By Robert Chazan
Read or Download Ajs Review, 1992, Part 2 PDF
Similar nonfiction_5 books
Right here, then is the fruit of Elena Kuz'mina's life-long quest for the Indo-Iranians. Already its predecessor ("Otkuda prishli indoarii", released in 1994) was once thought of the main entire research of the origins of the Indo-Iranians ever released, yet during this new, considerably extended variation (edited by means of J.
- The Killer Koala: Humorous Australian Bush Stories
- Poetry as window and mirror: positioning the poet in Hellenistic poetry
- The Economist July 23 2011
- Basic Concepts of Chemistry, Eighth Edition
- Marvel Illustrated: The Iliad (Part 7)
- Satellite and Typhoon - Eye to Eye (Science for Everyone)
Additional resources for Ajs Review, 1992, Part 2
73. See also Ephraim Urbach. Ha-Halacha: Mekoroteha ve-Hitpathutah(Yad la-Talmud, 1984), pp. 192-193. 74. Kalmin, Redaction of the Babylonian Talmud, pp. 1-11 and 51-94. TALMUDIC PORTRAYALS OF AMORAIC RELATIONSHIPS 193 simultaneouslybut independently,leavingbehinddifferentliteraturescomposed by differentgroups at the same time. The distinctionsbetweeneditorialand amoraiccommentary,however, might derivefrom the differentroles these commentariesplay in the sugya and tell us nothingaboutwho authoredthem or whentheywerecomposed.
Yosef assureshim that he has no cause for worry,implying that Rava acted contraryto Yosef. Safraor the anonymouseditorsask why he heardthis disturbingverse,and Yosef or the editors respondthat it was 75. Hullin 133a. Why,then, was it not sent to Rava, Safraor the editorsask, to whichYosefor the editorsrespondthat Ravawas in disfavor, literally,"rebuked,"and the heavenlypowers refrainedfrom direct communicationwith him. It is consistentwith Yosef'sdisapprovalof Rava in severalother contextsand does not work as well as an additionby the anonymouseditors,who elsewhererefrainfromexplicitcriticismof earlier rabbis.
6 I would maintain, however, that the judgment of any reader as to whetherthe teacher'skabbalisticexplanationsultimatelyresolveand erase the student'schallengesis ultimatelysubjective,and that a differentfeature of SeferHaKanahwarrantsfurtherattentionin any attemptto evaluatethe treatise'srelationshipto the rabbinicnorm. 8. Y. Baer, Toledot HaYehudim BeSefarad HaNozrit (Tel Aviv, 1949), p. 224. 9. S. Horodetzky, HaMistorin BeYisrael, vol. 2 (Tel Aviv, 1952), pp. 362-363. 10. Kushnir-Oron, HaPeliah veHakanah, p.