Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadMcClintock Biblical Encyclopedia: Midraish
Subjects in this Topic:
(Heb. îַãְøָùׁ ) is a word applied to the oldest Jewish exposition of the Scriptures-a peculiar, somewhat wild mode of interpretation, which appeals more to the feelings than to the reason.
I. Title and its Signification, etc. — The term îãøù , which is strangely rendered in the text of the A.V. by story (2Ch_13:22; 2Ch_24:27), is derived from the root ãøù , to search into, to examine, to -investigate, to explain, and primarily denotes the study, the exposition of Holy Scripture, in the abstract and general sense. Thus it is said, “Not the study of it ( äîãøù ), but the doing of the law is the chief thing” (Aboth, 1:17). The study or exposition of Holy Writ ( îãøù ) was effected in earlier times through public discourses, delivered on Sabbaths, festivals, and days of assembly, by the priests, Levites, elders of Israel, and prophets. During the period of the second Temple, when the canonical books and the written discourses ‘of the older prophets became unintelligible to the mass of the' people, who spoke Hebraized Aramaic, these public expositions became more formal, and were delivered on a large scale by the lawyers, or Scribes ( ñåôøéí ), as they are called in the N.T., the directors of schools ( øáøðï ), graduated rabbins ( øáåú , only with suff. øáåúéðå ), or learned men in general and members of societies ( äáøéí ).
II. Design and Classification. — The design of the Midrash or exposition varied according to circumstances. Sometimes the lecturer ( ãåøù ãøùï ) confined himself to giving a running paraphrase ( îúåøâîï ) into the vulgar Aramaic, or the other dialects of the country, of the lessons from the Law and Prophets which were read in Hebrew, see HAPHTARAH, thus gradually giving rise to the Chaldee, Syriac, and Greek versions, so that these Targumim may be regarded as being the result, or forming part of the Midrash. The chief design of the Midrash, however, was to propound the Scriptures either logically or homiletically. Hence obtained that twofold mode of expression called the legal or Halachic exegesis, and the homiletic or Hagadic exegesis, and their respective literatures.
1. The Legal or Halachic Exegesis. — The object of this branch of exposition is to ascertain, by analogy, combination, or otherwise, the meaning of the law respecting exceptional cases about which there is no direct enactment in the Mosaic code, as it was the only rule of practice in the political and religious government of the Jews under all vicissitudes of the commonwealth, and as the motto of the expositors and administrators of it was “ Turn it (i.e. the inspired code) over and over again, for everything is in it, and will be discovered therein” (Aboth, 5:22). The laws thus obtained, either by deduction from the text or introduction into it, are called Halachoth ( äìëåú , sing. äìëä , from äì , ִ to go), the rule by which to go, the binding precept, the authoritative law, being equivalent to the Hebrew word îùôèéí (comp. Chaldee Paraphrase on Exo_21:9), and this mode of exposition, which is chiefly confined to the Pentateuch as the legal part of the O.T., is termed Halachic exegesis. These Halachoth ( äìëåú ), some, of which are coeval with the enactments in the Pentateuch itself (Deu_17:11), while some are the labors of the Great Synagogue or the Sopherim = Scribes — beginning with Ezra, and terminating with Simon the Just — were for centuries transmitted orally, and hence are also called Shematha ( ùîòúà ),i.e., that which was heard, or that which was- received by members of the chain of tradition. Those prohibitory laws or fences ( âãø ñéâ , later âæøä ) which the Sopherim were obliged to make on their own account in consequence of the new wants of the times, without being indicated in the Pentateuch, and which are called Sopheric precepts ( ãáøé ñåôøéí ), and in the N.T. Tradition of the Elders ( ðáñÜäïóéò ôῶí ðñåóâõôÝñùí , Mat_15:2; Mar_7:3), are distinguished from the traditional laws which are deduced from the Bible. The latter are designated Deductions from the Laig ( ãàåøééúà ò÷ø ), and are of equal authority with the Biblical precepts. The few learned men who during the period of the Sopherim (B.C. 450-300) wrote down some of these laws, or indicated them by certain signs ( ñîðéí ) or hints ( øîæéí ) in their scrolls of the Pentateuch, only did so to assist their memory, and the documents are called Secret Scrolls ( îâìåú ñúøéí ). These marginal glosses in the MSS. of the Law became the basis of the Masorah (q.v.). Gradually, however, these Halachoth were fully written down, and are embodied in the following works.
(1.) It was not till the period of the Tanaim (an honorable appellation given to those doctors who transmitted the oral law), B.C. 220-A.D. 220, that the fixing, collecting, and final redaction of the Halachah — this mass of juridico-political and religious practice, or doctrine of human and divine law (humani et divinijuris) — took place. The first attempt at a compilation' and rubrification of it was made by Hillel I (B.C. 75-A.D. 8), who classified and arranged the diverse laws under six sedarim ( ñãøéí ) or orders. In this he was followed by Akiba (A.D. 20-120), and Simon III b.-Gamaliel II, who was the president of the Sanhedrim A.D. 140-163, and whose son R. Jehudah I the Holy, called Rabbi êáô᾿ ἐîï÷ήí (died A.D. cir. 193), completed the final redaction of the code called Mishna (q.v.).
(2.) The Mishna, however, like the Pentateuch, soon became the subject of discussion or study, as many of its expositions and enactments are not only couched in obscure language, but are derived from antagonistic sources. Hence. like the divine code of the law, which it both supplements and expounds, the Mishna itself was expounded during the period of the Amoraim. or expositors; an appellation given to the public expositors of the oral law ( äìëåú ), recorded by the Tanaim, A.D. 220-540, both in Jerusalem and Babylon. The result of these expositions is the two Talmuds, or more properly Gemaras, viz. the Jerusalem and the Babylon. SEE TALMUD.
(3.) Prior in point of age to the compilation of the Mishna is the commentary on Exodus, called Mechilta. which is composed of nine Tractates ( îñéëúåú ), subdivided into sections ( ôøùéåú ), and treating on select sections of Exodus in the following order: The first tract treats on Exo_12:1 to Exo_13:6, in eighteen sections; the second is on Exo_13:7 to Exo_14:31, in six sections; the third is on Exo_15:1-21, in ten sections; the fourth is on Exo_15:22 to Exo_17:7, in seven sections; the fifth is on Exo_17:8 to Exo_18:27, in four sections; the sixth is on Exo_19:1 to Exo_20:22, in eleven sections; the seventh is on Exo_21:1 to Exo_22:22, in eight sections; the eighth is on Exo_22:23 to Exo_23:19, in two sections; and the ninth tract is on Exo_29:12-17; Exo_35:1-3, in two sections. The first compilation of the Mechilta was most probably made under the influence of R. Ishmael b.-Elisa, A.D. cir. 90, see ISHMAEL SEE ELISA, which accounts for the many maxims contained in it, and not to be found elsewhere. It was re-edited afterwards, and greatly altered (comp. Geiger, Urschrift, p. 434 sq.). It was printed at Constantinople in 1515; then again at Venice in 1545; then, with a commentary and revised text by M. Frankfurter (Amst.), in 1712; but the best edition is that by Landau (Vilna), in 1844. A Latin translation of it by Ugolino is given in his Thesaursus Antiquitatum Sacrum, volume 14 (Venice, 1752).
(4.) Commentary on Leviticus, called Siphraa, Sifra ( ñôøà ), the Book; also Siphra D'be Rab ( øá ñôøà ãáé ), Siphra of the school of Rab, because Rab=Abba Areka, the first of the Amosraim, and founder of the celebrated school at Sora, of which he was president twenty-eight years (A.D. 219-247), is its author; and by some it is denominated Borsaitha shel Torath Cohanim ‘( áøéúà ùì úåøú ëäðéí ), because the book of Leviticus which it expounds is called by the Jews the Code of the Priests ( úåøú ëäðéí , Jebamoth, 72 b; Rashi, on Lev_9:23). The Siphra is divided into treatises ( ãéáåøéí ), which are subdvided into sections ( ôøùåú ), and these again into chapters ( ôø÷éí ). The first edition of it appeared, together with the Mechilta and Siphri, at Constantinople in 1515; then at Venice in 1545; and, with a very extensive commentary by Ibn Chajim, at Venice in 1609-11; with the commentary Ha-Tora Veha- Mitzva, by M.L. Malbim, at Bucharest in 1860. The best edition, however, is that by Schlossberg, with the commentary of Abraham b.-David, and the Massoreth Ha-Talmud of Weiss (Vienna, 1862). A Latin translation of it by Ugolino is given in his Thesaurus ‘Antiquitatum Sacrumn (Venice, 1752), volume 14.
(5.) Commentary on Numbers and Deuteronomy, called Siphrae or Siphri ( ñôøé ), the Books, also Siphre D'be Rab ( ñôøé ãáé øá ), because Rab, the author of the preceding work, is also the author of this commentary, and Vishallechu ( åéùìçå ), because it begins with Numbers v, 2, where this word occurs. The commentary on Numbers is divided into one hundred and sixty-one chapters, and that on Deuteronomy into three hundred and fifty-seven. The Siphre first appeared with the Mechilta and Siphra at Constantinople in 1515; at Venice in 1545. The best edition of it is in two volumes, with the extensive commentary by Lichtstein (volume 1, Dyrhenfort, 1810; volume 2, Radvill, 1819). A Latin translation of it by Ugolino is given in his Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrum (Venice, 1753), volume 15.
2. The Homiletic or Hagadic Exegesis. — The design of this branch of the Midrash or exposition is to edify the people of Israel in their most holy faith, to encourage them to obedience, to commend to them the paths of virtue and morality, to stimulate them to all good works, and to comfort them in tribulation by setting before them the marvellous dealings of Providence with the children of man, the illustrious examples of the holy patriarchs, and the signal punishment of evil-doers from by-gone history — investing each character, and every event, with the halo or contumely, the poetry or the legend, which the fertile genius of the Hebrew nation and the creative power of tradition had called into existence in the course of-time. This branch of exposition extends over the whole Hebrew Scriptures, while the Halachic interpretation, as we have seen, is chiefly confined to the Pentateuch, which is the civil and legal portion of the Bible. It is also called Hagadah ( äâãä ; Chaldee àâãä , from ðâã , to say), said, reported, on it, without its having any binding authority, in contradistinction to the Halachah, which is authoritative law. When it is stated that this department of Biblical exegesis is interspersed with homiletics, the beautiful maxims and ethical sayings of illustrious men, attractive mystical expositions about angels and demons, paradise and hell, Messiah and the Prince of Darkness; poetical allegories, symbolical interpretations of all the feasts and fasts, charming parables, witty epithalamiums, touching funeral orations, amazing legends, biographical and characteristic sketches of Biblical persons and national heroes; popular narratives, and historical notices of men, women, and events of by-gone days; philosophical disquisitions, satirical assaults on the heathen and their rites, able defences of Judaism, etc., etc., it will be readily understood why the Jewish nation gradually transferred to this storehouse” of Biblical arid national lore the name Midrash the exposition, êáô᾿ ἐîï÷ήí . This branch of public and popular exposition, in which the public at large naturally felt far more interest than in the dry disquisitions about legal enactments, being thus called by them The Midrash, the collection of works which contain this sacred and national lore obtained the name Midrashim ( îãøùéí ), Commentaries, in the sense of Caesar's Commentaries. Hence the term Midrashic or Hagadic exegesis, so commonly used in Jewish writings, by which is meant an interpretation effected in the spirit of those national and traditional views. The following are the principal Mlidrashim, or commentaries, in the more restricted sense of the word, which contain the ancient Hagadic expositions. (It must here be remarked that as this branch of the Midrash embraces the whole cycle of ethics. metaphysics, history, theosophy, etc., as well as Biblical exposition, it has been divided into-1, General Hagadah or Hagadah Midrash, in its wider sense, treating almost exclusively on morals, history, etc.; and, 2, into Special Hagadah or Hagadah Midrash,-in its narrower, and Midrash in its narrowed sense, occupying itself almost entirely with Biblical exposition, and making the elements of the general Hagada subservient to its purpose. It would be foreign to the design of this article were we to discuss anything more than the Midrash in its narrowest sense.)
(1.) Midra-sh Rabboth ( îãøù øáåú ), or simply Rabboth ( øáåú ), which is ascribed to Oshaja b.-Nachmani (fl. A.D. 278), and derives its name from the fact that this collection begins with a Hagadah of Oshaja Rabba, contains ten Midrashim, which bears the respective names of —
1. Bereshith Rabba ( áøàùéú øáà ), abbreviated from Bereshith d'Rabbi Oshaja Rabba ( ãáé àåùòéà øáà áøàùéú ), on Genesis, divided into a hundred sections ( ôøùåú ).
2. Shemoth Rabbah ( éáä ùîåú ), on Exodus, in fifty-two sections.
3. Va-jikra Rabbah ( åé÷øà øáä ), on Leviticus, in thirty-seven sections.
4. Ba-midbar Rabbah ( áîãáø øáä ), on Numbers, in twenty-three sections.
5. Debarim Rabbah ( ãáøéí øáä ), on Deuteronomy, in eleven sections.
6. Shir Ha-Shirimn Rabbah ( ùéø äùéøéí øáä ), also called Agadath Chasith ( àâãú çæéú ), because the text begins with the word Chasith, on the Song of Solomon
7. Midrash Ruth Rabbah ( îãøù øåú øáä ), on Ruth.
8. Midrash Eichah Rabbathi ( àéëä øáúé ), on Lamentations.
9. Midrash Coheleth ( îãøù ÷äìú ), on Ecclesiastes.
10. Midrash Megillath Esther ( àñúø îãøù îâéìú , also called Hagadath Megillah ( äâãú îâìä ), on Esther.
This entire collection, which was first published at Venice in 1545, has been reprinted many times since (best edition by Schrentzel, with the different commentaries, Stettin, 1863, 2 volumes). Excerpts of the Midrash on Ruth, Esther, and Lamentations have been published in Latin by Schnell (Altdorf, 1650). The age of the compilation of the separate Midrashim constituting this collection is critically and elaborately discussed by Zunz, Die Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, pages 174-184, 263 sq...
(2.) Pesikta ( ôñé÷úà ), compiled by Cahana or Kahana ben-Tachlifa, who was born about A.D. 330, and died in 411. This Midrash, which comprises a complete cycle of lectures on the Pericopes of the feasts and fasts, see HAPHTARAH, and which was lost for several centuries, has been restored by an anonymous writer about the year A.D. 846, and edited under the name Pesita Rabbathi ( ôñé÷úà øáúé ), intermixing it, however, with portions from the Midrash Jelammedenu. In this new form the Pesikta was first published by Isaac ben-Chajim Ha-Cohen (Prague, 1655). An excellent edition, entitled ôñ÷úà øáúé òí äâãåú åôøåù , with divisions into paragraphs, an emended text, extensive references, and a critical commentary and indices by Seeb (Wolf) ben-Israel Isser, was published in Breslau in 1831. The nature and date of this Midrash are discussed in a most masterly manner by Zunz, Die Gottesdienstlichen Vortraige, pages 185-226, 239-251: Rapaport, Erech Millin, page 171.
(3.) Midrash Tanchuma ( îãøù úðçåîà ), i.e., the Midrash compiled by Tanchuma ben-Abba (flourished cir. A.D. 440), also called Midrash Jelammedenu ( éìîãðå îãøù ), from the fact that eighty-two sections begin with the formula éìîãðå , it will teach us. This Midrash extends over the whole Pentateuch, and consists of 140 sections. It contains extracts from the Mechilta, Siphre, Va-Ikra Rabba, Pesikta, and Boraitha de Rabbi Eliezer. and was first published after a redaction of the first Geonim period, when a great deal of it was lost, altered, and interpolated by Joseph ben- Shoshan. (Constantinople, 1520; also Venice, 1545; Mantua, 1563; Salonica, 1578; with corrections after two MSS. and additions, Verona, 1595; and at different other places); the best edition is that with the twofold commentary by Chan. Sandel ben-Joseph (Vilna, 1833). For a thorough analysis of this Midrash we must refer to Zunz, Die Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage, pages 226-238.
(4.) Pirke Rabbi Eliezer ( ôø÷é øáé àìéòæø ), also called Boraitha or Agada de Rabbi Eliezer ( áøééúà ãøáé àìéòæø àâãà àå ), because Eliezer ben-Hyrcanus (flourished cir. A.D. 70) is its reputed author. This Midrash, which discusses the principal events recorded in the Pentateuch, consists of fifty-four sections, treating respectively on the following important subjects: the life of R. Eliezer (sections 1 and 2); the creation (6); new moon (7); intercalary year (8); the fifth day's creation (9); the flight of Jonah, and his abode in the fish (10); the sixth day's creation (11); Adam, paradise, and the creation of the plants (12); the fall (13); the curse (14); paradise and hell (15); Isaac and Rebecca (16); the offices to be performed to bridal pairs and mourners (17);,the creation (18); the ten things created on the eve of the sixth creation day (19); the expulsion from paradise (20); Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel (21); the degeneracy of Cain's descendants and the flood (22);the ark and its occupants (23); the descendants of Noah, the tower of Babel (24); Sodom, Lot, and his wife (25); the ten temptations of Abraham (26); his rescuing Lot (27); God's covenant with Abraham (28); his circumcision (29); the sending away of Hagar and Ishmael, the condition of the Jews in the days of Messiah (30); Abraham about to sacrifice Isaac (31); Isaac bestowing the blessing on Jacob (32); the resurrection (33); future state (34); Jacob's dream (35); his sojourn with Laban (36); his wrestling with the angel (37); the selling of Joseph (38); Jacob's sojourn in Egypt (39); God's manifestation in the bush (40): the giving of the law (41); the exodus (42); the power of repentance (43); the conflict of Moses with Amalek (44); the golden calf. (45); the tables of stone and the atonement (46); the exploit of Phineas (47); the birth of Moses and the redemption from Egypt (48); Samuel, Saul, Agag,. Haman, Mordecai, Titus, Nebuchadnezzar. Ahasuerus, Vashti, and Esther (49, 50); the new creation (51); the seven wonders of the world (52); the punishment of calumny, Absalom and David (53); and the leprosy of Miriam (54). This Midrash, which is chiefly written in pure and easy Hebrew, was first published at Constantinople in 1514, and has since been reprinted numerous times; but the best edition is with the critical commentary called the Great Edifice ( áéú äâãåì ), emended text and references to Talmud and Midrashim by Broda (Vilna, 1838; a more convenient edition of it, Lemberg, 1858). A Latin translation by Vorst was published under the title Capitula R. Eliezeris continentia imprimis succinctam historiae sacrae recensionens, etc., cum vett. Rabb. Commentariis (Leyden, 1644). The composition and age of this Midrash are discussed by Zunz, Die Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage, pages 271-278.
(5.) Midrash on Samuel, called ( øáúà îãøù ùîåàì ]) Midrash Shemuel [Rabbatha], divided into thirty-two sections ( ôøùåú ), twenty-four of which are devoted to 1 Samuel and eight to 2 Samuel It is chiefly made up of excerpts from older works, and the compiler is supposed to have lived about the beginning of the 11th century. Rashi is the first who quotes this Midrash (Comment. on Chronicles 10:13). It was first published at Constantinople in 1517, and has since been frequently reprinted with the Midrash described below. The best editions of it are the one with the twofold commentary Ez Joseph and Anaph Joseph, references to the parallel passages in the Talmud and Midrashim, etc., by Schrentzel (Stettin, 1860); and the other published together with the Midrash on Proverbs and the commentary of Isaac Cohen (Lemberg, 1861).
(6.) Midrash on the Psalms, called (
øáúà îãøù úìéí
) Midrash Tillim [Rabbatha], Hagadath Tillim (
äâãú úìéí
), or Shochar Tob (
ùçø èåá
), after the words with which it commences. With the exceptions of seven psalms — viz. 42, 96, 97, 98, 115, 123, and 131 — this Midrash extends over the whole Psalter. As it contains extracts from the Babylonian Talmud, the Pesikta, Boraitha of R. Eliezer, Tanchuma, and Pesikta Rabbathi, it must have been compiled about the end of the 10th century, most probably in Italy. It was first published at Constantinople in 1512. The portion on Psalms 119, which extends to the first verses of the letter
÷
, is called Midrash Alpha Betha (
îãøù àìôà áéúà
), from the fact that this is an alphabetic psalm; it has been published separately (Salonica, 1515). The Midrash on the Psalms has frequently been published together with the Midrash on Samuel, under the title Midrash Shochar Tob (
èåá ùåçø
), which properly belongs only to that on the Psalms.
(7.) Midrash on Proverbs, called (
øáúà îãøù îùìé
]) Midrash Mishle [Rabbatha], consists of a compilation of those maxims and expositions from former works which are best calculated to illustrate and explain the import of the book of Proverbs. The compiler, who lived about the middle of the 11th century, omits all the references to the original sources, discards the form of lectures, and assumes that of a commentary. The first edition of this Midrash appeared at Constantinople in 1512-17, with the commentary Sera Abraham (Vilna, 1834), and the commentary of Isaac Cohen (Stettin, 1861).(8.) Midrash Jalkut ( îãøù éì÷åè ), or Jalkut Shimoni ( éì÷åè ùîòåðé ), i.e., the collection or compilation of Simeon, who flourished in the 11th century. This Midrash, which extends over the whole Hebrew Scriptures, is described in the article CARA SEE CARA in this Cyclopaedia.
III. Method and Plan of the Midrash. — In discussing its method and plan; it must be borne in mind that the Midrash first developed itself in public lectures and homilies; that the ancient fragments of these discourses became afterwards literary commodities, serving frequently as the groundwork of literary productions; and that the Midrashic writers or compilers mixed up other matters and pieces of their own composition with the remnants of expository lectures. The ancient relics, however, are easily discernible by their dialect, diction, etc., and by the authority to whom they are ascribed. That there was a method in them has been shown by the erudite and indefatigable Jellinek, than whom there is no greater authority on the subject. He points out the following plan as gathered from the ancient fragments:
1. The lecturer first set forth the theme of his discourse in a passage of Scripture enunciating the particular truth which he wished to unfold, and then illustrated it by a parable, and enforced it by a saying which was popular in the mouth of the people. This rule is given in the Midrash itself (comp. î÷øà åéù ìäí îùì åéù ìäí îìéöä éù ìäï åëåìäåï , Midrash on the Song of Solomon , 1 a).
2. The attention of the audience was roused and the discourse was enlivened by the lecturer using a foreign word instead of a well-known expression, or by employing a Greek, Latin, Aramaic, or Persian term in addition to the Hebrew (comp. Aruch, s.v. àãåã÷é ). This accounts for the striking fact that so many foreign words occur in the Midrash to express things for which the Hebrew has expressions, and that both Hebrew and foreign words, expressing the same idea, stand side by side (comp. îçãø ìçãø åî÷éèåï ì÷éèåï Midrash Rabbah on Genesis, c. 7; áú èåáéí åáú âéðåñéï , Midrash on the Song of Solomon , 1 a).
3. The lecturer increased the beauty of his discourse by trying to discover analogies between numbers and persons related to each other — e.g. between David and Solomon. Comp. Midrash on the Song of Songs, ibid.
4. The lecture was also rendered more attractive by being interspersed with plays upon words, which were not intended to explain or corroborate a statement, but were simply meant to create a pleasant feeling in the audience. Hence, to judge of the frequent plays upon words by the rules of hermeneutics is to misunderstand the esthetics of the Hagadah.
5. It was considered as ornamenting the discourse, and pleasing to the audience, when single words were reduced to their numerical value in order to put a certain point of the lecture in a clearer light. Thus, e.g., the lecturer speaking of Eliezer, Abraham's faithful servant, and being desirous to show that he alone was worth a host of servants, remarked that Eliezer ( àìéòæø , 1+30+10+70+7+200=318) is exactly as much as the three hundred and eighteen young men mentioned in Gen_14:14. Comp. Midrash Rabboth on Genesis, chapter 42. When it is remembered that the Hebrew letters were commonly used as numbers, it will be easily understood how the audience would be rejoiced to see a word converted so dexterously into figures.
6. To relieve the discourse of its monotony, the lecturer resolved a long word into several little words, or formed new words by taking away a letter or two from the preceding and following words in the same sentence.
“If the Midrash is read with the guidance of these nesthetical canons,” continues Dr. Jellinek, “we shall find in it less arbitrariness and more order. We shall, moreover, understand its method and plan, and often be put in a position to distinguish the original discourse from the literary element of a later date, as well as from interpolations. For the confirmation of our aesthetical canons, let the reader compare and analyze chapters 2, 3, and 5 of Midrash Rabboth on Genesis” (Ben Chanamja, 4:383 sq.).
IV. Halachic and Hagadic Rules of Interpretation. — The preceding exposition of the method and plan of the Midrash has prepared us to enter upon the Halachic wand Hagadic rules of interpretation which were collected and systematized by Elieser ben-Jose the Galilaean ( äâìéìé éåñé ), one of the principal interpreters of the Pentateuch in the 2d century of the Christian era. According to this celebrated doctor, whose sayings are so, frequently recorded in the Talmud and the Siphri, there are thirty-two rules ( ùìùéí åùúéí îãåú ) whereby the Bible is to be interpreted, which are as follows:
1. By the superfluous use of the three particles âí àú , and à , the Scriptures indicate in a threefold manner, that something more is included in the text than the apparent declaration would seem to imply. Thus, e.g., when it is said, Gen_21:1, “And the Lord visited ( ùøä àú ) Sarah; the superfluous àú , which sometimes denotes with, is used to indicate that with Sarah the Lord also visited other barren women. The second, âí , is used superfluously in the passage “take also your herds, and also ( âí ) your flocks” (Exo_12:32), to indicate that Pharaoh also gave the Israelites sheep and oxen, in order to corroborate the declaration made in Exo_10:25; while the superfluous à , 2Ki_2:14, “He also ( à ) had smitten the waters,” indicates that more wonders were shown to Elisha at the Jordan than to Elijah, as it is declared in 2Ki_2:9. This rule is called øéáåé , inclusion, more being meant than said.
2. By the superfluous use of the three particles ø÷ à , ִ and îï , the Scriptures point out something which is to be excluded. Thus, e.g., à Gen_7:23, “And Noah only ( à ) ִ remained,” shows that even Noah was near death, thus indicating exclusion. The superfluous ø÷ in “Only ( ø÷ ) the fear of God is not in this place” (Gen_20:11), shows that the inhabitants were not altogether godless; while îï in Exo_18:13, “And the people stood by Moses from ( îï ) the morning unto the evening,” indicates that it did not last all day, but only six hours (Sabbath, 10a). This rule is called îéòåè , diminution, exclusion.
3. If words denoting inclusion follow each other, several things are included. Thus in 1Sa_17:36, “Thy servant slew also ( âí àú ) the lion, also ( âí ) the bear,” three superfluous expressions follow each other, to show that he slew three other animals besides the two expressly mentioned in the text. This rule is called àçø øéáåé øéáåé , inclusion after inclusion.
4. If words denoting exclusion follow each other, several things are excluded. Thus in Num_12:2, “Hath the Lord indeed only spoken to Moses? hath he not also spoken to us?” the superfluous expressions ø÷ and à which follow each other denote that the Lord spoke to Aaron and Miriam before he spoke to Moses, thus not only without the lawgiver being present to it, but before God spoke to him, and not only did he speak to Aaron, but also to Miriam, so that there is here a twofold exclusion. If two or more inclusive words follow each other, and do not admit of being explained as indicative of inclusion, they denote exclusion. Thus, e.g., if the first word include the whole, while the second only includes a part, the first inclusion is modified and diminished by the second. If, on the contrary, two or more exclusive words follow each other, and do not admit of being explained as indicative of exclusion, they denote inclusion. Thus, e.g., if the first exclude four, while the second only excludes two, two only remain included, so that the second exclusive expression serves to include or increase. This rule is called îéòåè îéòåè àçø , exclusion after exclusion, and the two exceptions are respectively denominated øéáåé àìà ìîòè àéï ééáåé àçø , inclusion after inclusion effecting diminution, and îéòåè àçø îéòåè àìà ìøáåú àéï . exclusion after exclusion effecting increase (comp. Pessachimn, 23a; Joma, 43a; Megilla, 23b; Kiddushin, 21b; Baba-Kama, 45b; Sanhedrin, 15a; with Menachoth, 34a).
5. Expressed inference from the minor to the major, called ÷ì åçåîø îôåøù . An example of this rule is to be found in Jer_12:5, “If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, [inference] then how canst thou contend with horses?”
6. Implied inference fromn the minor to the major, called ÷ì åçåîø ñúåí . This is found in Psa_15:4 : “He sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not,” hence how much less if he swear to his advantage (comp. Maccoth, 24a).
7. Inference from analogy or parallels, called ùåä âæøä . Thus it is said of Samuel, that “ there shall no razor come upon his head” (1Sa_1:11), and the same language is used with respect to Samson — “No razor shall come on his head” (Jdg_13:5); whereupon is based the deduction from analogy, that just as Samson was a Nazarite, so also Samuel (Nasir, 66a).
8. Building of the father ( áðéï àá ) is the property of any subject which is made the starting-point, and to constitute a rule ( àá , a father) for all similar subjects. Thus, e.g.; in Exo_3:4, it is stated, “God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses;” hence it concludes that whenever God spoke to Moses, he addressed him in the same manner. SEE HILLEL and SEE ISMAEL BEN-ELISA.
9. Brachylogy ( ãø ִ÷âøä ). The Scriptures sometimes express themselves briefly, and words must be supplied. Thus, e.g. åúëì ãåã , where it ought to be åúëì ðôù ãåã , and David's soul was consumed, ðôù being omitted; again, 1Ch_17:5, where îàåäì àì àåäì åîֹîùëï åàäåä ought to be îàåäì àì àåäì åîîùëï ìîùëï åàäéä îúäì , ִ “And I went from tent to tent, and from tabernacle to tabernacle,” the words îúäì and ìîùëï being omitted.
10. Repetition ( ãáø ùäåà ùðåé ). The Scriptures repeat a thing in order to indicate thereby something special. Thus it is said in Jer_7:4, “Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord;” the last phrase is repeated three times, to indicate that though his people Israel celebrate feasts in the temple three times in the year, the Lord will not regard it because they do not amend their ways.
11. The separation and order of the verses ( ùðçì÷ ñãåø ) are designed to convey some explanation. Thus Jer_7:18-19 of 2 Chronicles 30 ought to be differently placed (comp. Rashi, ad loc.).
12. A subject often explains itself while it imparts information on other subjects ( ìîã ãáø ùáà ììîã åðîöà ). Thus, “Its cry, it shall arise like that of a serpent” (Jer_46:22), indicates that the serpent must have raised a tremendous cry after the curse which the Lord pronounced against it, since we are nowhere else told that there was any occasion on which it cried; and that Egypt raises an equally loud cry — thus serving to give information upon another subject, and at the same time explaining itself (comp. Sofa, 9b).
13. A general statement is made first, and is followed by a single remark, which is simply to particularize the general. This rule is called àìà ôøèå ùì øàùåï áìì ùàçøéå îòùä åàéðå , and is illustrated by Gen_1:27, where the creation of man is recorded in general terms “Male and female created he them;” while Gen_2:7, which describes the creation of Adam, and Gen_2:21, which speaks of the creation of Eve, are simply the particulars of Gen_1:27, and not another record or contradiction.
14. A great and incomprehensible thing is represented by something small to render it intelligible. This rule is called ùäéà ùåîòú ãáø âãåì ùðúìä á÷èï ìäùëéò äàåæï ëãø , ִ and is illustrated by Deu_32:2 “My doctrine shall drop as the rain;” where the great doctrines of revelation are compared with the less significant rain, in order to make them comprehensible to man; and by Amo_3:8 — “When the lion roareth, who doth not fear? the Lord speaketh,” etc.; where the lion is compared with the Deity, to give man an intelligible idea of the power of God.
15. When two Scriptures seem to contradict each other, a third Scripture will reconcile them àú àú æä òã ùéáà äëúåá äùìéùé ùðé ëúåáéí åéëøéַò áéðéäéí äîëçéùéí . Thus it is said in 2Sa_24:9, “There were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men,” in contradiction to 1Ch_21:5, where “a thousand thousand and a hundred thousand men that drew sword” — three hundred: thousand more are said to have been among all Israel. The apparent contradiction is reconciled by 27:1, where it is said, “The children of Israel after their number; to wit, the chief fathers and captains of thousands and hundreds, and their officers who served the king in all matters of the courses, who came in and went out, was, month by month, through all the months of the year, twenty-four thousand in each course.” From this it is evident that the number of these servants for twelve months amounted to two hundred and eighty-eight thousand, and as the chief fathers of Israel consisted of twelve .thousand, we obtain the three hundred thousand who were noted in the registers of the king, and therefore are not mentioned in 2Sa_24:9. Thus the two apparently contradictory Scriptures are reconciled by a third Scripture. It deserves to be noticed that this ancient interpretation is now generally followed, and that it is espoused by Dr. Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics (Edinb. 1843), page 546, etc.
16. An expression used for the first time is explained by the passage in which it occurs ( ãáø îéåçã áî÷åîå ). Thus, e.g., Hanuah is the first who in her prayer addresses God as “Lord of Hosts; whence it is concluded that the superfluous expression hosts indicates that she must have argued to this effect — “Lord of the universe, thou hast erected two worlds ( öáàåú ); if I belong to the nether world I ought to be fruitful, and if to the upper I ought to live forever.” Hence the expression is designed for this passage (Berachoth, 31b).,
17. A circumstance is not fully described in the passage in which it first occurs, but is explained elsewhere ( ãáø ùàéðå îúôøù áî÷åîå åîúôøù áî÷åí àçø ). Thus it is stated in Gen_2:8, where the garden. of Eden is first mentioned, that there were in it all manner of fruit; but it is not to be gathered from this passage that there was anything else in the garden; while from Eze_28:13, where this passage is further explained, it is evident that there were also precious stones in Paradise.
18. Athing is named in part, but comprises the whole ( ãáø ùðàîø áî÷öú åäåà ðåäâ áëì ). Thus in Exo_22:30 it is forbidden to eat flesh “torn of beasts in the field;” and in Lev_22:8, it is said, “That which is torn he shall not eat,” here also forbidding that which is torn in the city. The use of the expression field in the first passage is owing to the fact that beasts are far more frequently torn in it than in the city; and the Scriptures mention the common and not the uncommon occurrences. Hence in the expression field everything is comprised — city, country, forest, mountain, valley, etc.
19. The respective predicates of two subjects in the same passages may refer to both alike ( åä ä ìçáéøå ãáø ùðàîø áæä ). Thus, “Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart” (Psa_97:11), does not imply that the former is without gladness and the latter without light, but what is predicated of one also belongs to the other (comp. Taanith, 15a).
20. The predicate of a subject may not refer to it at all, but to the one next to it ( òðéï ìå åäåà òðéï ìçáéøå ãáø ùðàîø áæä åàéðå ). Thus there mark, “This to Judah” (Deu_33:7), does not refer to Judah, since it is said further on, “And he said, Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah,” but to Simeon, whom Moses hereby blesses after Reuben.
21. When a subject is compared with two things, it is to receive the best attributes of both ( îãåú åàúä ðåúï ìå ëç äéôä ùáùúéäï ãáø ùäå÷ù ìùúé ). Thus, “The righteous shall flourish like the palm-tree; he shall grow up like a cedar in Lebanon” (Psa_92:12) the comparison is with the best qualities of both (comp Taanith, 25a).
22. The first clause explains by its parallelism the second, to which it refers ( ãáø ùçéøå îåéç òìּéå ). Thus, “A gift in secret pacifieth anger,” in the first hemistich signifying the anger of God, shows that “and a reward in the bosom strong wrath” (Pro_21:14), in the second hemistich, refers to the strong wrath of God (comp. Baba Bathra, 9b).
23. The second clause in parallelism explains the first hemistich, to which it refers ( çáéøå ãáø ùäåà îåëéç ). Thus, “The voice of the Lord shaketh the wilderness; the Lord shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh” (Psa_29:8). Here Kadesh, though comprised in the expression wilderness of the first clause, is used in the second clause to heighten the strength of the first hemistich, by showing that the wilderness must have been shaken exceedingly, since Kadesh, the great wilderness, was shaken (comp. Deu_1:16).
24. A subject included in a general description is excepted from it to convey a special lesson ( áëìì åéöà îï äëìì ììîã òì òöîå éöà ãáø ùäéä ). Thus, “Joshua, the son of Nun, sent out of Shittim two men to spy secretly, saying, Go, view the land, and Jericho” (Jos_2:1). Here Jericho is superfluous; since it is comprised in the general term land, but it is especially mentioned to indicate that Jericho by itself was equal in power and strength to the whole country. Hence that which is excepted teaches something special about itself.
25. A. subject included in a general description is excepted from it to teach something special about another subject ( çáéøå ãáø ùäéä áëìì åéöà îï äëìì ììîã òì ). Thus the command, “Ye shall take no redemption-price for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death” (Num_35:31), is entirely superfluous, since it is included in the declaration already made “As he hath done, so shall it be done to him” (Lev_24:19). It is, however, mentioned especially to be a guide for other punishments, since it is concluded from it that it is only for murderers that no redemption-price is to be taken, but that satisfaction may be taken in case of one knocking out his neighbor's tooth or eye (comp. Kethuboth, 37b, 38a).
26. Parable ( îùì ). Thus, “The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them, and they said unto the olive-tree, Reign thou over us” (Jdg_9:8), where it is the Israelites and not the trees who said to Othniel, son of Kenaz, Deborah and Gideon reign over us. So also the remark, “And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city” (Deu_22:17), is parabolic, meaning that they should make their testimony as clear as the cloth (comp. Kethuboth, 46a).
27. The preceding often explains what follows ( îîòì áäâãä îðéï ùãåøùéï ). Thus, “And the Lord said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well, executing that which is right in mine eyes... thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel” (2Ki_10:30), is to be explained by what precede, Because Jehu destroyed four generations of the house of Ahab-viz. Omri, Ahab, Joram, and his sons, as is stated (comp. 2Ki_10:13) — therefore shall four generations of his house remain on the throne.
28. Antithetic sentences often explain each other by their parallelism ( îðéï ùãåøùéï èðâø áäâãä ). Thus in Isa_30:16, “But ye said, No; for we will flee upon horses; therefore shall ye flee, and ride upon rapid runners; therefore shall your pursuers run;” the words wherewith they have sinned are put in parallelism with the words of punishment, couched in the same language and in similar expressions.
29. Explanations are. obtained by reducing the letters of a word to their numerical value ( âîèøéà áäâãä îðéï ùãåøùéí ), and substituting for it another word or phrase of the same value, or by transposing the letters ( çìå àåúéåú ). For an instance of the first we must refer to the reduction of àìéòæø to 318, given in the preceding section. The second part of this rule is illustrated by examples which show that several modes of transposing the letters were resorted to. Thus ùù , ִ Sheshach, is explained by ááì , Babel (Jer_25:26; Jer_51:41), and ìá ÷îé by ëùãéí (ibid. 51:1), by taking the letters of the alphabet in their inverse order; à , the first letter, is expressed by ú , the last letter of the alphabet; á , the second letter, by ù , the last but one; â by ø