The Mishna, etc

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 5392
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: The Mishna, etc

Post by MrMacSon » Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:35 pm


Johanan ben Zakkai

... Johanan’s teachings are to be traced not merely to the relatively few statements specifically attributed to him but to many views that become articulate during the 2nd century: for example, that acts of loving kindness atone no less effectively than the former Temple sacrificial ritual and are indeed at the core of the universe since its creation; that the study of Torah (the divine instruction or Law) is a central purpose of man and a paramount form of serving God; that a number of ceremonies and regulations once confined to the Temple were to be adopted even outside the Temple complex “to serve as memorials of the Sanctuary”; at the same time, despite the unique sanctity of Jerusalem, basic decisions regarding practice and instruction were now to be permitted to the authorized scholars wherever circumstances compelled them to sit in session. Such views, truly radical in origin, became normative rabbinical teaching and permanent components of Judaism.
.
.
The chief preoccupation of Johanan and his students was the study and continuing development of the Law (Halakha). He and they also engaged in the study of nonlegal subjects (Aggada), especially in connection with biblical exegesis (Midrash), explanation and interpretation of the biblical contents. In addition, he was interested in esoteric themes related to the subject of creation and the visions of the Merkavah (the divine chariot of Ezekiel 1), discourses on which were even delivered by some of his disciples. And, at least before the destruction of the Temple, if not thereafter as well, he seems to have held occasional sessions when certain ethical-philosophical questions, typical of Hellenistic-Roman popular philosophical discussion, were raised and explored. His homiletic interpretations of scripture often unite the symbolic with the rationalistic in a remarkable way.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Johanan-ben-Zakkai
Johanan ben Zakkai

The most important tanna in the last decade of the Second Temple, and, after the destruction of Jerusalem, the founder and first president of the academy at Jabneh. According to the theory formulated in the Mishnah (Ab. ii. 8), that traditions were handed down through an unbroken chain of scholars, Johanan, in receiving the teachings of Hillel and Shammai, formed the last link in that chain. But it is rather as a pupil of Hillel than of Shammai that he is known (Suk. 28a). Before his death Hillel is said to have prophetically designated Johanan, his youngest pupil, as "the father of wisdom" and "the father of coming generations" (Yer. Ned. v., end, 39b). Like that of Hillel, Johanan's life was divided into periods of forty years each. In the first of these he followed a mercantile pursuit; in the second he studied; and in the third he taught (R. H. 30b). Another version has it (Sifre, Deut. 357) that in the last forty years of his life he was a leader of Israel. If the last statement be accepted as approximately correct, and it is assumed that Johanan lived at the latest one decade after the destruction of Jerusalem, his public activity as the recognized leader of the pharisaic scribes must have begun between the years 30 and 40 of the common era.

Activity Before Destruction of Temple.
Some data have been preserved concerning Johanan's public activity in Jerusalem before the destruction of the Temple. Together with Simon b. Gamaliel I. he sent orders to the different districts of Palestine concerning the delivery of the tithe (statement of his pupil Joshua b. Neḥunya in the Mekilta of Simeon b. Yoḥai; Midr. ha-Gadol to Deut. xxvi. 13). He refuted the objections of the Sadducees to the Pharisees (Yad. iv. 5), and opposed the halakah of the Sadducees (Men. 65a; B. B. 115b). He prevented a Sadducean high priest from following the Sadducean regulations at the burning of the red heifer (Tosef., Parah, iii. 8; comp. Parah iii. 7, 8).

It was Johanan's activity as a teacher in Jerusalem which was especially extolled by tradition. His school was called the "great house," after the expression in II Kings xxv. 9 (Yer. Meg. 73d). It was the scene of many incidents that formed the subjects of anecdote and legend (Lam. R. i. 12, passim; Gen. R. iv.). The oft-repeated story concerning Johanan's most important pupil, Eliezer b. Hyrcanus, shows Johanan's bet ha-midrash (academy) as the scene of a pathetic meeting between son and father (Tan., ed. Buber, to Gen. xiv. 1). An old tradition (Pes. 26a) relates that Johanan sat in the shadow of the Temple and lectured the whole day; but that of course was not the permanent place for his teaching. The statements regarding five of his pupils, his verdict concerning them, and the question he put to them as to the best road for a person to pursue through life (Ab. ii. 8) are reminiscences of the period before the destruction.

Residence in Galilee.
Johanan's residence in 'Arab, a place in Galilee, which was perhaps his home, belongs to this period. Two questions of a legal nature (regarding the observance of the Sabbath) which he answered while there (Shab. xvi. 7, xxii. 3) gave rise to the statement that he lived there for eighteen years (probably a round number), and that he was moved by the religious indifference of the inhabitants to exclaim: "O Galilee, Galilee, thou hatest the Torah; hence wilt thou fall into the hands of robbers!"

Another prophetical exclamation of a similar nature is ascribed to Johanan. The gates of the Temple had ominously opened of themselves, whereupon he apostrophized the sanctuary: "O Temple, Temple, why dost thou frighten thyself? I know of thee that thou shalt be destroyed; Zechariah the son of Iddo [Zech. xi. 1] has already prophesied concerning thee: 'Open thy doors, O Lebanon [the sanctuary], that the fire may devour thy cedars'" (Yoma 39b; comp. Ab. R. N., Recension B, vii., ed. Schechter, p. 21).

After the Destruction.
Johanan's part in the last struggle of Jerusalem against Rome has been immortalized in the legends concerning the destruction of that city, which, however, have a historical kernel (Giṭ. 56b; Lam. R. i. 5; Ab. R. N. iv.). He counseled peace; and when the strife of parties in the besieged city became unbearable he had himself carried to the Roman camp in a coffin. Like Josephus, Johanan prophesied imperial honors for the general Vespasian, quoting the words of the prophet Isaiah: "Lebanon [that is, the sanctuary] shall fall by a mighty one" (Isa.x. 34). He sought and obtained permission to settle in Jabneh (Jamnia) and to exercise his profession of teacher there. In Jabneh, surrounded by his pupils, Johanan received the terrible news that the Temple was burned to ashes. They tore their garments, wept, and made lamentation as for the dead (Ab. R. N. iv.). But the aged master in the catastrophe which had befallen the Jewish people kept his vigor unimpaired.

He converted the school at Jabneh into a center for Judaism in Palestine. The college, of which he was president, exercised the functions of the great law court (Sanhedrin) of Jerusalem, and by this institution of an authorized board the continuity of spiritual leadership was maintained uninterrupted. Johanan saw to it that Jabneh took the place of Jerusalem as the Jewish religious center. He ordained that certain privileges peculiar to Jerusalem and the sanctuary should be transferred to Jabneh (R. H. iv. 1, 3).

Other regulations of his dealt with the determination of the exact time when the new month begins—a matter then very important—and with the acceptance of the testimony on which such determination is based (ib. iv. 41; Baraita, R. H. 21b). His order that, as had been customary in the Temple, the trumpets should sound in Jabneh on New-Year's Day even when it fell on the Sabbath, was opposed, but unsuccessfully, by some of the members of the council (Baraita, R. H. 29b).
.
.
His Teaching.
Johanan ben Zakkai's motto was, "If thou hast learned much of the Torah, do not take credit for it; for this was the purpose of thy creation" (Ab. ii. 8). He found his real calling in the study of the Law ...

His Exegesis.
In the halakic tradition Johanan is but seldom referred to as an originator of maxims. His halakah is doubtless to be found in that of Hillel's school and in the sayings of his pupils, especially of Eliezer and Joshua. The haggadic tradition, on the other hand, connects numerous and varied sayings with his name. Mention may first be made of conversations between him and his pupils, or between him and unbelievers who were versed in the Bible, in which questions of textual interpretation were discussed. At one time he asked his pupils what the words in Prov. xiv. 34 meant (Pesiḳ., ed. Buber, 12b; comp. B. B. 10b, where the accounts of two conversations have been confused). He himself interpreted them as follows: "Benevolence [ḥesed] on the part of a nation has the atoning power of a sin-offering" (B. B. l.c.).
.
.
The Ḥomer.
A special group of Johanan's haggadic text interpretations is given the name "Ḥomer," which term is related to the designation "doreshe ḥamurot," applied to the ancient expositors of the Bible. In this group the interpretations are symbolic, seeking to penetrate into the spirit of the Bible text ...

The exhortation to those who are freed from military service to return home (Deut. xx. 5-7):—this, he said, was given in order that the cities of Israel might not become depopulated in times of war (Sifre, Deut. 192) ...

Johanan's views on piety (comp. his motto given above) correspond to his teaching that Job's piety was not based on the love of God, but on the fear of Him (Job. i. 1; Soṭah v. 5, reported by Joshua b. Hananiah). He explains the exhortation in Eccl. ix. 8 allegorically: "White garments and costly oils are not meant here," he says (Eccl. R. ix. 6), "for the Gentile peoples have these in plenty: it is rather an exhortation to fulfil the Law, to do good deeds, and to study the Scriptures."

Esoteric Doctrines.
In a tradition concerning the knowledge of esoteric doctrines ("Ma'aseh Bereshit " and "Ma'aseh Merkabah"), related by Jose b. Judah, a tanna of the second half of the second century, it is said that Joshua b. Hananiah, the pupil of Johanan, under the eye of his master occupied himself with esoteric doctrines and that Akiba learned them from him (Ḥag. 14b). According to another tradition (ib.), it was Eleazar b. 'Arak with whom Johanan studied the mystic doctrines. A remarkable saying of Johanan's has been preserved, which is in accord with his study of mystic doctrines (Ḥag. 13a; comp. Pes. 94b). In this saying man is advised to bring the infinity of God, the Creator of the world, nearer to his own conception by imagining the space of the cosmos extended to unthinkable distances.

In conclusion may be mentioned the historical meaning which Johanan, on a certain sad occurrence, gave to a verse of the Song of Solomon (Yitro, Baḥodesh, 1). In Ma'on, a town of southern Judea, Johanan saw, probably not long after the destruction of Jerusalem, a young Jewess picking out grains of barley from the ordure of an Arab's horse, in order to still her hunger. Johanan said to his pupils who were with him:
  • "My whole life long I have tried to understand that sentence in the Song of Solomon [i. 8]: 'If thou know not, O thou fairest among women,' etc.

    Now for the first time I catch its meaning: 'You did not wish'—so goes the word reproving Israel—'to submit to God; hence you are made subject to foreign peoples. You did not wish to pay God a half-shekel for each person; now you pay 15 shekels to the government of your enemies. You did not wish to repair the roads and streets for the holiday pilgrims; you must now repair the road-houses and watch-towers for your oppressors. And in you is fulfilled the prophecy [Deut. xviii. 47-48, R. V.]: Because thou servedst not the Lord thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, by reason of the abundance of all things, therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies, which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things'."
Johanan felt the fall of his people more deeply than any one else, but—and in this lies his historical importance—he did more than any one else to prepare the way for Israel to rise again.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... n-b-zakkai

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 5392
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: The Mishna, etc

Post by MrMacSon » Sat Jun 16, 2018 9:02 pm


JOSHUA Ben HANANIAH (first and second centuries C.E.), tanna, one of the five disciples of Johanan b. Zakkai's inner circle (Avot 2:8), and the primary teacher of *Akiva. Joshua (together with *Eliezer ben Hyrcanus) served as the bridge between the earlier (pre-destruction) and later (post-destruction) periods of tannaitic tradition. Hundreds of statements in halakhah and aggadah are ascribed to him in both the Mishnah and the Tosefta, distributed fairly evenly over five of the six sedarim, with a slightly smaller presence of his teachings in seder Nezikin. In the eyes of later storytellers, the period of the tannaim was a heroic age, and even the slightest scrap of information about the least of the tannaim can develop in the later aggadah into a tale of epic proportions.

In the case of truly significant and heroic figures, like Joshua, this process of literary expansion and elaboration is inevitable. Since the narrative traditions in which Joshua eventually played a leading role developed over a period of centuries, it is essential to distinguish between the earlier forms of these traditions, found in the tannaitic sources themselves, and later developments found only in the Talmudim and the amoraic Midrashim. At the same time, the tannaitic traditions themselves are not necessarily free of redactional bias, and must be critically evaluated before using them to reconstruct the life and career of Joshua.
.
.
[Similar] care must certainly be taken when examining historical aggadot for which little or no evidence can be adduced from tannaitic sources. For example, as a close disciple of *Johanan b. Zakkai, Joshua reportedly plays a central role (together with Eliezer ben Hyrcanus) in the events surrounding Johanan's dramatic and fateful escape from besieged Jerusalem. According to this story, which has reached us in several different versions (TB Git. 56a, Lam. R. 1:5, 31, ARN1 4, ARN2 6), Joshua and Eliezer carried Johanan b. Zakkai out of Jerusalem in a coffin so that their master might meet with Vespasian. According to one of them (Lam. R.), Joshua and Eliezer were even sent back into the city to help bring out R. Zadok. Since, however, "in Tannaitic sources we find not the slightest reference to an escape" (Neusner, Development of a Legend, 228), and in fact all the traditions concerning this episode are late amoraic (TB Git. 56a, Lam. R.) or post-amoraic (ARN), it would probably be ill advised to use this or other similar "events" in order to draw historical conclusions concerning Joshua's attitude toward the Roman conquest of Judea, or toward the policies of various Jewish factions during the struggle ...

Various other legends developed around the figure of Rabbi Joshua, many of them also rooted to some degree in early tannaitic sources. For example, in Avot Johanan b. Zakkai praises Joshua, saying: "Happy is she who bore him" (Avot 2:8). A later aggadah reports that, when Joshua was still an infant, his mother used to bring him to the synagogue so that "his ears might become accustomed to the words of Torah" (TJ, Yev. 1:6, 3a) ...

According to the Tosefta (Sanh. 13:2) Joshua held that "pious gentiles have a share in the world to come," while Eliezer denied them any such reward. Later Midrashim ascribe to Joshua a positive attitude toward the acceptance of proselytes, while Eliezer was described as harsh and unreceptive (Gen. R. 70:5; Eccles. R. 1:8; 4; cf. TB, AZ 17a), thus paralleling somewhat the stereotypical opposition between Hillel and Shammai found in other late aggadot ...

In line with his leading role in the Jewish community, Joshua may indeed have participated in a number of official missions. The later aggadah describes Joshua as having engaged on such occasions in discussions on both theological and quasi-scientific matters with eminent non-Jews, notably the emperor Hadrian and the "elders" of Athens (Bekh. 8b; cf. Ein Ya'akov ad loc.). Similarly his discussions with the Roman emperor are described in the Babylonian Talmud (Ḥul. 59b–60a) and Palestinian Midrashim (see *Hadrian in aggadah). Finally, according to the testimony of the Tosefta (Ḥag. 2:2, and cf. 2:6), Joshua served as the primary teacher of Akiva in matters of esoteric speculation, transmitting to him the traditions of the merkavah which he had received from Johanan b. Zakkai, though here also Joshua's role in this tradition expanded significantly with the passage of time (Neusner, Development of a Legend, 247–52).

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/joshua-ben-hananiah

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 5392
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: The Mishna, etc

Post by MrMacSon » Sat Jun 16, 2018 9:49 pm


Joshua ben Hananiah (Hebrew: יהושע בן חנניה‬ d. 131 CE) was a leading tanna of the first half-century following the destruction of the Temple. He was of Levitical descent (Ma'as. Sh. v. 9), and served in the sanctuary as a member of the class of singers (Arakhin 11b). His mother intended him for a life of study, and, as an older contemporary, Dosa ben Harkinas, relates (Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot 3a), she carried the child in his cradle into the synagogue, so that his ears might become accustomed to the sounds of the words of the Torah. It was probably with reference to his pious mother that Johanan ben Zakai thus expressed himself concerning Joshua ben Hananiah: "Hail to thee who gave him birth" (Pirkei Avot ii. 8).

According to another tradition (Avot of Rabbi Natan xiv.) Johanan ben Zakai praised him in the words from Ecclesiastes iv. 12: "And a threefold cord is not quickly broken." Perhaps he meant that in Joshua the three branches of traditional learning, Midrash, Halakah, and Aggadah, were united in a firm whole; or possibly he used the passage in the sense in which it was employed later (Ecclesiastes Rabbah iv. 14; Bava Batra 59a), to show that Joshua belonged to a family of scholars even to the third generation. He is the seventh most frequently mentioned sage in the Mishnah.[1]


An Opponent of Asceticism
After the destruction of the Temple Joshua opposed the exaggerated asceticism with which many wished to show their grief, e.g., in going without meat and wine because the altar on which they had sacrificed animals and poured libations of wine had been destroyed. He represented to them that to be consistent they ought to eat no figs or grapes, since no more first-fruits were offered, and that they ought even to refrain from bread and water, since the festival of drawing water (Joshua describes this festival in Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 55b) had been discontinued, and the showbread as well as the two loaves of the feast of first-fruits could no longer be sacrificed (Tosefta, Sotah, end; Bava Batra 60b). With such arguments Joshua supported the efforts of his teacher to make the grief at the loss of the Temple, which until then had been the center of religious life, less bitter.
“ One time, when Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai was walking in Jerusalem with Rebbi Yehoshua, they arrived at where the Temple in Jerusalem now stood in ruins. "Woe to us" cried Rabbi Yehoshua, "for this house where atonement was made for Israel's sins now lies in ruins!"

Answered Rabban Yochanan, "We have another, equally important source of atonement, the practice of gemilut hasadim (loving kindness), as it is stated 'I desire loving kindness and not sacrifice.' ” — Avoth deRabbi Nathan
Avot de-Rabbi Nathan (Hebrew: אבות דרבי נתן‎), usually printed together with the minor tractates of the Talmud, is a Jewish aggadic work probably compiled in the geonic era (c.700–900 CE). Although Avot de-Rabbi Nathan is the first and longest of the "minor tractates", it probably does not belong in that collection chronologically, having more the character of a late midrash. In the form now extant it contains a mixture of Mishnah and Midrash, and may be technically designated as a homiletical exposition of the Mishnaic tractate Pirkei Avot, having for its foundation an older recension (version) of that tractate. It may be considered as a kind of "tosefta" or "gemarah" to the Mishna Avot, which does not possess a traditional gemarah. Avot de-Rabbi Nathan contains many sentences, proverbs, and incidents that are not found anywhere else in the early rabbinical literature (Cashdan 1965).

His opposition to asceticism, however, was due also to his mild and temperate nature, which caused him to say in regard to the severe regulations which had been adopted by the school of Shammai shortly before the destruction of the sanctuary: "On that day they overstepped the boundary."

Joshua saw the greatest danger to the community in the sickly offshoots of piety.

In his motto of life (Pirkei Avot ii. 11) he recommends temperance and the love of mankind as a security for individual happiness.

Various anecdotes illustrate the opposition between Joshua, who represented the teachings of Hillel, and his colleague Eliezer, who represented the teachings of Shammai, much in the same way as the opposition between Hillel and Shammai is depicted elsewhere (Genesis Rabbah lxx., beginning; Ecclesiastes Rabbah i. 8; Kiddushin 31a).


... he was the very one whom Gamaliel humiliated on a certain occasion when the authority of the president was in question ([[Rosh Hashanah (tractate)}Rosh Hashanah]] 25a; Yer. Rosh Hashana 58b). Joshua's pliant disposition did not shield him from humiliation by Gamaliel a second time, and the wrong done to this highly esteemed scholar was the cause of Gamaliel's removal from office. He soon obtained Joshua's forgiveness, and this opened the way for his reinstatement; but he was now obliged to share his office with Eleazar ben Azariah, who had originally been appointed his successor (Berakhot 28a).

Joshua esteemed Eleazar very highly, and on one occasion called out in his emphatic manner: "Hail to thee, Father Abraham, for Eleazar ben Azariah came forth from thy loins!" (Tosefta, Sotah, vii.; Hagigah 3a; Yer. Hagigah, beginning). When it became necessary to present the case of the Palestinian Jews at Rome, the two presidents, Gamaliel and Eleazar, went as their representatives, and Joshua ben Hananiah and Akiva accompanied them. This journey of the "elders" to Rome, and their stay in the Imperial City, furnished material for many narratives.
  • In one of these the Romans call on Joshua ben Hananiah to give proofs from the Bible of the resurrection of the dead and of the foreknowledge of God (Sanhedrin 90b).
  • In another, Joshua comes to the aid of Gamaliel when the latter is unable to answer the question of a "philosopher" (Genesis Rabbah xx.).
  • In one anecdote, concerning a sea voyage undertaken by Gamaliel and Joshua, the astronomical knowledge of the latter is put to use. He is said to have calculated that a comet would appear in the course of the voyage (Horayot 10a).
After Gamaliel's death (comp. Mo'ed Katan 27a; Yer. Mo'ed Katan 83a), the first place among the scholars fell to Joshua, since Eliezer ben Hyrcanus was under a ban. Joshua wished to do away with a regulation of Gamaliel's, but met with opposition on the part of the council (Eruvin 41a). Joshua stood by the death-bed of his colleague Eliezer ben Hyrcanus and called to him: "O master, thou art of more value to Israel than God's gift of the rain; since the rain gives life in this world only, whereas thou givest life both in this world and in the world to come" (Mekhilta, Yitro, Bachodesh, 10; Sifre, Deut. 32; comp. Sanhedrin 101a).

Under Hadrian
In the beginning of Hadrian's rule Joshua appears as a leader of the Jewish people. When the permission to rebuild the Temple was again refused, he turned the excited people from thoughts of revolt against Rome by a speech in which he skilfully made use of a fable of Aesop concerning the lion and the crane (Genesis Rabbah lxiv., end). About the same time Joshua by his eloquence prevented the whole area of the Temple from being pronounced unclean because one human bone had been found in it (Tosefta, 'Eduyot iii. 13; Zeb. 113a). Joshua lived to witness Hadrian's visit to Palestine, and he followed the emperor to Alexandria (130). The conversations between Joshua and Hadrian, as they have been preserved in the Babylonian Talmud and the Palestinian Midrash, have been greatly modified and exaggerated by tradition, but they nevertheless present in general a just picture of the intercourse between the witty Jewish scholar and the active, inquisitive emperor, the "curiositatum omnium explorator", as Tertullian calls him.

Relations with the Emperor
In Palestinian sources Joshua answers various questions of the emperor: how God created the world (Genesis Rabbah x.), concerning the angels (ib. lxxviii., beginning; Lamentations Rabbah iii. 21), as to the resurrection of the body (Genesis Rabbah xxviii.; Ecclesiastes Rabbah xii. 5), and with reference to the Decalogue (Pesikta Rabbati 21). In the Babylonian Talmud three conversations are related, which resemble that on the Decalogue, in that Joshua silences the emperor's mockery of the Jewish conception of God by proving to him God's incomparable greatness and majesty (Hullin 59b, 60a).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_ben_Hananiah
continued, but elaborated on -

Relations with the Emperor
.
Once a dispute in pantomime took place in the emperor's palace between Joshua and [an unbeliever, said to be] a Judæo-Christian ("Min"), in which Joshua maintained that God's protective hand was still stretched over Israel (Hagigah 5b).
Talmud - Mas. Chagigah 5b
.
R. Joshua b. Hanania was [once] at the court of Caesar.8 A certain unbeliever9 showed him [by gestures]: A people whose Lord has turned His face from them — He showed him [in reply]: His hand is stretched over us. Said Caesar to R. Joshua: What did he show thee?-A people whose Lord has turned His face from them. And I showed him: His hand is stretched over us.

They [then] said to the heretic:10 What didst thou show him?A people whose Lord has turned His face from them. And what did he show thee? — I do not know. Said they: A man who does not understand what he is being shown by gesture should hold converse in signs before the king! They led him forth and slew him.

(8) i.e., Hadrian, v.J.E. vol. VII, pp. 290-292.
(9) [xuruehpt]. Levy and others derive it from ** Epicurus, an Epicurean; Maimonides and Jast. connect with Heb. [repv] from rt. [rep]. A term applied to unbelievers generally, Jew or Gentile. MS.M.: ‘Min’ (v. next note), a Jewish sectary, 'probably* a Judeo-Christian'. V. J.E. vol. I, pp. 665-666 and Vol. VIII, pp. 594-595. [*italics mine ie.MrMacSon's]
(10) ihn, probably from meaning ‘species’, hence sectarian. V. preceding note

https://www.halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Chagigah.pdf

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 5392
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: The Mishna, etc

Post by MrMacSon » Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:37 pm


His Exegesis ie. Joshua ben Hananiah's
In the haggadic tradition Joshua ben Hananiah's exegetical controversies with two of his most prominent contemporaries occupy an important place. These two are his colleague Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, who is frequently mentioned in the Halakah also as holding an opposite opinion, and Eleazar of Modi'im, who belonged to the school of Jabneh and was especially known as the author of haggadic expositions of the Bible. The controversies between Eliezer and Joshua refer to cosmology, to eschatology, comprising views on the period as well as on the world to come and the resurrection, and to the interpretation of various Biblical passages.

The controversies between Joshua ben Hananiah and Eleazar of Modi'im are found in the tannaitic midrash to Exodus (the Mekhilta[disambiguation needed]), and they form at the same time a continuous double commentary on the sections concerning the stay of the Israelites at Marah (Exodus xv. 22–27), the miracle of the manna (ib. xvi.), the fight with Amalek (ib. xvii.), and the visit of Jethro (ib. xviii.). In these controversies Joshua, as a rule, stands for the naturalistic, literal meaning of the words and the historical interpretation of the contents, putting emphasis on the meaning demanded by the context.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_be ... s_Exegesis

Post Reply