#yerushalmi

The museum notes: "The following description was prepared by William Gross: This locally produced Torah tik in a style quite similar to that used in Syria comprises a wood body covered with a velvet material on which is applied a number of cut, decorated, and sometimes inscribed silver elements. The most unusual feature is the two large hamsas that appear on the front of the tik on both sides of the opening. There are also two silver elements in the shape of cypress trees, one of which carries an inscription identifying this tik as belonging to the Yochanan ben Zakai synagogue in Jewish Quarter of the old city in Jerusalem. The decorated sheets behind glass on the inside of the tik record two dedication dates of two sisters, one in 1914 and one in 1932. In 1914 one sister dedicated the tik in memory of the second sister. The second dedication, dated to 1932, is in memory of this sister who originally dedicated the tik in 1914. The image of the cypress tree is characteristic of Jerusalem iconography and the hamsa was extremely popular in the Jewish Quarter, as writings from the 19th century indicate.

Inscription:

On the cypress tree on the outside: Zohara bat Ya'akov Malool Synagogue Raban Yochanan ben Zakai

On the right inside panel: This Tik and the Torah scroll within was dedicated by the woman Zohara Levia bat Jamila Malool for the exaltation of her sister Aishah bat Jamilah Malool, may her soul be bound in the bond of life.

So, Jewish religious literature can be divided to three main branches: Mikra, Mishnah and Talmud. This is not a completely precise division, nor can it be applied to every Jewish religious book, but it's helpful for the basic books, those considered obligating by Rabbinic Judaism.

Mikra (which, roughly translated from Hebrew, means "something that is read") is the one of those three that is pretty much closed: you can't really write a new Jewish book that'll be considered a part of it. It's also called the Written Torah, and includes the entirety of the Hebrew Bible, AKA Tanakh. In case you're wondering, that includes all books in what Christians call "the Old Testament", only sorted differently and into three categories: Torah - the Pentateuch, Nevi'im (Prophets) - which includes every book named after a person outside of Job, Esther, Daniel, Ezra and Neḥemiah, and in addition to those books includes the books of Judges and Kings, and the Ketuvim (Written texts) - which includes all the rest of the books. The order of the books in the Tanakh is as follows (using their English names for convenience, I don't necessarily stand behind those translations): Torah: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Nevi'im: Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1&2), Kings (1&2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Twelve Prophets (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Naḥum, Ḥabakuk, Zephaniah, Ḥaggai, Zechariah, Malachi). Ketuvim: Psalms, Proverbs, Job (transliteration did a number on this one), the Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra&Neḥemiah, Chronicles (1&2). Overall, there are 24 books in the Hebrew Bible. It is only later divisions, some of which are outright nonsensical, that made the number into 39.

Those books are ones that are considered to be written using some degree of Divine Inspiration or outright prophecy (which doesn't have to do with knowing the future). Common tradition considers the division of the Tanakh to be between three levels of prophecy, of which the Ketuvim were written in the lowest. As the Written Torah, the entirety of these scriptures is meant to be read (and not repeated by heart). There are occasions where there's a difference between the reading tradition and the writing one - but that's another story. The last books in the Tanakh were written around the 5th Century BCE according to tradition, and it was closed to new additions a couple of decades, perhaps a century or two, later.

The other two branches are both considered parts of the Oral Torah, to varying degrees. You see, according to Jewish tradition, Moshe (Moses) got the Torah in Mt. Sinai in two parts: the Written one (which at the time only included the Pentateuch) and the Oral one, which included explanations on how to actually act upon the commandments in the Written Torah, in addition to deduction laws to be used on the Written Torah (at least according to Rambam, AKA Maimonides). Both the Mishnah and the Talmud, at their core, are based on that. But much of the things said there are things clearly said by Sages and Rabbis from the 1st Century CE onward. How does that work, then?

The answer kind of depends who you ask. But the Orthodox way to look at that is usually that people either have old traditions that were passed down to them, or are using the deduction laws given to Moshe at Mt. Sinai. But I guess all that was a digression, so let's get back on topic.

The Mishnah is called that way after the Hebrew word for repetition. It's supposed to be sturdied this way to be memorized, though it mostly exists as written text nowadays. Back in the time it was codified - the Tana'ic era (10-220 CE, approx.), called that way after the Aramaic word for people who memorize through repetition - there were many versions of traditional laws memorized this way. This stemmed from many different people teaching the same laws, and it ended up being a game of Telephone. Also, it probably needs to be said that while I call those "laws" they weren't usually the bottomline Halachic rules, since it included disagreements and multiple opinions.

The end of the Tana'ic era came when one person, Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, composed an authoritative collection of those after studying all the different traditions he knew of. This is what we nowadays call the Mishnah. It's made of 60 tractates- (whisper, whisper Wait, really? Whisper, whisper Huh. All right, then.) I have been informed that the number is actually 63. Who knew? Anyway, those 63 tractates are sorted by topic into 6 orders. Those orders are: Zera'im (seeds, concerns itself with matters related to plants with the odd tractate about liturgy at the start), Mo'ed (occeasion/time, concerns itself with Jewish holidays), Nashim (women, concerns itself with marriage laws in addition to two tractates about oaths and vows), Nezikin (damages, concerns itself with court procedures. Has two miscellaneous tractates that don't make sense there but belong nowhere else), Kodashim (holy things, concerns itself with matters relating to the Temple procedures as well as one tractate about Kashrut and one about heavenly punishments), and Taharot (ritually clean things, I guess? Though this translation is less than accurate. Has to do with - you guessed it - ritual cleanliness). The tractates aren't divided evenly between the orders, and inside of them are sorted by length. The longest tractate is 30 chapters, the shortest is 3. And yes, all of that was supposed to be remembered by heart - possibly only by a number of specific people.

Now, I didn't mention it previously, but there were certain books written that didn't get into the Tanakh - Apocryphal books. Those are not only considered outside the religious canon, but are not to be studied as well - though this might be a little flexible, the bottom line is they can't really be used for anything religious. I'm saying this right now because the same isn't true for Oral traditions that weren't codified in the Mishnah. Some of those were codified in other ways, and can be used to help understand the Mishnah better - which leads us to the Talmud.

Talmud, translated literally from Hebrew, means "study", as in the study of the traditions from the Mishnah. It is a separate book from the Mishanh, but is structured around it. Due to that, there are occasions people will tell you a given quote is from the Talmud when it's actually from the Mishanh - since the Talmud quotes the Mishnah when talking about it. The Talmud usually tries to reason the origin of the opinions in the Mishnah and to delve into the intricacies of those laws: what happens in fringe cases? What about other situations that the Mishnah didn't mention? How does what this specific Tana (rabbi from the Mishnah) says here fits with what he himself said in another place? And such things. The Talmud is, in essence, a recording of centuries of debates and discussions about the Mishnah. Oh, and there are two Talmudim (the plural form of Talmud).

One could say that the Jerusalem Talmud (Yerushalmi) is the equivalent of the oral traditions that didn't get into the Mishnah: it's less studied and considered less obligating than the Babilonian Talmud (Gemara, or Bavli). It still is occasionally quoted and used to study things the Gemara doesn't talk about or doesn't elaborate on. The main difference between the two is where thy were codified - the Yerushalmi is a codification of the study as it was conducted in the land of Israel (mostly in the galillee; the name Yerushalmi is a little misleading), while the Bavli codifies and records the study of Babylon. There's also a different in the language - both are written in Aramaic interladed with Hebrew, but in different dialects. The Yerushalmi was also codified a couple of centuries earlier than the Bavli - the Yerushalmi was codified around 350CE, due to persecutions under the Bizantine empire, while the Bavli was compiled by the 5th century CE.

While those two Talmudim are separate from each other, there is some intersection. Travel between the land of Israel and Babylon wasn't too rare at the time (called Tekufat Ha'Amora'im in Hebrew, the era of the Amora'im. Amora means interpretor or translator in Aramaic), and so you can see rabbis from Babylon mentioned in the Yerushalmi and Rabbis from the land of Israel mentioned in the Bavli. The easiest way to tell the difference is by their title - in Babylon, a rabbi is called "Rav [name]", while in the land of Israel they are called Rabbi. There is a reason to that, but I'm not getting into it yet. In addition, the Bavli regularly talks about how things are done "in the west" - which is the land of Israel, since it's to Babylon's west. As mentioned, the Bavli is the more authoritative of the two, and is the one usually referred to when people say "the Talmud". The Bavli directly discusses 37 of the Mishnah tractates - it nearly doesn't talk at all about the first and last orders of Mishnah. The Yerushalmi, meanwhile, talks extensively about the first one - but has nothing about the next to last one. There are also other tractates missing in the middle for both.

Now, technically the Babylonian Talmud was codified at the end of the Amora'ic era. However, somewhat unlike the Mishnah (well, I'm not being accurate, the Mishnah also has a thing or two that was shoved later), there were still later additions from a time known as the Savora'ic era. Savora is a word that means "a reasoner" in Aramaic, and I probably could've explained how appropriate this name is for them if I'd have studied enough. From what I know, the characteristics of a Talmudic piece from the Savora'ic era is having no names mentioned/having names of known Savora'im mentioned (the latter is a little rare, to my understanding), and reasoning about the language and meaning of words from the Mishnah. the Savora'ic era probably ended at around the 6th-7th century CE.

From that point on, we'll need to more or less abandon the comfortable division I offered earlier, because it's kind of hard to say which book belongs where, besides many books that might technically fall under the same category but be different enough to require their own categories. In addition, from here on out, no book is considered as all-obligating: you can't go against the Talmud in a halachic ruling, but you can go against anything later.

But, since this thing is long enough as it is right now, I think I'll just write a couple of additions about important books I chose not to mention, and then finish it here for now - with the next couple of periods of history of Jewish religious literature left for a future date.

So, the most significant genre of books I've been ignoring are the Midrashim. I mean, sure, I could talk about Apocrypha, or about the Tosefta/Baraitot (oral traditions that didn't get into the Mishnah), but I mentioned those already. The Midrashim, however, are a genre of writing I completely ignored so far.

I think the best way to explain Midrash is that it's a loose interpretation of the Mikra, based on traditions. There are generally two sub-genres for Midrash - Midrash Halachah and Midrash Agadah. The former concerns itself with the law, the latter with the stories and ideas. The books of Midrashei Halachah we have that I can remember are Mechilta (lit. "Including", more or less. On Exodus), Sifra (lit. "Book", from Aramaic. On Leviticus) and Sifrei (lit. "Books", from Aramaic. On Numbers and Deuteronomy). Those are mostly from the Tana'ic era, I think. There are two major books of Midrashei Agadah, both encompassing all of the pentateuch, named Midrash Rabbah and Midrash Tanḥuma. Those are named after specific people, likely the ones who compiled them, and those names indicate they are from the Amora'ic era.

So, to sum it up: 24 books written during the vague time of the Biblical era, codified into the Tanakh at around 300 BCE, with lots of disagreement on the exact date. Oral traditions passed down between generations, including ones clashing with each other and rulings added through the generations, passed around throughout the Tana'ic era (10-220 CE), and codified into 60 tractates of Mishnah by the end of it. In addition, at the same time, some loose interpretations of the Tanakh that have led to the rulings of those oral traditions are written down in the Midrashim. Discussions and elaborations on those oral traditions of the Mishnah as recorded from places of learning in Babylon and the Land of Israel through the Amora'ic era - around 220-500 CE - are recorded in the Talmud, with some additions from around the 6th century CE.

Any inconsistency in spelling and terminology is to be blamed on my unwillingness to go back and edit this. Sorry.

A confluence of factors has fueled the anti-Shariah movement, most notably the controversy over the proposed Islamic center near ground zero in New York, concerns about homegrown terrorism and the rise of the Tea Party. But the campaign’s air of grass-roots spontaneity, which has been carefully promoted by advocates, shrouds its more deliberate origins.