The Order of Arguments in כלך-Baraitot in Relation to the Conclusion
A study of all the baraitot in rabbinic literature which contain the phrase או כלך לדרך זו reveals that with very few exceptions they follow a precise structure: Argument A or Argument B, Argument C or Argument D, ending with a proof-text which invariably supports Argument A. Of the forty-nine suc...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Penn Press
1989
|
| In: |
The Jewish quarterly review
Year: 1989, Volume: 79, Issue: 4, Pages: 295-304 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | A study of all the baraitot in rabbinic literature which contain the phrase או כלך לדרך זו reveals that with very few exceptions they follow a precise structure: Argument A or Argument B, Argument C or Argument D, ending with a proof-text which invariably supports Argument A. Of the forty-nine such baraitot, all but a handful conform to this rule. In those instances where they do not, the manuscripts contain versions which conform to the rule, or the parallel versions have the arguments in proper order. Tosefta's one example of this structure (t Pisḥa 4.2) is a crux in more than one way. It contains no proof-text, although the Babylonian version of this baraita does. Moreover, while the Babylonian version (b Pes 61b) conforms to the rule regarding the order of arguments, the toseftan version seems in comparison to have arguments A and B reversed. Lacking the final proof-text, exegetes have been hard put to determine the baraita's conclusion. In light of the evidence presented here regarding the structure of all other baraitot of this type, and by comparing the toseftan baraita with its analogue, I conclude that the redactor intended to promote the point of view supported by what is argument B in b Pes, but had no text available to him which clearly expressed it. He therefore reversed the arguments and deleted the proof-text which seems to contradict the opinion he wishes to promote. The distribution of these baraitot is also of interest: Sifra (25 cases), Sifre Deuteronomy (4), BT (15), PT (2), and Tosefta with but one case. The article discusses the history of the או כלך לדרך זו form in the light of its rather skewed distribution of occurrences. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1553-0604 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The Jewish quarterly review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2307/1453890 |