Isidore Singer.

The Jewish encyclopedia : a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature, and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times to the present day (Volume 11) online

. (page 79 of 160)
Online LibraryIsidore SingerThe Jewish encyclopedia : a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature, and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times to the present day (Volume 11) → online text (page 79 of 160)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

viii. 1, with Yeb. 4Ga (where R. Simeon further-
more seems to liave read ^""i in the Sifre) and Ke-
doshim, vii. 3, with Tosef., Kid. i. 4. Such setamot
may be opposed by others that contradict H. Judah's
views; e.g., Sitra, Neg. ii. 1, compared with R. Ju-
<lah in Neg. ii. 1 ; Sifra, Neg. x. 8, compared with
R. Judah, Neg. x. 10; comp. also Tos. Niddah 28b,
•"'.■". "IDTO NH- All this, liowever, is no reason for
attacking the above-mentioned assumption that the
Sifra in its principal parts is a mrdrash of R. Ju-
dah's. Hoffmann remarks (i.e. p. 26) not incorrectly
that Sifra, Nedabah, iv. 12 agrees with the views of
R. Eliezer (Men. 26a), whose decision

Sources. U. Judah frequently accepts as handed
down by his own father, R. Ila'i, a
pupil of R. Eliezer (comp. Men. 18a and Yoma 39a
iit passim). Similarly, Sifra, Emor, xvii. 4 et seq.
agrees with R. Eliezer's view (Suk. 43a). Aside
from R. Judah's midrasli, R. Hiyya may have used
also R. Simeon's midrash (comp. Hoffmannh, I.e. p.
27), although some of the passages mentioned there
(as, e.g., the comparison of Sifra, Nedabah, vi. 9 with
Sifre, Deut. 78; Sifra, Nega'im, i. 9-10 with Sifre,
Deut. 218; Sifra, Behukkotai, viii. 2 with Sifre,
Deut. 124) seem to prove little. More doubtful is
the relation to R. Ishmael's midrash; and in this
connection must be considered the question whether
the citation of certain explanations of Leviticus
introduced by the formula ^"i ''3T NJn and actually
found in Sifra is not in part due to confusion
(comp. Hoffmann, I.e. ; Levy, I.e. p. 28, note 2, and
the interesting remark from Azulai quoted there).

But to R. Ishmael's school undoubtedly belong
the later additions to " 'Arayot," which, according to
Hag. i. 1 and Yer. lb, were not publicly taught in
R. Akiba's school; i.e., Ahare, xiii. 3-15; Kedo-
shim, ix. 1-7, xi. 14 (ed. Weiss), and finally, of
course, the so-called "Baraita de-Rabbi Yishma'el "
(begmning). The so-called "Mekilta

Additions de-Millu'im " or " Aggadat Millu'im "
by R. to Lev. viii. 1-10 is similarly to be

Ishmael's distinguished from the remainder of

School. the Sifra. It exists in two recensions,

of which the second, covering mishna-

yot 14-16 and 29-end, is cited by Rashi as " Baraita

ha-Nosefet 'al Torat Kohanim she-Lanu." The tan-

naim quoted most frequently in Sifra are R. Akiba
and his pupils, also R. Eliezer, R. Ishmael, R. Jose
ha-Gelili, Rabbi, and less often R. Jose bar Judah, R.
Eleazar bar R. Simeon, and R. Simeon b. Eleazar.

The Sifra was divided, according to an old arrange-
ment, into nine "dibburim" and eigiity " parashiy-
yot " or smaller sections ("'Halakot Gedolot," end;
Num. R. xviii. ; Kid. 33a can not be cited in proof,
because R. Simeon b. Rabbi can haidly have taught
Hiyya's Sifra). As it exists to-day it is divided into
fourteen larger sections and again into smaller pera-
kim, parashiyyot, and mishnayot. As the commen-
tators point out, it varies frequently from the Sifra
which the Talmudic authors knew (comp. Sifra,
Emor, xiii. 1 and Men. 77b; Sifra, Ke^
The doshim, ii. 5 and Hul. 137a ; Sifra, Ho-

Present bah, xiii. 6 and B. K. 104b); further-
Text, more, entire passages known to the
authors of Babli, as, e.g., Yoma 41a, are
missing in the present Sifra, and, on the other hand,
there are probably passages in the present Sifra
which were not known to Babli (comp. Hoffmann,
I.e. pp. 33, 3")). The Sifra frequently agrees with
the Palestinian rather than with the Babylonian
tradition; e.g., Sifra, Nedabah. xii. 2 (comp. Men.
57b); ib. xiv. 6 (comp. Hul. 49b); Sifra, Emor, ix. 8
(comp. Hul. 101b); and To.sef., Shek. i. 7 likewise
agrees with the Sifra. In the few cases where
the agreement is with Babli (Sifra, Emor, vii. 2
as compared with Men. 73b; similarly Tosef., Ker.
ii. 16) it must not be assumed that the text of the
Sifra was emended in agreement with Babli, but
that it represents the original version; e.g., in
Sifra, Kedoshim, viii. 1 DanXD is not a later emen-
dation for jnKD according to Yeb. 47a, as Weiss {ad
loc.) assumes, but represents rather the original read-
ing; Babli, as compared with Yerushalmi, cites Sifra
less accurately, sometimes abbreviating and some-
times amplifying it; e.g.. Kid. 57b, which is the am-
plification of Sifra, Nedabah, xvii. 8; Sheb. 26b,
which is a shortened (and therefore unintelligible)
version of Sifra, Hobah, ix. 2; and Zeb. 93b, which
is to be compared with Sifra, Zaw, vi. 6. Babli oc-
casionally makes use, in reference to the Sifra, of the
rule "mi she-shanah zu lo shanah zu " {i.e., the as-
signing of different parts of one halakah to different
authorities), as in Siicb. 13a, Sotah 16a, but un-
necessarily, since it is possible to harmonize the ap-
parently conflicting sentences and thereby show
that they may be assigned to the same authority.

Many errors have crept into the text througli the
practise of repeating one and the same midrash in
similar passages; e.g., Sifra to v. 3 and xxii. 5
(comp. Weiss, "Einleitung," etc., p. v., note 1,
though the passage quoted by Weiss does not be-
long here ; comp. Git- 49b) ; NjnnN NJtJ'ij is found
in Sifra, Nega'im, ii. 10.

The editions of the Sifra are as follows: Venice,
1545; withcommentar}' by RABaD, Constantinople,
1552; with "Korban Aharon," Venice, 1609; with
the same commentary, Dessau, 1742; with commen-
tary by Rapoport, Wilna, 1845; with counnentary
by Judah Jehiel, Lemberg, 1848; with commentary
by Malbim, Bucharest, 1860; with commentary by
RABaD and " Massoret ha-Talmud " by I. H. Weiss.
Vienna. 1862; with commentarj- by Samson of Sens

Sifre Zu^a



and notes by MaHRID, Warsaw, 1866. A Latin

translation is given in Ugolini, "Tliesaurus," xiv.

Bibmogbaphy: Epsteiu, Mi-Kadmiuiiyijot ha-YchmUni^pp.
511-56; Frankel, Darke lia-SliK)ni(t)i, pp. 'M7 et acq.; idem,
In Mimatssclirift, 1854, pp. :{s7-39r, 45:J-4G1 ; Gei^'er, JUd.
Zeit. xi. 50-60; Hoffmann, Zur Einlcitunij in die Hala-
chii^chen Midraschiin, pp. 2i) et seq.; Joel, Notizen zuni
Bnche, Daniel: Etwas Uhcr die DlUher Sifra und Sifre,
Breslau, 1873; Weiss, Gcach. der Jddiachen Tradition, II.
231 et aeq.; Zunz, G. V. pp. 49 et seq.
w. li. C. M. H.

SIFBE (known also as Sifre debe Rab) : Mid-
rash to Numbers and Deuteronomy (for tlie title "'Si-
fre debe Rab " see R. Hauaueol on Slieb. 37b, Alfasi
on Pes. X., and Rashi on Hos. ii. 1 ; it occurs likewise
in Mak. 9b, where, as Berliner says in his edition of
Rashi, p. 372, N"iSD2 is an error for "«-|DD2; comp.
"'Aruk," s.v. yznX)- In regard to the reference in
Sanh. 86a concei-ning the Sifre of R. Simeon see Me-
KiLTA DE-R.\BBi SniM'ON ; the question has like-
wise been raised whether, in view of the well-known
close relation that existed between the school of R.
Simeon and that of R. Ishmael (Yomu59ii; Zeb. 53b,
119b; Hul.69b), the words y'lT KT^X in^DI apply
to R. Simeon's Sifre in the same degree as to the
other works mentioned in this Talmudic passage
(Levy, " Ueber Einige Fragmente aus der Mischnah
des Abba Saul," p. 11, note 15). Such questions,
ho.vever, are unimportant in reference to the Sifre
now extant; for tiiis work is certainly not identical
with tiie Talmudic Sifre; and, on closer investiga-
tion, it is found to be not a uniform work, but one
composed of parts whicli did not originall}^ belong
together. Frankel in his " Darke ha-Mishnah " (p.
319) drew attention to the difference between that
portion of the Sifre which refers to Numbers and
that which refers to Deuteronomy,
A though, curiously enough, he misun-

Composite derstood this difference and conse-

Work. quently arrived at false conclusions.
Hoffmann has correctly defined the re-
lation between the two in his " Zur Einleitung in die
Halachischen Midraschim." pp. 52 etseq. Tlie Sifre
to Numbers is evidently a midrash whicli originated
in R. Simeon's school, and which has all the pecu-
liarities and characteristics of such a work. It fol-
lows the same principles of exposition as does the
Mekilta ; the same group of tannaim appeals ; and the
same teclinical terms are employed (see 5Iekilt.\:
to the examples there given may be added nO 'JDD
TJO 131 hiy lOytO, Num. vlii., for wliich the Sifra
to Lev. xxi. 12 uses the expression D1J n^ l^jn?)-
There are also many material points of similarity
with the Mekilta: thus Sifre 2 agrees literally with
Mek., Mishpatim, 6; Sifre 65 witli Mek., Bo, 5;
Sifre 71 with ib. 15; Sifre 142 with ih. 5. The liag-
gadic portions likewise contain many parallel pas-
sages (comp. the collation in Hoffmann, I.e. p. 54.
though Sifre 64 and INIek., Beshallah, 1 should not
be included, since these two passages disagree on
one point).

It is an especially noteworthy fact tliat the ex-
planation in Sifre, Num. 7 of the law regarding a
woman charged with adultery corresponds with a
view expressed by R. Ishmael, and also with the pre-
scribed halakah, according to which, one witness
being sufficient to convict, the water-test is not nec-
essary. The explanation given in the Sifre to Num-

bers thus contradicts the explanation in Sotah 31a
and in Sifre, Deut. 188. The view expressed in
Babli is curious: it cites (Sotah 2a and 31 b) the ex-
planation of tlie Sifre to Numlx-rs, and adds there

to-: ntrsnj x^ N"'m in x^x nn n^^ nn Njom -]JDm

ITIIDS, whereas the deduction should read to the
contrary, nn)^ nn''n in X^N r\2 n''^ ■•-in. Babli,
which evidently does not know R. Ishmael's view,
ftfes to interpret the baraita in the sense of the pre-
scribed halakah. But the baraita must in fact be
interpreted in the opposite sense, namely, as follow-
ing the view of R. Ishmael, who, because ny always
implies "two," as appears from Yer. Sotah 20d, de-
mands also in the case of a woman charged with
adultery two witnesses of the alleged crime. The
passage introduced by the phrase ^"iSD DflD (Sifre
161) likewise echoes R. Ishmael's views; and
the same is true of Sifre 21 as com[)ared with
Sifre 7. The beginning of Sifre 7 appears to be,
strangely enough, an anonymous halakah express-
ing the opposite opinion (comp. Yer. Sotah 16b),
though this also may at need be harmonized with
R. Ishmael's view. Sifre 39 likewise follows R.
Ishmael's view, according to Hul. 49a. These and
other less cogent reasons seem to indicate tliat tlie
Sifre to Numbers originated in R. Ishmael's school,
though this does not exclude the assumption that
the editor in addition borrowed much from R.
Simeon's midrash (comp. Hoffmann, I.e. p. 54) and
other less-known midrashim.

Among the tannaim appearing in the Sifre to
Numbers are: R. Ishmael and his pupils R. Josiah

and R. Jonathan ; R. Nathan ; Abba

Authori- Ilanan (citing R. Eliezer); R. Eliezer;

ties Quoted. R. Akiba and his jiupils R. Simeon

and R. Judah ; and, less frequently, R.
Meir and R. Jose. Rabbi also is often mentioned
here, as in other midrashic works, and finally R.
Judah b. Bathyra (Betera), who, as Hoffmann says,
is more frequently mentioned in midrasliic worlcs
from R. Ishmael's school than in any others. A
sentence of the amora Samuel b. Nahmani is quoted
once (No. 73).

The Sifre to Deuteronomy is of an entirely differ-
ent nature. The main portion (Nos. 53-303), halakie
in character, is preceded and followed by haggadic
parts; and it has all the characteristics of a midrash
from the school of R. Akiba. The principles under-
lying the exposition are the same as those in Sifra.
The term "mufneli " in the application of the prin-
ciple "gezerah shawah " occurs only once, and is to
be regarded as a later addition. The technical terms
are largely the same in both midrashim, different
terms being found only here and there in the Sifre.
Moreover, the group of tannaim is different from
that of the jMekilta. Those frequently mentioned
in the latter, namely, R. Josiah, R. Jonathan, R.
Nathan, and R. Isaac, are mentioned rarely in the
Sifre; and even then their names are evidently later

additions. Many passages quoted as

Interpola- being anonjnnous correspond with R.

tions. Akiba's views: e.g., Deut. 270 with

Yeb. 52b; t'b. 95 with Sanh. 45b; ib.
269 with Yer. Git. 49b; ib. 280 with Yer. Sanh. 2tc.
Similarly, some halakic differences between the Sifre
and the Mekilta may be pointed out: Sifre, Deut.



Slfre Zata

123 differs from Mek., Mishpatim, 1; ib. 122 from
Mek., Mishpatim, 2, which latter reproduces R.
Ishmacl's view (comp. Hoffmaun, I.e. pp. 68, 69).
All these points indicate that the Sifre to Deute-
ronomy originated in K. Akiba's school ; and, as sev-
eral anonymous passages may be cited to express
the views of K. Simeon, this midrash may with a
fair degree of certainty be ascribed to him. Such
anonymous passages are found in Sifre 72-74, sev-
eral sections of which Mak. 17a identities as R.
Simeon's interpretations. The same appears to be
the case in Sifre 94, compared Avith Sanh. 112a;
ib. 103 with Kid. 57a; ib. 121 with Sanh. 46b.
Sifre 166, and perhaps also 165, likewise corre-
spond with R. Simeon's views (comp. Hul. 136b;
Tosef., Hul. ix. 2, x. 1); while in Sifre 303 the ex-
planation of NOLin 1J0D Tnya xfj. and the omis-
sion of Dn"l33. also imply an agreement therewith
<comp. Yeb. 73b and Bik. ii. 2).

There are, however, some exceptions to the rule ;
e.g., Sifre 110 compared Avith ib. 281 and B. M. 115a;
ib. 219 with Sanh. 45b (the last-cited passage, how-
ever, may also be so interpreted as to harmonize
with R. Simeon's opinion). Sifre 280 likewise con-
tradicts R. Simeon's view, according to Kil. vii. 7.
But, since it has not been claimed that the Sifre to
Deuteronomy represents R. Simeon's midrash in its
original form, these few exceptions prove nothing.
The editor certainly drew upon other midrashic
works besides R. Simeon's midrash, especially upon
that of R. Ishmael, as appears from a comparison
with Mekilta to Deuteronomy (see Hoffmann in
"Hildesheimer-Jnbelschrift," p. 91), as well as from
the fact that several passages introduced by XJD
^'1 L^3T] occur in the Sifre {e.g., 71 and 75 compared
with Yeb. 73; ib. 229 with Shab. 32a; ib. 237 with
Y'er. Ket. 28c). Sifre 107, however, by no means cor-
responds with the passage '"~i 'jri in Yer. 'Er. 20c
(Hoffmann, "Zur Einleitung," etc., p. 67), but ex-
presses just the oppcsite view. Sifre, Deut. 171, s.r.
N'T corresponds perhaps with Meg. 25a, s.r. KJD
■^"1 ^2T; and Sifre 104 with the view of R. Ishmael
in Mek., Mishpatim, 201, according to the correct
reading of Yalkut, which has <'~\ instead of C"). It
thus ajjpears that the editor introduces the mid-
rashim from R. Ishmael's midrash with the phrase
XT. Hott'maim {I.e. p. 70) concludes from Pes.
68a and 71a that the editors of the Babylonian Tal-
mud possessed the Sifre in another edition than
the present one, which he takes to be
Used in the a Palestinian edition. But the former

Talmud, passage indicates merely that the Amo-

raim occasionally had not memorized

the baraitot perfectly, an instance of inaccuracy

with regard to the Sifre being evident in Hul. 74a

(comp. Tos. adloc, s.v. ^NH^).

It may be said in general of the Sifre to Numbers
and also of that to Deuteronomy that they are de-
fective in many passages, and that the Amoraim
probably possessed more trustworthy copies (comp.
Hoffmann, I.e. pp. 53, 68). Even Rashi and the
Lekah Tob quote from the Sifre passages which
are no longer extant (comp. "Gratz Jubelschrift,"
p. 4, notes 5, 7-10). While tlie middle, halakic
portion of the Sifre to Deutronomy belongs to
Akiba's school, the haggadic portions preceding

and following it seem to come from works of R. Ish-
mael's school. This appears clearly in the first part,
which shows many formal and material similarities
with the Mekilta. In regard to the latter portion,
it may be said that Sifre, Deut. 344 reproduces R.
Ishmael's view on the question at issue (comp. B.
K. 113a). As for the halakic midrash, it may be
said that, in contradistinction to the haggadic part,
the collector used, aside from R. Ishmael's midrash,
that of R. Simeon (comp. Sifre 28 with Lev. R.
i. ; ib. 37 with Gen. R. Ixxxv. ; ib. 40 with Lev. R.
XXXV. ; ib. 47 with Gen. R. xii. ; ib. 336 with Gen.
R. Ixxxii. ; ib. 313 with Tan., ed. Buber, p. 72).

The final redaction of the Sifre must have been
undertaken in the time of the Amoraim, since some
of them, e.g., R. Bannai and R. Jose b. Hanina, are
mentioned therein. Both the Sifre to Numbers and
that to Deuteronomy are divided into sections. The
earliest extant edition of the Sifre is that of Venice,
1545. Other editions are: Hamburg, 1789; Sidz-
bach, 1802; with commentary by David Pardo,
Salonica, 1804 ; with commentary by Abraham Lich-
tenstein (DmSN J/"lT), part i., Dyhernfurth, 1811;
part ii., Radwill, 1820; ed. Friedmann, Vienna, 1864.
A translation of the Sifre is found in Ugolini,
"Thesaurus," vol. xv.

BiBLior.RAPHT : Blau, in SteinschneMer Fest.tchrift, pp. 21-
40; Epstein, Mi-Kadmoninyot ha-Yehudim, pp. 50-56;
Frankel, Darkn ha-Mishnah, pp. a09 et seq.; (ieiirer. Ur-
schrift. pp. 4.34-450; idem, JUd. Zeit. 1866, pp. 96-1:^6: Hoff-
mann, Zur Einleitunfj in die Halachixclien Midraxchim,
pp. 51 et xeq.. 66 et seq.; Piclc, In Stade's ZeUschrift, 1886.
pp. 101-121 ; Weiss, Zur Geschichte der JUdUichen Tra-
w. B. C. M. H.

SIFBE ZUTA ("The Small Sifre"): A peculiar
midrash to Numbers, of especial interest for the
study of the Halakah. Its authenticity is wrongly
questioned by Weiss (" Zur Gesch. der Jildischen Tra-
dition," ii. 238). Medieval authers mention it under
the titles "Sifre shel Panim Alierim " and "Wi-
Yeshallehu Zuta"; and to distinguish from it the
well-known Sifre, "Or Zarua' " (ii. 22) calls the lat-
ter "Sifre Rabbati." The Sifre Zuta has not been
preserved; and, as appears from a remark of Abra-
ham Bakrat, it was no longer extant at the time in
which he wrote his stipercommentary on Rashi
(comp. Brlill, "Der Kleine Sifre," in. "Gratz Jubel-
schrift," p. 184). Earlier authors, however, knew
and occasionally quoted it, as, e.g., R. Samson of
Sens in his commentary on the mishnaic orders
Zera'im and Tohorot. Numerous fragments are
found in Yalljut Shim'oni to Numbers, which BrQll
{l.c.)h'ds collated (corrections and additions by Hoff-
mann, "Zur Einleitung in die Halachischen Mid-
raschim," p. 60). Quotations are found also in Num.
R. toNaso, as Epstein ("Mi-Kadmoniyyot ha-Yehu-
dim," p. 71) has pointed out. The "Mekilta to
Numbers" frequently quoted by Maimonides in his

"Sefer ha-Mizwot" is nothing else

Quoted in than the Sifre Zuta; for all his quota-

the " Sefer tions may be identified among the frag-

ha- ments of the Sifre contained in the

Mizwot." Yalkut Shim'oni, with the exception

of a passage in Shoresh 11 referring to
a Biblical section, for which, as Hoffmann shows(/./;.
]). 59) by a comparison with the "'Aruk," Yalljut
Shim'oni has not quoted the Sifre.

Sifre Zuta



Mainionides frequently drew upon the Sifre Zuta
in bis " Yad ha-Hazakah " also; and other medieval
authors who occasionally quoted it are mentioned
by Briill {I.e. pp. 180 et neq.). The iMidrash ha-
Gadolto Numbers quotes the larger part of the Sifre
Zuta, and has recently become a source of informa-
tion concerning the latter. Kiinigsberger has begun
to edit the Sifre Zuta on the basis of the extracts in
the Midrash ha-Gadol and Yalkut Shim'oni, though
he has not as yet proceeded further than the first
sections. A small fragment of the Sifre has been
published by Schechter in "J. Q. R." vi. 656-663.

The Sifre Zuta belongs to R. Akiba's school, as is
indicated by the method of exposition; e.g., that of
tlie double expressions in Num. x-\xv. 21 ; of the
partitive p, ib. xv. 19; and of the 1,
From the ib. v. 2; the phrase min DKI is ex-
School of plained as in Sifra, Zaw, ii. 1, and the
R. Akiba. term "yovh fis i" Sifra, Emor, vii. 8
{i.e. — ncyn N^). There are also other
points of similarity with the Sifra (Hoffmann, I.e.
p. e©): e.g., the terminology in part, as nZlIK' "IPIK

Dyo niriDn, xin pi nSii. dij no t-jhS; although

there are some unusual expressions, as ^JC*n Til^

{- "inN nan), nv ^sd (= Dipo ^20), mox (= ^n).

Furthermore, some of the views expressed in the
Sifre Zuta correspond with views known to be R.
Akiba's, as in v. 14, with which comp. Sotah 3a; and
in V. 15, with which comp. Sifre, Num. 8. The mid-
rash may be assigned to R. Simeon rather than to R.
Judah, as is done in the case of the Sifra, although
perhaps some of the anonymous halakot, as v. 15
(comp. Ned. 35b) and xv. 4 (comp. Men. 104b), ex-
press the views of the latter. R. Simeon's author-
ship is indicated by the fact that he is mentioned
least often in the midrash, and that of the later tan-
naim R. Eleazar b. Simeon is mentioned a few times.

There are still other indications pointing to
Simeon's authorship, as, for example, the enumera-
tion of the positive and negative commandments,
which is said to be a characteristic of the Sifre to
Deuteronomy, this midrash also being ascribed to
Simeon. Further evidence is presented by the cor-
respondence of various halakot with R. Simeon's
views. Aside from the passages quoted by HoflF-
mann (Z.c. p. 65), some of which represent Simeons
views more exactly than others — the parallel be-
tween V. 7 and Mek., Mishpatim, 15 is doubtful, on
account of the different readings io the Mekilta — still
others must be taken into account; e.g., Sifre Zuta
V. 21 compared with Tosef., Sheb. iii. 7; vi. 20, with
Nazir 46d (comp. Konigsberger, "Der Kleiiie Sifre,"
p. 14b, note 68, and p. 24, note 128); and, what is
especially characteristic, the reason for the law
under consideration (X"lpT NJOytD) is inquired into,
as in v. 15 and xix. 16 (comp. Tosef., Sheb. i. 7;
Yer. Nazir 56b). The well-known reference of the
Talmud, ^"'\ nCD DDD (Sanh. 86a), may therefore
apply to Sifre Zuta, in which, furthermore, there
are several exegetical notes on passages of Numbers
mentioned in the Talmud, but which are not found
in the larger Sifre (comp. Hoffmann, I.e. pp. 56 et
seq.). The fact that the Sifre Zuta to v. 27 contra-
dicts R. Simeon's view in Sotah 19a shows merely
that the editor drew also upon other midrashim,
including, perhaps, that of R Eliezer b. Jacob and

that of R. Ishmael (comp. Sifre Zuta to Num.

XXXV. 21 with Y"er. Mak. iJld). Noteworthy arc

the terms mON = h"n and n^x yOK'Da pN. which

are known to liave been used by Eliezer b. Jacob

(Zeb. yib, according to the correct reading; Sifre,

Dent. 195; comp. Hoffmann, I.e. p. 65, note 1;

Konigsberger, I.e. p. 5, note 7). The fact that Rabbi

is not mentioned leads IIolTmann to the cfjuclusion

that the Sifre Zuta was not edited by a pupil of

Rabbi. Some tannaim are mentioned therein who8(!

names are not found elsewhere; e.g., Simeon ben

Nehunyon and Papyas of Ono.

The Sifre Zuta has not yet been thoroughly


BiBMOGRAPHV : Besides tbe authorities quoted in Uie text,
Bacher, in J. Q. I{. 1896, viii. 329-33:3; Epstein, in R. E. J.
xxix. 'Mii et sc<i.: idem, in AUg. Zeit. de» Jmi. 1894, No. 34;
Zunz, (j. V. n. .51.
w. ij. C. M. H.


SIFTE YESHENIM. See Bass, Shabbethai.

SIGMARINGEN. See Hoikenzolleun.

SIGN. See Miracle.

SIGNATURE: Usually a writer inscribes his
name at the end of a writing as a certitieation of
authorship or as an indication that he accepts the
sponsorship of the writing; but it does not appear
that this was the (;ustom of the ancient Hebrews.
In the case of literary productions the author's name
appeared at the beginning: "The Proverbs of Solo-
mon the son of David " ; " The vision of Isaiah the
son of Amoz"; etc. Generally the full name, in-
cluding that of the father, is given; sometimes the
single name. The end of the Second Book of
Psalms reads, "The prayers of David the son of
Jesse are ended " (Ixxii. 20); but this seems to be
the statement of a compiler, for in the separate
psalms a.scribed to David his name ai)pears at the
head. "The words of Job are ended," at the close
of his last and longest speech (xxxi. 40), is not Jn's
signature ; for Job, in the book bearing his name, is
not treated as its author.

In the edictsof kings and other gr<;at civil author-
ities, in Babylonia and Persia, for example, the name
and titles likewise appear at the begin -
Edicts and ning, not at the end, as is seen in many

Letters. well-preserved in.scriptions. Ezra i.

2 begins the decree of King Cyrus,

"Thussaith Cyrus king of Persia." Later in the

Online LibraryIsidore SingerThe Jewish encyclopedia : a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature, and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times to the present day (Volume 11) → online text (page 79 of 160)