#tannaim

[leroibobo]

the old synagogue of peki'in, palestine. the current building dates to 1873, a reconstruction of the original which was destroyed in an earthquake 30 years earlier. local tradition holds that the synagogue was built on the site of the bet midrash where 1st-century tannaim joshua ben hananiah and shimon bar yochai taught.

the synagogue isn't usually active today - peki'in is currently designated as a "druze village" - but is cared for by native margalit zinati. the zinati family has lived in peki'in for centuries - according to their tradition, since the time of the second temple.

[magnetothemagnificent]

Hi! I thought this might be a good question to ask you since you are so knowledgeable. I’m writing an epic fantasy story and I need to do some research on what life was like for Jews right before and after the destruction of the 2nd beit hamikdash because that is the basis of the setting. I would also love some information about the daily life of the kohanim at the time. Could you help me out with some reliable sources? Thanks so much!

Some aspects of Jewish life c. 1st century CE:

Economy:

Large-scale household pottery manufacture

-Pottery manufactured by Jews does not need to be ritually purified

-Certain pots began to be standardized in size, indicating importance of measurements for other industries

Expansion of oil and wine industries (hence the standardized jars)

Culture:

Stone vessels. Varying explanations, but all have to do with maintaining a distinct Jewish identity.

A new type of oil lamp- knife-pared lamp.

Dining rooms for the wealthy.

Lots of Mikvaot

Rock-cut familial burial caves

Display tombs but only in Jerusalem

Jews regarded as distinct ethnicity both by themselves and by the foreign powers

Prayer developing. Prayer distinct from Temple worship had already begun after the destruction of the first Temple, and continued into the second Temple era.

Lots of apocalyptic and messianic cults especially as the destruction of the Temple grew closer.

Spoken language is Aramaic and Hebrew

Synagogues beginning to appear

Strong relationship between the Jews of Israel and the Jews of Babylonia

Lots of Halakhic debates

Corruption within the Kohanim because of the Hasmonean power vaccuum and the Romans appointing the High Priests instead of the Jews.

Sources:

Jewish Life Before the Revolt: The Archaeological Evidence

Ethnicity and Ancient Judaism: Jewish Identities in 1st Century Alexandria and Antioch

Prayer in the Period of the Tannaim and Amoraim

Aramaic Tombstones from Zoar and Jewish Conceptions of the Afterlife

THE ORIGIN OF THE SYNAGOGUE: A RE-ASSESSMENT

‮אתא אגרתא ממערבא‬ ("An Epistle Came from the West"): Historical and Archaeological Evidence for the Ties between the Jewish Communities in the Land of Israel and Babylonia during the Talmudic Period

Were the Priests All the Same? Qumranic Halakhah in Comparison with Sadducean Halakhah

The Torah of the Jews of Ancient Rome

I'm also tagging @didyoumeanxianity because they have a lot more experience with that era (I'm more biological anthropology than cultural).

Good luck with your novel, it sounds so exciting!!

[todaysjewishholiday]

26 Iyyar 5784 (2-3 June 2024)

Once again, we have a yahrzeit of two influential teachers centuries apart who shaped Judaism and demonstrate Jewish diversity and adaptability.

Saadia ben Yosef, Gaon of Sura, was born on the banks of the Nile in 4652, roughly 200 years after the Islamic conquest. Thus, rather than the Greco-Roman and Persian cultures of the Tannaim and Amoraim, he grew up in an Arabic speaking world shaped by a rival Abrahamic tradition. He was the first Jewish scholar to write primarily in Judeo-Arabic, the language later adopted by the Rambam Moshe ben Maimon. At the age of 20, Saadia began compiling a Hebrew dictionary. He soon went to eretz yisroel for further study, and after ten years there moved to Babylonia where he became a member of yeshiva of Sura, which had been in continuous operation from the time of the Amoraim. Within two years the Jewish exilarch appointed Saadia as Gaon of the academy.

From the start, Saadia’s career was shaped by disputation and sharp debate with those whose stances he found theologically or socially objectionable. The tenor of those disputes was shaped not only by Jewish tradition, but by the open conflict between Mutazilite and Mutakallamist scholars of Islam, who in Saadia’s time remained in dispute about whether the Quranuc text was a created object like other creations, or co-eternal with G-d and fundamental to the divine essence. Parallel debates about the Torah have raged in Judaism, but Saadia borrowed the shape of the qadi’s arguments rather than their content, engaging in sharp disputes about the proper way to calculate the Hebrew calendar and striving to defend rabbinic Judaism in fiery exchanges with Karaite scholars who accepted only the written Torah and rejected the oral traditions central to rabbinic practice. Saadia’s fiery temper and forceful personality soon put him at odds with his benefactor the Exilarch, and they spent several years in bitter conflict, each going so far as to issue cherem against the other. Their eventual reconciliation allowed Saadia to return to his position as head of the yeshiva of Sura, a position which carried great weight of authority for Jews throughout the Islamic world.

A prolific scholar, he composed numerous translations, publishing much of the Tanakh in Arabic translation, numerous linguistic texts on the Hebrew language, works of halakha, theology, and Jewish mysticism, and a large number of polemics against his various ideological opponents. He died in Sura in the year 4702 at the age of sixty, reportedly of severe depression from his many conflicts with the exilarch and others.

Moshe Chaim Luzzatto was born just over eight hundred years late than Saadia, in 5467, in the Venetian Ghetto (the first Jewish quarter to be called by that odious name). He received a wide Jewish and secular education, and may have attended the university of Padua. In his teens he began to compose poetry, including his own collection of 150 Hebrew psalms in full biblical style, and study Jewish mysticism. At the age of twenty he claimed he had been visited by a Malakh and began writing down mystical lessons from this heavenly mentor. This claim of divine tutelage shocked and offended the Venetian rabbinical establishment, and he was only saved by cherem by agreeing to cease his writing and teaching of mysticism. He then emigrated to Amsterdam where he continued his mystical explorations while working as a diamond cutter, thus following closely in the footsteps of a controversial Jew from a century before, Baruch Spinoza. Disappointed by the difficulties of life in Amsterdam, he traveled to eretz yisroel with his family three years before his death and established a shul in Acre. He died during a plague outbreak in Acre at the age of 39, leaving behind an immense body of poetry, drama, and theological, ethical, and mystical instruction despite the seizure and destruction of much of his early work by the Venetian Jewish authorities. His works were soon praised by the Vilna Gaon and became central to the Mussar movement, and his Hebrew poetry and blending of secular and Torah learning and literature became a major inspiration to the Haskalah. For his rabbinic teachings he is known by the acronym RaMCHaL, for Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto.

The twenty-sixth of Iyyar is also the sixth night of the sixth week of the Omer count. Yesterday was the fortieth day of the Omer. After tonight’s count, 8 days remain before Shavuot.

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

Personal question you don’t have to answer: I saw in the tags of that now-paganism post you talked about not believing in other gods but you do believe in other supernatural beings such as sheydim, and then you talked about a “Her” reaching out to you and Her not being who you originally thought.

Were you reached out to by a sheyd?

Nope!

When I originally (and reluctantly) began to dip my toes back into theism, I was very much a pagan and so my initial thought/understanding after some research was Hestia. And honestly? I was very fine with that, because Hestia has a lot more of an interesting mythology than you might think at first blush.

Initially the thing I was "asked" (nudged? idk) to do, was to cover my hair. I brushed that off for a couple years until it became extremely obvious that this was what I was being spiritually called to do. At that point I started searching out reasons and who that might be coming from, which led me to Hestia. So I began to do research to find a good reason why this was a bad idea, and eventually (if skeptically) concluded that it was entirely harmless and up to me if I wanted to connect. So I thought what the hell, why not. I covered my hair and looked up more information and had a little altar and left small hearth offerings for about two years. In that time though, unfortunately there was no real movement, no progress, no additional contact, nothing. During that time, I began to get increasingly more interested in Judaism - academically, of course - and had a much harder time focusing on any pagan path. Instead, I found myself powerfully and inexplicably drawn to Judaism despite my denial and all protestations to the contrary.

To cut a long saga short, after a couple years of radio silence, I realized I must have been wrong about the identity of the source of that nudge, and it was only once I learned about the Shechinah being feminine that it all made sense. The feminine energy I was reading was not coming from a goddess per se, but rather the one and only G-d who is effectively every gender and no gender, but whose earthly presence is typically understood in feminine terms.

And you know what? Guess around what time it was that I started feeling the pull to cover my hair? It was shortly after I became officially engaged to my now-spouse and we were living together in what was in practice (if not by law) a marriage.

When I finally admitted where I was at with things and reached out to Hashem, I experienced an immediate and powerful connection that drastically outstripped any spiritual experience I'd had before. I could only conclude from that experience that Hashem was real like nothing else I'd ever tried to build a connection with, and I felt compelled to connect as deeply with Her as was possible. My path was laid out for me.

As for the sheydim or other possible non-human beings... look I wouldn't say I for sure *believe* in them so much as I don't feel like I have enough information to rule it out. The Talmud and mystical rabbinic writings treat them as being very real, and I'm inclined not to assume that I'm smarter or wiser than all of the Tannaim, Amoraim, Sages, and great rabbis who did believe in them. However, I've never directly experienced them myself. Other gods I don't have a problem ruling out, at least insofar as it matters to me. If they exist, they aren't my problem. I respect other people's connections to the Divine as valid and real for them, in the same way I would like other people to respect and validate (for me) my connection to G-d, which is through the lens of Judaism. Essentially, I believe that G-d is G-d, that G-d wants a relationship with all people, and will speak to us in the "voice" that we are most likely to hear. For me that voice is the still small echo from Sinai. For you it might be something else. G-d is infinite and we each glimpse the smallest fraction of that divinity in our travels through life and spirituality.

[goy-bullshit-translator]

Hot take: The tannaim were right to shift the focus of Hanukkah away from the Hasmonaim: they were brutal militarists who usurped the throne from the Davidic line, eroded the separation between the royals and the kohanim by appointing one of their own as kohen gadol, persecuted the P'rushim, and literally invited Rome in to take over.

alright sure, we can do ideological and historical discourse too. why not. i didn't need clean notes.

[eretzyisrael]

Parashat Shoftim

by: Meir Anolick

Written for Shabbat Parashat Shoftim, ד באלול תשע”ד:

This week’s Parsha contains a plethora of important Mitzvot, many of which are national or communal Mitzvot. Among these are the commandments for us to follow the ruling of the courts, and that we should not deviate right or left. “According to the teaching that they will teach you and according to the judgment that they will say to you, shall you do; you shall not deviate from the word that they will tell you, right or left.” (17:11)

This verse means more than just following the courts. It seems obvious that for any social and judicial structure to work, we must obey the decisions of the courts, lest the nation fall to disarray and chaos. However, this Mitzvah is also a more general Mitzvah that constitutes the requirement to follow the teachings and ruling of Rabbanim, not just the courts1. If a Rav tells you to perform a Mitzvah in a certain way, and you don’t like that way, then you must do it anyway. There is no deciding for ourselves, and no shopping for Rabbis; if the Rabbi says it, you do it.

Over the past few years, I have heard many cases of people who disregard or mock the saying and teachings of Rabbanim, both great and small. Things like, “Oh, that’s just what the Rabbis say”, and “Those Rabbis don’t know what they’re talking about” seem to have become frighteningly commonplace. Many important facts seem to be ignored, disregarded, or forgotten by people who utter such disparaging remarks. First, some seem to feel that we don’t need to treat the Rabbanim of our generation with the same reverence and respect that we treat the Amoraim and Tannaim, since our generation and our leaders are on a much lower level than a couple thousand years ago. However, as it says in this week’s Parsha, just before the above-quoted verse, “and to the Judge who twill be in those days” (17:9), which is one of the places where we learn that the greatest of our generation needs to be treated like the greatest of the previous generation, since they are the greatest in our days.

Furthermore, many people seem to have forgotten that Rabbanim are, in fact, human, and as such have to deal with many of the same issues that the rest of us common folk do. As such, they understand our problems and difficulties, and their rulings will be taking these into account. In addition, anyone who is a Posek has achieved a very high level of learning, and for us to tell him that he’s wrong is like us trying to tell Einstein that he got his theory of relativity wrong. Without the years of knowledge and experience that they have, how can we think that we begin to understand how they came to the ruling they’ve given us?

Though there is plenty more to say on the subject, I will leave off with one last point. Judaism is built on tradition. It is through tradition that the ancient teachings of our sages from ages past and that national memory of the Exodus from Mitzrayim have been retained for over two-thousand years.

That tradition has been preserved, cultivated, and maintained carefully by the Rabbanim of each generation, and they are the ones that have helped to guide us through to get us where we are today. To start denigrating and disregarding them is to sever that tradition that links us back all the way to Har Sinai, and that would sever us from the great tradition that gives us our strength. 

We must remember that our Rabbanim are our leaders and guides in a world that is often overwhelming us with materialism and futile desires. We must learn to cling to them, and cling to their teachings, if we want to be able to develop a connection to Hashem. Shabbat Shalom.

1 From here, it would seem that violating a Rabbinic prohibition also violates a Torah prohibition, and we know that is not the case, but it is a complex matter.

[awideplace]

hi, an unbeliever keeps questioning me on the accuracy of the Bible after being translated from it's original language. how might I answer his questions about how we know it to be accurate? he seems to be stubborn and as though I am not very smart for believing in the Bible. I know that I can't change his mind rather possibly sew a seed. I'm just not sure how to approach this question specifically because I feel it will lead to him debating me which I do not want.

The translation of the Bible into English was an incredibly detailed, laborious, careful work. The English Bible can be deemed a “literal” translation that attempts to stick as closely as possible to the Greek and Hebrew texts, while still being readable English.

Q. How does the translation process impact the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Bible?

A. This question deals with three very important issues: inspiration, preservation, and translation.

The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible teaches that scripture is “God-breathed”; that is, God personally superintended the writing process, guiding the human authors so that His complete message was recorded for us. The Bible is truly God’s Word. During the writing process, the personality and writing style of each author was allowed expression; however, God so directed the writers that the 66 books they produced were free of error and were exactly what God wanted us to have. See 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21.

Of course, when we speak of “inspiration,” we are referring only to the process by which the original documents were composed. After that, the doctrine of the preservation of the Bible takes over. If God went to such great lengths to give us His Word, surely He would also take steps to preserve that Word unchanged. What we see in history is that God did exactly that.

The Old Testament Hebrew scriptures were painstakingly copied by Jewish scribes. Groups such as the Sopherim, the Zugoth, the Tannaim, and the Masoretes had a deep reverence for the texts they were copying. Their reverence was coupled with strict rules governing their work: the type of parchment used, the size of the columns, the kind of ink, and the spacing of words were all prescribed. Writing anything from memory was expressly forbidden, and the lines, words, and even the individual letters were methodically counted as a means of double-checking accuracy. The result of all this was that the words written by Isaiah’s pen are still available today. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls clearly confirms the precision of the Hebrew text.

The same is true for the New Testament Greek text. Thousands of Greek texts, some dating back to nearly A.D. 117, are available. The slight variations among the texts—not one of which affects an article of faith—are easily reconciled. Scholars have concluded that the New Testament we have at present is virtually unchanged from the original writings. Textual scholar Sir Frederic Kenyon said about the Bible, “It is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved. . . . This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.” 

This brings us to the translation of the Bible. Translation is an interpretative process, to some extent. When translating from one language to another, choices must be made. Should it be the more exact word, even if the meaning of that word is unclear to the modern reader? Or should it be a corresponding thought, at the expense of a more literal reading?

As an example, in Colossians 3:12, Paul says we are to put on “bowels of mercies” (KJV). The Greek word for “bowels,” which is literally “intestines,” comes from a root word meaning “spleen.” The KJV translators chose a literal translation of the word. The translators of the NASB chose “heart of compassion”—the “heart” being what today’s reader thinks of as the seat of emotions. The Amplified Bible has it as “tenderhearted pity and mercy.” The NIV simply puts “compassion.”

So, the KJV is the most literal in the above example, but the other translations certainly do justice to the verse. The core meaning of the command is to have compassionate feelings.

Most translations of the Bible are done by committee. This helps to guarantee that no individual prejudice or theology will affect the decisions of word choice, etc. Of course, the committee itself may have a particular agenda or bias (such as those producing the current “gender-neutral” mistranslations). But there is still plenty of good scholarship being done, and many good translations are available.

Having a good, honest translation of the Bible is important. A good translating team will have done its homework and will let the Bible speak for itself.

As a general rule, the more literal translations, such as the KJV, NKJV, ASB and NASB, have less “interpretative” work. The “freer” translations, such as the NIV, NLT, and CEV, by necessity do more “interpretation” of the text, but are generally more readable. Then there are the paraphrases, such as The Message and The Living Bible, which are not really translations at all but one person’s retelling of the Bible. (Source: https://www.gotquestions.org/translation-inspiration.html)

Something every Christian should read in order to appreciate their Bible further: What is the history of the Bible in English?

[witchofanguish]

Remarkable amounts of martyrdom going on when you look into the amoraim and tannaim. You begin to see how these guys got so paranoid

[avirosenthal]

Sotah 22a

The Tannaim, who teach halakha from their memorized texts, destroy the world. Modern equivalent: blindly following the Mishnah Brurah without checking its sources.

[teachings2023]

Rav Nathan Tvsi Finkel

Le 21.2.2023

"A PARTIR DE MAINTENANT, PREND L'HABITUDE D'INTERROGER ET D'ECOUTER LES GRANDS TZADIKIMS, NOUS. ILS TE DIRONT DIRECTEMENT CE QUE TU DOIS SAVOIR, CE QUE HASHEM VEUT QUE TU SACHES. BARUK HASHEM." 📜🕎 🇮🇱

Les 20 tzadikims importants dans le judaisme sont:

Rabbi Akiba,

Akiva ben Yosef (Mishnaic Hebrew: עֲקִיבָא בֶּן יוֹסֵף‎ ʿĂqīvāʾ ben Yōsēf; c. 50 – 28 September 135 CE),[1] also known as Rabbi Akiva (רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא‎), was a leading Jewish scholar and sage, a tanna of the latter part of the first century and the beginning of the second century. Rabbi Akiva was a leading contributor to the Mishnah and to Midrash halakha. He is referred to in the Talmud as Rosh la-Hakhamim "Chief of the Sages". He was executed by the Romans in the aftermath of the Bar Kokhba revolt.

Rabbi Ishmael,

Rabbi Ishmael or Ishmael ben Elisha, meaning: Ismael son of Elisha, (90-135 CE [1], Hebrew: ) was a Rabbinic sage from the third tannaitic generation [1]. He was descended from a priestly family and the legends refer to him as High Priest although he lived after the destruction of the Second Temple [2]. He is generally referred to simply as Rabbi Ishmael [3]. As a young child, Ishmael, whose parentage is not known but who traced his lineage through a high priestly line [3], was known for his wisdom and was seen as a prodigy. He was one of the most prominent Tannaim (the great Sages of the Mishnah) and was a central figure in the development of rabbinic Judaism [4]. His teachings and commentaries on the Torah and Mishnah are recorded in the works of Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael and Sifrei. He is also credited with originating the concept of Midrash, which is a method of interpreting scripture through narrative and allegory.

Rabbi Judah ben Ilai, Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, Rabbi Eleazar ben Shammua, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, Rabbi Abbahu, Rabbi Simeon ben Gamliel, Rabbi Yose HaGelili, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, Rabbi Hillel, Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa, Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri, Rabbi Abba Arikha, Rabbi Yehuda HeChassid, Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, Rabbi Isaac Luria, et Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto. Ces tzadikims sont connus pour leur sagesse, leur savoir et leur influence sur le judaïsme et les écritures bibliques à travers les âges.

[qaraxuanzenith]

Which Mishnaic Sage Are You?

Because I am a giant Talmud nerd, I have created a quiz to determine which of my favourite Tannaim (Mishnaic Sages) are you. Come try it out!

[keshetchai]

A disagreement which is for the sake of Heaven will be preserved, and one which is not for the sake of Heaven will not be preserved. What is a disagreement that is for the sake of Heaven? The disagreement of Hillel and Shammai.

So I was just chatting with someone about this, and wanted to show people my color-coded example of Jesus arguing just like the Pharisees do. Or rather, Jesus talks like a student of the tannaim, who the Christians call Pharisees. The term Pharisees is pretty much entirely found in the Christian gospels and then in Josephus (after the fact). The problem is that some Christians divorce their scriptures from first century Jewish thought, as if Jesus was somehow radically unique in every possible way. On the contrary! (I’m not the first one to suggest that even if Jesus wasn’t “formally” a pharisee, he certainly reads like he learned from some of them.) 

Basically the above texts are side-by-side Matthew 19 [minus I think the first two verses] and Gittin 90a, in the Talmud.

Both texts are responding to an issue of halakha (Jewish law) and divorce. The questions explicit and implicit can be broken up into multiple questions like so: 

Is it permitted halakhically for a man to divorce his wife?

for any reason?

only for specific reasons?

and if only for specific reasons, what are those?

Gittin 90a is a discussion between the schools of Hillel and Shammai, leaders in the Sanhedrin under King Herod. Hillel takes a lenient stance: “A man may divorce his wife for even a minor issue,” Shammai says it must only be due to sexual immorality (adultery). The Talmud also records later assertations, so Akiva, who is after Jesus’s time (born 50 CE approx), makes an appearance here. 

Matthew 19 returns to the central questions of Gittin 90a. When these texts are read side-by-side, Mathew reads less like Jesus is arguing against a monolithic group of “pharisees” who all agree with each other and disagree with Jesus – and more like Jesus is adding to an on-going (undecided) discussion where he is asked to state his own ruling and how he came to this conclusion. Which is the same thing that Akiva’s inserted comment does, effectively.

Basically, Jesus is just joining an ongoing Jewish discussion, lol.  I bring this up because it's super easy for christians to intentionally or unintentionally fall into a cycle of vilification of the Pharisees and by extension all of Rabbinical Judaism. When that happens, it misses out on the broader context of what is going on, and perpetuates antisemitic ideas/rhetoric.

[julio-claudian-saberface]

The Jewish Encyclopedia section about Solomon marrying the Egyptian princess is such a ride.

The Tannaim lay particular stress on Solomon's criminal act in marrying the daughter of Pharaoh, which they declare took place on the night when the Temple was completed. This assertion is at variance with Seder 'Olam R. xv., where it is held that Solomon married her when he began to build the Temple, that is, in the fourth year of his reign (comp. I Kings vi. 1). The particular love which he manifested for her (comp. ib. xi. 1) was rather a depraved passion; and she, more than all his other foreign wives, caused him to sin. He had drunk no wine during the seven years of the construction of the Temple; but on the night of its completion he celebrated his wedding with so much revelry that its sound mingled before God with that of the Israelites who celebrated the completion of the sacred edifice, and God at that time thought of destroying with the Temple the whole city of Jerusalem.

God fuming with a pillow pulled over his head, contemplating smitage. 

Pharaoh's daughter brought Solomon 1,000 different kinds of musical instruments, explaining to him that each of them was used in the worship of a special idol.

Pharaoh’s daughter snaps her fingers, calls in the backup dancers and special effects technicians, and launches into the magicians’ song from Prince of Egypt. 

(She remembers to mention Isis, though)

(Perhaps more snakes were devoured that night. Who can say?)

She hung over his bed a canopy embroidered with gems which shone like stars; so that every time he intended to rise, he, on looking at the gems, thought it was still night. He continued to sleep, with the keys of the Temple under his pillow; and the priests therefore were unable to offer the morning sacrifice. They informed his mother, Bath-sheba, who roused the king when four hours of the day had flown. She then reprimanded him for his conduct; and verses 1-9 of Prov. xxxi. are considered by the Rabbis as having been pronounced by Bath-sheba on that occasion.

Bathsheba: Who can find a virtuous woman? Well, they won’t find one here. And what did I tell you about drinking? 

Solomon: It’s okay, Mom, next time I’ll marry a nice Jewish girl, I promise.

Bathsheba: I don’t think you’re quite grasping the point here. 

The destructive effect on the Temple of Solomon's marriage to Pharaoh's daughter is further expressed in the following allegory: "When Solomon wedded Pharaoh's daughter, Michael [another version has Gabriel] drove a rod into the bed of the sea; and the slime gathering around it formed an island on which, later, Rome [the enemy of Jerusalem] was built." 

Solomon: [gets hitched]

Michael/Gabriel:

[a-safe-and-quiet-place]

The Keresh is the enormous deer of Be-Ila'i, and it has but one horn as black as dye. The hide of the keresh of Be-Ila'i is sixteen cubits long (24 feet). Some of the Sages of the Talmud (Tannaim and Amoraim) identify this creature as the legendary Taḥash. It is associated with the Tigris, the giant lion of the same wild habitat. Be-Ila'i is an unknown forest of this name according to Rashi, also according to Lewysohn. According to Jastrow it refers to the mountains of interior Asia.

The keresh is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud (Yerushalmi) Shabbos 2:3, in the Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli) Shabbath 28b, Chullin 59b, Bava Basra 16b, and in the Midrash Koheles Rabbah 1:28. Rashi's commentary on Bava Basra 16b says the keresh has horns black as dye, and while there is no contradiction in saying that the horn of the keresh is as black as dye, some took the construction of this comment in its most mechanical literal sense to mean that it has a single horn. The keresh has been speculatively identified as possibly the giraffe, and also possibly as the rhinoceros. But the keresh is said to be a clean animal, and the rhinoceros is an unclean animal. According to the Septuagint, and according to the rabbinical commentaries of Saadia Gaon, Rabbeinu Yonah and Radak, the giraffe is the וָזָֽמֶר zemer of Deuteronomy 14:5 — chamois, mountain sheep, camelopardalus, wild sheep.

An awareness of ancient folklore having roots in prehistoric reality may have reasonably suggested to the Sages the actual existence of the enormous keresh. Possible sightings and capture of what may have been a giant one-horned Eurasian rhinoceros (Elasmotherium), once native to the central Asian and European steppes, have been preserved in legends. The animal has anciently been called a "deer-like" beast with one big horn, a "big bull" with one horn on its head, and a giant "unicorn" with five colors. However, the Elasmotherium was not big enough to be the keresh, measuring only about 10 cubits nose to tail, 15–16 feet, and it is supposed to have become extinct over 10,000 years ago. There is currently no certain consensus on the identity of the Keresh.

btw it really sucks that tumblr doesn’t let people upload gifs with less than 3mb

[coffeeshoprabbi]

Who or What is Chazal?

Who or What is Chazal?

Image: A page from a medieval Jerusalem Talmud manuscript. Found in the Cairo genizah. Public Domain.

“Chazal says…” a more advanced rabbinical students said to me, in answer to a question. I heard, “Chagall says…” and was very confused. I’d asked a question about halakhah (Jewish law) – why is he quoting a Jewish artist?

Chazal (Kha-ZAHL) is a word denoting all the sages, the ancient…

[eretzyisrael]

Parashat Shoftim

by: Meir Anolick

Written for Shabbat Parashat Shoftim

This week’s Parsha contains a plethora of important Mitzvot, many of which are national or communal Mitzvot. Among these are the commandments for us to follow the ruling of the courts, and that we should not deviate right or left. “According to the teaching that they will teach you and according to the judgment that they will say to you, shall you do; you shall not deviate from the word that they will tell you, right or left.” (17:11)

This verse means more than just following the courts. It seems obvious that for any social and judicial structure to work, we must obey the decisions of the courts, lest the nation fall to disarray and chaos. However, this Mitzvah is also a more general Mitzvah that constitutes the requirement to follow the teachings and ruling of Rabbanim, not just the courts1. If a Rav tells you to perform a Mitzvah in a certain way, and you don’t like that way, then you must do it anyway. There is no deciding for ourselves, and no shopping for Rabbis; if the Rabbi says it, you do it.

Over the past few years, I have heard many cases of people who disregard or mock the saying and teachings of Rabbanim, both great and small. Things like, “Oh, that’s just what the Rabbis say”, and “Those Rabbis don’t know what they’re talking about” seem to have become frighteningly commonplace. Many important facts seem to be ignored, disregarded, or forgotten by people who utter such disparaging remarks. First, some seem to feel that we don’t need to treat the Rabbanim of our generation with the same reverence and respect that we treat the Amoraim and Tannaim, since our generation and our leaders are on a much lower level than a couple thousand years ago. However, as it says in this week’s Parsha, just before the above-quoted verse, “and to the Judge who twill be in those days” (17:9), which is one of the places where we learn that the greatest of our generation needs to be treated like the greatest of the previous generation, since they are the greatest in our days.

Furthermore, many people seem to have forgotten that Rabbanim are, in fact, human, and as such have to deal with many of the same issues that the rest of us common folk do. As such, they understand our problems and difficulties, and their rulings will be taking these into account. In addition, anyone who is a Posek has achieved a very high level of learning, and for us to tell him that he’s wrong is like us trying to tell Einstein that he got his theory of relativity wrong. Without the years of knowledge and experience that they have, how can we think that we begin to understand how they came to the ruling they’ve given us?

Though there is plenty more to say on the subject, I will leave off with one last point. Judaism is built on tradition. It is through tradition that the ancient teachings of our sages from ages past and that national memory of the Exodus from Mitzrayim have been retained for over two-thousand years.

That tradition has been preserved, cultivated, and maintained carefully by the Rabbanim of each generation, and they are the ones that have helped to guide us through to get us where we are today. To start denigrating and disregarding them is to sever that tradition that links us back all the way to Har Sinai, and that would sever us from the great tradition that gives us our strength.

We must remember that our Rabbanim are our leaders and guides in a world that is often overwhelming us with materialism and futile desires. We must learn to cling to them, and cling to their teachings, if we want to be able to develop a connection to Hashem. Shabbat Shalom.

1 From here, it would seem that violating a Rabbinic prohibition also violates a Torah prohibition, and we know that is not the case, but it is a complex matter.

Source: amchachamvnavon.wordpress.com