Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 16.djvu/529

Rh M I S H N A H 507 the Mishnah, as a work, was first sifted by his disciple R. Meir, Tosephto, as a work, was first sifted by another disciple E. Nehemyah ; md just as R. Meir s Mishnah was sifted again by Rabbi and others after him, and was not written down before the 6th century, so Tosephto was sifted again by R. Hiyya, R. Hosha yah, and others, and was not written down in its entirety before the 6th century. It is no wonder, then, that it now contains matter of a considerably later age. Tosephto is not merely of great help for understanding the Mishnah, which is, in a certain sense, incomplete without it, but for the precise and exact knowledge of Jewish archaeology and other sciences, and in its Agadic parts, of which there are many, for the Greek Scriptures also. Here ought also to be mentioned Aloth de-Rabbi Nathan, which is, no doubt, Tosephto to the Mishnah of Aboth. Tosephto used to be printed till within the last forty years l as an appendix to the Eiph, i.e., the Hilckhoth Rab AJphcs (a compendium of the Talmud by R Yitshak b. Ya akob Al-Phesi, or Al-Phasi, i.e., of Fez, ob. 1103), which appeared first with this appendix at Venice, 1521-22, folio. Here, however, it was not edited critically or printed with even ordinary care. But in the Vienna edition of the Babylonian Talmud (1860-72) it came out, for the first time, worthily after a MS. till then uncollated which is preserved in the Court Library. Dr Zuckermandel has since published it from the Erfurt and Vienna MSS., with collations. 2 A Latin translation of Tosephto (with the Hebrew text) is to be found, under the name of Tosaphta, in Blasius Ugolinus s Thesaums Antiquitatum Sacrarum (xvii.-xx.). It comprises, however, only the orders Zerdim, Mo cd, and Kodoshim, and came out at Venice in the years 1755-57, folio. The second of these pieces of literature is Mekhilto. This word is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew Middah (measure), and hence signifies mould, form, i.e., of Scriptural exegesis, notably of part or parts of the Pentateuch. As such it might, of course, stand for any kind of commentary on any book of the Pentateuch, and have been composed by any one. And we find, indeed, that Mekhilto signified at one time a commentary on the books Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, either by R. Yishma el or by R. Akibah, 3 at another time a commentary on Exodus, by R. Shime on b. Yohai, 4 and at another time again a commentary on the last four books of Moses, by (Shime on) Ben Azzai. 5 Mekhilto now, however, means a commentary on the greater part of Exodus, ascribed to R. Yishma el (flourished in the 1st century) ; although, in reality, this teacher cannot have been the author of the book, seeing that his name is more than seventy times mentioned in it. The reason why the ancients called the book by his name is, no doubt, because the first words of the real work are Amar Rabbi Yishma el. Like the other works of the &quot; oral law,&quot; Mekhilto was not written down before the 6th century, a fact which accounts also, in part at least, for the loss of several portions of this com mentary, which, at present, only extends from xii. 1 to xxv. 3, with several gaps between. That Mekhilto was once fuller than it is now we know, not only from a statement made by Maimonides and others, but from a MS. (Add. 394. 1, in the University Library of Cambridge, leaf 40&), where an extract is given by a Franco- German author of the 12th or 13th century. The Talmud knows the name Mekhilto, and actually quotes Boraithoth (non-canonical Mishniyyoth) which are to be found in our book; and yet the existing Mekhilto can scarcely have been known to the teachers of the Talmud. Mekhilto is by some called Midrash and by others Mishnah ; both names are in a certain sense correct. It is Mid- rash in substance, inasmuch as it contains exegesis, and in form, inasmuch as it is subdivided into Parshiyyoth and follows the order of the Scriptural verses. But it is Mishnah in substance, inas much as it not only deals with the groundwork of the Mishnah, but consists of Boraithoth (non-canonical Mishniyyoth}, and in form, inasmuch as it is, like the canonical Mishnah, divided into Massekhtoth. These latter are nine in number, and are called re spectively (1) Dephisha (with 18 Parshiyyoth and 1 Pcthihto or introduction), (2) Bes hallah (with 6 Parshiyyoth and 1 Pcthihto), (3) Deshirctha (with 10 Parshiyyoth), (4) Vayyassa (with 6 Par shiyyoth), (b) Amalck (with 2 Parshiyyoth), (6) Yithro (with 2 Parshiyyoth), (7) Bahodcsh (with 11 Parshiyyoth), (8) Nezikin and Kaspo (with 20 Parshiyyoth), and (9) Shabbctho (with 2 Par shiyyoth 1 in the pericope Ki thissa and 1 in that of Vayyakhcl). Mekhilto was published first at Constantinople in 1515, under the name of Sephcr Hammckhilto, and in 1545 at Venice as Mid- rash Hammckhilto. In 1712 it appeared at Amsterdam with a commentary. In 1744 it appeared again at Venice with a Latin translation by Blasius Ugolinus (Thes. Antiq. Sacr., xiv. ). In 1801 it appeared at Leghorn with a different commentary. In 1844 it 1 That on the order Zerdim came out at Vilna in 1799, 4to; but in its entirety it came only out between 1837, 1841, and 1871, folio. 2 Issued at Pasewalk and Treves from 3877 to 1882, 8vo. 3 See Maimonides s preface to. the Mishneh Torah. 4 See Nahmanides s commentary on the Pentateuch (on Gen. xlix. 31). 5 See Yuhasin Ilasshalrm (e&amp;lt;l. Filipowski, London and Edinburgh, 1857, 8vo), p. 30, col. 2. came out at Vilna with a new commentary. All these are in folio. The best and cheapest editions with commentaries are those by Weiss (1865) and Friedmann (1870), both printed at Vienna, and in 8vo. The third of these pieces of literature is Siphro. Both Leviticus Siphro. itself, because it is the most difficult of all Mosaic books, and the oldest Rabbinic commentary on it, because it is the most difficult of all commentaries on the Scriptures, have been from time immemorial known under the name of Siphro (i.e., the Book). 6 This book and this commentary are also called Torath Kohanim, and the former is spoken of in the Talmud already as Sij.hro debe Rab. 7 This latter expression has led many great men (among others Maimonides) 8 to ascribe the authorship of this commentary to Rab (Abba Arikho, a nephew and disciple of R. Hiyya). But such a view is erroneous in the extreme, as the book is, so far as form and substance go, both older and later than Rab, paradoxical as this statement may appear. It is older in its origin and in its matter, for not merely do all the anonymous Boraithoth which are to be found in it belong to R. Yehudah b. Il ai, a teacher of the 1st century, but one of the sons of Rabbi (of the 2d century) had actually taught another rabbi two-thirds of a third, i.e., two-ninths, of this work. 9 It is later than Rab, for in it are found one &quot;authority&quot; and several &quot;results&quot; of much later date than that of this great Babylonian teacher. 10 The fact is, the word Rab in the phrase Siphro dcbe Rab is not a proper name at all, but simply stands for &quot;teacher,&quot; and dcbe Rab thus signifies &quot;of a school,&quot; a term used for any teacher and any school of any time. Although most of the Boraithoth which it contains are as old as the 1st century, this book as such cannot have been written down earlier than the 6th, in accordance with the treatment, in this respect, of all the other Halakhic works of the &quot;oral law.&quot; Siphro, although it bears on the pericopes and verses of Leviticus, and is on account of this fact by many called a Midrash, is in reality Mishnah, 11 a name borne out by the nature of its contents, which are mostly Mishnic, and sometimes represent actual canonical Mishniyyoth. Siphro exhibits a curious conglomeration of matter. It opens with the &quot;Rules of the Interpretation of Scripture,&quot; ascribed to R. Yishma el, a Boraitho which, although important in itself, is not more important for this than for any other com mentary on the Pentateuch. And this conglomerate nature shows itself even more strikingly in form ; for Siphro contains as forms of division Dibburim, Mekhilto, Parshiyyoth (some of which mean pericopes, whilst others mean chapters), Pcrakim, and Piskoth. All this points, of course, to various divisions of the book made at various times. Whilst none of these divisions can be later than the 12th century, 12 the earliest is at least as old as the 2d, and^elongs perhaps to the 1st. 13 Siphro is chiefly of importance for the under standing of the Mishnah of the orders Kodoshim and Tohoroth (which were, no doubt, the earliest Mishniyyoth put into &quot;order&quot;) ; but, whilst it is a sure help for the Mishnah, ihcMishnah is no sure help for it : Siphro is a genuine specimen of the &quot;oral law,&quot; inasmuch as it cannot be mastered without a teacher. Owing to the difficulty of understanding it, Siphro has not been often studied, and conse quently not often printed. The cditio princeps is of 1545 ; the second edition with the commentary Korban Aharon is of 1609-11, both at Venice. The third edition with the just-named commen tary is of 1702, and came out at Dessau. The fourth edition, with a Latin translation, is to be found in Blasius Ugolinus s Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarum, &c., Venice, 1744 (vol. xiv.). All these are in folio. The fifth edition, with the commentary Azarath Kohanim (vol. i.), appeared at Vilna, 1845, 4to. The sixth edition, with the commentary Asirith Hacphah, appeared at Lemberg, 1848, folio. The seventh edition, with the commentary Hattorah Vcham-Mitsi-ah, appeared at Bucharest, 1860, 4 to. The eighth edition, with the commentary of R. Abraham b. David of Pi s- quieres, &c., appeared at Vienna, 1862 ; and the ninth edition, with the commentary by R. Shimshon of Sens, appeared at War saw, 1866, both in folio. The fourth of these pieces of literature is Siphcrc. Siphcre, or Siphere. Siphcre dcbe Rab, which in earlier times certainly included the oldest Rabbinic commentaries on Exodus, Numbers, and Deu teronomy (and perhaps also that on Leviticus), means now the oldest Rabbinic commentary on the last two books of Moses only. 6 See T. B., Berakhoth, 186, and Rashi, in loco. The Siphro said here to have been studied by Benaiah the son of Jehoiada may well have been our Leviticus, though of course it cannot have been the Siphro with which we are here concerned. 7 Ibid. 8 Preface to Mishneh Torah. 9 See T. B., Kiddushin, 33a. 10 See the pericope Kedoshim, vi. 11 Its original founder (R. Yehudah b. Il ai) identifies Mishnah and Midrash, T. B., Kiddushin, 49a, 12 They were known to R. Abraham b. David (Rabad). 13 T. B., Kiddushin, 33a.