Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 1, scan section 5

also feared that the Amoraic manuscripts would be lost in the coming dark days or materially altered, so he summoned all his contemporary associates and hastily closed up the Talmud, pro- hibiting any further additions^ This enforced haste caused not only an improper arrangement and many numerous repetitions and additions, but also led to the " talmudizing " of articles directly traceable to bitter and relentless opponents of the Tal- mud. The time (Rabana Jose conducted his college only seven- teen years) being too short for a proper and critical review of Mishna was taught in the time of Rabbi ! " which means that Rabbi himself was not aware of it. See Weiss' " Traditions of the Oral Law," under the head " Mishna and Rabbi." BRIEF GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xix each and every subject, many theories were surreptitiously added by its enemies, with the purpose of making it detestable to its adherents. Of such character is the expression, " That of R. Ashi is a fabrication," which is repeated numerous times through- out the Talmud and which could by no means have originated with the Amoraim, who as a rule were very guarded in their ex- pressions and would never have dreamed of applying it or simi- lar expressions to such Talmudical authorities as R. Ashi and Mar, his son, much less to the Patriarchs or the Prophets. This closing up of the Talmud did not, however, prevent the importa- tion of foreign matter into it, and many such have crept in through the agency of the " Rabanan Saburai" and the Gaonim of every later generation. The chief aim of the authors of the Gemara being to perpetu- ate the Mishna as the sole source of the Jewish religious and civil code after the Mosaic laws themselves, they not only directed all their energy to the discussion and perfecting of its deductions, but treated its very words and letters as inspired and as holy as the Bible itself, forming at times conclusions from a superfluous word or letter. Oftentimes, when they found the Mishna differ- ing with an established custom in their days, they resorted to subtle inquiry and minute discussion, until they succeeded in establishing harmony between the differing points. All these efforts were directed to refute and disprove the assertions of the different sects who opposed the oral law and who were inclined to adhere to the written law solely. Therefore the Rabbis of the Gemara said " Minalan ?" (Wherefrom its source ?) or " MiNOH Hanne Mili ? " (which means " Whence is all this deduced ? " ) in the treatment of a subject not plainly specified in the Bible; and also the exclamatory remark " Peshita ! " (It is self-evident!) as regards subjects plainly enumerated in the Scriptures which do not admit of any other interpretation. Of the same origin is the question " Lemai HiLKHETHA?" (For what purpose was this Halakha stated ?) with reference to an obsolete custom. So much for the general history of the Talmud. INTRODUCTION TO TRACT SABBATH. With this tract we commence the translation of the section of the Talmud called Moed (Festivals), containing the following tracts : Sabbath, Erubhin, Rosh Hashana, Yuma, Shekalim, Suk- kah, Megillah, Taanith, Pesachim, Betzah, Hagigah, and Moed Katan. All these tracts are entirely devoted to precepts pertain- ing to the observance of the festivals and Sabbath, such as the performance of the different ritual ceremonies on feast-days, the manner of sanctifying the Sabbath, and the ordinances relating to mourning for the dead both on Sabbath and week-days. The commandments on which these precepts are founded, or from which they are derived, are contained in various portions of the Pentateuch, The fourth commandment of the Decalogue enacts (Exod. xx. 8-11 and Deut. v. 12-15): "The seventh day shall ye keep holy." In various other parts of the Pentateuch the due observance of the Sabbath is repeatedly ordained ; in some instances merely mentioning the day as one to be kept inviolate and holy ; and in others employing greater emphasis, referring to the history of creation, and establishing the obser* vance as a sign of the covenant between the Lord and Israel. Such texts are Exod. xiii. 12 ; xvi. 15 ; xxxi. 13-17 ; xxxiv. 21 ; XXXV. 1-3; Lev. xix. 29; xxiii. 32; Num. xv. 9, etc. While the general principle is thus frequently inculcated, its special applica- tion, however, and specific enactments as to what constitutes a violation of the Sabbath, are nowhere fully carried out in the Pentateuch, and thus but few texts of the Scriptures serve as a direct basis for the minute and numerous enactments of the rab- binical law. The Mishna enumerates thirty-nine "Abhoth" or principal acts xxii INTRODUCTION TO TRACT SABBATH. of labor, the performance of any one of which constitutes a violation of the Sabbath. Every other kind o\ work becomes illegal only if it can be classified under one or anj of these principal acts of labor. Thus, for instance, under the principal act of ploughing, every analogous kind of work, such as digging, delving, weeding, dunging, etc., must be classified. In addition to these thirty-nine principal acts and their accessories and derivatives, there are other acts which are especially prohibited by the rabbinical law as tend- ing to violate the Sabbath rest (Shbhuth). For the violation itself various degrees of culpability are established, and various degrees of punishment awarded. All these subjects relating to the due observance of the Sabbath, and pointing out its violation in every possible way, form the contents of the treatise Sabbath. In order properly to understand the Mishna, ^ \d to avoid tedious repetitions, it is necessary to commence with the explana- tion of certain general principles and technical expressions pre- dominating in the text. Wherever throughout the Mishna the expression guilty, cul- pable (Hayabh), or free (Patur) is used, the meaning of the former (guilty) is that the transgressor acting unintentionally must bring the sin-offering prescribed in the law ; of the second expression (free), that the accused is absolved from punishment. If through the performance of an unprohibited act some other (prohibited) occupation is inadvertently entered upon, it consti- tutes no offence, providing the latter is not done intentionally nor the lawful occupation entered upon with the covert purpose of making it serve as a subterfuge to do that which is prohibited. In the degrees of violation the nature of the occupation must be considered, as various kinds of labor may be required to per- form and complete one act, and thus the offender may become amenable to several penalties. On the other hand, the rule is laid down that such occupations as only destroy, but do not serve an end in view, do not involve culpability (in the rigorous sense of the word) ; nor yet does work which is but imperfectly or