In the Talmud (Rosh HaShanah 29b, 31b, Sotalt 40a) we only find nine enactments. 32. Rosi, HaShanalt 29b. 33. Bava Kamma 74b. 34. Cf. L. Ginzberg, A Commentary on the Palestinian Talmud, N.Y., 1946, vol. 3, pp. 194-197. 35. Berachos 27b-28a. 36. See Sanlledrin 32b, Kesubos 103b and Jerusalem Talmud Kilayim 9,3. RSG's mention of Rebbe's two places of residence is out of context and requires an explanation. Perhaps RSG is teaching us not to be misled by the Talmud passages in Megi/lah Sb and Avodah ZaraJ, I0a which seemingly state that he also lived in Tiberias, as these passages are, in fact, understood by Tosafos in Mtfillah loc cit., s.v. v'Ha and Rashi, Roslt Hasluuul 31b s.v. Deis. See Doros HaRi.rltollim, vol.Schap. 18, pg. 70 who explains the above mentioned controversial passaaes.

text.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 9:

The First Generation of Amoraim: Chronology

In the days of Rebbe, R. Huna the First• was HCP Hliit :i, iti.it ,,, ,c,,:i, the exilarch in Babylonia.• This is [proved by] Tl",ct-e, il""iti •,:i:i:i t-en,.,l r, what we say [in the Talmud):2 "lH tU:> H""n 1ic ":li it"l0 H1':l Rebbe enquired of R. Chiyya: "Would ,,it ,n,i ?"H Tl"1'W:l "lH it0 one like myself [bring the sin-offering of a] he-goat?"• He replied, "You have :i, "lnc, .Hliit :i, uc, ',:i:i:i your rival in Babylonia, namely, R. ppinc H:>iti 10:itt' cniti Hi1>0 Huna." R. Safra taught:• There [in 10:lW iio" t,e', t"iilitO:l "'ict-ei:> Babylonia] is the "sceptre"; here [in Eretz H? ;i"?li T":lC pp,nc, itiiit"C Yisrael] is the "lawgiver" as we learn "WHi ,,H itiin"C 10:lW ,,c, (in Sanhedrin):3 "The sceptre shall not ?H,W" l'\H t"i,,w ',:i:i:iw n,..,.,l depart from Yehudah nor the lawgiver from between his feet";4 "The sceptre shall ,,t-e , ..,l, l":10 pp,nc, ,pc:i not depart from Yehudah" refers to the itiin t"ic.,cw ',',it ',w i"l:l "l:l exilarchs in Babylonia who rule Israel with "1>10 "l)"i1' ?:l:li "lit HC?H C":li:l the rod•. 'Nor the lawgiver from between .tU"H 10:lFI 'J'IM'lit his feet': refers to the grandchildren of it"Wl>l nl ":lii "Ci":i, Hillel• who teach Torah to Israel in public.,, p:i, "Wille, ,:i:i:i toiit :i,, We see, then,s that [the leaders] of Babylonia were greater [in authority] since they are called "the sceptre".• In the days of Rebbe, R. Huna passed away in Babylonia. The Rabbis

exilarch in babylonia: And, therefore, Rebbe had to be subservient to him, as RSG will soon show. be-goat: Only the ruler of the Jewish people brought a he-goat for a sin offering (See Leviticus 4:23); Rebbe was asking whether his office of nasi in the Eretz Yisrael community conferred upon him the status of ruler over all Israel. taught: An alternate version of R. Chiyya's reply. According to both versions, however, Rebbe would not bring the ruler's sin-offering as he was subordinate to the exilarchs in Babylonia. the rod: Of governmental authority granted them by the Babylonian kings. grandchildren of Hillel: Including Rebbe who was a direct seventh - generation descendant. They are called "the sceptre": RSG is proving that the exilarch was on a higher level than Rebbe, the descendant of Hillel. 90

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Firsl Generation of Amoraim

relate

in

the

Jerusalem

91

Talmud,

Kilayim6 and Kesubos:1

in M"Mtt' rn:lin:,i C"H?:ii "C?tt'ii":l ;:, ,, ,ciH M"ni ,ni,.:l i"ll1 ,, ne,i11 ,.lH ciH "" icH,.tt' nc n,..n:l ,.lpt ie,w nee r,n Hl'\iHtttlC yin"Cil yi,e,, 'llpt? Hlin :li p..,c "Hi M"liH..lc, Hl:l"Mic HlH H:,n; Hni,l ft''!, 'O:l~C Hin, "Hl"C ?"l1? ii"? TC Hin T'IC'll:l ~:lW HlHi n,in.. HlHi H..,:,,, TC n,,n.., H.. ,, , ....i, yet ,n Hn::iiplc Hnp, ye Hlin :li HM ',•H n .. n:l, H'l'IM ,•H ,, ;e, ,,.lE) ic:Ji:,ru H,.,.n .. n .., icH .H:l uiiH H?i p,i i:l? 1' "l1:l THC ,.tn pi!) 011:,i H,.,.n i,i..-, tt'l i:l M!)~H

Rebbe was extremely humble and used to say: "Whatever someone requests of me I am willing to do except what the ancestors of Besayra did for my ancestor,• removing themselves from the position of nasi and appointing him.a Moreover, if R. Huna the Exilarch would come up here [to Eretz Yisrael], I would place him above me, since he is from the tribe of Yehudah while I am from the tribe of Binyamin;9 he is from the great ones of Yehudah, from the males, while I am from the small ones, from the females." One time, R. Chiyya the Great• went up to [Rebbe] and told him: "R. Huna is outside." Rebbe's face turned white • ,.J, [R. Chiyya] told him:• "His casket has come." Rebbc said to R. Chiyya: "Go see M"ft'E)l:l HniE)"fl lMli ,, M"?l1 who wants you outside." He [went out ,,, j't'l::,J? , ....11 H?i T"C,.. l"l'\?li and] looked but found nobody. Then R. 1,::1 ,:::1 ..c,.. ,, icH .f"C'" t"n,n Chiyya realized that Rebbe was angry with M"lC :li t,.c,,. f"l'\?l'\ f"?,.M:l him.• He ex-communicated himself for .Hn,.iiHi H"?,.?:J ?:J thirty d~~s and did not go up to Rebbe for thirty days. R. Yossi b. Bun said: "During ,c ?:l:l:l Hlin ::1, ,n::i "lCnN, these thirty days Rav learned from him* ?Hiottt n ..,n:l nin, HJpu, ::1, all the principles of the Torah."* ,,n ,:, H:lpu, ,c, ?Hice, '"iCHi Mar R. Ukva • was appointed exilarch in Babylonia after R. Huna, and Shmuel was with him, as we say:11

::1,::1,

::u,

::1,, ,,

,:i,

er,,.

ancestor: Hillel. R. Cbiyya the Great: So he is usually called in Rabbinic literature emanating from Eretz Yisrael. white: He thought that R. Huna was alive and that he would have to forfeit his position. told him: He explained his original statement. angry witla him: Because he had not told him immediately that it was only the casket that had come. Rebbe had therefore hinted to him to leave the premises. bim:R. Chiyya.10 of tbe Torah: This whole passage is brought by RSG as proof that R. Huna passed away in Rebbe's lifetime. Mar R. Ukva: "Mar" is a Babylonian title of rank. It is sometimes also applied to

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sllerira Gaon

92

When Shmuel and Mar Ukva were studying, Mar Ukva sat before• Shmuel at a distance of four cubits; but when they12 sat at a judicial session, Shmuel sat before Mar Ukva • at a distance of four cubits. And we say• in [Tractate] Shabbos: 13 Shmuel said• to R. Yehudah: "Keen scholar, your superior• is in cool water, but your superior's superior• is in hot water. Surely Mar Ukva and his court are available, and of them it is said: 14 "Thus said the Lord, 'O House of David, execute judgement in the morning.' " In the days of Rebbe, Rav went down to Babylonia in the year 530 of the Greek Kingdom• [219 C.E.], by which we are accustomed to count the date. R. Shila was the head of the Rabbis here [in Babylonia] after Rebbe* (the head of the Rabbis in Babylonia was called the "Reish

il"Ci' N:lpu, iC :l"M" iliil T"Cil i:,i il"i,, nicN 11::i ',Nicvr ?Nicttt :l"l'\" n,n Nl"i:l :l"l'\" n,n il'i", n,cN '1:l N:lpu, ,c, il"CP ?Nicttt il"? iCN n:lttt:l Tl"iCNi "i"ii':l 1ttt"i Nnttt n,,n., ::i,, iQ Nil "C"CM:l 1ttt"i1 Nttt"ii ,n::i ::iin:,, C""i' il"1 l'\":li N:lpu, ip:l? il"1 iii M":l "'" iCN il:) .t!)!),tttC ruttt:l ?:l:l? :li l'\Ml ,,, ,c,,::i, N.l ?"lii ti' ni:,;c; illttt ;•pn

":l Nttt"i N?"ttt 'i N:)il n,ni ttt"i "ii'C n,n, .'i iM:l Tl:li Tl"iCN1 p:li1 Nttt"i ?:l:l:l Ni10

Sidra"* 16) as we say:11

Shmuel, Mar Ukva's close colleague, but usually is reserved for the members of the exilarch's family. sat before: This frequently - used Talmudic expression connotes a student sitting in front of his teacher. before Mar Ukva: Since in judicial matters he was the supreme civil head. And we say: This is a second proof that Shmuel was a contemporary of Mar Ukva. Shmuel said: R. Yehudah was worried that Shmuel might be punished by heaven for ignoring a certain person who had requested judgement. Shmuel's answer is quoted here by RSG: that the responsibility belonged to the exilarch, who was of the House of David. your superior: I.e. Shmuel himself. your superior's superior: Mar Ukva. 530 of the Greek Kingdom: RSG customarily counts the year from the founding of the "Greek" (Seleucid) Dynasty, in 312 B.C.E. (3449 from Creation). See, however, the discussion in our introduction, pg. 22. In the Talmud this system of dating is always called minyan shtaros ("the date for documents"). after Rebbe: After Rebbe's death. IS Shira: According to R. HaLevi 16a "sidra" is synonymous with Yeshivah or "school." Unlike the Mesivta, the role of the "Sidra" was only the proliferation of Torah and Torah values. The specific programs and authority of a Rosh Yeshiva did not exist. It is also likely that, initially, the emphasis in the Sidra was on lectures on Shabbos dealing with the Sidra (Parshah) of the week. This was then expanded to the other days of

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

93

The First Generation of .Amoraim

Rav came to the place of R. Shila and acted as his interpreter.• When R. Shila passed away, Rav and Shmuel were [already] here [in Babylonia]. Rav gave precedence* to Shmuel and did not want to be his superior and have him sit before him. Nor did Shmuel want to be Rav's superior and have Rav sit before him, for Rav was much older than Shmuel, as we say in the Gemara Merubah: 1s Rav and Shmuel and R. Assi once met at the celebration of a circumcision,• or as some say, of the redemption of a firstborn son.• Rav would not enter before Shmuel* nor Shmuel before R. Assi, • nor R. Assi before Rav.• They said: "Who should encourage [the other to go first]''?* [It was decided that] Shmuel should encourage [Rav to go first]. But why should not Rav have encouraged* [Shmuel]? [Because]

op N'?"to ,,, i1"1l'lN'? l1'?P"N Ji .NiicNJ i1"'?1' iin N'?"tt' ,,, i1"tt'£)l nJ i:)i :i, n,,::i,N, N:)i1 '?N,ctt', ::i, :l1 ":llOJN N',i i1"CPC '?Nictt'', n,:nn,tot',i M"'1' Ntt'"1 ..,nc, N, ,N,ctt' r:,N, M"CP ,N,ctt', ::i,, i1"'1' Ntt'"1 ,,nc, ":llOJN tt'"tt'i' n,n, i1"CP ::i,, M":lin,N,, N"MM ,:, N:li~ ',NiC?t'C Ji :1, :n::,.,,c, MiCl:l Tl"1CN1 1'i:ltt' "J', iz,',pN "ON :iii ',Nictt'i :i, pn 11,tt'" ,:i; n, ,,cN, pn ,N,ctt' ,N,ctt', M"Ci' '""1' N, "ON :iii :l11 M"Ci'C '""1' N', TNC "10N :l11 M"Ci'C ','1'11' N', .:i, n,~l, .,N,ctt' n,~l 7M1~l

the week and included other subects also.16b The Mcsivta, on the other hand, was distinguished from a mere sidra. The Mesivta was an assembly of all the outstanding scholars and claimed quasi-legislative powers, or, later, editorial control over the evolving Gemara. Iris interpreter: The proof is that even a great scholar like Rav agreed to serve in the subordinate position of interpreter for R. Shila, who, therefore, must have been the "bead of the Rabbis in Babylonia." precedence: The anecdote is cited to illustrate the mutual respect between Rav and Shmuel. circumcision: Lit., "the week of the son." redemption of a fintborn son: A first-born must be redeemed on the 31st day; see Numbers 18:16. before Shmuel: Since he did not want to be considered Shmuel's superior, even though Rav was older. before R. Assi: On account of seniority. before Rav: Whose disciple he was. encourage [the otller to go fint]: This is based on RSG's unique understanding of the anecdote, 19 according to which there were three separate conflicts of precedence, all occurring at once. It was finally decided that Shmuel encourage Rav to go first, though this was not their usual practice. Rav accepted and entered, followed by R. Assi and then Shmuel. The latter two entrances conformed with the usual practice, since Rav always went before R. Assi and R. Assi before Shmuel. slto■ld not Ra, have encouraged: Since it seems he considered Shmuel his superior

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

94

lggeres of Rav Slrerira Gaon

it was Rav who had granted Shmuel precedence.• Therefore• Rav left Shmuel in Nehardea which was his [Shmuel's]• place and a place of Torah,20 and distanced himself to a place which had no Torah. That was Sura, which is M'asa Mechasya.21 There were many Jews there and yet there were some who did not even know the prohibition against [combining] milk and meat.22 He said: "I will settle here so that there will be Torah in this place." This is in accordance with the episode explained in [Chapter] Kol HaBasar:23 Rav found an open space and put a fence around it• and when he came to Tatlepush• he taught them• and declared the udder forbidden to them.• And [Rav] was called the "Reish Sidra," as R. Yochanan said to Isi b. Hini:24 "Who is the Reish Sidra in Babylonia?" He replied: "Abba Aricha."•

n"Ci'C :i, n ..,:i,M Mn ',Mictt'

.n""~r,, nttt3Jc Minn citt'C ',Micttt', :ii n"p:lttt ,::,n ciwi Min, n,n:,,, Min, M1'1ii1l:l M',i Mn:ii,r, pn,nMi n,,n cipc M"n, Mi,c Mini n,,n n":l nin "tt'"E)l ?Mitt'" yin, M"CMC MMC ,in M? ,nni ,icM ,r,"E)Mi cnn "::l M::ln :l"l"\"M :ii icMi "1'1" Mn::i,, "Mn:i n,in "inr,, ":l"i1 r,:, 'El:l tttii!lci nttt3Jc Minn "::l n::i ,,.:n Mtc n1'p:i :i, ittt:in iU"iC.lN tt'Ul?~~; 1'?i'"N ":li i1l ...r,n:, ,,cM yu..,,M, ,, i1"? iCNp1 Niic ttt"i "ipNi Niic ttt"i ?NC "l"M 1::i "C"M" pni" C""pMi .M::l"iM M:lN ",cM 7',:l:l:l

and never went before him. Therefore let R. Assi go first followed by Shmuel and then Rav. it was Rav who granted Shmuel precedence: Not because Shmuel was superior, but because Rav wanted to honor him. In this instance, however, since it would have meant R. Assi's going before Rav, the usual practice was set aside. Tberefore: Because Rav did not want to be Shmuel's superior and in fact gave him precedence. bis [Shmuel's]: An alternative interpretation would be: Rav's place. Contextually this is more valid but, for some reason, has not been so understood by the translators of the Iggeres. fence around it: He came to a place where the people were negligent in their religious observance and he therefore placed upon them additional restrictions. Tatlepush: In the neighborhood of Sura. . taught them: RSG has omitted most of the Talmudic narrative. His intention, however, is clear: Rav taught them the basic laws of milk and meat and then instituted a new halachic ordinance. forbidden to them: According to Biblical and Mishnaic halachah the udder is permitted to be cooked and eaten. This was, then, an additional restriction. This episode is proof of the ignorance of the Jews of Sura. In addition, it supports RSG's thesis as to why Rav moved to Sura: "to make it a place of Torah." Abba Aricba: Rav. The surname Aricha, "the Tall," was given to him because of his tall physical stature (sec Niddah 24b). His first name was Abba (sec Yoma 87a).

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

95

The First Generation of Amoraim

And the dream that R. Chanina dreamt about [Rav's] being hanged there was fulfilled, as is explained* in Chapter Yom HaKippurim. 25 Rav purchased, by means of a drawing,• the garden adjoining his beis midrash.21 [This garden] had been the property of a proselyte. [Rav] assembled there [in Sura] many students, taught much Torah there, and established a beis din there. [Now] there were two great batei din in Babylonia: the one in Nchardea which had already existed and the one in Sura, founded by Rav. And this is what Shmuel [refers to when he] says:28 A prozbur can be written only in the beis din of Sura or in the beis din of Nehardea. And Rav and Shmuel had two mesivtos, • as it says in [Chapter] Hamevi Get MiMedinas HaYam:29

Rav says Babylonia is like Eretz Yisracl with respect to divorces, while Shmuel says it is like territory outside Eretz Yisrael. • And [the Gemara] explains:30 Rav thought since there were mesivtos, [witnesses] were available. [But] Shmuel thought the (personnel of the] mesivtos were preoccupied with their studies.

Ml"lM ,, i1"', i1"tni Mt:i',n i1":l

'E>::l ?t'ii1>0, ":)"i1 ":) cnn ni1>pti .c",iE>:>n c,, ::li ":li i1"N"l', :li i1""lpi l:'l"l:>i ili1 "C:)l M"in, Mn,,-x: C?t' f:lii M:lil!:) C"i"tl',l'\ Cl'\i1 .,•: c?t' 11:p, n::lin n,,n C"',iil T"l"i "n::l "l?t' ',:,.;:;: iin, ,n, ,::> i1"i1=' M11i,nl:l ,n it:iMi U""i1i ::li "'1':lpi Miic:l M',M ',i;:ciiE> ll":ll'\:> M', ',Mit:i?t' Ml"i ":l:l iM Miici Ml"i ":l:l iM .M1'iinli t"n,n r,M,ri?t'i :,r, ,nr, t"ini tol M":l0i1:l "'it:iMi Ml'\:l"l'\0 ,,n iriM ::li r,;:;: :C"i1 ru,,r,r, ',Mit:i?t'i T"~l', ',Mitt'" fiM:> M"i1 ti"=> "~?t'E>i r,M., n-xin:> iriM n:>?t'ri Ml'\:l"nt:i M:)"Mi ,::ic : , , Nl'\:l"l'\0 i:c ',Mit:i?t'i "M":>?t' .,,..,~ ,n,c,"l:l

explained: The Talmud relates that R. Chanina had seen in a dream that Rav was being hanged on a palm tree, and the tradition is that one who in a dream is hanged on a palm tree will become a head and leader. drawing: Rav acquired ownership of the property by drawing the figure of an animal or bird on the wall of the house. 26 prozbul: This declaration, introduced by Hillel the Elder (sec Gittin 36a), provides the means to make it easier for people to borrow money and not have their loans cancelled by the conclusion of the Shemittah year. had two meshtos: This constituted an innovation, since prior to this the ..Sidra" (see gloss above pg. 92, s.v. Sidra) was the standard institution. After the Sanhedrin was disbanded in Eretz Yisrael upon the death of R. Yehudah Nesia (305 C.E.), Rav and Shmuel established mesivtos in Babylonia modeled after the Sanhedrin. These mesivtos took upon themselves the role of batei din, central courts of legislation and judgement, and supreme centers of the most outstanding scholars. outside Eretz Yisrael: See Gittin 2b for the various halachic differences between Babylonia and Eretz Yisrael regarding divorce documents.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

96

lggues of Rav Slrnira Gaon

Rav and Shmuel occasionally saw one ';,tcictt'i :ii nn ,,n T"i'i!);, another. Rav passed away in the year 558 n"lpn Ntt':l :i, :l":ltt"I ,,,nN of the Seleucid Era [247 C.E.], and after l"ltt' 't n,,n; il"in:i ;tc,ctt' .1n.1, him Shmuel conducted matters by himself for mn, nc::,, .Nn:l"nc tc,n N'in, seven years, [during which] there was [only] pm" ,, i1"; :;i,n::, mn C'"i'C one mcsivta. As long as Rav was alive, R. Yochanan n.1, ,n:i, ,:i:i:itt' u:i, c,p; would correspond with him [with the pn,., ,, i1"; :l"n:, n,n :i,, i1"tt'E>l greeting]: "to our teacher in Babylonia." After .;:,.:i:itt' u,:in c,p; ;tc,ctt'; Rav died, R. Yochanan would correspond with il":li NlN1 lrT" tc, "n::)N ,etc Shmuel [with the greeting]: "to our colleague t"ntt'i tcii:111 i1"; i1tt'i :in:, in Babylonia." Said [Shmuel to himself]: "Docs he [R. Yochanan] still not realize that I NC';,lJ:l Nl:ltt'in "n:)N iCN l"ltt' am his master?"• He thereupon wrote out and y,1110 n,; ,,tt"I :in:, 11,,, Nin sent to [R. Yocbanan] a calendar of the exact iCN Nl'lN£1i1Q j:'!)C ,;cl ,c,,n moment of the appearance of the new moon, '"tN ;:i:i:i n:i, n,; ,nN c~ month by month, for the next sixty years. .y";,n:i p,,ctci::, i1'"tntc, R. Yochanan said: "So he knows plain arithmetic."• He then sent him thirteen camel-loads of [questions and answers regarding] treifah.• He said: "It is clear that I have a teacher in Babylonia, I will go and meet him," as we learn in [Tractate] Chullin.J• master: I.e. is there not one thing in which I am superior to him and can therefore be considered his teacher? (Rashi). aritlametic: At the time, this was only an academic exercise, since the fixing of the calendar was still the prerogative of the nasi. treifah: concerning doubtful cases of animals whose meat may have been rendered non-kosher by disease.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I

,

The First Generation of Amoraim

97

Notes to Cllapter 9

6. 7.

As opposed to R. Huna of the second generation of Amoraim who was the head of Sura after Rav. Horayos llb. Sa with slight variations. Genesis 49: 10. This is RSG's understanding of Rav Safra's reference to the Braissa in Sanhedrin. The Talmud in Sanhedrin also has this understanding of the Braissa. 9:3. 12:3.

8.

Sec Pesachim 66a.

I. 2. 3. 4. S.

This is an original approach about Hillel's ancestry only found here. In Taanis 4:2 the Jerusalem Talmud accepts the traditional approach. It is also possible that only Rebbe's father was from Binyamin, so that the second statement is a clarification of the first one. 10. Pnei Moshe in his commentary on the passage in Kilayim. 11. Moed Katan 16b with variations. 12. Cf. Mss. 13. S5a. 14. Jeremiah 21:12. IS. The exact date is unclear and opinions have varied from as early as 190 C.E. to as late as 220 C.E. 16. French version. Parentheses ours. 16a. Doros Harishonim, vol. S, pg. 406. 16b. Sec Shabbos 152a and Yoma 87a. 17. Yoma 20b. 18. Bava Kama 80a with variants. We have here accepted the French version of the quoted passage since it can be substantiated by a rcsponsum of RSG (see Levine's appendices, No. XVI, pg. XII). This example can be offered as proof of the greater reliability of the French version. 19. Sec Levine, Joe. cit. 20. Sec Yevamos 122a. 21. They arc not the same place (sec Beitzah 29a and Yoma 86a) but Masa Mechasya was a town in the Sura province. 22. French version. 23. Chui/in 110a. 24. Ibid 137b. Levine, pg. 80 note l, must be emended. 25. Yoma 87b. 26. Sec Bava Basra S4a. Levine, pg. 80 note 4, must be emended as must David Goodblatt, Rabbinic lnst"'ction in Sasanian Babylonia, Leiden, 1975, pg. 22 who, it seems, simply copied Levine's references. 27. Sec Kiddushin 39a (Levine, Joe. cit., note 5, must be emended) and Rashi, ibid, s.v. Ktrl',. 28. Gillin 36b. 29. lbid6a.

9.

30. Ibid. 31. Chui/in 95b.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 10: The

Amoraic Period ( 1): Chronology

Shmuel died in the year 5651 [of the Seleucid ,•cpn ru~:i ?Nie~ :i":,~i Era; 254 C.E.]. His students were R. Nachman N1'1iiil:l lCMl :ii ii"1"C?l'\ iini in Nehardea, R. Yehudah in Pumbedisa and n~~ :iii Nn..,:icim:i n,,n.. :iii R. Shcshes in Shilchi. ...n,~:i In the year 570 [of the Seleucid Era; 259 C.E.]2 Papa b. NetzarJ came• and l:l N!,E) Nl'\N iil~ i,•pn ru~:i, destroyed Nehardea. Rabbah b. Abbahu, our n:i, ?TNi N1'iinJ? n:i,nN, 11.l ancestor,4 went to Shechantziv and [then] to ..n,~,i ::l"ll-'~' Ulpt ni:iN ,:i Shilchi and [then] to Mechoza.• R. Yosef ,::i r:,ci" :i, cnn nini .Nnnc, b. Chama, the father of Rava, was there 1,.., p:i,i N:ii, ni:iN Ncn [in Mechoza]. Our• other Rabbis• [went] to6 Pumbedisa, which from the Second Temple Miii "l~ M":l "Ci" jC1 Nl'\"1::lCU):l Period• was the main center of the Diaspora, nNi,~ ii, n•,::i pni:, n,u iplJ ~N n,i,c, i"l£l? ii?Uii l'\N as we learn in the Mishnah:7 [The chain of beacons continued•] until .NM"1:lCU) Nin ii?U ""::lN icNi he saw the whole of the Diaspora before Nlin :i, ,,c ,Nie~ ,n:ii him like one bonfire. l"1':l1Ni iiN"~l "l:l lC nin, And Abbaye explains:s n:iin ii1U"\ r:iii 1?0 l"l~ "Diaspora" means Pumbedisa.9 After Shmuel, R. Huna ruled.9a He was of the exilarchic family, and he ruled for forty years. He disseminated much Torah, as we learn in Kesubos: 10 Papa b. Netzar came: He was the ruler of Palmyra which is located on an oasis in the Syrian Desert. As a result of its central location, it became a center of trade and a major power. For a while a large part of Babylonia fell under its control. to Sbecbantziv... and to Mecboza: After fleeing the destruction of Nehardea, he went to Shechantiv and then to Shilchi, and finally settled in Mechou.s Our: RSG himself, being the Rosh Mesivta in Pumbedisa, completely identifies with the first Rabbis who transfered to Pumbcdisa from Nehardea, especially with his direct ancestor, Rabbah b. Abbahu. other Rabbis: Who had fled Nehardea. from the Second Temple Period: The mesivta in Pumbedisa, according to RSG, eventually came to be considered the replacement of Nehardea. In time, it became so completely identified with it that RSG refers to it as the center of the Diaspora from the days of the Second Temple, even though until about 259 C.E., this had in fact been Nehardea (cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol. I, pg. 138). [the chain of beacons continued]: Beacons were lit on mountaintops to convey the news of the New Moon to the entire Diaspora in Babylonia. 98

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

99

Tl,e Amoraic Period (l)

When the Rabbis left the house of study of R. Huna,• eight hundred Rabbis remained.• R. Huna used to expound with thirteen Amoraim.• When the Rabbis left R. Huna's house of study and shook out their robes, the dust would rise and cover the sun. And they said in the West:• "The Mesivta of R. Huna the Babylonian has arisen." And we learn in Chapter Baba Al Yevimto: 11 R. Abba b. Zavda, R. Sheshes, R. Chalbo, R. Gidal and R. Acha b. Chanina all became sterile• from the lectures• of R. Huna. R. Acha b. Yaakov said: "There were sixty elders and all became sterile from the lectures of R. Huna12 except me, for I have fulfilled in myself [the verse]: 'Wisdom preserves the life of him who possesses it.' "1J In the days of R. Huna, R. Yochanan passed away in Eretz Yisrael. We say that for eighty• years R. Yochanan ruled in Eretz Yisrael after R. Chanina, 16 who followed R. Afas, who came after Rabbeinu Hakadosh, as is explained in Chapter HaNosei.'1

"ito!)c ,,n i::, ni::lin:>::l jl"iCHi "W""!) ,,it Hliit ::li "::lC tl::li itiit Hliit ::lii tJ::li itHC "lCn iin i::::, "HiiCH iC"?Ji::l ~"ii "J!)li Hliit ::li "::lC jl::li "ito!)C "C:>c, p::lH i'"?C itiit, iit""C"?l itCi' H::lil1C::l "iCHi He,.., it"? Hliit ::lii Hn::l"JiC HJiWil it? ?11 H::lit pi!):l jl"iCHi:>i ilH?::l::l :1,, Hi::lt i::l H:lH ::li ,nc"::l" HnH :i,, :1,, ,:i,n :1,, nww il"i'i!)C ,,p11nH ,n,::, iil"ln i::l i::l HMH ::li iCH .Hliit :lii "HWE)l:l n"C"pi "Hl"C i::l? :li'l1" .it"?l1:l it""Mn itc:,niti

,,J

'i ::l":>W Hliii :lii it"Ci":,.i j"lW j"lcn, jl"iCHi 'IWH::l pn,.. ,n:1 ?HiW" }'iH:l jln,.. ":li ,,c niit, Cl£)H ,, in:l itiit1 Hl"ln 'i pi!):l Wi!)c,::, w,ipit U"::li ,n:1 .HWUit

left the bome of study of R. Hana: After spending the months of the Yarchei Kallah, Elul and Adar, with him. eigM b■ndred Rabbis remained: For year-round study. thirteen Amoraim: Assistants who repeated the words of R. Huna to all parts of his huge audience (Rashi). West: Erctz Yisrael. became sterile: The discourses were long, and in their desire not to interrupt them, the sages suppressed their need to urinate and thus impaired their generative organs. lectures: This term (Aram., Pirka) denotes some kind of assembly or session, of a popular, exoteric character, but having some scholars in attendance. A lecture on a specific topic, usually occurring on Shabbos, was an integral part of the Pirka. eigllty: Rabbi HaLevi•4 emends this to read: "sixty." 279 C.E.: Rabbi HaLevilS attempts to show that the death actually took place in 289

C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

100

In the year 590 [of the Seleucid Era; 279 ,,, pn,, ,, ir:,!lN r"Pl'I ruttt:li C.E.],• R. Yochanan and R. Elazar passed ."CM '1 1'>Ci N1n Nl'ltt':l it1''>N away• in the same year,• and R. Ami ruled. ":lC n,n, N:lil!:) Nlin ::i, i:l.lNi R. Huna became very influential, for he was Nl'l"1:lCU:lC n,,n, :lii .MN"tt'l of the exilarchic dynasty.• R. Yehudah was in Pumbedisa with his studentsl9 [who sat] before "tnl'lc n,n, M"CP n,,,cr,n, him, and he occasionally appeared before ::1,, .c,pi!:l'> Nlin ::1,., """ R. Huna. • R. Nachman was in Shilchi and p:li 011 Ntinc::1, "M'>ttt:l 1cnl Mechoza with the Rabbis of Nehardea,20 but n,n, ll"M:)tt'N N'>i .N1'1,nl1 we do not find that R. Nachman went to Nlin :li1 M"CP'> fCMl :li '>""1' R. Huna. Rather they were like a pair,• for nc::,::11 ,,n ,n""lit "l:l::l N'>M in a number of places [in the Talmud] R. t"i:ln Nlin :tCMl ::1, ,cN ,z,::,,, Nactiman says: 21 .,,nN N'>C:l "" C"p,o Huna our colleague relates this [braissa] to another matter. ::1,,p Nlin ::1,, M"tt'iic ":li The beis midrash of R. Huna was near Masa Mechasya. R. Chisda, in Sura,• was a N1CM ::iii Nii1 M"CMC Nl'lC'> colleague of R. Huna. 22 And in the lifetime .nin Niic:li Nlin :li'> n,n ,::1n of R. Huna, R. Chisda built the Bei Rav• in N1CM :li M""l:l Nlin :li1 M"lttt:li the year 604 [of the Seleucid Era; 293 C.E.]. .1"il'I l'lltt':l :li ":l', R. Huna died in the year 608 [of the Seleucid Era; 297 C.E.],* and his coffin was M"il'I Mltt':l Nlin :li :l"::ltt'i brought to Eretz Yisrael, as is explained in ,::,,n ,::, ""N'> u,,Nr, nipcM,

passed away: This is the only instance in the Iggcres where the term --,iow is used instead of •:i,:,r1sa. in tile same year: In the few months' interim, R. Elazar had replaced R. Yochanan as the acting head of the Yeshivah in Tiberias. exUarcbic dynasty: Lit., "the house of the nasi." 18 before R. Huna: In the latter's mesivta. Herc RSG is acknowle71' HaRoeh:39 Bar Hodya was a dream interprcter...[and :li1 ii"tt'!)l nl101 J•i,t-ti said to Rava]: "Abbaye will die and his iii"C Niic::,. tiNl iiiii N7 t-ticn Mesivta will come before you."• And the Rabbis of the whole world* gathered Ntt'"£)l n,n "!)ll n::,.,, Nni::,,c before him. Although* after R. Chisda died• there was no gaon• in Sura,• nevertheless the rule of Rava was much greater and he

shofar: A box which was called shofar because it resembled the ram's horn, being narrow at the top and wide at the bottom. new shekels: Used for current contributions of the yearly shekeL old shekels: Used for overdue contributions which have other uses. This passage is cited as proof for RSG's understanding of the term "shofar" in the previous passage. Mechoza: A town near Pumbedisa. Rava's father had settled in Mecho1.a. (See above p. 98.)

before you: In Mecho1.a. of the whole world: RSG uses this expression specifically with Rava because he now became the senior sage of all Yisrael. Since the days of R. Ami, some thirty years before (308 C.E.) there had been no Rosh Yeshiva in Eretz Yisrael, due to the political turbulence brought on by the abdication of the Emperor Diocletian in 305 C.E. and then the acceptance of Christianity as the state religion in 325 C.E. Although: I.e. although it would seem that R. Chisda was so great that a replacement could not be found for him in Sura, nevertheless Rava was still greater. after R. Chiscia died: In 309 C.E. gaon: I.e., Rosh Mesivta. It is noteworthy that RSG uses this term here for the first

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

105

The A.moraic Period (I)

had great authority and influence. R. Yosers pi!):l fl"icNi:, i:,c,,. ::1,, Nn.:ii:l blessing of him was fulfilled, as we say in ito!)N n,n i.:, n:i, :,; iN~in Chapter Hotziu Lo:40 n ..,,nN':, ""tNi "lCC i:,c,.. :i, ":lO When Rava was about to take leave of R. N;c, i1' n"1'i:,; ,n; i:,ploi Yosef, he would go backwards until his feet banged [against the doorway], and ,nN No, qc,.. :i, ":l1 Nn!lpCN the doorway of R. Yosers house became Nn" n"; ioN qc,.. :1,; n"; ,,cN, full of bloodstains. They came and told .N.:,i:, N':,i:,N 1ttt"i c,,n,., Ni1'i R. Yoser" [what Rava was doing]. R. ..,c 1':liN ,,n N:1,, Nni:,;o "lttti Yosef said to him: "May it be the will [of Hashem] that your head shall rise above the whole city."* N':, N:lii j"lttt j"':,"N in;:,:ii And the years of the rule of Rava were ci!):l Nli:l"liC Nin N':,N N"in fourteen, and he died in the year 663 [of the "nin jl':,£1"N N:li in:li Nl"\"1:l Seleucid Era; 352 C.E.]. In all these years•,2 there was only one pnt" i:l jCnl :li Nl"l:l"liO Mesivta, [the one] in Pumbedisa. 43 After :l":,ttti C"lttt n1':liN Nli"1:lOi£):l Rava they split again into two Mesivtos: R. tttil:i nin, N!l!l ::1,, t"cin nlttt:l Nachman b. Yitzchak [ruled] in Pumbedisa ,c..,n n:i ,;c, Niic; ::1,,p ,nttt for four years, and died in the year 667 [of .t"!lin ruttt:i :l".:l~ j"lttt the Seleucid Era; 356 C.E.]. R. Papa was in Narish, near Sura. He ruled nineteen"" years i.:,;c pnt" i:i jCnl :1, in::1, and died in the year 682 [of the Seleucid Era; Non :ii C"liNl no:, Nn"i:lCU):l 371 C.E.).45 .n"!),n nlttt:l :l":lttti Nn..,:i ci!):l After R. Nachman b. Yitzchak a number of Geonim ruled in Pumbedisa. R. Chama [was :j"1':ltttln ;:, pi!):l jl"iONi il""ni in] Pumbedisa and died in 688 [of the Seleucid it3J"':,N ":li:, i:i1'i Nl"", Ninn Era377 C.E.]. And this is confirmed by what icN cnn jl:lio N:liii Ninn n,n we learn in Chapter Kol HaNishbaim: 46 N:li1'CO NnilN Nl"li""O NlN A certain judge ruled according to the Nl'IN ,u,..;N ,,.:, Nn:,;n ,,..;, view of R. Elazar."' There was a certain rabbinical disciple in his locality who said to him: "I will go to the Mesivta48 and bring a letter that the law does not follow R. Elazar." He came before R. Chama,

time, even though he is presently discussing the Amoraic Period and not the Geonic period. See, however, our discussion on pg.123, n. 71. in Sara: Though Rabba b. Chiyya rendered Torah lectures as mentioned above, p.103. told R. Yoseplll: Since R. Yoseph was blind"' he did not see this reverent behavior on the part of his disciple. tile whole city: That you become Rosh Yeshiva (Rashi). all these years: From R. Yehudah to Rava.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

106

who said to him: "A judge who rules according to [the view of] R. Elazar rules [legitimately]."* After him R. Zevid ruled in Pumbedisa,• and he died in the year 696 (of the Seleucid Era; 385 C.E.]. After him R. Dimi from Nehardea ruled, and he died in the year 699 [of the Seleucid Era; 388 C.E.]. After him Rafram ruled, and he died in the year 706 [of the Seleucid Era; 395 C.E.J.s1 After him R. Kahana ruled, and he died in the year 725 [of _the Seleucid Era; 414 C.E.].

Nl"411 i1"? ,oN, Non ::l11 M"OP? .1::l.V 1f1'"?N 11::, 1"::l.Vi 1 41::lf ::l1 ,,o i1"1l'l::li .i"J1l'\ N~::l ::l":,~i Nl'\411::lOiE)::l "0"1 ::l1 ,,c i1411l'\::li ~"J1li N~::l ::l":,~i N1'11i1l0 .C"l~ ::l':,~, c,~, ,,o n,,n::li :Ji ,,c n,,zi::li .,"~n ru~::l .C"l~ n":,~n ru~::l ::l":,~, Nln:, i1411::l NnN ::l1 170 i1411M::li .C 41l~ ?"~l'\ lil~::l ::)41::,~i N::l11

rules legitimately: The passage is cited to show that R. Chama was the Rosh Mesivta in Pumbedisa.49 in Pumbedisa: These words are seemingly superfluous since the previous Rosh Mesivta, R. Chama, also ruled in Pumbedisa. In fact, when discussing the next three Rashei Mesivta, RSG omits the unnecessary mention of Pumbedisa.so

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The A.moraic Period ( J)

107

Notes to Cllapter 10 We have here followed the French version because the Spanish version (564) is difficult since RSG writes, according to both versions, (p. 96) that Rav died in 5S8 and that Shmuel lived after him another seven years, which would place Shmuel's death in 565, not 564. 2. J. Neusner, A History of the Jews in Babylonia, Leiden, 1965, Vol. II, pg. 49, has tried to prove this date inaccurate and use this as further proof of the general inaccuracy of the lggeres. Y. Gafny, ..The Study of Talmudic Chronology in the Iggeres of RSG" (Heb.), Zion, 52 (1987) pg. 2 has convincingly shown the exactness of our date. 3. See Kesubos Sib. Levine, pg. 82, note 6, must be emended accordingly. 4. See chap. 7 pg. 71. 5. Cf. Doros HaRislronim, vol. 5, pg. 414. 6. French version. 1. Rosh Hasanal, 22b; See above p. 42. 8. Ibid 23b; our text has R. Yosef. See, however, Rashi, Sanhedrin 32b s.v. ;i',u',. 9. Here again, in this paragraph, as so often in the lggeres, RSG expresses his fondness for his Yeshivah, the one in Pumbedisa, and holds it in much more esteem than its competitior, the Yeshivah in Sura. R. HaLevi's denial of this fact (Doros HaRislronim, vol. 6, p. 152) is not to be understood. 9a. This information can be supported by the Seder Tannaim v'Amoraim, p. 183 (Neubauer Edition) which perhaps, was RSG's source, as nothing explicit can be found in the Talmud. sec, however, below note 45. 10. 106a with variants. 11. Yevamos 64b with variants. 12. French version. 13. Ecclesiastes 7:12. 14. Doros HaRishonim, vol. 5, pp. 299 ff. The underlying problem behind these textual emendations is that three pieces of information offered by RSG are obviously not compatible from a chronological perspective: I) R. Yochanan studied under Rebbe (Cf. chap. 7, pg. 71). 2) R. Yochanan ruled for eighty years after the reign of both R. Chanina and R. Afas. 3) R. Yochanan died in 279 C.E. Z. Frankel, Mevo Ha'Yerushalmi, Breslau, 1870, pg. 97, has suggested that the "eighty years" are a reference to his lifetime not his reign. The Doros HaRishonim (loc. cit.) secs here a simple copyist's mistake. Some (see, for example, R.R. Kimelman, Rabbi Yohanan o/Tiberias, Aspects of the Social and Religious History of Third Cent. Palestine, Dissertation, Yale University, 1977, pp. 6 ff.) have emended the text to read "fifty" and even ..forty". Of course, the focal point of all solutions attempted is the determination of the exact year of Rebbe's death. See chap. 9, pg. 92. 15. Doros HaRishonim, Joe. cit., pg. 310. 15a. Y. Gafny (See. n.2; pg. 3) has suggested that when discussing R. Yochanan, who lived in Eretz Yisrael, unlike the other Rabbis mentioned in this section of the lggeres, RSG perhaps relied on a new source which utilized different terminology. 16. Cf. above chap. 2, p.14. 17. Kesubos 103b. 18. R. Huna's connection with the exilarchic family, already mentioned above, p. 98, has no clear Talmudic source. Perhaps RSG culled it from his version of the Moed Katan narrative about R. Huna's death, soon to be quoted. 19. Cf. Mss. It is noteworthy that RSG omits here the usual term ..rule" even though it is clear further on in this chapter that R. Yehudah was the Rosh Mesivta at Pumbedisa. 20. See above, P. 98, according to the Fr. version. I.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Iggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

/08

21. See Kiddushin 47a, Bava Metzia )Sa, et al. 22. Cf. Gittin 7a, Sanl,edrin 17b and Ta'anis 23b. 22a. See chap. II, pg.110, gloss s.v. Synagogue. 23. Cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol. S, pgs. 411-417. 24. 25a. 25. R. Rafael N.N. Rabinowitz's very original theory of a simple copyist's mistake to explain the "Reish Galusa" addition is unacceptable. 26. See Rabbeinu Channanel (Moed Katan 25a) who probably bases his interpretation on RSG's version of the passage. (See Dikdukei Sofrim, N.Y., 1976, vol. I, Moed Katan 25a, note 6.) 27. 14a except for the passage about the astrologers' forecast. 28. 64a. The order of the two tractates cited is difficult. 29. Doros HaRishonim, vol. S, pg. 434. 30. Cf. Mss. 31. Though RSG does not bring any Talmudic source for his infonnation about R. Huna b. Chiyya, Bechoros 3 la bas been mentioned by scholars as a possible source. Sec M . Baer, "lyunim b'lggeres Rav Sherira Gaon", Bar-II/an Yearbook, 4-S (196S), p. 193 and bibliography cited. It has even been suggested there, based on a careful analysis of that passage, that Rabbah and R. Yosef, deadlocked, actually turned to R. Huna b. Chiyya and offered him the position of Rosh Yeshiva! 32. French version. According to the Spanish version, most of the Jewish population I■ tile world lived in Pumbedisa then, a statistic yet to be proven, unless the intention is specifically to Babylonian Jewry. 33. S. Krauss, "The Explanation of the Term Yarchei Kallah," Tarbitz, 20 (1949), 123 ff. and bibliography. 34. Bava Metzia 86a. 35. French version. The Spanish version is apparently inconsistent in this chronology since if R. Yoseph died in 323 C.E. then the 13 years of Abbaye should bring us to 336 C.E., not 338 C.E. Cf., however, Doros HaRishonim, vol. S, pg. 474 who tries to explain the Spanish version. 36. Gittin 60b. 37. See however Rashi in Gittin ibid s.v. v'Ha Shofar who offers an alternative understanding. 38. 6:4. 39. Berachos S6a. 40. Yoma 53a with variants. 41. See Shabbos I09a. 42. The French version, which we have used here, can be substantiated by RSG's comments in chap. 11. p.112. See also Rabbi HaLevi, vol. S. p. 49S. 43. This statement, repeated again in Chapter 11 on pg. 112 in connection with R. Ashi, is problematic since RSG himself has stated previously that while R. Chisda was Rosh Mesivta in Sura (297-307), R. Yehudah (until 298) and then Rabbah (298-320) were the Rashei Mesivta in Pumbedisa; i.e. there were already two mesivtos in Babylonia immediately after the death of R. Huna (297 C.E.). In addition, RSG's statement here is not compatible with his comments on pg. 102 regarding R. Huna b. Chiyya. Here, too, RSG perhaps simply relied on the Seder Tannaim v'Amoraim (see Neubauer Ed., Joe. cit.). 44. Cf. Mss. 45. Both the Spanish version (687) and the French version (686) are in error since 663+19=682. Perhaps RSG mistakenly relied on the Seder Tannaim v'Amoraim (See Neubauer Ed., p. 183). This work is probably one of RSG's main sources in this part of the lggeres. Sec, however, Jacob E. Ephrathi, The Savoraic Period and its Literature, Petach-Tikva, 1973, pg.32 and D . Goodblatt (see Chap. 9, n. 26), pg. 16, n. 14, who deny this and discuss RSG's various sources for his chronology. 46. Shavuos 48b with variants.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

. ..

- ...

The Amoraic Period (1)

109

47. Cf. Ms. since this version presents R. Elamr as an Amora, which contextually makes more sense. 48. French venion. The Spanish reading: "I will bring a letter from the West (Eretz Yisrael)" is difficult since already in 351 C. E. there was large-scale destruction of the Torah institutions in Eretz Yisrael. It, therefore, would make no sense for the disciple to travel there. The term was mistakenly borrowed from Bava Metzia 41b and Sanltedrin 29a. 49. The proof that R. Chama was the Rosh Mesivta in Pumbcdisa, however, docs not seem · clear. In fact the Talmud in Sanltedrin 17b tells us that R. Chama had been the foremost sage of Nehardca and is not mentioned in connection with Pumbedisa. The French version, on the other hand, has R. Chama as the Rosh Mesivta in Nehardea. Either way, RSG's proof is unclear, as Rabbi HaLevi (vol. 5, pg. 505) has pointed out. Hyman (To/dos Tannaim JI'Amoraim, Jerusalem, 1954, vol. 2, pg. 456) is of the opinion that the Yeshivah of Pumbcdisa was temporarily set up in Nehardea under R. Chama's leadership. There is no proof for his claim. SO. Hyman (pg. 76, n. 20) proof to his thesis that R. Chama never left Nehardea. Sec above n. 49. 51. The French version mentions Rafram but not the year of his death, the only case of its kind found in this chronological section of the lggercs.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 11:

The Amoraic Period (2) / The Savoraim:

In all those years after R. Pappa,• R. Ashi was gaon• in Sura.•• He came to Masa Mechasya,2 tore down the Synagogue•J of Bei Rav,• and rebuilt it (as we say in [Chapter] HaShutafin),11 making a number of fine improvements.• He convened* [in Masa Mechasya] festivals and fast days• that

:i, ,n:ic H""ltu l"'" ,n,:,:i, HMC:l tiHl "tt'H :li H£)£) ":11 Hntul:) ":17 Hine, H"CMC l"£)MituM:l '"iCH1:) M"l:li :li 11:ip, Hlii"£)tu Hrupn nc:, ,:i11, l"i,n H71 HM""ll1n, "7li

n,n

,n,

after R. Pappa: I.e., after his death in 371 C.E.; see above, chapter 10. pg.105. gaon: The term was not used to refer to the head of a mesivta in R. Ashi's period, and hence its use here is problematic. However, see below, n. 71. Sura: Masa Mechasya was located almost on the outskirts of Sura, and the mesivta there continued the traditions of Sura. Synagogue: RSG might mean the synagogue which was still named after its original founder, Rav, even though it had moved to Masa Mechasya.4 See next gloss. Synagogue of Bei Rav: "Bei Rav" in the Talmuds often means "the house of [study of the students who still need] the teacher." Some scholars6 understand that this is the intention here, too, so that the phrase has no special connection with the students of the beis midrash or the synagogue of Rav. On the other hand, we also find instances where "Bei Rav" is directly associated with the Amora Rav.7 The intention here, then, would be to the rebuilding of the beis midrash or synagogues of Rav9 which, though once situated in Sura and now transferred to Masa Mechasya, still retained its original name. to fine improvements: The intention might be to the drainage system he installed. (See Bava Basra, foe. cit.) convened... festivals: Festivals, even those of Rabbinic authority, ceased to be instituted after the destruction of the Temple. RSG's intention is, therefore, unclear. He cannot be referring to the Festival of the Exilarch, since he mentions this further on. He might be referring to the authority to convene a grandiose public observance of the festivals, involving the special gathering of the leaders of Babylonian Jewry. In this case, the "festivals" here might be identified with the "Shabsa DeRigla" found in the Talmud, always in connection with the exilarch.12 The public gathering of the sages in the house of the exilarch, surrounded by the celebrating crowds outside, took place, then, on the Shabbos day IJ of the festival.14 fast days: If RSG's intention is to the establishment of official fast-days, similar to the ones described in Tractate Taanis, ch.4, then this would contradict the Talmud,1S which J/0

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The A.moraic Period (2)

Ill

[until then ]had been the prerogative only of N1'1ii1l:li Nni',;i tt'"i', N',N the exilarch and in Nehardea.• He made it• MU:l Nni?l tt'"i1 N?li? M""itt'i the site of the Festival of the Exilarch, • for ,n,,n Ntt'"Dli l"?El0 nin, ;,N,n he [R. Ashi] was an extraordinary person and tt'"i nin, t ru ,:i Nlim .in,,,.:i, was great in Torah and wealth. i0i ,0,,0, "0i" ii1li1:l Nni?l Huna bar Nassan, who was the exilarch t"D"=> ,,n ,n,::> N"in:i ,,n, Ki~n in those days,ts and Mereimar and Mar Zutra, who were [exilarchs ]after him, were tii1"?li? ii1l"itt'i "tt'N :ii; i1"? subordinate to R. Ashi, and they convened t"~"l:l ?l",0Ni N"Cn0 Nn0::i their festivals at Masa Mechasya. Thus we UN qN N:lii i1"i:l NMN :ii i0N say in Gittin: 19 N? "tt'N :ii 11' ,, ni0"0 i0Nl R. Acha bar Rava said: "We, too, may inN c,p0::i n,,,.:i, n,,n u,m say that from the days of Rebbe until R. Nlii1 "lNtt' lru ,::i Nlii1 n,n Nm Ashi we have not found Torah and wealth ."tt'N ::i,, q'l'I::) n,n q::>"01 TN ,:i in one place. H But was there not Huna bar Nassan? Huna bar Nassan is different, tt'"i, "?li U"PMN1 ti":>, [since] he was subordinate to R. Ashi. "=>"iJ ,,n, N"CM0 Nrl0:l Kni,.:i Since the Festival of the Exilarch was t 0 n ?f"0? Nn"1:l0iDi Nnitt"'i established at Masa Mechasya,• the heads of Pumbedisa had to go there on the

seems to say that there were no public fast-days in Babylonia because no one had the authority to make such a decree. M. Baert6 has suggested, based on RSG's own responsa, that RSG is referring here to semi-public fasts convened in the presence of many sages or one very outstanding sage. It is possible that the exilarch was invited to participate. Unfortunately, Baer's suggestion is not completely compatible with RSG's statement here. Nehardea: There is no clear evidence that the scat of the exilarch was always in Nehardca. Perhaps RSG is referring to the period of Rav's reign in Nehardca, when the exilarchate was probably located there; or during the reign of R. Nachman, the son-in-law of the exilarch, in Nehardca. (See above, chapter IO, pg.98) it: Masa Mechasya. Festi'fal of the Exilarch: This was a display of honor and gratitude towards the exilarch by the Jewish people of Babylonia, including the sages and heads of the mesivtos. All would gather at the residence of the exilarch. The exilarch's presence at the prayer services of the fast-days was also considered indispensable, and this was also a mark of respect for him. It would seem that on these occasions the exilarch lectured, as well as the heads of the mesivtos.1 7 at Masa Meelaasya: Though the subservience of Huna bar Nassan is mentioned in the Talmud,20 RSG, relying on a written or oral source, is here explaining the nature of that subservience.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

JggereJ of Rav Sltuira Gaon

ll2

n,n, Nn:it: totinn, ,., ,., l'\:lt::l N:lii i11:1pNi Nni',l f:"11 N',l1 .yen '7t"C" Nn,r,;i T"1i N',"~:l N', "tt'H :i, ,:111, nc:i, :111 n"".ltt':l N?"~:11:) y:, intot N:i,, "":lNi qc,, :i,, n:i,, n,,n.. Nl'\:l"l"\C Nin N',N N"in N?1 T"",n "t:N :i, ,n:i, Nn"i:icu,:i :l1 1CN1 il""Mi Nl"l:l"l"\C "l'\1l'\ n7 "1:ll1 N.lH l"\:ltt' l"\:)CC:l "tt'H Shabbos:24 .n:1,nN N.,, N"CMC NJic', I brought it about that Masa Mechasya

Shabbos of [the Torah portion] Lech Lecha; for that is the Shabbos on which the Festival of the Exilarch took place. And most of the exilarchs21 established residence there.22 What R. Ashi accomplished was not undone afterwards, as things were undone• in the years of R. Yehudah, Rabbah, R. Yosef, Abbaye, and Rava, when there was only one Mesivta in Pumbedisa.23 But after R. Ashi [is lifetime] there were [still] two Mesivtos. This is the meaning of what R. Ashi said in Tractate

should not be destroyed.25* "f:1 ,,ni NM?t'i Nl"\tt' ?:):li Every year when there was an exilarch in Masa Mechasya who convened the Festival N7l1 l1:lp1 N"CMC Nl'\C:J Nl"\i?l at Bei Rav,• the heads* and the Rabbis of Nniit:i M"Cp', t"',tN :l1 ":l:J .HJi"1:lCill1 l):J1i Pumbedisa came before [R. Ashi]. •

not... undone: See next gloss. not...destroyed: Masa Mechasya was considered "not destroyed," (and hence R. Ashi's accomplishments were "not undone"), since the Mesivta there continued to function (for at least fifty years) after R. Ashi's death, which was not the case after R. Huna's death. Hyman has offered another interpretation. According to him, RSG is referring to the Festival of the Exilarch, which continued to take place in Masa Mechasya even after the death of R. Ashi. This was not the case previously, because even though the festival's main locality continued to be Sura during the reign of Rav and R. Huna, it was transferred to Pumbedisa after R. Huna's death. Bei Rav: I.e., the Mesivta of Sura, now situated in Masa Mechasya. beads: Heads of the Mesivta. the heads...came before [R. Aslai]: RSG devotes much discussion to R. Ashi's personality, and especially to the transfer of the Festival of the Exilarch to Masa Mechasya. The reason might be twofold. First, he might wish to highlight the distinction between R. Asbi's time and RSG's own era, when relations between the exilarch and the heads of the Mesivta were very strained. (The great dispute between R. Saadia Gaon and David ben Zakkai is only one example.). This would also explain the coming paragraphs in our chapter, where RSG digresses into a discussion about the relations between the exilarchs and the Rabbis in late Sassanian and early Islamic times. Secondly, the material about R. Ash i's greatness might have been presented to enhance the prestige of the Yeshivah of Pumbedisa, which in RSG's days was not receiving proper financial support.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

:r-----

/13

Tise Amoraic Period (2)

This arrangement• had been the custom until about two hundred years ago,• because the exilarchs exercised heavy - handed authority and wielded great power• in the days of the Persians• and in the days of the Ishmaelites.• For they [the exilarchs] would buy the exilarchate for large sums of money, and there were those among them who did much to aggrieve and oppress the rabbis.

i11 t"iil Mr\?"C 'l"ill y:mi 'J"Miil Ml'\~il TC l"l~ lr\MC iil1T n~p n,,c Mni'Jl ~.., , yin'J n,n, C""Citl "C":l Mn:l, Mnil~,,~ il"'J l"l:lt C"'JMl1C~" "C":li C"'J,il C"Ci:l n"n,.. ~Mi'J M:li~ l.3:li ..,nc, yin:l n,m .,n; P"Wi ilM"~l ":li Ml?"i Mr\il:lMi Our ancestors were of exilarchic descent. However, they abandoned all those evil ways Mnn,M "lil 'J:i mp:l~ iil"C lil"M of the exilarchate and joined the Rabbis of l.3:li:l "?""l1i niM"~li Ml'\~":l the Mcsivta, seeking modesty, humility, and ni'Jtl~ ilill1 Ml1:lC? Mr\:l"r\C:l meekness. But we are not of the family tOnlM "Mll'\C:l "l:lC M'Ji .n,:i"Cl,

,,n,

,;i

arraaeement: I.e., that the venue for the Festival of the Exilarch was Masa Mechasya, and the Rabbis of Pumbedisa appeared before the exilarch. two hundred years ago: Circa 800 C.E. wielded areat power: The growing ambition of the exilarch, referred to here by RSG, may have been spurred by the demise of the institution of the nasi in Eretz Yisrael in the Persian era (425 C.E.). As long as there had been a nasi in his proper place in the Jewish homeland, even though he had little actual power, his very existence had acted as a restraint on any undue ambitions of the Babylonian exilarchs. It would also seem that Bustenai, the first exilarch of the Islamic era, in his controversial rise to power (see below, s.v...Family of Bustenai"), planted the seeds of discord which, after his death, immediately began to sprout. Persians: The Sassanian dynasty. Isl11aaelites: The Arab caliphs. Fa.Uy of Bmteaai: Bustenai was the first exilarch in Babylonia after the Arab conquest (ca. 637 C.E.). Legend relates that towards the end of Persian rule in Babylonia, the king decreed that all the descendants of the House of David be exterminated, including the Exilarch Chaninai, whose wife was pregnant at the time. Later, the king had a dream in which he saw himself hewing down fruit trees in a grove (Pers., bustena1). Before the last tree was felled, a venerable old man appeared before him and struck him on the forehead. On the advice of his courtiers, the king consulted a Jewish sage concerning the meaning of this dream. The sage, who was Chaninai's father-in-law, interpreted that the old man represented King David, who was trying to prevent the extermination of his descendants. The king then summoned Chaninai's widow to court _a nd supplied her with all her needs. When she bore a son, she named him Bustenai in memory of the king's dream. When Bustenai grew up, he appeared at court before the king, and the wisdom he displayed on that occasion amazed all

oi~

d by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

/ggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

JU

of Bustenai. • Rather, before that,• our ancestors had joined the Rabbis of the Mesivta.• And since the exilarchs held such power, the heads [of the Mesivtos] were unable to avoid appearing before them during their Festival. However, in the middle of the days of the Ishmaelites,• in the days of David ben Yehudah26 the* Exilarch,27 [the exilarchs] fell from the grace of the reigning authorities, and the heads of Pumbedisa no longer went after them. Instead, when the exilarchs wished to have a festival in Pumbedisa, they would go there and convene it. And now, nothing has remained from the exilarchic dynasty except one child.•

l):l1:l illj:)T "'""1' ":lil il"Oj:)0 H',H .Hn:l"nc, ilH"i'l ":lil r'IO"',e'i ti,:,i K',i KnKiii,, 7,r,,:,, ,,n "' .fiil"',l1:l tiil"0i' ',f"0', "1'l0 iii "0":l C"',KWi'" "C" nt>H:li Knil'IO',ii, TC ,.,l)ni'K "K:lT T:l KnKiii,, ,,tK "", K:,r,c, i:, """ 7,n,,n:i Kn"i:l0U)i ,nr, ,,no', C"K"i'l', ,nr, KM"l cnn, T""t" Kr\"i:l0U):l K,l, 1""r\i'K K? KMi'il .n,r, ?"1':lpi •i'"l" ,n "'" MK"i'l ":li 1,n,:,0

who were present. Thereafter the king honored him and appointed him exilarch, to the great satisfaction of the Jews. After the Arabs conquered Babylonia, Caliph Omar confirmed Bustenai as exilarch. He gave one of the captured daughters of the king of Persia to Bustenai in marriage, and she bore him three sons. Bustenai was the progenitor of the Babylonian exilarchs in the period of Arab rule. RSG, steering clear away from the controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the sons of Bustenai's Persian wife, stresses that he himself was of the House of David, but not a descendant of Bustenai. before that: Before the rise of Bustenai. our ancestors ... mesivta: In this digression, RSG is distancing himself and his family from any tie to the Bustenai dynasty. days of the Ishmaelltes: I.e., Arabic rule. the Exilarcb: Lit., "the nasi."27 except one cblld: J.N. Epstein (p.612; see our Introduction, p.22), has explained this unclear passage as referring to the great-great-grandson of David ben Zakkai. According to R. Nassan HaBavli (A. Neubauer, Medieval Jewish Chronicles; Oxford, 1881; vol.2, p.82), when the Exilarch David ben Zakkai died, followed shortly by his son Yehudah, R. Saadia Gaon took the grandson, Yecbezkiah, into his home, and no one could be found who was fit for the position of exilarch. R. Saadia then died, in the year 945 C.E. It would seem, then, that this Ycchezkiah served as exilarch for only a short period. He had a son named David, who is mentioned in a letter written by his son, Yechezlciah II (see J . Mann, Texts and Studies; Cincinnati, 1930; p.183). David never became exilarch. This was true situation in 987 C.E.• when, according to Epstein, the French version of the lggeres was written. That is why the French version states that no one remained from the exilarch's family, "not even one

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

.....

_

.:.,

Tire Amoraic Period (1)

115

R. Ashi functioned as head of his Mesivta Kniitt'i "WK :li lMl1 for almost sixty years.• This explains why we •l"ltt' t"ntt''i :nip n"n::l"l'\O::l say in Chapter Mi She-Meis:za nott' "O piEl::l ll",oK, U""n1 In the first cycle• of R. Ashi he told us ,oK "tt'K ::1,, KOP Ki,,no::l [this,] and in the latter cycle of R. Ashi ::1,, Kin::1 Ki,,no::1, ":::,n l' he told us [something else. ]29 For this is what the Rabbis instituted:• to '1:::)i11 ..,nK KEllK::l l' ,oK "tt'K study two tractateslt every year, whether Kntt' ;:::,::1 "lno'i p::1, U"pn long or short.• So he [R. Ashi] reviewed ,en 1n Nn"":)CO t"n,n Kntt'i his32 entire Talmudic knowledge• in thirty il"'ii:::, Kiio'in yn, years. Sincell R. Ashi ruled close• to sixty ,,o "tt'K ::1,, 1,..:::,, ·l"ltt' l"l'\?l'\::l years, there were two cycles. And he died in l"ltt' l"l'\tt' ::1,,p; the year 738 [of the Seleucid Era; 427 C.E.]. ..,n ":::)i1 .n"'itt'n Ntt'::l ::l":::)tt'1 ..,,,no R. Y eimar ruled after him in Masa Mechasya,34 and he died in the year 743 [of ::li K"CMC Kl'\O::l il"il'\::l 7'ioi the Seleucid Era; 432 C.E.]. .J"Ott'l'\ Ntt'::l M"'tEll Mli iO"" After him [ruled] R. ldi bar Avin, and he died in the year 763 [of the Seleucid Era; 452 l"::lK ,::1 "1"K ::1,, il"in::1, C.E.]. ..l"Ctt'l'\ N tt'::l ::l":::,tt'i After him [ruled] R. Nachman bar R. Huna, and he died in the year 766 [of Klii1 ::li i::l TOMl ::li il"in::li the Seleucid Era; 455 C.E.,] in a time of persecution,35 when Yazdogird• decreed the KiCtt' ?E~n .,"ctt'n Ntt':l :l":::)tt'i .Kn::ltt' "?ilQ::l? ii.lit it.:ii abolition of Shabbos.36

,,n, ,n,.

,,n

child;" since David, the son of Yechezkiah I, for some reason left Babylonia and was never a candidate for the exilarchate. According to Epstein, the Spanish version of the lggeres (which we have followed) was written later, in the period of R. Hai Gaon's leadership. By this time, Yechezkiah II, the son of David, was a candidate for the position of exilarch, which he eventually filled, in 1021 C.E. Therefore the Spanish version states that "only one child" (i.e., Yechezkiah II) remained. sixty years: RSG probably mentions this span of time because throughout the eight hundred years of the Amoraic and Geonic periods we do not find the head of an academy continuing in his position for so long. cycle: Thirty-year review of the entire Talmud. Rabbis instituted: This institution can be traced back to the days of Rav in Sura. He may even have been its founder.30 wllether long or short: This might mean whether the year was long (a leap-year) or short (a regular year). his entire Talmudic knowledge: Lit., "his entire Talmud .., Close to: It was actually 56 years: from 371 to 427 C.E. Yazdogird: Yazdogird II was a religiously zealous Sassanian king who tried forcing Zoroastrianism upon the entire Armenian region.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

116

Then R. Tavyomi, who is Mar bar R. Ashi,37 ruled in Mechasya,• and he died in the year 779 [of the Seleucid Era; 468 C.E.,] on the night following• Yom Kippur.•• After him, Rabbah Tosfaah• [ruled,] and he died in the year 785• [of the Seleucid Era; 474 C.E.].•J On Wednesday, the thirteenth [day] of Kislev, in the year 786 [of the Seleucid Era; 475 C.E.],44 Ravina•s bar R. Huna• died.46 He represents the end of Talmudic halachic determination.• During those years,• [the following Geonim] ruled in Pumbedisa: R. Geviha of Bei Kesil; and he died in 744 [of the Seleucid Era; 433 C.E.].

Min, "C,,:io :, M"Onc: ,,,c, rutt': :,:,tt"I "tt'M : i i : 10 .c,,,!l:in c,, "M'rtc:i io•wn :i,:,tt'i nM!lcin n:, n,,n:, .W!ltt'n rutt': ,r,o:,: l ... Nin, N:tt': 11:,M:, Nl":N Ml:, :,:,tt' M•,nz, rurr Min, Ml":, Min, Mlin :,, n,,: .ntc,,n qio Mn,,:i c,El:i i:,',c "ltt' l"""M:, nltt': :,:,tt"I ;,n:, ,:c Mn":J :, .,•ctt'n

in Mechasya: According to Rabbi Y.A. Halevi,38 this phrase is not superfluous, since the previously mentioned three heads of the Mesivta ruled in Sura, not Masa Mechasya. HaLevi claims that the Mesivta was transferred to Sura by R. Yeimar (also called R. Mereimar) after R. Ashi's death,39 and Mar bar R. Ashi transferred it back to Masa Mechasya.40 night following: Dying on the night after Yorn Kippurim is considered a good omen.40a Perhaps, that is why RSG mentions this point. Tosfaah: This name comes from the linguistic root meaning, "to add." It might be connected with the work that he did with his colleague, Ravina II. What they added to the Talmud were comments and points that developed during the seventh and final generation of A.moraim, after the death of R. Ashi and Ravina 1.42 He received the honorofic title, "Tosfaah," since Ravina II, who died a year after him, did not do any serious work by himself. 785: Our version has 781, but is incorrect.43 Ravina bar R. Hana: Known as Ravina II, he was the student of R. Ashi and the brother of R. Nachman. Both Ravina and R. Nachman were sons of R. Huna, who was the brother-in-law of Ravina 1.46 end of Talmudic halachic determination: See our discussion in the glosses to Chapter 7, p.79, s.v. "Talmudic halachic determination," where we focus on the concept of authority implied by this expression. Its specific meaning with regard to the literary development of the Talmud is discussed by Rabbi HaLcvi47 who points out that this generation of Ravina II (ca. 500 C.E.) concluded the formulation of the Talmud by accomplishing the following tasks: ( 1) New Amoraic material which had accumulated since the generation of Abbaye and Rava was integrated into the Gemara. (2) Older traditions, not put into ftnal form by Abbaye and Rava, were now fioalm:d.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Amoraic Pmod (2)

ll i

After him, Rafram* of Pumbcdisa; and he died in the year 754 [of the Seleucid Era; 443 C.E.]. After him, R. Rechumi - or, as some have it,• R. Recbumai - and he died in the year 767 [of the Seleucid Era; 456 C.E.,49] in the time of persecution decreed by Yazdogird. After him, R. Sama the son of Rava ruled. In that same period - that of [R. Sama] and Mar bar R. Ashi* - we have heard* from the earlier sages and have seen it written in their chronicles,• that they prayed for mercy regarding [the persecutions of] Y azdogird," and a serpent• swallowed him in bis bedroom, and the persecution was annulled. . In the days of this R. Sama, on Shabbos in Teves of the year 781 [of the Seleucid Era;

Kl'\"i:l cu:, TC CiE)i M"il'\:li .i"l~n ru~:1 :l":J~ "E)'Jn, l'\"Ni "C,M"i :li M"in:1, CTl'\ ru~:l :l":J~, "Cini :li .i-uit" it.l1 K1C~ T11':l M"i:l KCC :li 1'JC M"in:li ,c,, n,,.., pi£ln ,rnN:1, K:1,, C"li~KiM TC Ul1C~ TK :li i:l CM"lii~t "i£lC:l :lin~ il"Kii i-uit"'J Ml"ll'\ M"'Jl1:li "CMi i11:1i .Nie~ ,10:1, i:l:JW ":l:l N~'Jc l'\:l~:l KCC :li T"iMi M"Ci":li Kl:li ,,cnN K"E)~l'\ ru~:l l'\:llO:l

(3) Remaining questions regarding earlier Amoraic traditions were clarified. (4) The sugyos (Talmudic passages on a particular topic) were organized: both the internal arrangement of each individual sugya and each sugya's place in the chapter. Previously, all the sugyos of a chapter had been studied together, with no fixed place or order assigned to the sugyos within each chapter. Dlll'iag tllose yean: Having concluded the history of Masa Mechasya (Sura) up to the death of Ravina, RSG now goes back to tell the history of Pumbedisa during those same years. Rafram: This is Rafram II, not to be confused with Rafram I, who ruled in Pumbcdisa after R. Dimi of Nchardca (sec above, p.106).48 as some laave It: Lit., "There arc those who exchange." tat of [R. Sama] aad Mar bar R. Asbi: RSG does not give us a precise date. However, from other sources it would seem that Yazdogird's death took place in either 456 or 457 C.E.50 we llave heard: We have an oral tradition. cbro■icles: This book (or books) simply included the names of the deceased in chronological order - something like the record book of a burial society (chevra kadisha). It is unclear whether these "chronicles" belonged to the community at large or just to the Mcsivta. The purpose was to record the date of death (yahrtzeit) of the deceased, and their names. There were also chronological lists of the rashei yeshivah of each mesivta. ..-,ea: According to somc,s2 the "serpent" is a veiled allusion to a su~ful

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

118

lggeres of Rav Slwrlra Gaon

,::i

,::i

470 C.E., the following sages] were arrested: lC to,n, HPU" ,c 1C"CH Rabbana Ameimar bar Mar Yenuka; Huna ,::i n"Tiw, Kn,;;i Tt"'1 "tt'K Mari, son of the Exilarch; and Mesharshya .iip!I bar Pakod. On the eighteenth of Teves, Huna bar Mar n::110::i c,, 1tt'3J nJ,ctt'::ii Zutra theSJ Exilarch* and Mesharshya were NitoiT 10 1:l KJin i?"lOl'l'IK executed. And in Adar of that year, Rabbana NM?t'i iitc::ii K"tt'1Wi K"tt'J Ameimar bar Mar Yenuka was killed. ,c 1:l 1C"CK KJ:l1 ?"lOl'l'IK Ki .KpJ" In the year 785 [of the Seleucid Era; 474 C.E.,54] all the Babylonian• synagogues were ;:, ,,cnK K"Eltt'l'l Ntt':li closed~ and Jewish infants S6 were handed over "J:l ito"PJMKi ?:l:li Kl'ltt'J:, ":l to the Magians.s1• ."WCN? "K1iM" In the year 787 [of the Seleucid Era; 476 NCC :l1 :l"::)ft' T"Eltt'n Ntt':li C.E.], R. Sama the son of Rava died. .H:lii M"1:l After him, R. Y osiss ruled. In his days9 was the end of Talmudic halachic determination i'T"Ci":li "Ci" :l1 1?C M"1M:li .K,,c,n C""MCKi i'lKi,n q,c and the Talmud was sealed.62* Most of the Savoraim died within a few ,::i,:,tt' "K1i:lC TJ::111 K:liii

::i,

conspiracy that resulted in the king's assasination; and the fight over the succession resulted in the annulment of the decree of persecution. Exilarch: Lit., "Nasi." Babylonian: The intention is to the province or city of Babylon, not the whole land of Babylonia. Babylon included Sura, but the persecutions did not affect Pumbedisa.ss Magians: The priests of the Persian religion. end of...sealed: The first part of this phrase - "end of halachic determination in the Talmud" - RSG has already applied to Ravina II (see above, p.116, and our gloss there). But the second part of the phrase - "and the Talmud was closed" - is reserved for R. Yosi, one of the first of the Savoraim (see above, Chapter 8, p.82). It is most probable that the intention here is to the literary conclusion of the Talmud, not necesssarily its final halachic authority. During the period after R. Yosi's death, the first generation of Savoraim still continued to add clarification of points already included in the Talmud, as well as points not discussed in the formal text of tbe Gemara. These were all based on explanations heard from their teachers, the last generation of Amoraim. According to Rabbi Y.I. HaLevi,60 it was probably during the first generation of Savoraim that the Talmud was first written down as a complete work. This, combined with the fact that the first of the Savoraim were the last sages to insert their discussions into the Gemara, helps understand RSG's statement that the Talmud was "sealed" in this generation. within a few tears of each other: RSG is here referring specifically to the executions of Savoraim, even though, according to RSG, the whole period only lasted about one hundred years. explained: Unlike p.117, where RSG states that he himself saw the "chronicles," here

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

~

JH

Amoraic Pmod (2)

years of each other,• as the geonim explained* in their historical• books:63 In the year 815 [of the Seleucid Era; 504 C.E.], Rabbana Sama the son of Rabbana Yehudai died in [the month of] Sivan; and they say• that he was the Judge of the Gate.• On Sunday, the fourth of Adar, in the year 817 [of the Seleucid Era; 506 C.E.], R. Achai bar R. Huna• died. In Nissan of that year, R. Rechumi• - or, as some have it,• R. Rechumai - died. In the year 817 [of the Seleucid Era; 506 C.E.,] in [the month of] Kislev, R. Shmuel bar Abbahu,67 of Pumbedisa, died. In Adar, Ravina bar Amotzia died. In the year 819 [of the Seleucid Era; 508 C.E.], R. Huna the Exilarch died. In 822 [of the Seleucid Era; 511 C.E.,] on Yom Kippur,67a there was anger, and R. Achai the son of Rabbah bar Abbuha died. In 826 [of the Seleucid Era; 515 C.E.], R. Tachna and Mar Zutra, the sons of R. Chinnena, died. R. • Yosi68 remained the gaon• in our Mesivta for about forty• years.

C"l,Kl ,will ":,n, rmo.mc C"lW:l :C"C"n "i::i,::i CM"lii:,t "iE>C:l KCC Kl::li :l"::)e' i~l'\l'\ Ntt':l t"icK, ti"C:l "K,,n.. Kl::ii, M"i:l .n,n K:l:li Kl"",, ,iK::l 11:liK Kin, K:lW:l ,n::i, :ii i::1 "KMK :ii :l"::)e' l""l'\l'\ ruw .Klin :ii :l":,W Ki Kl'\Wi TC"l:li ."Kcini :ii T"E>';,nc, M"K, "Cini :ii :::i,:,w i';,c:,:::i t""l'\M ruw:::i, .Kl'\"i::ic,!) 1c, n,,n, i:::i ';,Kicw .K"r!CK i:l Kl"::li :l":,W iiK:li Klin ::1, J"::)e' IO""MM ruw::i, .Kl'\i';,l tt'"i n,n iill:, c,,::i :1•:,nn ruw::i, n:1i, M"i:l "KMK :ii :l":,W, KDl1t .Mi::lK i::1 Klnn :ii :1,:,w ,•:,M ruw::i, .Kll"M :ii "l:l Ki10n ici tiKl r:,c,, n::ii i""l'\WKi •l"le' 'C:) l"l'\:l"l'\CJ

he is probably referring to a secondary source, as the word "explained" (irill) might indicate.61 historical books: Lit.• "the books of their memories." tlaey say: We have an established oral tradition. judge of tbe gate: Apparently this is a term for the chief judge of the Torah court attached to the mesivta. It was applied to R. Hai Gaon in the formal opening statement of the lggeres. It can be identified with the Hebrew Av Beis Din. R. Acbal Bar R. Hana: He should be identified with R. Achai of Bei Chasim. mentioned in Chapter 8 (p.82). R. Recll■ml: This is the third Amora of this name (though he is also considered one of the Savoraim). The first R. Rechumi was a student of Abbaye and Rava,64 and the second was a student of R. Ashi and Ravina, and is mentioned above, p.117.65 or, as some taa,e it: The doubt resulted from two close dates for two scholars with very similar names.66 R. Yosi: After a brief digression (quoting a Geonic "book of chronicles") regarding

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

120

Afterwards,• R. Eina [was gaon] in Sura,• and R. Simonia [was gaon] in Pumbedisa. Afterwards [was] R. Revai of Rov.10 He was from our Mesivta, and they say• that he was a gaon. 11

:lii NiiC:l Nl,lJ :li

,:,n ifl:li

.Nn,,:u:>,!):l il"l,C"C ye, ::1,,c "N:li ::1, "~it ,n:i, TiN.l1 l"iCNi iliil y;,, NJ"l:l"J"lC .iliit

the deaths of most of the Savoraim of the first generation, RSG returns to his own earlier remarks about R. Yosi's appointment. gaon: Head of the Mesivta. See below, however, n. 71. about forty: Actually it was thirty-eight years, from 476 C.E. to 514 C.E., when R. Yosi died (Sefer HaKabbalah). Afterwards: This was the beginning of the second generation of Savoraim. in Sura: The Mesivta here was re-opened after a lapse of forty69 years. It had been closed due to the unfavorable conditions caused by the persecutions in the area. they say: See above, s.v. "they say."

Notes to Cluapter 11 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10.

11. 12. 13.

French version, and Seder Tannaim Ve-Amoraim (Neubauer ed., p.183). French version. Our interpretation: beis midrash (see gloss, s.v. "Synagogue of Bei Rav") is difficult since the passage in Bava Basra to which RSG refers specifically discusses synagogues. L. Ginzberg (see below, note 66), p.42, note 2; and Rappaport (see below, note SO), p.142. Pesachim 8b; Gitlin 61b; A.vodah Zarah 22b; et al. As for example Hyman, p.78, note 1. (Hyman docs not acknowledge that his source is Rabbi HaLevi, vol.5, p.593-600 and note 182). Rabbi HaLevi equates "Bei Rav" with the "Bei Rabbanan" of Megillah 28b, and has RSG referring to a synagogue frequented by the Rabbis of Masa Mechasya. See Beraclros 25a; Kidduslrill 39a (see above, chapter 9, p.95); Kesubos 106a; Gittill 66b and 89b; et al. Rappaport (loc. cit.) seems unclear about this while Ginzberg (loc. cit.) misquotes him and writes: ...the expression was applied to the academy and the synagogue of Rab... . Proof for this thesis might be found in the term, "Beis Rabbeinu" in Megillah 29a. The difficulty, however, with this, is defining the distinction between these two terms. A "Bei Rav" is also mentioned earlier in the lggeres (p. 100). It was built by R. Chisda while the beis midraslr of R. Huna, the Rosh Mesivta, was still standing. Perhaps he replaced the academy erected by Rav and built a new and apparently larger structure, the old building now functioning as synagogue. Its relationship to the "Bei Rav" mentioned here requires further research. Bava Basra 3b. See Sukkah 26a; Beitzah 25b; Yoma 87a; and Raslri, s.v. -n,"M in Sukkah JOb. Sec, however, Raslri in Berachos 30a, Beclroros 44b, and Sanhedrin 7b.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

121

The Amoraic Period (2)

14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

The term, H"m:, M",,21 •l:> is also found in BaYa Kamma 113a, but its meaning is unclear. Taanis 12b. See Rashi on that passage and see Otzar HaGeonim there, note 44. Tl,e Babylonian Exilarchate, Tel-Aviv, 1970, p.140, note 53. This thesis can be deduced from Yoma 7a. RSG is the first to make this claim. There is no Talmudic evidence for it. RSG seems to have had access to an independent tradition concerning the exilarcbs of the Amoraic, and certainly the Geonic period. This was in addition to his other sources, such as the Talmud, Seder O/am Zula, Seder Tannaim Ve-Amoraim, or any earlier common source available to the last two and himself. In fact, his information about the transfer of the Festival of the Exilarchs is mentioned nowhere in the Talmud. The Tosafists in Gitlin (soon to be quoted) comment about Huna bar Nassan: ..who was close to the government;., and: "he possessed both Torah learning and temporal greatness... It can be seen from here and other Medieval authorities (Rishonim) that RSG's Gconic tradition was no longer available to them. R. Avraham Zacuto in his Se/er HaYuchsin (Filipowski ed., p.127) also does not designate Huna bar Nassan as an exilarch.

19. 59a. 20. Sanhedrin 59a. 21. The plural form would seem to indicate that there existed more than one exilarch in the same period. Cf. M. Baer, ..The Exilarchs in Talmudic Times., Zion, 1963 (28), p.31, where the author offers proof for this from the Meiri in his commentary on BaYa Metzia, pp.61-62, discussing a passage in Yevamos 115b. Further proof can be brought from Chui/in 92a. Surprisingly, Baer has overlooked RSG's statement here. 22. We have preferred the French version, which indicates that since the exilarcbs found it difficult to come to R. Ashi for the festivals, most of them decided to live in either Sura or Masa Mechasya. According to the Spanish version, RSG is being redundant, mentioning twice that the exilarchs went to Masa Mechasya. 23. See our discussion of this topic in chapter 10, p.108, note 43. 24. I la. 25. The Talmud, in Shabbos, /oc. cit., seems to have an alternate understanding of bis statement: He saved Masa Mechasya from destruction by not permitting houses to be built higher than the synagogue. 26. We have preferred the French version, David ben Yebudah, which better fits RSG's expression, ..in the middle of the days of the lshmaelites... David ben Yehudah lived about 825 C.E., whereas David ben Zakkai, from the point of view of RSG, would more properly be described as living at the end of the days of the lshmaelites. The very expression, ..the middle of the days of the Ishmaelites., is puzzling, since the ..Ishmaelites" (Arab caliphs) were still in power in RSG's time. The simplest assumption is that RSG took his own time as the "end" of the Ishmaelite period. 27. The term, "nasi," used for "exilarch," appears only here and in RSG's following statement in this capter. This lends additional credence to M. Baer's claim (see chapter 10, note 31) that the information in this digression is based solely upon a family tradition, and, therefore, possesses its own distinct terminology. 28. Bava Basra 157b. 29. RSG has abbreviated this passage. 30. Cf. Kesubos 106a. 31. The French version has, MnM:>•nc instead of Hn"::>cc. The former term could also refer to a fixed period of study. See above, p.104. 32. French version. 33. Levine (p.94) has apparently erred in making a new paragraph here. 34. Rabbi HaLcvi, in Doros HaRishonim, vol.5, pp.597-598, and vol.6, pp.64-68, emends the text, without any source, to read "Sura," because R. Mareimar (also called R. Yeimar)

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

122

lggeres ofRaY Sl,erira Gaon

transferred the academy back to Sura. This is why, according to HaLevi, RSG bad to mention the location of his reign. Though Rabbi HaLevi's approach is unacceptable, it does seem unnecessary for RSG to mention "Masa Mechasya" here, according to our version. 35. French version. 36. Yazdogird II ruled from 438-457 C.E., as opposed to Yazdogird I, the first king of the Fifth Century, who ruled from 399-421 C.E. 37. See /JaYa Basra 12b. 38. Loe. cit. 39. See ETU\lin 8a, Pesachim 117b, and Sukkah 13b. 40. See BaYa Basra, Joe. cit. 40a. See Kesubos 103b. 41. This dating of the death of Mar bar R. Ashi is the first of a few instances in the next few paragraphs where RSG, unlike in the rest of the lggeres, can offer more precise dates. This can be attributed to a new source or list used by RSG beginning with Mar bar R. Ashi (the end of the Talmudic era). This source might be what RSG is referring to when he mentions in conjunction with this period (see p.117) "what we heard from the early sages and saw in their chronicles." (See also p.119, where the same type of statement is made in conjunction with the beginning of the Savoraic period.) This is also the first time in the lggeres where RSG specifically mentions a written source. 42. Concerning Ravina, see Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.19 ff. 43. The French version offers the correct date, according to Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.22. This date can be substantiated by a further statement of RSG on p.118 (French version). 44. Herc, too, we have followed Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.16. According to him - and he offers proof from Se/er HaKabbalaJ,, p.42 - Ravina either ruled for a very short period or didn't rule at all before he died. This would explain the strange omission of the

word: "'iN1. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

SO. 51. 52. 53. 54.

55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61.

French version. Cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.13 ff. Vol.5, pp.526-36, 551-71. Cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.85. French version. This version can be substantiated from RSG's previous comments regarding the death of R. Nachman bar R. Huna in 766 of the Seleucid era, in connection with the beginning of Yazdogird's decrees. See Shir, Erech Milin (Prague, 1852), vol.I, pp.37-39. French version. See Zev Yavetz, To/dos Israel, Berlin, 1912, vol.8, p.144. See above, note 27. French version. This version also adds: " ...when Rabbah Tosfaah died." This corresponds to the date offered for Rabbah Tosfaah's death on p.116. See Doros HaRishonim, vol.5, p.544, note 158; vol.6, p.106. French version. This information can be substantiated by a secular source written in the Tenth Century. See G. Widengen, "The Status of the Jews in the Sassanian Empire;" lr011ica AntiiJIUI I (1963), pp.142-3. Cf. chapter 8, p.82, and Levine, p.70, note 1. According to the Se/er HaKabbalah, R. Yosi ruled in Pumbedisa for 38 years (476-514 C.E.). This matches RSG's figure of "about forty years." However, Se/er HaKabbalaJ, dates the sealing of the Talmud as 500 C.E. Vol.6, pp.25-26, SO. These different sources can account for the stylistic nuances noticeable in the Iggeres. For example, on p.98, in discussing the Amoraim who preceded R. Ashi, he begins each new

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The A,,,oraic Period (2)

62. 63.

64. 65. 66.

67. 67a

68. 69.

70. 71.

123

addition with the words, "And after him ruled..." The same is true on p.llS. where he discusses the Amoraim who followed R. Ashi. Here, on the other band, when listing the Savoraun, be simply begins with, "And in the year... " Each source is cited in its own wording. S.Z. Havlin, in his excellent article in Researches in Talmudic Literotlll'e (Jerusalem, 1983; p .159 and note S3) has omitted this reference. And see above, chapter 6, p.58. We have followed the French version, which omits, D"D•., .,:l.,:l. This seems to be more correct, since these words were probably added to the lggcrcs as an explanation of the words, nu,"t)T., iK>, or were borrowed from the Book of Esther 6:1, as J.E. Ephrati (see Ch.IO, note 45), pg. 31, has pointed out. Therefore, B.M. Levine is incorrect in insening these words into the French text, based upon the manuscripts. See Nazir 13a and Pesaclwn 39a. See Doros HaRisl,onim vol.6, p.13. Rabbi Hal..evi (vol.6. p.13) remarks that we see here bow careful RSG was when quoting traditions, even recording so insignificant a variant as "D1n, vs. ...a:,,n,. L. Ginzberg's attack on HaLevi ( Geonica; New York, 1968; vol. I, p.4, note I) is incomprehensible to me. French version. This can be supponed from Cmdlin 59b. RSG's mention of the particular day of death is noteworthy. It would seem from the passage in Kcsubos 103b (see above, o. 40a) that dying on Yom Kippurim, as opposed to Motzoei Yom Kippurim (see above p. 116 gloss s.v. "night following"), is considered a bad omen. Perhaps, in order to prevent concluding this as regards the death of R. Acbai (RSG's ancestor), RSG points out that his death was due to an outpour of anger on the part of God. Mss. And see above, p.82. This is the period from the death of the last rosh yeshiva/, in Sura, Ravina bar R. Huna, in 475 C.E., until R. Eina, who became rosl, yeshivoh after R. Yosi's death in 514 C.E. See above, chapter 8, p.82. This sentence like the previous one about R. Yosi) is problematic, since "goon" is usually considered a proper noun applied to the heads of the yeshivos only during the Geonic period (from 589 C.E.). Yet RSG, here and earlier (chapter 8, p.83) mentions that R. Revai was a "goon." In fact, we even find the term used by RSG with regard to Amoraun earlier in this chapter (p.110) and in chapter 10, p.105. It is therefore possible that "gaon" can also mean a very prominent person, who commanded more authority and prestige than the other rashei yeshivaJr, even though he never formally received any higher appointment. See A. Kohut, Aruch HaShalem (Vienna, 1926), p.218, where the author tries to find parallels to the term goon in Arabic and Persian. However, this attempt is refuted by S. Krauss in the Supplementary Volume to the A.rue/,; Vienna, 1937; p. ll J.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter: 12

The Geonic Period ( 1)

There1 were years of persecution and suffering2 at the end of the Persian rule,• and [the Rabbis] could not institute pirkei,• establish mesivtos,• and carry on the normal duties• of the Geonim. • [This continued] until, after several years,* our Rabbis from Pumbedisa came to the outskirts of Nehardea, to [the city of] Peroz-Shavur. These are the Geonim who were in our Mesivta in Pumbedisa after the episode• [that took place] at the end of Persian rule: From the year 900 [of the Seleucid Era; 589 C.E.],s Mar Channan of Ashkaya•

q,c::i n,,i, iott' ,ltt' y,,,n, l,;:,, ,,n K,, c,,c,E) l'\i:,,c Kn::i,no ,::i,nK, ,p,E) 11::ipo; il'\:l ,11 c,l,Kl lillO ,::i,c, Kl;,, p:li il'\K1 l'lltt' no:, Kl11ii1l n,::i,::ic, KM..1:lOU)C .,,:it' ti,!), Kru..,o, Kl'\l,.10:l iini C,.l,Kl y,;,Ki y,,..K iM:l Kn,,::io,E):l Kl;,, Ntt':l c,,c,g n,:,;o qic::i y,,c .K-.,ptt'KO pn iO 1'0 illtt' i'.Yl'\l'\

at the end of Persian rule: RSG is referring to the thirty- year period right after the death of R. Revai in about 559 C.E. (see above, p.00). This period also marks the fourth and last generation of the Savoraim, a generation which was headed by R. Giza and R. Sama,3 and which came to an end in 589 C.E. Thus, according to RSG, the era of the Savoraim lasted about 89 years. pirkei: These were the sermons given in the beis mitlrash on Shabbos and festivals, before the Mussa/ prayer-service.'4 These sermons were mainly directed towards the masses, and not necessarily towards the sages and the students. It would seems that this institution was very popular in Pumbedisa. This is why RSG mentions its termination when discussing the closing of the Mesivta. establish mesivtos: From the context, it would seem that RSG's reference is to the lecture (shiur) which was delivered to the scholars of the mesivta every day except Shabbos, when the pirka (see previous gloss) took place. The daily shiur was obligatory for the students at the Mesivta. 7 normal duties: Lit., "custom." Perhaps the intention is to the communal activities of the heads of the yeshivos. Geonim: The heads of the yeshivos. after several years: Rabbi HaLevi 7a makes this about ten years, in which the sages still hoped the persecutions would subside, and they would not have to leave Pumbedisa. They finally left in about 569 C.E. to Peroz-Shavur, establishing a mesivta there which existed for about ninety years. the episode: I.e., the persecutions during the reign of Kavadh I (488-531 C.E.). Mar Claaaan of Aslakaya: Though he re-opened the Mesivta at Pumbedisa, the Mesivta

124

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

125

The Geonic Period {1)

rulcd.9 And after him, R. Mari,10 our ancestor, the son of Mar R. Dimi Sorgo, ruled,• and his beis midrash is known in Peroz-Shavur to this day [and] is called: the House of R. Mari.•• In his day, R. Mar bar R. Huna ruled in Sura• in the year 92012 [of the Seleucid Era; 609 C.E.].13 After R. Mari Sorgo, R. Channina•• of Bei Gihara ruled in Nehardea,• and in his days• Mohammed came forth into the world. And they say• that R. Chinnenai was in Sura during this period,• [while] R. Channa was gaon in Pumbedisa,• and Marts R. Yitzchak Gaon [in Peroz-Shavur]. • It was he who was in Peroz-Shavur when Ali ben Abutaleb conquered [the city].• Mar Yitzchak of PerozShavur went out to [meet] him, and welcomed him with great friendliness. At that time, there were in Peroz-Shavur ninety thousand Jews, 17 who were received by Ali ben Abutaleb with* great friendliness.1 8

Ulpt ,,tl :i, itl ,,,tl n,,n:i, zi,:i, tliic "tl", :i, itli n,,:::,. c,,n ,11 ,,:::ttt ti1"£l:l liTU itttiio ."10 :l1 ":l N1i)l i:l itl :li Niic:l 170 i"O":li .:l"pnn ruttt::l Nlin :i, 770 uiic "iO :l1 ,,nNi ":l Ttl "Nll"M :li ic Nl1i1ill:l .c,,11, itlno N'r ,,0,::1, N1il"l ,rnN Ni,c::i ini't1 "1CNi tiNl NJM :l1i ,"Nll"M :li l'll1il tiNl i)Ml" :l1 iitli Nli"i:ltli!) n11 ,,:1ttt ni!l:l il"ilttt Nin, Nt"i :l?Ntoi:lN p "711 ilttt:l:,ttt inNip; ,,:ittt ni!l 10 pnt" ,o il"ili l'li!)" C"l!) i:lC:l i"l!) 7":li'ili i:,,N '! Ninn c,,n ,,:ittt ,,,£):::,. '?Nto":lN p "711 07:lpi ?Nittt"C .l'li!:l" C"lEl 1:lCJ

at Peroz-Shavur had not yet been closed, and R. Mari replaced him there. raled: He was transferred from Peroz-Shavur to Pumbedisa. in Sara: He re-opened the Mesivta of Sura. Nellardea: I.e., Peroz-Shavur. in his days: The advent of Mohammed was in 613 C.E. And they say: Very often in the lggeres, RSG has to rely on oral traditions. This occurs especially in discussions about Sura, for whose history he did not have as much written material as for his own mesivta, Pumbedisa. this period: He apparently succeeded R. Mar bar R. Huna. in Pumbedisa: He succeeded R. Mari bar R. Dimi Sorgo. Mar R. Yitzchak Gaon [in Peroz-Sba,ur]: He succeeded R. Chamina of Bei Gihara in 636 C.E., and was the third and last head of Peroz-Shavur. conquered [the dty]: Rabbi HaLevit6 has pointed out that the reference here is not to a military conquest, but simply to the acceptance of Ali's authority; for Ali only became caliph in 656 C.E., while the conquest of Babylonia had taken place under Caliph Omar around 640 C.E. witla great friendliness: R. Yitzchak seems to have been convinced by the friendship displayed by Ali that Pumbedisa and Sura were no longer in danger, and hence PerozShavur was no longer needed as a potential place of refuge. He therefore disbanded this Mcsivta, its members being absorbed into Pumbedisa.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

126

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

After [R. Channa, there was] Mar R. Rava• [in Pumbedisa], in whose days• [the Rabbis] instituted the enactment that one may immediately give one's wife a divorce - which is not in accordance with the Talmud passage that discusses the daughter-in-law• of R. Zevid.20 In his [Mar Rava's] days,• Mar R. Huna21 was gaon in Sura. After Mar R. Rava [there was] R. Busai; and22 in Sura, Mar R. Sheshna, on whose seal was written [his full name]: Mesharshya bar Tachlifa. After Mar R. Busai2J in Pumbcdisa [was] Mar R. Huna Mari bar Mar Yosef, who became gaon in the year 1000 [of the Seleucid Era; 689 C.E.]. • {RSG will now concentrate on the Geonim in Pumbedisa who reigned during the second hundred years of the Geonic Era.]

After him was Mar R. Chiyya from Mishan, and after him, Mar Ravya. After him [was] Mar R. Netronai bar Mar R. Nechemiah, who ruled in the year 1030 [of the Seleucid Era; 719 C.E.]. It is known that his son-in-law, Mar R. Yanka, became related by marriage to

Ui'l"\rt? M::li ::li ic ,,.,nMi iM,, iirt?M? ,n,M? ~ r,r,; ,,c,::i .'i:Ji ,,::lT ::li1 i1"J"\?:Ji Ml'\3JOtt':J "Mliii ::li ,c Mi,c::l i1"ii ,,c,:l, .yiN.l ."MCi::l :ii M:li :ii ic izi::ii Mlrt?rt? ::li i::i Miic::i ii"iii ,::i M"tttitttc :n"n,c,n ?lJ :l"li:J, .Mg,;nz, "Mll'\Ci::l :ii ic M"il"l::li T::l ,,c to,n :li ,c MJ"\"1:lCU):l .i:,?M lilrt?::l tiMl n,n i:,c,, ,c .Tttt"CC M""n ::i, ,c M",n:li .M"::li ic M"in::ii i::l "Mliitol ::li ic ii"iJ'l:li i:,,M J"\l?Q:l ,,c, n,cnl :li i1"lJ"\M Ni'l" ::1, ,c, .v,,. , •T"l'l"l'l, i:i"i'liM iiM"?Ql r,,::1,::l yr,nc nin,

,o

Mar R. Rava: He reigned in 640 C.E. in whose days: According to Sefer Ha-Ittur, 19 this took place in 962 of the Seleucid Era (651 C.E.). the daughter-in-law of R. Ze'fid: According to this passage in Tractate Kesubos, the "rebellious wife" (moredes, one who refuses to have marital relations with her husband) must wait twelve months for her divorce, to afford her an opportunity to change her attitude. in bis [Mar Rava's] days: Herc and above, RSG's use of the term, "in his days," might be intended to show the subordinate status of the Mesivta of Sura. in the year 1000 [...689 C.E.]: This, then, completes the first hundred years of the Geonic Era. It is known... R. Mar Yanka: This entire passage in our Spanish version, which was incorrectly emended by Levine's addition, based on the Fr. version, is very difficult. Why would R. Netronai, the Goon, permit his son-in-law to carry on in such a manner? Why would the Rabbis want to flee to Sura, where, as RSG tells us further on, there

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

127

The Geonic Period ( J)

the family of the exilarch, andli4 he [Mar R. Yanka] forced his authority on the Rabbis [of Pumbedisa]. Some of them fled to Sura until the death of Mar R. Yanka, • and [only afterwards] returned to their Mesivta. • After him, Mar R. Yehudah ruled, and then Mar R. Yosef ruled; he was known by all as the "Kesusai,"* [and he ruled] in the year 1050 [of the Seleucid Era; 739 C.E.]. After him, Mar R. Shmuel bar R. Mar ruled, in 1059 [of the Seleucid Era; 748 C.E.]. After him, Mar R. Netronai28 Kahana bar Mar R. Amuna ruled. He was from Baghdad,• from Tutira• Bera. In his day, R. Acha of Shabcha went up to Eretz Yisrael, because R. Netronai was his disciple,J1 and when [the exilarch] appointed [R. Netronai]* to be gaon• over them, [R. Acha] went up to There.•

Miic,; yinlo ,p,1n p:li C,17 n,,o Mi'l" io :lii M"tt'Ell Mli il7 .y,nn:l"l"\O';, ,,,n, .n,,n.. :li ,o ,-:,0 M"il"l:li nin, qc,,.. :li ,o 1';,0 n"in:n q';,M Ntt' "Mnin~ ';,~:l l7"i" .y"tt'on, i:l ';,MiOtt' :li i0 1';,C M"il"l:li .to"li f:1';,M Ntt' iQ :li "iitol :li iC 1';,C M"il"l:li ii.l:l yo, nliCM ::i, iC y::i Mln~ M"o,.. .Mi:l Mi"n,n ye, M"M }'iM';, MM:ltt'C MMM ::li :j,"';,C, n,n M"l7Ctt' "iitol :li iCi ';,Mitt"' i'"';,C, ,n..';,17 MM"tt'l inl"i:liM ,~,

::i,

.cnnc,

were disorders and revolutions caused by the exilarchs, who deposed Geonim and installed them again''? How could Mar R. Yanka wield such power? After all, he was only related by marriage to the exilarch's family, and, since they were situated in Sura, while he lived in Pumbcdisa, they could not give him their close support. In light of these difficulties, it seems that some mss. variants of our Spanish version should be adopted (see Levine, p.102, variants 13-15, 19). Without otherwise tampering with the standard text, it would then read: He [Mar R. Netronai ]was known as25 Mar R. Yanka, and, encouraged by his kinship26 with the family of the exilarch, forced his authority on the Rabbis of his mesivta, and they fled to their mesivtos."27 This now constitutes an entire new understanding of the passage. Mesina: i.e. Pumbcdisa. One wonders why RSG writes in such a cryptic style and does not clearly state: Pumbcdisa. See, however, the above gloss. Kesasai: This might mean that he originated from a city called Kusai (see Niddah 69a). from Bqhdad: It is strange that RSG notes the place of origin of only three of the Geonim of Pumbcdisa. Some29 have theorized that these three cases were singled out because they were members of the Mesivta of Sura. This hypothesis gains support from the fact that Baghdad and Sura are close to each other (about ~10 miles apart). Tatin: Aramaic for "bridge." appointed [R. Netronai]: R. Acba of Shabcha, author of the She'iltos, was the foremost disciple of R. Shmuel bar R. Mar,30 and was considered by everyone as the Goon's natural successor. When R. Acha's disciple, R. Netronai, was appointed instead, R. Acha left Babylonia for Eretz Yisrael. Raavad (Se/er HaKabba/ah, p.47) 0

0

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

/ggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

128

After him, Mar R. Avraham Kahana32 ruled.* After him, R. Dodai bar Mar R. Nachman ruled, in 1072 [of the Seleucid Era; 761 C.E.], and he was the brother of Mar R. YehudaiJJ Gaon. * After him, R. Channanya bar R. Mesharshya ruled, in the year 1075 [of the Seleucid Era; 764 C.E.]. And after him, R. Malka bar Mar R. Acha [ruled], in 1082 [of the Seleucid Era; 771 C.E.]. He deposed* the Exilarch* R. Netronai bar Zabinai in the dispute about Zakkai bar Achunai, who had been exilarch for some years. The two Mesivtos united with the Exilarch Zakkai, and they deposed Netronai. * R. Malka passed* on to the Garden of Eden, and the Exilarch R. Netronai went to Maghreb. *

cni:lN :li ,c ,.,c ;,,,n:i, ."Nlit:) i:l "N1i1 :li ic ,.,c i1"in:1i Nim :l"1'inn Nttt:l TCMl :li ,c .yiNl niii1" :1, ,c, mnN :1, ,:1 n,nn :li ,.,c il"in:i, .it"l'inn ru~:1 N"~,w ,c ,:1 N:,.,c :li 7,c n"in:1, Nim :l"Elinn J"llttt:l NMN :i, p N"~l "Nlii~l :ii? i1"nMN ic i:l "N:)t ?l' KNi?El::l "Nl":lt nc:, ":li1 "Ci) N"Tt'l Nin, "NlinN NJ"l:l"liC y,n,n ,~l:)l'lNi T"l~ "Nliitol? nii:ll'i NTli1 "N:)f C1' :lii Y,1' p? N:l.,C :li ito!)Ni .:lil'C? ?tM N"~l "Nliitol

attributes this affront to R. Acha to the hostility of the exilarch towards him, but does not explain the reason for the enmity. Gaon: Lit., "nasi." Went up to There: "There" is a standard term for Eretz Yisrael. Mar R. Avraham Kalaana raled: Raavad had no knowledge of this succesor. It is possible that he succeeded his brother, Mar R. Netronai. R. Yehudai Gaon: RSG mentions the family relation because R. Yehudai Gaon was so famous, as RSG will discuss below (p.132). he deposed the Exilarcll: The cause of this conflict is unclear. Some34 claim that we can sec from the lggeres that Netronai was a scholar, and the Geonim did not care to have a learned exilarch in office. There is, however, no basis in the text for this theory. On the contrary, it would seem that the Geonim would prefer a learned exilarch, since he would be close to them in intellectual interests. From a Geniz.ah fragment,35 however, it appears that Zakkai was a descendant of Bustenai and a Persian princess, a marriage whose legitimacy had been questioned by many; and this is why R. Netronai opposed Zakkai. the Exilarclt: This term is difficult, since R. Netronai was trying to usurp the exilarcbate from Zakkai, who, RSG claims, had held the office for some years, while R. Netronai at this point was not an exilarch. See, however, our gloss s. v. "R. Malka." they deposed Netronai: Here, too, we encounter a difficulty. If both mesivtos made common cause against Netronai, why does RSG single out R. Malka as the one who deposed him? However, see next gloss. R. Malka passed on... Magbreb: Connecting the death of R. Malka with the departure of R. Netronai for Maghreb is altogether inexplicable. L. Ginzbcrg36 has introduced a

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Geonic Period (1)

/29

After R. Malka, Mar R. AbbaJ7a the son of Dodai, our ancestor, ruled,38 in the year 1084 [of the Seleucid Era; 773 C.E. ]. After him, Mar Shinoi ruled, but not for long.• After him, Mar R. Channinai Gaon Kahana bar Mar R. Avraham Gaon ruled, in the year 1093 [of the Seleucid Era; 782 C.E.]; but the exilarch removed him [from his position].•

H::11 ::11 1C H~?C :ii in::ii nltt':l UlpT "K1i1 ::111 M"1:l .1"!)1Jin H?i "Uft' :li iO 1?0 M"in::ii -1"iHM "Hl"lM :ii ic 1?0 M"1n:li titc) cn,::itc ::i, ,c ,::i Hln:, titc) .MH"tt'l M"i::ii,i )~iZ,Z, Ntt':l

Mar R. Huna Mar HaLevi bar Yitzchak arose• after him, in the year 1096 [of the Seleucid Era; 785 C.E.]. In his day, they instituted the enactment that the chattels ,c Hlin ::i, ,o M"1liH:l cp, of orphans may be used to pay the ,~inn Ntt':l pnt" ,::i ..,,n financial obligations accruing from a woman's nft'H n::i,n:, ":l)c, U"pn , ..c ..::i, kesubah or from other debts.• ."?lO?tOCC i',"!)K "Cli"C ::1in ?!1:li

completely new understanding of this passage. According to him, R. Malka installed R. Netronai as exilarch in opposition to the Exilarch Zakkai. The two mesivtos, on the other hand, assembled in joint session, in the presence of Zakkai, and deposed R. Malka. According to Ginzberg, later historians misunderstood these events and altered the text of the lggeres. Where it had formerly read, " ...and they deposed him" - i.e., R. Malka - they added the name, "Netronai," so that the text read as we now have it, " ... and they deposed Nctronai."37 According to Ginzberg's understanding, the end of the passage becomes clear. R. Netronai departed for Maghrcb when R. Malka, his main supporter, passed away. Maglll'eb: Lit., "the west" - i, c., Spain and North Africa. b■t not for loag: He was gaon for part of 782 C.E. remo,ed lalm [from his position]: RSG, who usually drops a hint at least as to the cause of such disputes, has not a word to say about this occurrence.39 arose: RSG uses this term instead of his usual expression, "ruled." It may be that he intended this as a mark of distinction, since Mar R. Huna presided over the important change in property law mentioned in this paragraph. Alternatively, "arose" might indicate that Mar R. Huna had not been the expected successor to the previous gaon. the chattels of orpbans...debts: Rabbi HaLevi-40 tries to show that although the Talmud4 I did not permit such collection of debts, this was only true of the Talmudic period when land was the normal guarantee of financial obligations. However, during the Geonic period it was permitted. 42 This change was due to the favorable environment for commerce created through out the vast Moslem Empire, which made it advantageous to shift from farming to trade and handicrafts, so that movable goods now became the primary guarantor of debts.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I

I

I

L ~..L..1

Jggeres of RilY Slterlra Gaon

130

After him, Mar R. Menashe bar Mar R. Yosef ruled, in the year 1099 [of the Seleucid Era; 788 C.E.]. He was from Goboya,• from the descendants of Ukva. • During these years• the succession of the Geonim at Sura, up to the year 1000 [of the Seleucid Era; 689 C.E.] is not quite clear to us, by reason of the disorders• and revolutions46 caused by the exilarchs, who deposed Geonim and installed them again. What is clear to us, we have already written about them. But from the year 1000 on, we do have clarity about them.• We have discussed the Geonim that ruled in Pumbedisa during these one hundred years, beginning from 1000 [of the Seleucid Era; 689 C.E.]. During these same years, the following Geonim ruled in Sura: Mar R. Chinnena48 from Nehar Pekod [ruled for] five years.• Mar R. Nehilai from Narish [ruled for] eighteen years.• After him, Mar R. Yaakov HaCohen from Nehar Pakod [ruled] for eighteen years.•

ntt'lC ::li ic 1'70 n"in::li to"'!firu, Ntt'::l qc,,. ::1, ,c ,::1 .N::lpil.1 "::l "l::l TC n,n nN::li.:n

,,n,

C"l,Nl yin,:, "ltt' T"?"N::li NE)?N Ntt' il7 H"CMC NrlNC::l ,,on ?l7 , ..!)ft' Hli"nl N? HrlH"ito, Hl'\H::,i!)n 7,n::1 rl"N, r,,nc y,n, t"i::1w, C"N"tt'li Hl::l"n:, i::i::, Hl'7 , ..,::1, nc, ,n; 1?"Hi H!)?H Ntt' lC ?::lN ,tin; .1,n::1 l' C"i'

,n,

1?"Hi NE)?HC "ltt' 'i' l"?"H::li CU)~ ,:in:,, C"l,Hl 7,n, Nlttt.. :C"l,Nl f"?"H Hi,0::1 ,::,;c Nn..,::1

,!),

tt'CM iii)!l inlC "Nll"M ::li ic tt'ilc .. "H?"iil ::1, ,c .C"ltt' .C"lttt n""

,,n

Goboya: A district in Babylonia:'3 Ukva: Perhaps RSG is referring to the Amora of the Third Century who, according to him,44 became exilarch after Huna. daring these yean: RSG is referring to the first hundred years of the Geonic period, from 589 to 689 C.E.45 disorders and revolutions: It is possible that, from the point of view of the non-Jewish government, the geonate first became a powerful political and judicial body under Caliph Ali ben Abutaleb (circa 651 C.E.). Perhaps that is why RSG mentioned above (p.125) the friendly reception that Ali accorded the Gaon R. Yitzchak of Peroz-Shavur. According to Ginzberg,47 the Rabbis secured from the new Caliph permission to call into being, side by side with the exilarchate, a religious authority with definite powers and competence. It was natural that the head of the time-honored Mesivta of Sura would be placed at the head of this new authority. It was also natural that the exilarchate would not accept so powerful a rival as the geonate of Sura without manifesting some resistance. An alternate explanation for these "disturbances and revolutions" might be that a power struggle over the exilarchate was taking place between the descendants of Bustenai's Persian wife and the descendants of his Jewish wife. clarity about them: I.e., about the chronology of the geonim at Sura. for five years: From 689 to 694 C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Geonic Pmod ( 1)

131

After him, Mar Shmuel [ruled] for eighteen years.• He was a member of our Yeshivah of Pumbcdisa,• and a descendant of Ameimar.• The father of this Mar Shmuel was the son of Mar Rava Gaon, [about whom] we have written• that he was gaon in Pumbedisa, and R. Huna Gaon of Masa Mcchasya• was together with him when the [enactment concerning] divorce was instituted.• Since there was no one in Masa Mechasya who equalled him [Mar Shmuel] in wisdom, the Exilarch Shlomo bar Chisda took him [from Pumbcdisa] and appointed him [gaon] in Masa Mechasya. He was a great sage, and his sons are [still] in Pumbcdisa. Some of his descendants [sit] in front of us• in the Mesivta, and some have married into our family. After him [ruled] Mar R. Mari HaCohen from Nehar Pakod, for eight years.• And after him, Mar R. Acha [ruled] for one-half year.•

,rue TM:::IM ::lPlJ" :1, ,c , ..,nH

.C"l~

M"" iipl)

C"ltt' M"" ?Hie~ ,c , ..,nH M"M Hl"\"i::lcil) ,~ UM::l~"c, , ..:1H, M"M ,c"CH ,~ , ..l::l "l::lc, ?ft' U::l M"M Ml ?Hiett' ic ?ft' TiHl M"Mtt' U::ll"\:::ltt' TiHl H::li ic HliM :1, n,n M"in:1, HM"i::lcil) .'IOlM rupn l"\lJ'tt'::l H"CMO Hnc, THC H"CMC HMO::l n,n H?i Ti":::ii M"?Ptt' M"n,,:::i nc:::in::l l"?l)Ci Hn,,.:i ~.., 'Hien MC?tt' ,,,.:i c:::in, H'CMC Hl"\C::l M''lCi M"Hi iin HM"i::lCiE)::l 'MU::li i1'i1 l"\'Hi HM::l"MO::l Hloip M"lJil TO .Nl::l TMnc, THO Tii1::l ii1lC Ti1:::li1 "iO iC n,,n:1, .C'ltt' 'M iipE:l .Mltt' "'!M HMM ::l1 10 M'1l"\::li

,:1

:1,

Mar R. Nehilai...for eighteen years: From 697 to 715 C.E. Mar R. Yaakov...eighteen tears: From 715 to 733 C.E. Mar Shmael...eighteen years: From 733 to 751 C.E. out yeshivah of Pumbedisa: RSG, affiliated with Pumbedisa, was particularly proud of the distinction that fell to the lot of a member of his own Yeshivah, and recorded it with great satisfaction. descendant of Ameimar: Lit., "one of the grandsons of Ameimar." This is hardly possible, considering that Ameimar lived in the early fifth century at the latest. He was R. Ashi's teacher and R. Ashi studied under him in Nehardea. Ameimar was considered one of the leading sages in that generation. 49 This Ameimar is also not the Ameimar mentioned earlier by RSG in chapter 11, p.115.SO We laave written: See above, p.129. of Masa Mechasya: Though Sura and Masa Mechasya are two separate cities,s1 Masa Mechasya was a smaller community on the outskirts of Sura, and often is referred to as "Sura." was instituted: See above, s. v. "The daughter-in-law of R. zevid." RSG points this out because so important an enactment, to become law in all the courts, required the unanimous agreement of both mesivtos. See Rambam's Introduction to Mishneh Torah. in front of us: As our students. for eight years: From 751 to 759 C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Jggeres of Rav Slierira Goon

132

After him, Mar R. Yehudai bar Mar R. ,c ,:1 "Hi,n41 :1, ,c n41in:1, Nachman [ruled], for three and one-half "Cl Kim n~nc, C"l~ '.l 1cru :1, years.• He also was from Pumbedisa, and .l"r,iic, THC n,n Hr,, Hn..,:10,i,c there was no one in Sura who equalled him in Hin qH .n"n,:i Hiic:1 nc:in:1 wisdom. He, too, was taken [from Pumbedisa] 41 by the Exilarch Shlomo, and he appointed n""lCi 'H"~l ncr,~ n ',p~ "t>l him [gaon] there• [in Sura]. He was blind.• Hin, .n"n C"l"1' ,,He, cnn', He and his brother• were Geonim during the Hli:l41liC ..n,n:l C41liH.l ,..n ,..nH, same period in the two Mesivtos. In those n",n:l C"C"n yn,H:li inH P1!):l days after R. Yehudai, Anan• went astray.• .l)l1 pill After Mar R. Yehudai, • Mar R. Achunai Kahana bar Mar R. Pappa [ruled], for eight years.• After Mar R. Achunai Kahana, Bar Mar R. Huna [ruled] for five years.•

:1, ,c "H,,n.. :1, ,c ..,n:i, 'n H!)!) :i, ,c ,:1 Hln:l "HlinH .C41l~

i:l Hln:i "HlinH :li ,c ,n:1, After him, Mar R. Mari HaLevi bar R. .C"l~ n Hlin :l1 iC Mesharshya [ruled] for three and one-half ,:i ..,r,n ,.,0 :1, ,c n"in:i, years,• and after him, Mar R. Biboi HaLevi .n~nc, C"l~ 'l H"~,w :ii ,:i ..,..,n ..,:i..:i :i, ,c M"in:i, 1

for one-half year: In 759 C.E. Mar R. Yebadai...for three and one-half years: From 759 to 763 C.E. appointed bim...tbere: RSG is basically saying that the exilarch was desirous of securing the most prominent scholars of the day for the Sura geonate. he was blind: Lit. , "of enlightened eyes" (a euphemism). It is not clear why RSG mentions this fact.52 bis brother: See above, p.128. Anan: When the Exilarch Shlomo died in about 759 C.E., his logical successor would have been Anan, the older of his two nephews. It seems the Geonim (probably R. Yehudai and R. Dodai) had reason to doubt Anan's character and beliefs, and therefore rejected him. After the caliph confirmed the appointment of Anan's younger brother, who was the choice of the two Geonim, Anan refused to accept the decision and declared himself exilarch. The Moslem authorities considered this an act of rebellion, and he was imprisoned. On his release, Anan, filled with hatred towards the Rabbis, proceeded to invent a new religion, denying the validity of the entire Oral Law as recorded in the Talmud, and claiming to accept only the Scriptures. Hence his followers were called "Karaites" (c,Hip), literally, "Scripturalists." went astray: Lit., "went out." The expression is probably borrowed from the mishnah in Chaggigah 16a. after Mar R. Yehudai: Perhaps because of his prominence, he is mentioned again; or it could be that the repeat of his name is due to the preceding relatively long break in the chronological list.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

133

TM Geonic P~riod ( 1)

bar Mar Rava from Nehar Pakod [ruled] for ten and one- half years.• He was with Mar R. Huna Mar HaLevi and Mar R. Menashe, the Geonim of Pumbedisa,• when they instituted the enactment• that the kesubah and [other] debts may be collected from chattels. These complete one hundred years.•

C"ltt' 1tt'l1 iip~ 1i1lC N~1 10 :Ji ,11 i1"i1 Nim ,nine, i1tt'lC :l1 ,c cm ..,',;, ,c Nlii1 i1:llC'7 upntt'~ NZ,"1:lCU) "l,Nl i'7Ni .,',10'710cc :Jin '711:li n:lin~', .i1ltt' 'i' nc,n

,c

for eight years: From 763 to 771 C.E. for file yean: From 771 to 776 C.E. Mar R. Mari...for tlaree and one-half yean: From 776 to 780 C.E. for ten and one-half yean: From 780 to 790 C.E. of Pumbedisa: Here again RSG points out that the enactment was a joint decision by both mesivtos..53 enactment: See above, s.v. "The chattels of orphans...dcbts." one bandred yean: From 689 to 790 C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

134

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

Notes to Chapter 12 I. 2.

3.

4.

5. 6. 7. 7a. 8.

9. 10. 11.

12. 13.

French version, variant reading. A description of these events can be found in Seder O/am Zuta in A. Neubauer's Medieval Jewish Chronicles; vol.2, p.76. Rabbi Ha Levi (vol.6, p.38) devotes an entire chapter to these episodes. Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.~33. The source for these names is probably Seder TQIUUlim Ve-Amoraim. Rabbi HaLevi suggests, with proof~ that R. Dimi Sorgo was also part of this fourth and last generation of Amoraim. Sec Rashi on Berachos 28b, s.v. M',. See Berachos 28b; Shabbos 56b and 148a: Yoma 77b and 78a. Hyman (p.86, and note I there) claims that RSG is referring to the appointment of heads of the Mesivta. This claim has no textual basis. See Bava Kamma 117a; Nedarim Sia; Kesubos 106a, and Maharsha there, s.v. ,·.nm. Vol. 6, pg. 34. Levine (p.100, note I) has the year 4,346 from Creation. In his addenda (which unfortunately were not reprinted in the Jerusalem, 1972 edition), p.5, he subsequently corrected this to 4,348. However, 4,349 is actually the more correct date. See Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.166. See S. Assaf, Tekufat HaGeonim Ve-Sifrutah; Jerusalem, 1955; p.45 for the technical sense of the root,j°:'O which is so often found in the Iggeres. French version. Rabbi HaLevi (vol. 6, p.84) states that the intention here is to R. Mari's personal house of study. His thesis is actually unnecessary. The Mesivta at Peroz-Shavur could still have been named after R. Mari even after his transfer to Pumbedisa. We see such a phenomenon with Rav's beis midrash; see chapter I I, p.110. Mss. M. Holder, History of the Jewish People from Yavneh to Pumbedisa~ New York, 1986, p.265, contradicts himself by offering 609 C.E. as the year of the re-opening of Sura, and then stating that this was two years after Pumbedisa's re-opening, which he places at 589

C.E. 14. 15. 16 17.

18. 19. 20. 21.

22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

Mss. Mss. Vol. 6, p.178. Z. Fendel, Legacy of Sinai, New York, 1981, quotes Hyman (p. 89, note 9), who cites Se/er Ha Yuchsin as the source for this figure. Fendel has not realized that all Hyman's citations 'rom Se/er Ha Yuchsin are actually from the version of the lggeres of RSG which is printed in Se/er Ha Yuchsin! According to the French version, they received him with great friendliness. Lemberg; p.59b. Kesubos 63b. French version. There should not be a new paragraph here. as appears in Levine's version. Mss. Mss. Mss. The exact relationship is not offered by RSG. He probably was a son-in-law. Rabbi Halevi (vol.6, p.192) explains that though the two primary mesivtos were in Sura and Pumbedisa, there were also smaller yeshivos belonging to individual sages in their respective hometowns or even near the main mesivtos themselves. Rabbi HaLevi offers proof for this phenomenon regarding the Talmudic period, but, unfortunately, none to substantiate such a situation in the Geonic period.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

135

The Geonic Period ( I)

28. French version. 29. L. Ginzberg, Geonica, p.40. 30. Sec Chidushei HaRashba on Beracltos 43a, s.v. •:::iwc. 31. This same term is found in chapter 5, p.41. L. Ginzberg's translation, "secretary" (Geonica, p.16) is probably incorrect. Cf. Rabbi HaLevi, vol.6, p. 193, and S. Assaf, op. cit., p.154. 32. Mss.

33. Mss. 34. I. H. Weiss, Dor Dor Ve-Dorsltav; Vilna, 1904, vol.4, p. 26. 35. S. Shechter, Saadyana, Cambridge, 1903, pg. 78. 36. Sec, however, below, chapter 13, p. 140. 37. Ginzberg asserts that even if mi::un-is the correct reading, as it would seem from all the manuscripts, nevertheless his claim that R. Malka was not the opponent, but rather the friend of R. Netronai, "remains unassailed." 38. French version. 39. L. Ginzberg (Geonica, pp.21, 40-41) suggests that Mar Chaninai's father, Avraham, was actually a member of the Mesivta of Sura, and received the geonate of Pumbedisa against the wishes of the rabbis there. He says: "the assumption is not unwarranted that the deposing of R. Chaninai was due to the wishes of the Academy (Mesivta), which was not inclined to accept an outsider." 40. Vol.6, p.232. 41. See Kesubos 67a. 42. Sec Rosh on Bava Kamma, ch.I, sec.19. 43. See Berachos 17b and Kiddushin 12a. 44. See above, chapter 9, p.91. 45: M. Holder (see above, note 13), p.267, has misunderstood these words. 46. See above, chapter 5, p.48, for a slightly different usage of this terminology. See also Levine, p.46, note 3. 41. Geonica, p.54. However, we are not accepting Ginzberg's entire thesis mentioned there, but only his explanation for the friction between the exilarchate and Sura. 48. Mss. 49. See Bava Basra 31a; Beitzah 22; Chui/in 53b. SO. Cf. Doros HaRishonim, vol.6, p.37. M. Holder (see note 13; p.323) in his index has not distinguished between these two sages. 51. See chapter 9, p.94, and Levine, p.79, note 4; chapter IO, p.100 and Doros HaRishonim, vol.5, pp.593-600. 52. See, however, M. Margolis, Hilchos HaNagid, Jerusalem, 1962, p.17 for the importance of this information. 53. See I. H. Weiss "Mevo'ot Ha'Talmud V'Toldosayhem" Beth Talmud, 1881(1), pg. 57, who shows that RSG, here, was the source for an unusual halacha stated in the HaGahos Mordechai at the end of Tractate Kesubos, pg. 22 (llb).

-,u,,~.,

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I

I

II

Chapter 13:

The Geonic Period (2)

After them,• [the] Geonim of Pumbedisa,• Nn,,:1cu.,c C'liN.1 y,n,,n:1, [was] Mar R. Yeshayah HaLevi bar Mar R. N:lN :li iC i:l ,,'Jn il'lM' :li iC Abba. He was from Kluadi, a city in the N:lipc, Nnc n,n ,,Ni'J~ ye, vicinity of Baghdad.• He ruled from the year .t"i' Ntt':l 1'JCi 11l:l? 107 1 [of the Seleucid Era; 796 C.E.]. After him, Mar R. Kahana Gaon• bar Mar :li iC i:l z:JCi' :li iC il'ili:li R. Channinai Gaon [ruled] from the year 115 .?O"i' Ntt':l ,n'Jtt'C N?'~ [of the Seleucid Era; 804 C.E.]. i:l tiN) Nlil~ :li iC il'in:li After him, Mar R. Yosef bar Mar R. Shila .i"?Op liltt':l tiN) 'Nl'ln :li iC of Shalchi [ruled] from the year 119 [of the Seleucid Era; 797 C.E.]. tiNl 'NCi:l'N :li iC il'in:li After him, Mar R. lbomai Gaon, the brother Cili:lN :li ,c, il'i:l i':lN 'nK of [R. Kahana's] father, and the son of Mar .N"~i' Ntt':l tiNl R. Avraham Gaon,• [ruled] from the year 121 ,c, il'i:l z:ic,, :li iC il'in:li [of the Seleucid Era; 810 C.E.]. ,, After him [ruled] Mar R. Yosef the son iliil N'Ji il ~i' nltt':l N:lN :li of Mar R. Abba, from the year 125* [of the Seleucid Era; 814 C.E.]. It

them: The Geonim of Pumbedisa of the previous one hundred years. [the] Geonim of Pumbedisa: RSG now takes up the history of Pumbedisa where he had left off at the end of the previous hundred years (see above, p.130). Kluadi, a city in the vicinity of Baghdad: It is interesting that RSG mentions the provenance of R. Yeshayah, of R. Yosef of Shalchi (in the next paragraph), and of R. Netronai (Chapter 12, p.127). In fact, these are the only three Geom:n of Pumbedisa whose place of origin is mentioned. See our gloss in Chapter 12, p.117, s. v. "from Baghdad." Mar R. Kahana Gaon: The grandson of Mar R. Avraham Gaon, soon to be mentioned. R. Avraham Gaon: He was mentioned above, Chapter 12, p.128. After him [ruled] Mar R. Yosef...the year 125: According to R. HaLevi's thesis,1 this emendation by Levine2 is incorrect and the entire sentence does not belong here.3 R. HaLevi claims that the dispute described here was actually between Mar R. lbomai and Mar R. Aharon, and the dream concerned Mar R. lbomai's appointment, not that of Mar R. Yosef, who has not yet been mentioned. On the contrary, Ha Levi feels, RSG speaks of Mar R. Yosef with much respect and awe. This can be seen in his account of the Eliyahu episode, his mention of the fact that his forebear was 136

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Geollic Period (2)

137

was not his place,• for there was Mar R. ..,cp tinM :1, ,c n,n, n,n:,,, Aharon Kimoi, who was av beis din• and 1"Cl n,n, l"i Z,'l:l :lN Nin, was more learned and was preferable to [R. "i" ',,17 in"0 n"l"C "E)IO tl"il'i Yosef]. However, because of a dream• they• tiN.:i i:,o,,. ::i, ,c; n,,::i,N c,;n gave the authority to Mar R. Yosef Gaon. He [R. Yosef] was a man of very great piety, ,cnN, iNC Ti'Ti N:lilO i"On n,n, and was very old. It is said• that Eliyahu :l"l'l"i n,; "nN ;"T ,n..;N nin, [the Prophet], of blessed memory,10 used to ,n Ne,, .n"'J ,, "Ci":l Nl'\:l"n0::1 come to him, and sat in hisll Mesivta• during l:l"IO?t'Ni :l"O i:, p::11', in; 1CN his days.• One day, he [R. Yosef Gaon ]said Nl"\Ni N:lO N11l', n,; iniiN to the rabbis: When I sit down and review the studies, make room for the old man who "17,,, ll:li n"; nn N',i "11; comes to me." The rabbis did not sec [the .N:lilO n,; iniiNi nin ""T ,n..;N, old man], and they knew that it was Eliyahu, l"C" im Kl'ltt'n '"n,,c, "NMi of blessed memory, and they made much Nin ntt'l7C Ninnc Ntt'"1 ,iooc room for him. The present custom of making ,,£),o n"n tiNl ":lN ":lNi .,.,::111, room on the right side at the front [of the hall•] is observed because of that incident. My father's father,• the Gaon,• was 0

R. Yosers secretary, and his description of R. Yosers great diligence in his youth. R. HaLevi's contextual arguments4 are not convincing, nor are his claims of corruption against the French version mss.5 We have therefore followed Levine's text. It was not bis place: He was not the next in line for the post of gaon. aY beis din: And as such rightfully deserved to be appointed gaon.6 dream: RSG offers us no information about this at all. they: The members of the Mesivta.7 It is said: According to the Sefer HaKabbalah,B R. Yehudah the Scribe9 offered this testimony. his Mesivta: The intention here, as we explained in Chapter 7, p.79, is to a session. during his days: I.e., during his reign as gaon. at the front [of the hall]: At the front of the main hall where the members of the Mcsivta assembled for learning and deliberations. father's father: This reading is very difficult, since R. Yehudah, RSG's grandfather (the son of Mar R. Shmuel Reish Kallah; see Chapter 14, p.156) died in 917 C.E. He had to have lived a long life of at least 120 years in order to be the secretary of R. Yosef in 814 C.E. (I have arrived at this figure by assuming that R. Yehudah was at least 18 years old when he became secretary - a very young age, indeed, for someone to be managing the affairs of the Mesivta!) 12 The preferred reading is that offered in the French version: " the father of the father of the Gaon who was the father of my father"IJ so that not R. Yehudah Gaon, but R. Yehudah Gaon's grandfather, the father of R. Shmuel Reish Kallah, was the secretary. My father's father, the Gaon: This would be R. Yehudah Gaon (see below, p.156). But see previous gloss.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

/38

his [R. Yosefs] scribe,• standing before him* all his days [and managing*] the needs of the Yeshivah. • On the day when he [R. Yoset] passed away, there was a great uproar,• and the earth shook. It is also said [of R. Yosef Gaon]that he greatly afflicted himself in his youth for the sake of his studies,• and his teacher, Mar R. Shinoi Gaon, blessed him,• saying: "May you merit to lead your nation." [R. Yoset] ruled for two years.• After him arose• Mar R. Avraham bar Mar R. Sherira, in the year 127 [of the Seleucid Era; 816 C.E.], and he ruled for twelve years.• Mar R. Yosef bar Mar Chiyya was av beis din, and in the dispute• between the

, ..J!)', il::l"Tt'"ii

,,i ,cu,,

',:,::l C')3't Mii1 i~&,N1 NCi":li .i"C" ',:::,:i "Cl ,cnN, Nl7iN nil, MCi''.l ?3' N:li~ M"Tt'&,l i:1~0 "'lle' :li iC M":,i:li M"nipl":l ,:i,n, n:,"n ?"Ni yiN.l il":li T"le' y,n,n, .,n~,M

n,n,

,,,.l

.,,c

Citi:lN :li ,c M"in:l cp, t":,p Jiltt':l Mi"ie' :li iO i:l :li "'\C l"t"Mi .C"ltt' :l"" ,,oi l", n":l :lN N""M ,c ,.,, qc,.. C"N"e'l iii, ?N"l11 NNi?£>:li

scribe: I.e., secretary. standing before him: I.e., serving him. [and managing]: Lit., "for." standing before bim... Yeshhah: He served R. Yoscf as secretary and general administrator of the Yeshivah until the end of R. Yosers life. a great uproar: Lit. "anger," a term often referring to signs of divine wrath.14 greatly afflided... of lais studies: We have followed HaLevi's sound undcrstandinglS of the text, and not that of Z. Gractz,16 followed by I.H. Weiss,17 who, as R. HaLevi rightly claims, have completely distorted RSG's narrative. According to them, R. Yosef conceded that he was not a learned man at all, and even admitted that he had forgotten ts "the learning of his youth." 19 There is no mention of these ideas anywhere in the tcxt!20 Mar R. Sbinoi... bleaed him: He blessed the young R. Yosef as a reward for the tremendous self-sacrifice he displayed when learning in R. Shinoi's personal yeshivah. 21 This learning must have taken place long before R. Shinoi became gaon in 782 C.E. and headed the Yeshivah of Pumbedisa; for by then R. Yosef, who is described by RSG as being "very old," was at least fifty years old and the term, n\n,Pl\~ ("in his youth") would be out of place. However, it is possible that R. Shinoi gave the blessing when he was gaon, and that it was fulfilled about thirty years latcr.22 It is also noteworthy that according to the very weak thesis of Graetz and Weiss, mentioned in the previous gloss, one must wonder why his master, R. Shinoi, would t:>lcss his student for "forgetting his learning." for two years: 814-816 C.E. arose: RSG here departs from his standard term, "ruled." (Sec note 9 in Chapter 12, p.134.) It could be that RSG did not want to use this term since R. Avraham's tenure was disputed and then shared with R. Yosef bar Mar Chiyya. twelve years: 816-828 C.E. dispute: We know from other sources23 that this controversy was brought before

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

139

The Geonic Period (2)

Exilarchs Daniel* and David,* Mar R. Yosef was called* to the geonate. • In the end, they made peace with Mar R. Avraham• and it was decided that both of them, Mar R. Yosef and Mar R. Avraham, should be called Geonim. However, when both were present at the same gathering, R. Avraham would lecture

r,,c:::i.r,, nuiNl::l t10,, :::i., ,o ,,pN cn,:::i.N :::i., ,c 011 ,c,,£)ru t1c,, :::i., C'l,Nl ,n,,,n ,,po cn,:iN :::i., N1M:l ,n,,,n T'£)l:)0 ,:, iil"O :::i,,n,, cn,:::i.N :::i., 'lnc Nn:>,,

,o,

,o ,n,,,n, ,,oN,

the caliph, and the outcome was a sharp decline in the status of the exilarchate. In fact, this appeal for arbitration may have been the cause of the decree of Caliph Maroun (813-833 C.E.) authorizing the formation of independent religious sects. According to this decree, any ten men - Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and, it seems, Karaites - were authorized to organize themselves into an independent community and were free to elect a leader. Of course, this completely undermined the power of the exilarch, who until then had enjoyed the direct and exclusive support of the government. Perhaps RSG in Chapter 11, p.114, when discussing the temporary downfall of the Babylonian exilarchate, was referring specifically to this episode. Daaiel: He was supported by a rich and influential section of the Baghdad community and was probably also supported by the Mesivta of Sura.24 It is also possible that he was a Karaite sympathizer.ls He might actually have been the brother of David ben Yehudah,26 his rival for the exilarchate. David: This was David ben Yehudah27 who, some conjecture, was a descendant of Bustenai's Persian wife (see above, Chapter 11, p.113). He was supported by the Ycshivah of Pumbedisa28 and it seems he was finally appointed exilarch, since only he is mentioned as the exilarch who appointed Mar R. Yitzchak in 833 C.E. called: Perhaps the intention is that he never really became a gaon (see below, s.v. "sit in front of him"), but was simply called gaon in order to make peace between the exilarchs. Cf. our discussion on p.147 concerning this term as it appears in connection with R. Amram Gaon. in tile d.lspate...poute: It would seem from the context that R. Avraham Gaon supported David.29 Daniel declared himself exilarch and, not recognizing R. Avraham as gaon, appointed R. Yosef bar Mar Chiyya. The result, as RSG describes, was dual occupancy of the geonate, even after David ben Yehudah gained the upper hand. (See

above, s.v. "David.") tlley made peace witll Mar R. Analaam: This reading is difficult. Why would David hen Yehudah, Mar R. Avraham~s patron, have to make peace with him?30 Perhaps

the intention here is that David hen Yehudah placated R. Avraham, encouraging him to be reconciled with R. Yosef. The preferred reading, however, is that of the French version: '"In the end, the influential community members31 made peace between him [Mar R. Yosef] and Mar R. Avraham." Although David ben Yehudah, the patron of Mar R. A vraham, eventually gained the upper hand, Mar R. Yosef, once appointed, was not deposed. A precedent for this can be found in Berachos28a, in the incident with Rabban Gamliel and R. Elazar ben Azariah.32

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I

I

H

lggn-es of Rav Sherira Gaot1

140

and R. Yosef would sit in front of him.* They came to Baghdad,• and it happened that they were at the synagogue of bar Nashla, where there was a great gathering.* When the official of the congregation arose and announced, "Listen to the commentaries of the Heads of the Mesivta," all Israel began to weep, since no one had ever heard that before.• Mar R. Yosef, too, was shocked by this. He rose• and declared, "I resign from the post of gaon, and resume my position as av beis din."* Mar R. Avraham blessed him, saying: "May Hashem grant you [a place in] His world to come." After Mar R. Avraham, our Mar R. YoscP ruled, from the year 139 [of the Seleucid Era; 828 C.E.], for six years.• After him, Mar R. Yitzchak bar Mar R. Channanya [ruled] in the year 144 [of the

U"IK Kin Nl0ti n~p qc,, :l, ,0 Kl"ltt',l:, n,::l ,,n, ~,nK, iil:l7 cp ,:,, ,n:li K;:,:l n;tt'l ,:1i ,K0 u,0tt' t,i:,Ki Kii:lti Kn"7tt' 1 ,0,0; Kl"l:l,l"l0 TKi nii:lCNi tin'i i,,0tt'i N:,,;i 'iKitt', i:,::i qNi .Nl"l:l,l"l0 TNi i0K i::> ,,;l, ;i, cp, 11t11itN qc,, ,0 nu,Kl 10 ,Ntt'E)l n,p,;c i0N, ,0 n,:,,:li .i":l ni:lK; n,i,nN, i:n'i Nl0n, i0Ni cni:lK ::i, .n,;,, ,nKi N071'7

,0 1;0 cni:lK ::li ,0 in:li .C,ltt' ,, io•;p l"lltt'::l pi qo,, :ii ::1, ,0 i:l pni, :li ,0 n,in:li ;,,:l ,n,nnK, i"0p l"lltt' N,nn

sit in front of him: He was given the seat of honor ranking just below that of R. Avraham. However, we can also cull from this information that the actual Rosh Mesivta was Mar R. Avraham, and even his rival, Mar R. Yosef, recognized this, and the two probably worked together harmoniously. Baghdad: This was now the seat of the exilarchate. a great gathering: Lit., "the Great Kai/ah." If the intention is to the Yarchei Kai/ah (see above, Chapter 10, p.103), then it would be strange that it was held in Baghdad, rather than at the Mesivta in Pumbedisa. In addition, the term 'Great' is not clear.33 Perhaps RSG is referring here to the Festival of the Exilarch (see Chapter 11, p. 111 ). If so, that would explain the Baghdad venue.33a heard that before: The people were upset upon hearing that two men were referred to as "Rosh Mesivta," for this signified dispute and division. Examination of the French version of the lggeres confirms this interpretation.J.4 rose: Lit., "stood up on his feet." av beis din: The parallel to the episode of Rabban Gamliel and R. Elazar hen Azariah (see above, s.v."they made peace with Mar R. Avraham") is striking, especially according to the version found in the Jerusalem Talmud (Beraclws 4,1), which states that R. Elazar ben Azariah left the position of nasi and became av beis din ) S

our Mar R. Yosef: I.e., the same Mar R. Yosef bar Mar Chiyya whom we have been discussing. After the death of R. Avraham Gaon, Mar R. Yosef became the undisputed gaon of Pumbedisa.

for six yean: 828-833 C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

141

Tlte GHlfic Period (2)

Seleucid Era; 833 C.E.]. But they installcd36• n,n, ":l, :i, ,c ,::1 qc," ::1, ,c him over Mar R. Yosef bar Mar R. Rabi, H'l'IM ic i:l qOi" :iii "l~:l :li who had been av beis din38 in the years of i~H) H:lH ::1, ,c, it"i:l ,::1 n,n, R. . Yosef bar Mar Chiyya, and who was ~"~i' n,n pn'!r' ::1, .i»pt the son of the son of Mar R. Abba Gaon, our forcbcar.l9 [This appointment took place Hlin ,::1 ,,, n":,co ,:,, M"l"C because]• Mar R. Yitzchak was older than :li ic T"~i' j:)M'X" :li ic'? H"~l him.• And when the Exilarch David bcn ::1, Hl'\H H:l:li Hl"", n,n qo,'t Yehudah appointed Mar R. Yitzchak, it was ~p; H'? jt'I', ,cH, M"n,; j:)M'X" upsettingto• to Mar R. Yosef, who was the :iii n:ii:, pHi H:l:li Hl""i 1'? Judge of the Gate.• R. Yitzchak came to him n"in, nH nto:iic icH ,pH qo,, and told him: "Do not feel upset, Judge of the Gate.• Our [situation is] similar to that qc," ::1, '?":li', ,:ic, "H,n:l n":,n of Rabbah and R. Yosef. • Thereforeu you are "Ci' ru,i:, n"; icH, jt'I', "'XiH, _assured of meriting [the position of gaon] after .C"l~ ~ 1'?Ci Hl'\:l"l'\C ~, me." R. Yosef accepted this,• was pacified, and told him: "I will bow down before the "l'\~ pi qci" :ii ic n",n:li Head of the Mcsivta." He [R. Yitzchak] ruled -ti' N~:l C"l~ six years.• After him our• Mar R. Yosef [ruled] for two years• from the year 150 [of the Seleucid Era; 839 C.E.].

,c,

they appointed: Probably, R. Yitzchak was appointed by the members of the Mesivta, and not, as R. HaLevi claims,37 by the Exilarch David ben Yehudah. [This appoiatmeat... becaase]: This addition is necessary because otherwise the statement that "Mar R. Yitz:chak was older than him.. seems superfluous. older tbaa bim: Older than R. Yosef bar Mar R. Rabi. Jadge of the Gate: Sec above, glosses to Chapter 11, p.119, s.v. "Judge... RSG's mention again of Mar R. Yosef as the Judge of the Gate (a position equivalent to av beis din')4• is difficult. The French version, indeed, omits it. This passage is further proof for the identification of the Judge of the Gate with the av beis din.42 "Do not feel upset, Judge of the Gate:" R. Yitz:chak probably mentioned this title in order to placate Mar R. Yosef. Rabbab and R. Yosef: These two Amoraim were both candidates for the position of Head of the Mesivta, and Rabbah was selected over R. Yosef. However, after Rabbah died, R. Yosef succeeded him. (See above, p.102.) R. Yitzchak is drawing attention to the fact that his colleague, too, is called R. Yosef. this: These words of conciliation. six years: 833-839 C.E. oar: RSG's intention is unclear to me. See above, however, s.v. "our Mar R. Yosef." two years: 839-842 C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Goon

142

After him, Mar R. Poltoi bar Mar R. Abbaye [ruled] for sixteen years,• from the year 153 [of the Seleucid Era; 842 C.E. ]. After him, Mar R. Achai Kahana• bar Mar Rav [ruled] for six months in the year 169 [of the Seleucid Era; 858 C.E.].

:l1 ic l"JP Ntt!:l ii"1M:li ii1tt11' tttttf ""JK J1 ic iJ "i?),,!) .iiltt' Klii:, "KnK :l1 ic ii"1nJi C"tttin iittfttf Ji ic 1:l Kin, .~"op Ntt'::l

After him, there was a dispute, for a year and ,c t"J Krui,!l nin M"in:1i one- half,• between Mar R. Menachem Gaon ~oi" Ji ,c, ii"1J tiKl cnlc the son of Mar R. Y osef Gaon bar Chiyya pJ,, C"1n:lici K""n ,:1 tiNl (the leading Rabbis were with him),• and Mar R. Matisyahu bar Mar Rabi* (other• Rabbis ,c T"J, Kl;£), Knttt il"1ii:l ,,n were with him). Mar R. Menachem died in p:1, nm ":l1 ,c i:l ii"nnc :1, the year 171 [of the Seleucid Era; 860 C.E.], iC1 il"tU!)J rui ii"1ilJ "l"1MN and all* the Rabbis then returned to be in in,:> i,,m K"1'P ruttt:1 cnlc front of R. Matisyahu for ten years.• ::1, "C~ ,::,n p:i,

::i,

::i , ,n:i

,c,

After him [was] R. Mar Abba bar Mar R. Ammi, from the year 180 [of the Seleucid Era; 869 C.E.]. He was the grandson of Mar R. Shmuel,47* who was established by the Exilarch Shlomo bar Chisdai [to be gaon] in Masa Mechasya, as we explained above.49 He [R. Mar Abba] ruled for two and one-half years.•

."lttf itt11' iii"MMC Ji iC 1:l KJK 10 J1 ii"1l'\Ji ',ttt ilJ p Kim £)"P Nttf:l "CN ,:1 nc,ttt i:l"Jilttt ,N,cttt :1, ,c K"Onc KZ,C:l Kni?l tt1"1 "K1Cn C"lttf "Mttti n,w, Utt11"£)ttf ,c:, .,,c n-:tnc,

sixteen years: 842-858 C.E. R. Aclaai Kahana: He probably was a descendant of R. Avraham Kahana.44 for a year and one-baH: This is the first recorded division within the Mesivta of Pumbedisa for so long a period.4S with him: I.e., they supported him. bar Mar Rabi: Perhaps he was a brother of the earlier Mar R. Yoscf bar Mar Rabi (sec above, p.141). other: RSG's careful choice of terminology would seem to indicate that up until 1171 of the Seleucid Era, Mar R. Menachem was the main gaon in Pumbcdisa. all: This is proof for the assertion of R. HaLcvi46 that there never really was any friction or hatred between the two factions. ten years: 860-869 C.E. grandson of Mar R. Shmuel: It is most difficult to accept this statement, since Mar R. Abba was gaon in 869 C.E., while Mar R. Shmuel (see above, p.131) was gaon in 733 C.E. Perhaps RSG simply means that R. Abba was a descendant of Mar R. Shmuel.47 R. HaLcvi48 suggests that the father of Mar R. Abba, Mar R. Ammi, was the grandson. This would better fit the given dates, but is not necessarily contextually correct. two and one-half years: 869-872 C.E.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

'I'he Geonic P~iod (2)

143

After him, Mar R. Tzemach Gaon• bar Mar R. Poltoi Gaon [ruled] from the year 183 [of the Seleucid Era; 872 C.E.]. He was the maternal grandfather of our father-SO• the oaon, and he ruled for nineteen51 years.• After him, Mar R. Hai bar Mar David ruled for seven and one-half years,• from the year 201 [ of the Seleucid Era; 890 C.E.]. During these one hundred years,• the following Geonim stood* in Mechasya:• Mar

ncJ :ii ,c l"!li' rutt'::i n,,n::i, Nini tiNl ,?:li',ii, :ii ic i::i tiNl ,,own 7'70, T1NJ '7w icN ,::iN .f,ltt' ,c 7,c N"i ruw::i n,,n::i, l,ltt' 3':ltt' iii ic i::i ,,Nn :ii .nJnc, it"OMC:l iic3' i1ltt' i1Nt) i?N:li

R. Tzemacll Gaon: He produced the first Talmudic dictionary, the Aruch, an ordered list of some 300 Aramaic terms, as well as a list of names and places mentioned in the Talmud. This was the forerunner of the more elaborate work of the same title by R. Nassan bar R. Yechiel of Rome (1035-1102 C.E.). 0111' fatller: R. Channina (see Chapter 14, p.158). niaeteen years: 872-890 C.E. R. HaLcvi (vol.6, pp.240-241) is convinced that the correct reading here is "nine years," so that when we add the seven and one-half years of Mar R. Hai's reign we reach the year 1,199 of the Seleucid Era (898 C.E.), which exactly completes the 'one hundred years' referred to by RSG in the next lines. In Chapter 14, p.156, we have shown the weakness of HaLcvi's proof, which he based on a corrupted version of Se/er HaKabba/ah found in Se/er HaYuchasin.si HaLevi's other claim is that RSG throughout the Iggeres is very exact about his periods of one hundred years. This claim is not altogether valid. In this chapter, p.145, RSG introduces his list of the Geonim of Sura during "these hundred years." He then presents a list which spans 139 years! HaLevi himself (vol.6, p.243) notices this and attempts, not too successfully, to explain it. Moreover, at the beginning of this chapter RSG begins the list of the third hundred years of the Geonim of Pumbedisa with R. Yeshayah, whose reign began in "107" of the Seleucid Era (796 C. E.), seven years after the exact beginning of the hundred years! HaLevi also fails to mention that in order to maintain his version, he must change the year of R. Hai's ascension (above) from "201" to "199." R. HaLevi did not see the Genizah fragment quoted in Geonica, pp. 7 and 70, in which R. Chezkiah hen Shmuel, the great-grandson of R. Tzemach Gaon, mentions that R. Tzemach and R. Poltoi ruled for a combined period of forty years. This is strong evidence that R. Tzemach must have ruled for nineteen years, since RSG states that R. Poltoi ruled for sixteen years. Thus their combined reign would be thirty-five years, which closely approximates the figure given by the Genizah fragment. sen■ aad one-laalf years: 890-897 C.E. tltese one hundred years: The figure is almost exact: from 796 C.E., beginning with R. Yeshayah HaLevi, to 897 C.E. stood: See above, p.139. Mechasya: Masa Mechasya, i.e., Sura.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

144

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

R. Hilai bar R. Mari• [ruled] for nine years.• "iC :li i:l "K?i1 :li i:l C"lU~.l After him, Mar R. Yaakov HaKohen• bar .C"ltt' lmrl Mar R. Mordechai [ruled] for fourteen years.• ,:i li1:JiT :ipi,, :i, ,c ,,,nK, After him, Mar R. Eivumai, the brother of .C"ltt' 1"" ":J1iC :li ic R. Mordechai, [ruled] for eight years.• After him, Mar R. TzaddoksJ• bar Mar R. "i'TiMK "KCi:l"K :li iC i"iMKi Ashi [ruled] for two years.• .C"ltt' itlictt' ":J1iC

:i,,

After him, Mar R. Hilai bar Mar R. Channina [ruled] for three and one-half years.• After him, Mar R. Kimoi bar Mar R. Ashi [ruled] for three and one-half years.• There was a dispute about which we have no information.S4 After him [ruled] Mar R. Moshess Kahana bar Mar R. Yaakov, for ten and one-half years.• Then for two years they remained without a gaon. •

:li iC i:l i'"1i :li iC i"iMKi .C"ltt' "lift' "~K iC i:l "N'iit :li iC iT"ili:li .itiMCi C"ltt' '.l iTl"lM :li ,c

,:i

,,c"p

r",ni

:i,

,c iT"ili:li

:i,

.nine, C"ltt' '.l "tt'K ,lit"'i1' 100"0? N:J"'i1 Nrui'i£)

KliT:J K"tt'itt'C :li iC iT"ili:li K.l'i!li C"Jtt' itt'1' :li)1'" :li iC i:l .1no N'i:l C"ltt' "lift' ,,cln

bar R. Mari: R. Mari is mentioned in Chapter 12, p.132. He had five direct descendants who followed him in the geonate: R. Hilai, R. Netronai, R. Hilai, R. Yaakov, and R. Yosef. nine years: 790-799 C.E. Mar R. Yaakov HaKoben: He was the first of a priestly family that furnished the geonate with three other incumbents: R. Eivumai, R. Moshe, and R. Kohen Tzcdek. fourteen years: 799-813 C.E. eight years: 813-821 C.E. According to S. Assaf,52 the authentic version can be found in two mss. which read ..five years," against most mss., which have our version! Mar R. Tzaddok: R. Tzaddok, like Mar R. Yaakov, was followed in the geonate by other members of his family: his brother, R. Kimoi; his two sons, R. Nachshon and R. Tzcmach; and his grandson, R. Hai bar R. Nachshon. two years: 821-823 C.E. R. Hilai...three and one-half years: 823-827 C.E. R. Kimoi...three and one-half years: 827-830 C.E. R. Yaakov...ten and one-half years: 830-841 C.E. they remained without a gaon: This was the first time that the geonate of Sura had been left vacant for an appreciable period. Perhaps no suitable candidate was found as a replacement. It is also possible that there were internal disturbances in Sura, which became divided into two factions: the partisans of the family of R. Tzaddok, and those of the family of R. Yaakov. In the end, R. Moshe, the son of R. Yaakov, gained the upper hand, while R. Nachshon, the son of R. Tzaddok, assumed the geonate fifty years later.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

T1se Geonic Period (2)

U5

After this• Mar R. Kohen Tzedek bar Mar R. EivumaiS6 was appointed• gaon [and ruled for] ten• and one-half years.•

yn:, :li itl 1'tt)l'\DK ,:,n in:li i~l7 tiK) "Ktli:lK :li itl i:l piJ .i'TJMtli C"l~

After this: after the two years during which "they remained without a gaon." was appointed: This term, 1,cnCM, usually is not used for any of the Geonim of either Pumbedisa or Sura. In this case, the gaon took office following a vacancy due to

a dispute. (See above, s.v. "two years.") RSG therefore probably wants to make it clear that Mar R. Kohen Tzedek was a unanimous choice. ten: R. HaLeviS7 reads "six," claiming that the copyist confused the letter,,, meaning "six," for, \ meaning "ten." R. Kohen Tzedek...ten and one-haH yean: Until the end of this chapter, RSG deals with the second one-hundred- year period he lists for the Geonim of Sura, beginning about the year 1100 of the Seleucid Era.58 Our translation simply follows the text of the lggcrcs, including the number of years given for each gaon's reign. RSG relied on a written tradition regarding the Mcsivta of Sura, without attempting to resolve any discrepancies that tradition might contain. As many scholars59 have already shown, however, there is a serious chronological difficulty with RSG's tradition. The period covered here is 139 years, 1100-1239 of the Seleucid Era. The end of this period, 1239 of the Seleucid Era,CCi .l"1'H :li'1'" :li it:> i:l illi"l:::) :li?) ycr, ,,n M?i ?"Hin nin .:ii,Mi .C"l~ '" 7;0, "Nn ,;,:, p::li

departed for tile Garde■ of Eden: Is it mere coincidence that RSG applies this term to the passing of this R. Malk.ah of Sura and also (Chapter 11, p.128) to the passing of R. Malkah of Pumbedisa? elden... dled within a tlaree-montb period: See Chapter 12, p.118, where RSG makes a similar statement regarding the last of the Savoraim. appointed: Here again RSG's source, or RSG himself, deems it necessary to use a special term, 1,cnDM, to describe the appointment of a gaon whose rule began after a major upheaval or vacancy. We saw this previously in the case of Mar R. Kohen Tzedek (p.145).

R. Hai Gaon...for ten years: Assaf and Brand,90 without any explanation, have added one year to R. Hai's reign. R. HaLevi,9 1 in order to account for the excess of at least five years which still exists, even according to his calculations, between the reign of R. Amram and that of R. Sa'adia, has given R. Hai a reign of six years instead of ten. for se,en years: R. HaLevi92 seems to assign R. Shalom only six years. After him: After Mar R. Shalom. they: The members of th,e Mesivta.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Iggnes of Rav S/terlra Gaon

150

After him, the Rabbis discused disbanding 71::,,i "l":l icnK n"in::,,i the [Mesivta of Sura at] Masa Mechasya n""nc,, n"DMC Knc, "'?ito:l', and transferring the remaining [scholars] to Kn"i::,,c,I)? n::,, ,,.,.tt'ci JKC Pumbedisa. In the end, [however,] they agreed ::,,i ,c, 10cc, ,c,.:>cK qic::,,-,, to appoint Mar R. Nassan Aluf, our uncle, the brother of our father, the son of Mar ::,,i ici M"i:l U":lK "MK qi?K Jl'U R. Yehudah Gaon, our grandfather, to the n,1,Kl Ctt':l U":lK ":lK tiKl n,,n.. geonate of [Masa] Mechasya, so that the KCtt' ?"lO:l"? K?i ":>"M ":> K"CM0 [good] name [of the institution] would carry .M"tt'l)l Ml ":>MiKi on. [However,] before [he could assume his U":li ic? MK"tt'l iii M""nKi position], he went to his rest.• Then the Exilarch• David brought Mar "l:lC K?i qc,.. ::,,, ,::,, K"ilJc Rav'S Sa'adia bar R. Yosef. He was not from C"imc K?K n,n Kn:l"nc, p::,,, the sons of the Rabbis of the Mesivta,• but rutt' , ....K:l M":>Cc, "CU'\l):l lJ'I,.., was from Egypt, and was known as96 [Al- tiM"l:lC i""ntt'Ki JKC t'J"l:>i tow',i ]Fayumi.97 He [David] appointed him [gaon] ,:,..cc, ..,,;lJ 10, K"CMc, p:::i,, in lyar of the year 239 [of the Seleucid Era; :l"niK, Kn"i::,,c,I), p:i, ';,lJ 928 C.E.].98 [R. Sa'adia Gaon] gathered those who remained of the sons of the Rabbis of t"n,n K"CMC Knc, Kn:l"nC Mechasya • and the younger students• who n"ilJc u::,,i::,,, tin:,, Ktli i"ltt' had attached themselves to the Rabbis of n"ilJC Kl:li ii""ipi K"tt'lM iii Pumbedisa, and he conducted the Mesivta of ..,pnc, K"tt'ln ,,,, ..n,MK? Masa Mechasya• for two years. The Exilarch n,.v K,, n,,1 tt'Ki n,..n, M"WK" David quarreled with them [the Rabbis] and with R. Sa'adia, and R. Sa'adia called upon the brother of the Exilarch David, who was named Yoshiyahu, to become the exilarch.• However, this attempt did not succeed, and Yoshiyahu was exiled to Khorasan. • R. Yaakov bar R. Netronai...thirteen years: R. HaLevi93 here too reduces the gaon's reign by one year, assigning R. Yaakov only twelve years. be went to bis rest: Lit., "his soul rested" (MTIU ru). RSG rarely uses this term when writing of the Geonic period. (But see Chapter 12, p.126, regarding Mar Yanka.) He usually uses the expression, ::l,:)I' or i!ll!"H. This matter requires further research. tbe Exilarch: Lit., "the nasi." sons of the Rabbis of tbe Mesina: See this same term in Chapter 14, p.158, and our discussion there. Mecllasya: Masa Mechasya, i.e., Sura. younger students: This word (,'n'7») is not clear. It could mean "gleanings" or " young ones." Masa Mecbasya: Sura. exilarch: Here RSG uses the term, "Head of the Diaspora" (n1'7l n,) for exilarch, instead of his usual term, "nasi." This change of terminology is probably connected with the unusual circumstances in which Yoshiyahu was appointed.99 Khorasan: A province in northeastern Persia, and a major stronghold of the Karaites. 100

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA --- - -- --- ...:..- ---

____,_;.

151

TIie Geonic Period (2)

The Exilarch David then called upon R. Yosef, the son of R. Yaakov,• to be gaon of Masa Mechasya. He [R. Yosef] was known as bar Satya. He was of tender years, and was a minor scholar in comparison with Mar R. Sa'adia. Mar R. Sa'adia Gaon went into hiding for a number of years• because of fear of the dispute with the Exilarch David,• and R. Yosef conducted the geonate in Masa Mechasya. In the end, R. Sa'adia was reconciled with the Exilarch David, but R. Yosef remained in his place• [as gaon]. The total years of Mar R. Sa'adia• were fourteen years,• and he died during the days of our father, the Gaon,• in the year 253 [of the Seleucid Era; 942 C.E.], after [the death of] the Exilarch David.• Then R. Yosef was left as the sole leader• in Masa Mechasya, and the situation deteriorated completely, and he was not even a match for R. Aharon Gaon.• He left Babylonia and Masa Mechasya and went and settled in the city of Batzra, where he died. After that, there was no Mesivta in Masa Mechasya.

qc,.. ::l,.., H~ln ,,, M"ip, H"toD i::l::l l1",.., :lPl1" :i,, M"i:l ,,, H"Dnc Hl'\C:l tiHl n,..n.., M"M llOP i"C',ni M"M C"l~:l ,c H:lnli .n..,110 :i, ,c ":JJ" cw C"l~ nc::, tiHl M"il1D :i, H"~ln ,,, np,..,nc nc"H ..,..:i~:i H"Onc Hl'\C::l nu,Hl lMl qo,.. :i,, iii Cl1 "il1C "::li 0"41E>H qiC):i',i .n,n::i,,:i cp qo,.. :i,, H"~ln ,n,n n,,i,c :i, ,c, "le' .-,.-,::, n,,110 ,c ::li ::l"::le'i ."'le' ..,c in:i l"li Ne':l U41:lH JiHlM "S":l .H"e'lM iii H"Onc Hnc:i qci" :i, ,n"nH, niit H..,, ,,cl', it"n""C it..,,..,,H, :i, n,,n::l ,..,..E>H itE> 7,nn1> it"" Hncr,, ',::)::)', it"i'::le'i tiHl tiitH Hru,,c:i :l"n", ',rH, H"Dnc "" "'::lit ,n:i, cnn :i,::,e,, n,1:i, .H"'Dnc Hnc:i Hn:i,nc niit

the son of R. Yukov: He was the son of R. Netronai, and is mentioned above, p.149.

a aambers of years: According to the Sefer HaKabbalah, this was for seven years. fear of the dispute with the Exilarcla David: Indeed, according to the 'Sefer HaKabbalah, p.55, the Exilarch David wanted to put R. Sa"adia to death. remah1ed in Ids place: Lit., "stood in his place." See above, pp.129 and 138, where the first word of this expression is also found in a similar context. The total years of Mar R. Sa'adia: The total number of years from the time he became gaon until his death, including an indeterminate number of years during which he was in hiding. folll'teea years: Simple arithmetic compels us to accept this French and ms. version, and not "twelve," as appears in the Spanish version. oar father, the Gaoa: R. Channina Gaon (see below, Chapter 14, p.00), who ruled from 938-943 C.E. [tile deatll of] tile Exilarcll David: In 940 C.E. left• tile sole leader: Lit., "was alone." R. Aharon Gaon: His undistinguished counterpart in Pumbedisa, as RSG points out below, Chapter 14, p.158).

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Shoira Gaon

152

Notes to Copter 13 I. la.

2. 3. 4. 5.

Beginning with this date until the end, RSG omits the "1000" when listing the Seleucid year. Vol.6, p.2~237 and notes 22 and 23 there. P.109, lines 13 and 14. As stated in my Introduction, I have consistently used Levine's emendations and his eclectic version as the Aramaic text in this work. HaLevi here accuses B. Goldberg's and A. Neubauer's editions of the lggeres of being completely corrupt; according to him, only the Ylldtasin version has retained the truth. He asserts that the last three words of the phrase: tiKl qci• 10', ,m,:rm (" ...they gave the authority to Mar R. Yosef Gaon") are superfluous here. This claim seems, at best, overly pedantic. R. HaLevi docs not point out that his approach, too, would necessitate the addition of, TMZUi right after the word, ,m,::iiM, as well as the omission of the letter,., from the word, Moreover, according to his solution it would be preferable, though not essential, to omit the word, f110. RSG's statements here and in the next paragraph to some extent refute the claim of R. HaLevi (vol.6, p.266) that the av beis din was never seriously considered a candidate for the geonate whenever the position became vacant. In fact, R. HaLevi's other claim, that the av beis din succeeded to the office of gaon only in rare instances, is difficult to accept. We know of at least seven or eight aw,s beis din who eventually became Geonim. These include R. Yosef bar Mar Chiyya (sec next paragraph of the lggercs), R. Tzemach [see L. Ginzberg, Ginzei Shecluer-, New York, 1929; vol. 2, p.200 (Ginzberg, GetHlico, p.11, n.4 must be emended)], and R. Hai (see p. 164). (Ginzberg, in his list of avos batei dill, in Geottiai. /oc. cit., should also have included Mar R. Aharon Kimoi here, and Mar R. Amram; see chapter 14, p.159). Levine's emendation (p.109, n.6) is incorrect, since usually the members of the Mcsivta appointed the iaon. P.51. The Se/er HaKabbalaA's account is a free paraphrase of our Spanish version of the lggercs on p.137, where RSG's grandfather is described as the scribe of Mar R. Yosef. See, however, our gloss below, s.v. "father's father." See S.Lieberman, Greek in lewis/, Palestine; New York, 1947; p.70, n.23, for a discussion of this term. French version. R. HaLevi (vol.6, p.249), however, feels comfortable with this long life span. On the other hand, he admits that it would be difficult to explain how this R. Yehudah bar Mar Shmuel Reish Kallah could be the son of the R. Shmuel Reish Kallah mentioned above, p.127; for the latter was the teacher of R. Acha of Shabcha, who flourished in 748 C.E. The lengthy expression, "the father of the father of the GaOII who was the father of my father" (u•::iN •:IN 1iKl •:IN •:IN) is used, instead of the simpler expression, "the grandfather of the Gaotr who was my grandfather, (y,Kl 'li" ti"), tPT because RSG's maternal grandfather, R. Tzemach, had also been a ga011. Thus the term, "my grandfather" might have been misconstrued as referring to R. Tzemach. See above, Chapter 11, p.119. Doros HaRis/tonim, vol.6, p.236. History of the Jews; Philadelphia, 1956; vol.Ill, p. 154. Weiss, Dor Dor VeDorsluw; Vilna, 1904; p.26. This is a word Graetz and Weiss simply decided to add to our textf This interpretation might have been valid if the text had read: n-n,pl,i. All our rnss. have: M'n1pl•::I.

,0.,.

6.

7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12.

13.

14.

IS. 16.

17. 18. 19.

____ Digitized by

Google

- - -~--- -- ---·-·-·-··-··--·- - -

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

153

Th~ G~onic Period (2)

20. Weiss, loc. cit. , also states that R. Yosef claimed Elijah the Prophet visited him. RSG never mentions such a claim. 21. See R. HaLevi, loc. cit., n.22, for a discussion of this point. 22. I fail to comprehend R. HaLevi's rejection of this alternative. 23. See Z. Graetz, History of the Jn1s; Warsaw, 1908 (Heb. edition); vol. 3, p.419, and n.7. Graetz quotes from the work of Bar Hebraeus of Syria.

24. Ibid. 25. See Y.D . Markon's article in Festldrriftfar Moritz Sdu,efer; Berlin, 1927; pp.130-136. 26. See &cyclopedia Judaico, vol.5, column 1351. 27. See French version. 28. Loe. cit., n. J. However, J. Mann (see our Introduction; p.XXV, n.51.), vol.2, p.130, claims that Bar-Hebraeus' account is too confused to be accepted. 29. From R. HaLevi's comments (vol.6, p.120, and n.24 there), however, it would seem that be is of the opinion that it was Daniel who supported Mar R. A vraham. 30. R. HaLevi's sharp "pilpJ' Ooc. cit.) does not resolve this difficulty. 31. The intention here is unclear. See Levine, p.111, n.l, for a discussion of the term, ~ro. Sec also Rabbeinu Channanel on Pesocllim 48b, s.v. icM. 32. Cf. Yoma 13a, Tosafos, s.v. "01' •:ii:, n:::,'m, which discusses the halachic ramifications of that episode. 33. Indeed, the French version omits this word. 33a. This thesis, however, is problematic since RSG has already informed us in chap. 11, pg. I 13, that the Festival of the Exilarch, to where the goon of Pumbcdisa had to travel, was abolished during the exilarchate of David ben Yehudah. See, however, B. Goldberg (Preface, pg.XI, n.4) p.84, who suggests that the intention here is to the Shabbos before a festival when everybody gathered in the ~is midrasli or synagogue to learn about the laws of the festival. He refers us to Raslu in &radws 6b s.v. M""UM. This thesis has one serious difficulty: why was the gathering held in Baghdad and why was it attended by the Geonim of Pumbcdisa? 34. M. Holder's translation of this phrase (History of the Jn1islr People from Yavnelr to Pum~diso; New York, 1986; p.298) is incorrect. 35. Cf. our discussion in Bilnl Sltmos Dor VaDor; Jerusalem, 1986; p.238, n.11 . 36. See above, chapter 12, p.128, where the same term appears and is understood by many there to mean "depose," contrary to its meaning here. 37. Vol.6, p.240. He probably relied on the words, l"l':100 ,:::,,, appearing soon. However, that expression proves nothing, since the official appointment was always performed by the exilarch. 38. Ms. and French version. 39. See above, ch.12, p.129. 40. French version. 41. See above, ch.11, p.119. 42. See Geonico, loc.cit., p.12, n.4. 43. Mss. 44. See above, ch.12, p.128. 45. According to Daros HaRtslronim (loc. cit., pp.240, 272), this was an internal dispute in the Mesivta between two equally qualified Rabbis who both undertook the functions of goon.

46. Loe. cit. 47. See above, ch.12, p. 131, where a similar term is understood in this sense. 48. Loe. cit., p.249. 49. See ch.12, p.131. SO. Ms. and French version. We know from many other sources that he was the maternal great-grandfather of RSG. We have, therefore, not accepted the French version, which distances him one more generation from RSG.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA

154

Jggeres of Rav Slterira Gaon

SI. Sefer HaKabbaJalt, p.52. The Raavad says: He was succeeded by Rabbah bar Ammi [who served] for two years and a half and passed away in 4624 (from Creation). He was succeeded by R. Tzemach bar R. Poltoi [who served] for nineteen years and passed away in 4633! There is a flagrant error in simple arithmetic, as G. Cohen, loc. cit., has pointed out, which caused R. Zacuto to emend the number 19 to 9. Apparently, the Raavad overlooked the, ..,.. of the number, "?I'" (19) because of its proximity to the, .., .. in the name of R. Poltoi ("l?l,11). 52. See below, s.v. "for ten and one-half years," and n.58. 53. Mss. 54. It is noteworthy that L. Ginzberg, op. cit., p.16, docs not mention this dispute. SS. Ms. and French version. This reading can be verified by a Gmizale fragment published in Giluei S/recltter, loc. cit., p.214. 56. Ms. S1. Loe. cit. p.259. 58. This period actually begins with Mar R. Hilai bar Mar R. Mari (790 C.E.), mentioned above, p. 144. 59. Prominent among those who have attempted to salvage RSG's report arc the following: (a) W. Bacher and A. Epstein, "Gaon" (Tire Jewislt Encyclopedia; 1903; vol.V, p.570). (Brody, sec (d), I. 6, must be emended) (b) R. Y.A. Halevi, Doros HaRisltonim; vol.6, pp.242- 246, 282-283. (c) S. Assaf and J. Brandes, "Gaon" (Encyclopedia Judaica; Jerusalem, 1971; vol.VII, columns 319- 320. (d) Y. Brody, "Rav Amram bar Shcsbna - Gaon in Sura?" Tarbitz 56 (1987), pp.327-345. Brody's excellent research and article have been extremely useful to me. (i(). See below, p. lSO. 61. Sec J. Mann, "A Fihrist of Sa'adia's works;" JQR, 11 (1920-21); pp.423-428. 62. According to the reading (p.149) which gives Mar R. Yom-Tov's reign as ten years, the discrepancy would be even greater. However, we have not accepted that reading; sec n.94. 63. These arc: (a) Y,rMll 10D"C' M:i"rt MM,., i"'Tim (p.144) - after R. Kimoi). (b) ,:,n ,rc 1"01WM1...':l0i M:m i:l'X'i (p.149) - after R. Malkah. (c) Mr.JD i'Mn:li "0'::>n M:l 'f"T...,nl'M M'n M::ii?i Mn'1c Mn'""" (p.149) - after R. Shalom. (d) n•Dl ru ,:,niK'I (p.150) - after R. Yom-Tov Kahana. 64. R. Halevi (Joe. cit.) relied on our version, which bas "ten," and this accounts for bis greater discrepancy (sec bis p.244). 65. Sec above, n.59. 66. p.259. 67. Loe. cit. 68. Loe. cit. 69. Loe. cit., especially pp.258-259. 70. His proof for this (sec pp.24S-246) is based on teslunos written by R. Amram earlier than 1169 of the Seleucid Era. The weakness of his theory, however, is the fact that not only the gaon wrote rcsponsa. The head of the cxilarch's ycshivah, who was called Mn,,0, M:l::ii IQ'¥t, also sometimes wrote them. Sec A.A. Harkavy, Teslutvos HaGeo11im; Berlin, 1887; p.389. In addition, RSG specifically states that R. Amram "was called gaon," not Mni,0, M:l::ii IQ'¥t. Sec Levine, p.115, n.2. 71. Loe. cit. 12. Geonic Teslt11Vos from t/re GenizaJr; Jerusalem, 1929; p.27. R. HaLevi, to his credit, was not aware of this publication. 73. Loe. cit. 74. His only proof is based on his original assumption, discussed in our next note. See his interesting discussion on pp.341-344 of his excellent article. 75. Brody suggests that if we can trace two separate 1esh11Vos dealing with the same problem

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

The Geonic Period (2)

155

posed by the same questioners. we can then more or less pinpoint the year or yean in which the two Geonbn reigned. Since only Gtoldm (i.e.• beads of ,rw.sivto.,) or the~,~ auinc, wrote te.slatvos (see Geollica, vol.2, p.31, 1.21), then these two tullwo.s we attempt to track down must have been written to the beads of both Sura and Pumbedisa, if we are sure that the author was not the aui,ic, "~, KJWT. Brody is successful in his attempt, and discovers teslanos to questions addressed simultaneously to both R. Netronai and R. Poltoi (see pp.335-336). as well as some addressed simultaneously to both R. Netronai and R. Matisyabu. We know that none of these served as aui,ic, "~, auwi, so they must have been contemporaneous Geonim of Sura and Pumbedisa. 76. See above. p.146. 77. See above. p.142. 18. Op. cit., p.340. 79. I.e., reading "6.. instead of "10.. either regarding R. Kohen Tzedek or R. Sar Shalom. See our glosses in this chapter. s.v. "ten" and "for ten and one-half years." Brody suggests that this mistake was not necessarily RSG's. It might have crept into the written Suran source upon which RSG relied. 80. Unfortunately, the timeline for the Geonic Era offercd by M. Holder, History of the Jewi.slt People; New York, 1986, docs not correspond to any of these three approaches, does not properly correspond to RSG's figures, and is not wholly consistent with dates offered in his text (see, for example, p.295, regarding R. Yaakov bar R. Netronai, and p.287, regarding R. Kohen Tzedek). 81. Brody (p.340) reconstructs what he believes was the original wording of the written tradition used by RSG, before the error occurred. His p.331, I. 10, however, must be emended. 82. See Levine, loc. cit. 83. See above, p.132. In fact, perhaps that is why RSG mentions both R. Netronai's father and grandfather when discussing him, a phenomenon hardly found elsewhere in the lggeres. 84. See above, p.132. 85. It is noteworthy that both R. Moshe and R. Kohen Tzedek, who preceded R. Netronai, were also sons of previous Geonim. 86. See the Introduction to Seu, Rav Amram, all editions; Teslntvos HaGeonim (J. Mosafia ed.; Lyck, 1864; scc.56); and Geollica, /oc. cit., p.303, n.2, and p.326. 87. Even though it would seem that neither his father nor his grandfather was a gaon. 88. To/do.s; Warsaw, 1917; vol.I , pp.118-119 (ium. in the Introduction tc- Teslntvos Geonim Kadmonim; Berlin, 1848; D. Cassel ed.). 89. This is the figure that appears in both versions. I therefore fail to comprehend Brody's comment (op. cit., p.332, n.32), regarding Assaf"s calculations. 90. Loe. cit. 91 . Op. cit., pp.282-283. 92. Ibid. 93. Ibid. 94. Ms. 95. Ms. 96. Obviously, the "::1" and "::," of "01•m::1 (see next note) have been confused. 97. Mss. and French version. See also Se/er HaKabbalaJr, p.55. Hyman, p.101. simply ignored commenting on this incomprehensible reading! 98. See above, n.61. 99. See also E. Rivkin,"The Saadia-David ben Zakkai Controversy; A Structural Analysis;" Snulies and Es.says in Honor ofAbralram A. Nnmuur; Leiden, 1962; pp.388-423; and M. Auerbach, "Die Streit zwischen Saadia Gaon und dne Exilarchen David ben Sakkai;" Juedi.sche Snulim Joseph WohlgnnMt... gewidmet, Frankfurt a. M ., 1928; pp.1-30. 100. See L. Nemoy, "Al-Qirqisani's Account of the Jewish Sects and Christianity;" HUCA , VII (19.30); p.395.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Chapter 14: The

Geonic Period (3)

During these other hundred years,• the following Geonim ruled in Pumbedisa: After Mar R. Hai Gaon bar Mar R. David• [was] Mar R. Kimoi Gaon bar Mar R. Achai Gaon.• He ruled from the year 2093* [of the Seleucid Era; 897 C.E.], for eight and one-half years.6* Afterwards' Mar R. Yehudah, our grandfather, who was our father's father, [and was] the son of Mar R. Shmuel,*

i:,',c C"iMN C"ltt' 'i' i?N:li :tn i'iNi ,C"liNl Nli"i:l 01!)::l ic i:i tiNJ ""Nil :ii ic in:i ic i:i tiNJ ,,c,p :ii ic iii :ii ~":) nltt'J 7;c, tiNJ "NMN ::i i .NJ?£), l"ltt' ,,o "lCli

n,,n,

iJlpt :1, ,c 7,c ,n:i, ?Nictt' :i, ,c ,:i iJ":lN ":lN Nintu

these other hundred yean: I.e., the hundred-year period paralleling the period just described in Sura. R. Achai Gaon: He was mentioned earlier, in chapter 13, p.142, although there RSG added his title, Kahana.2 It is highly probable that he was a descendant of Mar Netronai Kahana, and also of Mar R. Avraham Kahana, the first Geonim of priestly descent in Pumbedisa. 209: Though our text has an incomprehensible "29, (io:,)" it is most probably a corruption and should read, "209 (ioi)." The exchange of :, for , is a very common copyist's error. Accordingly, R. Hai Gaon bar Mar R. David began his tenure in 201 of the Seleucid Era, ruled seven and one-half years (see above, chapter 13, p.143), and completed his reign in 209. The difficulty with this interpretation is that according to it, R. Kimoi only began his reign eight years after the start of the 100-year period. The French version reads: 201. This also is incomprehensible, since that is when R. Hai Gaon bar Mar R. David began, not completed, his term.3 According to R. HaLevi4 the correct reading here is "99 (iox)," and the intention is to the Seleucid year 199 (ioxp). In this, R. HaLevi is consistent with his controversial approach discussed above, chapter 13, p.143. eight and one-half yean: Based on our previous emendation, we have followed the French version and the ms. (which are supported by all editions of the Se/er HaKabbalahS), and have preferred these over the reading, " eighteen and one-half years.. which appears in the Spanish version.6 Mar R. Shmuel: See our discussion in the glosses to chapter 13, p.137, s.v. "father's father," regarding the question whether this R. Shmuel Reish Kallah, the greatgrandfather of RSG, can be identified with R. Shmuel Reish Kallah,8 the teacher of R. Acha of Shabcha, who was mentioned earlier, in chapter 12, p.127. Rosh Kallah: Lit., "Head of the Kai/ah." According to the account of R. Nassan 156

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

'11,e Geonic Period (3)

157

RoslfJ Kai/ah,* ruled from the year 217 [of the nltt' H"' t•"i rue, tt'HiJ n',:) tt'"i Seleucid Era; 905 C.E.] for eleven years and .n•:,, rue, iiN::l ::l":ltt'i nine, a half. He died in Adar of the year 228 [of ll:li t":l Nru,,E) n,n, the Seleucid Era; 917 C.E.]. A dispute [then] occurred between p:l,, N"~lit ,,,, Hn:l"nCi the Rabbis of the Mesivta and the :li ,c, n,..,p, ,E)l:lH Hn::l"nCi Exilarch•2 David; for the Rabbis of the "iC"i' Ji iC i::l tiHl H.lit:l itt':lC Mesivta assembled and appointed [as gaon] Mar R. Mevasser• Kahana Gaon bar Mar ::li iC', it""ii' H"tt'lit iiii tiHl R. Kimoi Gaon, while the Exilarch David qc,.. Ji ,c tJ Hln:, pit tn:i appointed Mar R. Kohen Tzedek Kahana• tt'in ,11 tin".l":l Nru,r,E) n,n, hen Mar R. Yosef. The dispute between ,,, HC',ttt ,,,.m l.,, rut: them continued until the month of Elul, 1nt1 i~::lC ::li ,c Cl7 H"tt'ln 233 [of the Seleucid Era; 922 C.E.], when n,,,., l)::lii 1,Nl ,~:le ::li :l"n", the E:xilarch David and Mar R. Mevasscr Gaon made peace.• R. Mevasser Gaon and his Rabbis convened by themselves, and the most outstanding Rabbis were with him; while Mar R. Kohen Tzedek and his Rabbis [convened]

,,,H

HaBavli,10 there were seven rashei kallah, the seven most prominent members of the Mesivta. See also Chui/in 49a, where rashei ka//ah are mentioned. During the Kai/ah month (see above, p.103), the head of the Mesivta would reply to the queries of the scholars, and then one of those sitting in the first row, the rasl,ei kal/al,, would discuss the topic with the hearers until it was explained and clarified to all. The function of the rosh kallah is not discussed by R. Nassan HaBavli, but it is likely that this official took an active part in the instruction given at the Mesivta. It is even more likely that this term is the singular of "rashei kallah". As Ginzbergll has pointed out: "Apparently, the gaon, av beis din, and rosh ka//ah of the Geonic period have some sort of correspondence with the triad of directors presiding over the Sanhedrin: the nasi, av beis din, and chacham." See above, chapter 2, p.12. R. Me~asser: It has been suggestedl3 that this is a name for the Prophet Eliyahu, whose appellation in Jewish literature is Mevasser, "Proclaimer" [of good tidings]. Mar R. Kollen Tzedek Ialaana: It is possible that be belonged to the same family as R. Mevasser Kahana, so that the quarrel was between two branches of the same family. made peace: It is noteworthy that RSG chose these words, being careful not to state that the Exilarch David accepted R. Mevasser as gaon. The episode, however, requires further study, for it is the only known case in the Geonic period where the Mesivta emerged somewhat triumphant from a contest with the exilarcb over the appointment of a gaon. In all other cases mentioned in the last two chapters, the exilarch always maintained the upper hand. In fact, this very Exilarcb David was able to hold his own in his bitter dispute with so powerful an opponent as R. Sa'adya Gaon (see above, chapter 13, p. lSO). Here, on the other hand, he seems to have been overcome by R. Mcvasser.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

158

Jggeres of Rav Sl,erira GaOII

by themselves.• In the year 237 [of the Seleucid Era; 926 C.E.], in Kislev, Mar R. Mevasscr Gaon died, and his Rabbis• came to• R. Kohen Tzcdek, and he died in the year 24715 [ of the Seleucid Era; 935 C.E.]. Afterwards, Mar R. Tzemach Gaon bar Mar R. Kafnai•6 ruled for two years and a half, and died at the beginning of the year 249* [of the Seleucid Era; 937 C.E. ]. And from Teves of the year 249,• our father R. Channina•' Gaon, the son of Mar R. Yehudah Gaon, ruled for five years and a half, and he died in the year 25418 [ of the Seleucid Era; 943 C.E.]. After him, Mar R. Aharon bar Mar R. Yosef HaKohen was appointed [to the geonate]. He was not from the descendants•9• of the Rabbis. Rather, he was from merchants, and Mar R. Mevasscr Gaon had appointed him [to sit in] the Great Row• in the

M"1M:l ,,n p:1,, C"in::1,0, c,::1, n.., .., p:1,, p,i 1n=> ,o, ::l":ltt' ,,c:i::1 ,,,,, Ntt'::li .c,:,,; ll:li UiNi tiNl itt'::lC :ii ic Ntt'::l ::l":ltt'i p,i yn:i n,, n .., ..,

:i,

.t"tli

i:l tiNl MCJ ::l1 10 1?0 in::li Nl?!), l"ltt' t"n,n 'IN)!):) ::1, ,c .~-e, N~ ~Ni:,, :l",tt"I :11 170 10"01 Ntt' n:,,~::1, :i, ,c, n ..,:,, tiNl U"::lN Nl"ln :l":ltt'i Nl?!), C"ltt' 'M tiNl n,,n, .i"li Ntt':l yinN ::1, ,c ,,cncN n,,n::1, ".l::lc iN,, yn:in qc,, :1, ,c ,:i ,c, n,n "1ln TC N?N n,n p:,,, N:11 N1i:l M":lCC tiNl 1~::lC ::l1

Mar Kohen Tzedek...[conve11ed] by themselves: If our thesis in the above gloss is correct, that the Exilarch David never really confirmed the choice of the Mesivta, then it is not strange at all that Mar Kohen Tzcdek could continue opposing R. Mevasser.•• m Rabbis: The Rabbis who had supported him. came to:I.e., they now recognized R. Kohen Tzcdek as the gaon. bepnning of the year 249: In order somehow to salvage this very difficult reading, which appears in all mss. of both versions, we must further assume that R. Kohen Tzcdek also died in the beginning of the year 247 of the Seleucid Era, which is possible, though not mentioned by RSG. It makes better sense to accept the ms. and French versions which offer 246 as the date of R. Kohen Tzcdek's death. Thus, adding two and one-half years (the reign of R. Tzemach Gaon) easily brings us to the beginning of the year 249. Teves of tbe year 249: R. Tzemach Gaon probably died sometime in the autumn (i.e., the beginning) of the year 249. (The Seleucid Era is usually counted from the autumn of 312 B.C.) After a very short interim in Teves, a new gaon was appointed. descendants: This term (,l:::i) is ambiguous and could also mean "disciples." Sefer KaKabbalah (p.58) states that Mar R. Aharon achieved the position of gaon because of his great wealth. It could be that RSG uses the phrase, "not from the descendants of the Rabbis" to hint that this gaon was not fully qualified for the position in terms of his scholarship. Great Row: The Rabbis of the Mesivta sat in rows according to their scholarly rank.

.. ·- - .

Gooole --·--····-·~--- ·- --~---Q_ ,__

Digitized by

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

11w Geoldc Period (3)

159

Mesivta. And this was not because he was "'!Ki n,n trn,, ,K,,, Kn:l,nc:l fit to succeed our father the Gaon in the K',K Kli:lK JiKl 11'\:l nu,Kl', geonate. Rather, the post should have gone "MK :lK C1ClJ :l1 ,er, n,n Kn:),, to Mar R. Amram the Av [Deis Din], the n',:) ~K, n~lC :li, n,,:l UCK brother of our mother; [R. Amram was] the son of R. Mishui20 the Rosh Kai/ah.• But tlJ n,n, tinK :li ,c n,r,lJ rmp, Mar R. Aharon jumped on him, and was very :lK 0101' :l1 10 n"l0 r,,n,, iMC fierce. Mar R. Amram the Av Bcis Din was l,r,m i10:) in:li n,cpr, 'nKi ,~ afraid of him, so he went before him.• After tn:) :li ,c i:l n,cru :li ,c n,r,lJ some [time], Mar R. Nechemiah bar Mar tinK ,c, n,cp :l,n,, in:l p,i R. Kohen Tzedek, who had sat before him* ?J:11 ,~ill K7t n"l"C r:rilJ nin [Mar R. Aharon], split from him. However, Mar Aharon was preferable to him,• and tinK :l1 ,c :l":)~ in:l, M"lC the Rabbis did not leave him. [However,] Jl:lii tinnipc ,,,n tc-lJi qio:l after Mar R. Aharon died, at the end of KlruKi n,cru :i, ,c, n,cpr, 271 (of the Seleucid Era; 959 C.E.), some of Kl"'l~K K', Klr,,, ~"Ill Jl:l1i the Rabbis went back [to sit] before Mar R. Kl"'lm n,cp', Kl'nK K,,, M"ClJ Nechemiah.* But we, and the many Rabbis Kl,,":li' K,,, i•:l :lK KlilJ Kinn who were ours,• were not in unison with him, and I did not go before him.• During .n,cru :li ,c :l":)~ ilJ nu,Kl that time, I was av beis dill,• [but] I did not accept the Geonate until Mar R. Nechemiah died. The "Great Row" is probably the first row, whose memben were the rashei /cal/ah. See above, s.v. "Rosh Kallah." tlle Rosia lallala: We have undestood the appellative to be referring to R. Mishui, Though he is also described as a understood to the Mesivta21, perhaps, this was one of the functions of a rosll lcalJaJ,. Othen2la consider R. Amram the rosJ, /cal/al,. They, however, must explain the term "lK" that appean with R. Amram in most mss, sinil we know from other sources that be was the maternal uncle, not great-uncle, of RSG. went before laim: He submitted to R. Aharon's authority. sat before ldm: This is another expression meaning to accept his authority (see previous gloss). "Went before him" seems to imply that R. Amram had bis own independent status, but he went to pay bis respects to R. Aharon and to consult him, to show that he considered him his superior (see above). "Had sat before him" would imply that R. Nechemiah had been constantly in bis presence as a disciple or subordinate judge. preferable to lllm: RSG does not inform us clearly in what sense Mar R. Aharon was preferable. Perhaps be simply was too powerful, as we saw above. See, however, the some term in chap. 13, p.137. oms: I.e., belonging to the Mesivta of Pumbedisa. co before him: See above, s.v. "went before him" and "sat before him." aT IJels dla: RSG was av beis din, which was usually the last step before becoming gaon.-n Moreover, Mar R. Nechemiah was less qualified than him for the Geonate. Nevertheless, RSG decided not to take the leadership position until R. Ncchcmiah

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

160

lggeres of Rav Sllerira Goon

In the year 279 [of the Seleucid Era; 968 C.E.], I was appointed to the geonate. And about two years ago,• we appointed our ~n Hai to the position of av beis din*. May it be the will of the Holy One, Blessed is He, to include us among the living• and among those who are written for life, and may He give us the merit to lead Yisrael in a truthful, proper, and fitting manner. And may Mashiach hen David come quickly and soon, in our lifetime, and in your• lifetime, and in the lifetime of the whole House of Yisrael. May it be His will, Amen.

Kl"::>'CnCK to•lJj Ntt':n m:1 ""KM? ,nu:,cc, nuitu:i .C"ltt' ':l ,,we ,•:1 ni:lK:l "itt'?i n•:1p "Ci'C KU1i "M" Cln C""nn ClJ C":litt'n Kln" "ii:li? Klr\" ":JT"i C""n? C":lil'\:)M "iKi:,i y,:i,n:, 'tott'p:l ?Kitt" TCT:li '?)lJ:l iii p n"W? M"r\""i ;:,, ""n:i, ti::>""n:i, Kl""n:l :l"iP iCKli yiri "M" pi ?Kitt" n":l .JCK

died. This might have been a sign of respect for R. Ncchemiah, or it might be that RSG preferred to stay away from controversy. ago: I.e., two years before 298 of the Seleucid Era (987 C.E.), when the Iggercs was written. This interpretation, implying that R. Hai was appointed in 296 of the Seleucid Era (985 C.E.), can be verified by the Damascus ms. (sec Introduction, p.XXIII, n.40), which gives a similar figure, 298, as the year of R. Hai's appointment.23 Hai... •• beis dia: Rav Hai was born in 939 C.E.24 and was appointed as av beis din in 98S or 986 C.E. which would make him about 46 or 4525 years old when he received the appointment. among tlae H-.1111: Levine (p.121, n.6) theorizes that this blessing suggests strongly that the lggeres was written and sealed before Rosh HaShanah, perhaps in the Yarcl,ei Kai/ah month of Elul. He further speculates that this timing might also account for the fact that one ms.26 gives the year 299 of the Seleucid Era as the date when the lggeres was written. He suggests that although the lggeres was written in 298, it might not have arrived in Kairouan until after Rosh HaShanah. you: Rav Yaakov ben Nissim of Kairouan, to whom this lggeres was written.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

______,

UNIVERSl1Y OF VIRGINIA .. - - - -- -- -- - --·-

·_

TIie Geo,uc Pmod (JJ

161

Notes to I. 2. 3. 4. S. 6.

7.

c..,._ 14

See above, p.143. It would appear from the lgera that RSG was not particularly consistent about mentioning the titles of the Gttlllim. See, however, the ms. of the French venion, which gives 208. This date is very close to our emendation. Vol.6, p.248. P.42 (Heb. sec.). It is highly probable that R. Zacuto•s reading of "eighteen and one-half years" in bis venion of the Se/er HaKabbolol, (a probable emendation of the Raavad•s in order to heal the breach in chronology) might have led R. Shmuel Shalom. the editor of the first edition of the Sefer fwlttutl, (Constantinople. 1566). to change the text in the lgeres also appearing there.

Ms.

8.

Though RSG does not call him by this title, cf. the RIUl,bo, quoted on p.135, n.30, who does. 9. Ms. 10. Medinal J~ull CllrOllk/a; vol.2, p.87. 11. Geolllctl, p. 12, n.4. 12. Lit., "the Nasi.'• 13. GeDlfica, p.SS, n.1. 14. This would, then, somewhat alleviate the difficulty raised by Ginzberg in GeOllica, p.63. IS. See, however, the ms. and French venions; and cf. R. HaLevi, Joe. cit., p.133. 16. The Sefer HaKabbalaA (p.59) cites this goo,,. 17. French version. 18. R. HaLevi inexplicably emends the text to 256. Hyman (p.103, n.27) suggests 2SS. According to our interpretation, which accepts the lggeres' statement that R. Channina began his reign in Teves of 249, there is no need for emendation. Adding five and one-half years to Teves, 249 would give us Tammuz, 254. 19. See above, ch. 13, p.lSO. 20. I have preferred the French venion. See Levine, M,Tek,rfat HaGeonim, p.25. 21. See GetHlica, p. 12, n. 4, for the source. 21a. Loe. cit. 22. See RSG's remarks in chapter 13, p.138, about how unusual it was that R. Yosef bar Mar Chiyya, the av bets din, was not chosen to be '"""· RSG implies that R. Yosef bad a claim to the geonate by virtue of being the av Nu dbt. See our further discussion in chap. 13, p. I 52, n. 6. 23. Mann (see Introduction, p.XXV, n.S I) emends that text to read: 296. Rappaport, too (see Introduction, p.XXII) has our understanding. Unfortunately, a printer's error fell in and his note should read 296 or, more probably, 1.97, but not 294. B. Goldberg, in his edition (Mainz, 1873), p.60, has defended his version: ":," (20 years); the intention being, then, that R. Hai was appointed as av bets dill twenty years after RSG became gaon, i.e., in 299 of the Seleucid Era, the same year that RSG wrote the Iggeres. Unfortunately, Goldberg has failed to realize that even according to his corrupted edition, the lggeres was written in 298 and not 299 (see p.l there). In addition, the specific term: , ~ does not accomodate his interpretation; nor does the linguistic style of RSG. One might attempt to salvage Goldberg's thesis by pointing out that the word: , ~ could be understood to mean "approximately" twenty years. However, it is not clear why RSG should be vague about this important event of his own lifetime, when he is so precise about events occurring hundreds of years previously. 24. Not 969 as Rappapon (Toldot Rav Hai, pg. 165) claims. His calcuation is based on the Sefer

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Ian-es of Rav Sllerlra Gaon

162

HalCabbalah mss. that places his death in 1038 C.E. after a life of sixty-nine yean. The more reliable mas. however, have "ninety-nine." The date 940 that Weia (Dor Dor ~Donlltr,, Vilna, 1904, vol. 4, p. 145, n. 3 and p. 155) offen is also incorrect. See A.A. HarlCavy (Intro. p.XXII, n.36) vol. I, sec. I, p. 171. 25. Not 17 as Rappoport (op. cit. p.171, n. 4) or 20 as appears in TPIIIW>I AloltarNI, Lemberg, 849, sec. 29. 26. See Levine, p.4.

Digitized by

G~oogle _ -

Original from

1INIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CITED Editions and Translations of tlte lggeres I. Bodek, J., Yenuhalayim; Levov, 1844; pp.53-83. 2. Filipowski. Z., Se/er Ha Yucluuin HaS/ralem; London, 1857; p.38. 2a. ---Shomer Zion HaNe'emm,, Altuna 1851-1852, nos. 106-117. 3. Goodblatt, D., Rabbinic Instruction in Sasanian Babylonia; Leiden, 1975; pp.22-27. 4. Goldberg, B., "lggeret Rav Sherira Gaon"; C/rafetz Matmonim; Berlin, 1844; pp.66-84. 5. - - - , lggeres Rav Slterira Gaon.· Mainz, 1873. 6. Kahane, A., Sifrut HaHistoria HaYisraelit; Warsaw, 1922. vol.I, pp.73 ff. 7. Landau, L., Epitre Historique du R. Sclterira Gaon (Traduite de fltebreu modernearameen et commentee avec une introduction); Paris, 1904. 8. Neubauer, A., Medieval Jewish Chronicles; Oxford, 1887; vol.I, pp.3-46. 9. Wallerstein, Josue, Sclterirae Quae Dicitur Epistola (lnterpretatione Lativa A.dvo/ationibus et Criticis et Exegeticis lnstructa); Krotochini, 1861. Secondary Sources A.nkori, Z., Karaites in Byzantium; New York, 1959. Assaf, S., Tekufat HaGeonim VeSifrutah; edited by M. Margalios; Jerusalem, 1955. Baer, M., "lyunim Be-lggeres Rav Sherira Gaon"; Bar-Ilan Yearbook 4-5 (1967); pp.181-196. Baron, S.W., A. Social and Religious History of the Jews; Philadelphia, 1958; vol.V, pp.275 ff. Ben-Sasson, Menachem, Society and Leadership in Jewish Communities in North Africa (Kairouan) from 800-1037 (doctoral dissertation); Jerusalem, 1983. - - - , "Fragmentary Letters from the Genizah Concerning the Ties of the Babylonian Academies with the West"; Tarbitz 56, (1987) p. 183, n. 37. Brody, Y., "Rav Amran bar Sheshna - Gaon in Sura?," Tarbitz, 56 (1987), pp. 327 ff. Chazan, M.Y., "lyei HaYam" (commentary on Teshuvos HaGeonim); Leghorn, 18f;9; pp.76-109. Elbogen, I., "Wie steht es um die zwei Rezensionen des Sherira-Briefes"; Festschrift nun 75-Jaehrigen Bestehen des Juedisch-Theologischen Seminars Breslau, 1929; vol.II, pp.63lf. Ephrati, Jacob E., The Savoraic Period and its Literature; Petach-Tikvah, 1973; pp.1-13, 281-303. Epstein, A., Kitvei R. A.vra/ram Epstein; edited by A.M. Haberman; Jerusalem, 1957; vol.II, pp.410-419. Epstein, J.N., Mevo'ot LeSifrut Ha-A.moraim; Tel Aviv, 1963; pp.610-615. 163

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Slterira Goon

164

Fuerst, J.I., "Chronology in Scherira's Brief"; Der Orient (Literaturblatt des Orients); Berlin, 1848; vol.9, p.622. Gafny, Y., "Talmudic Chronology in the lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon"; Zion, 52 ( 1987), pp. I ff. Ginzberg, L., Geonica; New York, 1909; vol.I, pp.1-69. Halberstam, S.Z.Ch., "lggeres Bikores"; Kevod Levanon, 10 (1873); vol.II, pp.7-16. Harkavy, A.A., Zichron LaRishonim: Berlin, 1887; vol.I, sec.4, Introduction. Kaminka, A., "Scherira's Responsum, uber d. Opposition gegen d. Geonim"; Judische Literaturb/att, Supplement to lsraelitische Wochenschrift (25 volumes); edited by Abraham Treuenfels and Moritz Rahmer; Magdeburg, 1870- 94. Mann, J., "The Responsa of the Babylonian Geonim as a Source of Jewish History"; JQR, NS, VII-XI (1916-1922). - - - , Texts and Studies in Jewish History and Literature; Philadelphia, 1935; vol.II, pp. 128 ff. Ncmoy, L., Karaite Anthology; New Haven, 1952. Pomanski, S., Esquisse Historique sur Les Juift de Kairouan [in Hebrew]; Warsaw, 1909; p.38. Rappaport, S.Y.L., To/edot; Warsaw, 1913; vol. I, pp. 42-51, 168-171. - - - , Erech Milin; Prague, 1852; pp.37 ff., 136 ff. - - - , Teshuvos Geonim Kadmonim; edited by D. Cassel; Berlin, 1848; Preface. Roth, E., "A Geonic Fragment Concerning the Oral Chain of Tradition"; Tarbitz, 26 ( 1957); pp.410 ff. Weiss, I.H., Dor Dor VeDorshav; Vilna, 1904; vol.4, pp.143-155. - - - , "Mevo'ot HaTalmud V'Toldosayem"; Beth Talmud; Vienna, 1881; pp. 5560.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Index 1: References in the lggeres to Scripture and Talmud The first column represents the page in the Scripture or Talmud and the second, the page number in the Iggeres Scri,taes Leviticus

Kesubos

6:22 - 47

12,3 - 90

17:8 - BS

Babylonian Talmad

53b - 21 54a - 42 62b - 15 67a - 44 86a - 42

Psalms

Berachos

Pesachim

102:15 - 85

14a - 40 19a - 42 27b - 87 28a - 8, 23 32a - 42 38b - 75 56a - 105

3a - 15 48b - 62 66b- 3 68b - 73 104b - 74

9,3 - 90

Deuteronomy

Proverbs 16:1 - 27

Misllnall Eruvin 5,1 - 21

Sl,ekalim

16a - 42 20b - 92 24a - 41 53a - 105 59a - 61 66b - 29 70a - 48 87b - 95

64a - IOI Shabbos

6,4 - 104

Yevamos

Ila - 112 14b - 5 15a - 86 35b - 42 55a - 92 66b - 22 109a - 105 147b - 13

16,7 - 41

Sanhedrin 5,2 - 52

Avos ch.I - 86 4,3 - S6

Eduyos 1,3 1,6 5,2 5,6 -

Yoma

Beitzah 31a - 63

Rosi, HaSl,anah 22b - 41, 98 23b - 42 29b- 87

Eruvin

15 27 23 23

Kelim 13,8 - 64

Jeraalem

Talm■d

Kilayi,,,

13a - 26 13b - 55 16b - 38 19a - 42 32b - 73 46b - 2, 37, 63 SOb - 71 S3a - 16, 22, 25, 74

Taanis 21a - 36

Megillah 29a - 85

Mo'ed Katan 16b - 91

165

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon

166 2Sa - 101

67a - 2S

Chaggigah 2a - 23

Kiddusl,in 2a- 83

3a - 35

41a - 16 47a - 100

Yevamos 16a - 26 42b - 37 43a - 64 62b- 8 64b - 3, 99 72b- 43 84a - 13 I0lb - 61 105b - 60

BavaKamma 80a - 93

Kesubos

Bava Basra

8a - 71 63b - 126 97b - 61 103b - 34, 99 106a - 98

3b- 110 52b - 41 134a - 44, 52, 56 154b - 41 156b - 61 157b-115

43b - 82 86a - 2, 25, 62 88b - 18 106b -78 Sllnuos 2b - 29 41b - 43 45b - 44 48b- 105

102a - 29, 32

Bava Metzia

,4vodaJ, ZmaJr 8b - 9 Horayos lib - 90

15a - 100 33a - 56 84b - 13 85b - 71 86a - 79, 103

Sotalr

14a - 47, 101 13b - 12, 22

Zevaclwn 96b - 46

Clnd/u, 6b-n 18b - 75 80b - 72 82a - 64 85a - 62 95b- 96 110a - 94 137b - 71, 94 lkcJwros 32b- 65

Sanhedrin

2a- 29 49b -59

2a - 61 14a - 9 32b - 41 38b - 25 40a - 20 41a - 21 41b - 76 42a - 45

Gillin 6a - 95 6b - 104 7a - 82 36b - 95 44a - 65 59a - 17 111

Digitized by

Google

TemuraJr 14b - 84

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

INDEX 2: References in the Glosses and Notes to Scripture, Talmud, Midrash, and Rambam The first column represents the page in the source and the second, the page number in the book Saiptare Genesis 5:1 - XXI 49:10 - 97 Exodus 28:28 - 81 34:27 - 88 Lnitiau 4:23 - 90 Nwnbers 18:16 -93 ch.19 - 64 27:10- XXV Deuter011omy 13:2 - 20 16:20 - 50 21 :1-9 - 58 21 :4 - 64 JoJmlll 15:31 - 88 I Kings 2:1-2 - XXV II Kings 18:4 - 81 24:16 - 84 /saiaJ, 58:1 - 68 Proverbs 14:4 - 51 24:6 - 51 31:6 -88 LammtatiOIIS 3:31 - 81

5:12- XXIV Ecclesiastes 7:12 - 107 Estlrn 6:1 - 123 Daniel 4:5 - 39 Cl,rOllic/es 24:13 - 19

Mlsllull Kilayim 8,2 - 58 Sl,ekalim 1,1 - 31 Taanis 1,6 - 79 Avos 1,3-12 - 85 2,2 - 23 Makos 3,15 - 23 Avodall Zarah 2,6 - 23 Yadayim 4,7 - 67

Tosefta Slulbbos 3,13 - 39 Shekalim 5,1 - 10

Mldnsll Bereislus Rabbal, 4- 87 VayikraRabbaJ, 13 - 71 BaMidbar Rabbal, 10- 12 Mitlram Tdrillim 3,3 - 80 Mitlrasl, Muldei 1,13 - 87 Kol,e//es RabbaJ, 6,2 - 50 10,5 - 17

Jermalem

Talm■d

Beracl,os 3,1 - 39 4,1 - 11 Tenunos 5,2 - 11 Kilayim 9,3 - 89 Sl,elcalim 5.1 - 10, 39 Taanis 4,2 - 97 4,5 - 11 Gittin 7,4 - 11 Horayos 3,5 - 50

/67

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

lggeres of Rav SMrira Goon

168 Babylollla■

Talm11d

Beraclws 15a - 80 17b - 134 2Sa- 110 27b- 7 28b - 133 30a - 110 3th - 67 61b - 11 Shabbos 14b - 69 31a - 10 52a - 69 56b - 134 63a - 67 109a - 105 130a - 7 130b - 7 148a - 133 152a - 97 Eruvin 8a -122 13b - 24 54b- 20 Pesacltim 3b- It 6b- 67 8b - 110 28b- 67 39a - 123 66a - 51, 88, 97 109a - 11 114a - 11 117b - 122

CluzggigaJ,

16a - 10, 132 Ytvamos 16a - 6 49a - 67 SOa - 68 58a - SI 62b - 8 64b - 39 78b - 67 93a - 24 115b - 121 122a - 97 Kesubos 7b- XXI Sib - 107

Yoma

7a - 121 24a - SO 35b - 88 74a - 67 77b - 133 78a - 133 86a - 97 87a - 94, 97, 110

Digitized by

2Sa - 13 Su/clcal, I0b- 110 13b - 122 26a - 110 28a - 4, 35, 68 32a - 67 52b - 67 Beitzah 22 - 134 2Sb- 110 29a -97 Rosh HaSluma/t 21a - 80 29b - II, 89 31b - 89 Taani.s 12b - 121 18b - 88 23b - 108 Megi//aJ, Sb- 89 16b - 88 28b- SO, 110 29a- 110 Mo'ed Katan 22b - 19 25a - 80, 108

Google

67a - 135 69b- 39 IOOb - 10 103b - 122, 19, 80, 89 106a - 110, 134 Illa - 80 Nedluim 81a - 134 Nazir Sa- 67 13a - 123 Sotall 22a - so 40a - 89 47a - 81 49a - 6, 19, 39 Gittill 2b-95 7a - 108 36a - 95 55b- 32 60b- XXI 6Jb - 110 66b - 110 88a- 84 89b - 110 Kldduslun 17a - 67 24a - 67 24b - SI 35a - 67 39a - 97, 110 42a - 67 57b- 8 65a - 51 68b - 67 72a - 135 BavaKamma 14a - 69

17a - 13 18b - 67 74b - 89 84a - 67 94b - 68

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Index

169

113a - 121 117a - 134

BaYa Metzia 3a - 51

4a - SI

59a-121 88b - 11 91a - 19 92b- 84 93a- 6 98b - 86

44b- 110

Temurah 14a - 51 16a - 51 Niddah 6b- 87 24b - 94 69a - 126

33b- 19 41b - 109 59b - 7, 11 95a - 67

AvodaJ, Zarah

BaYa &ura

8b- 86

Minor Tractates

31a - 135 54a - 97 11 lb - 67 119b - 67 126b - 122 134a - 5 157b - XXI

IOa - 89 18a - 8 22b- 110 36a - 23

Sema,·hot

Shnuos 19a - 67

Zevachim 19a - 19

8,9 - 8

Rambam Introtblction to the MWuud, - 11 Hilchos Yesotki HaTorah

Menachos

9,1 - 20

Sanlsedrin

33b - 88

Hilchos Talmud Torah

4a - 67 Sa - 12 7b- 110 Ila - 89 17b - 108, 109 29a - 109 32b - 89 38a - 84

Chui/in

4,2 - 13 80

15a - 50 49a - 156 59b - 124 92a - 121 141a - 39

Hilchos Bechoros

Digitized by

1,3 - 69

Hilchos Me/acllim 25,23 - 11

Hilchos Sanhedrin 1,3 - 89

Bechoros 31a - 108

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Dedicated in loving memory of: :flDV) " ~ Reb Sllmael Fuclls )"t N"DYIJ"I , nzm ,,," by his wife, Serena "N1YI and his sons, Berish and Moshe

Reb Avralaam Shlomo Goldberg ) 11t t•?Vm ,»< l''\:>

by his daughter and son-in-law, Rachel and Moshe Fuchs

Reb Sol Reiaberg )

11

t

l'?VJJl 1"N 't":>

by his daughter and son-in-law,

Chaaaab aad Berish Fuchs May our children look always to the lives of their grandfathers example and inspiration.

)"t

as an

171

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

In dedication to the memory of: :flD1') , , ~

Mrs. Hinda Meisels n ll 11

011wn ncn n11:>

A fine artist and great baa/as chessed, she suffered for many years, but never gave up her unceasing efforts to help others. May her memory be an inspiration to her grandchildren, as it is to her daughter and son-in-law:

Devorah and Shavy Weinstock

,n,n ~DII µ ' ~ *,11, '1 n ,wn ,m N"=> 11

.,~ ,u,~ µ :ap,, M»t ,, 1uon ::i,n n11cwn ,1Dl)O :i~ ,1"N l"'

172

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

This is the continuation of the Berlin ms. Or. Qu. 685 which appears on the jacket cover. See Levine's discussion regarding this manuscript, Intro. p.XX.

173

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Vienna National Bibliothek Ms. Hebr. 120 A 13th or 14th cent. Spanish script, this ms. corresponds to the French version of our Iggeres! See Levine's discussion, Intro. pg.21. 175

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA