TALMUD
In
that
they
were
constantly
slandering
him,
and
imputing
evil
Intentions
to
him
in
everything
that
he
did.
It
he
happened
to
come
out
of
his
house
rather
earlier
than
usual,
it
was
said:
"Why
has
he
gone
out
so
early
to-day?
There
has
no
doubt
been
some
quarrelling
at
homel"
If,
on
the
other
hand,
he
went
out
a
little
later
than
usual,
it
was
said:
"What
has
been
occupying
him
so
long
indoors?
Assuredly
he
has
been
concocting
plans
to
oppress
the
people
yet
morel"'
(Bernfeld,
Der
Talmud,
p.
46).
Or,
to
give
one
other
example:
in
pointing
out
the
evils
which
come
from
a
father's
favouring
one
son
above
the
others,
it
is
said:
'This
should
not
be
done,
for
because
of
the
coat
of
many
colours
which
the
patriarch
Jacob
gave
his
favourite
son
Joseph
(Gn
37"-)i
all
Israel
went
down
into
Egypt'
(i6.
p.
47).
Haggadofh
flourish,
as
regards
quality,
more
in
the
Yerushalmi
than
in
the
Babli;
for
in
the
Babylonian
schools
intellectual
acumen
reigned
supreme:
there
was
but
little
room
for
the
play
of
the
emotions
or
for
the
development
of
poetical
imagination:
these
were
rather
the
property
of
Palestinian
soil.
Therefore,
although
the
Haggadic
element
is,
so
far
as
quantity
is
concerned,
much
fuller
in
the
BaUi
than
in
the
Yerushalmi,
it
is,
generally
speaking,
of
a
far
less
attractive
character
in
■
the
former
than
in
the
latter.
'The
fact
that
the
Haggadah
is
much
more
prominent
in
Babli,
of
which
it
forms,
according
to
Weiss,
more
than
one-third,
while
it
constitutes
only
one-sixth
of
Yerushalmi,
was
due,
in
a
sense,
to
the
course
of
the
development
of
Hebrew
literature.
No
independent
mass
of
Haggadoth
de-veloped
in
Babylon,
as
was
the
case
in
Palestine;
and
the
Haggadic
writings
were
accordingly
collected
in
the
Talmud'
(JB
xii.
12).
But
the
Haggadah,
whether
in
the
Yerushalmi
or
in
the
Babli,
occupies
in
reality
a
sub-ordinate
place,
for
in
its
origin,
as
we
have
seen,
the
Talmud
was
a
commentary
on
the
Mishna,
which
was
a
collection
of
Halakhoth;
and
although
the
Haggadic
portions
are
of
much
greater
human
interest,
it
is
the
Halakhic
portions
that
form
the
bulk
of
the
Talmud,
and
that
constitute
its
importance
as
the
fountain-head
of
Jewish
belief
and
theology.
2.
Authority
of
the
Talmud.
—
Inasmuch
as
the
Oral
Law,
which
with
its
comments
and
explanations
is
what
constitutes
the
Talmud,
is
regarded
as
of
equal
authority
with
the
Written
Law,
it
will
be
clear
that
the
Talmud
is
regarded,
at
all
events
by
orthodox
Jews,
as
the
highest
and
final
authority
on
all
matters
of
faith.
It
is
true
that
in
the
Talmud
itself
the
letter
of
Scripture
is
always
clearly
differentiated
from
the
rest;
but,
in
the
first
place,
the
conmients
and
explanations
declare
what
Scripture
means,
and
without
this
official
explana-tion
the
Scriptural
passage
would
lose
much
of
its
practical
value
for
the
Jew;
and,
in
the
second
place,
it
is
firmly
believed
that
the
oral
laws
preserved
in
the
Talmud
were
delivered
to
Moses
on
Mount
Sinai.
It
is
therefore
no
exaggeration
to
say
that
the
Talmud
is
of
equal
authority
with
Scripture.
The
eighth
principle
of
the
Jewish
creed
runs:
'I
firmly
believe
that
the
Law
which
we
possess
now
is
the
same
which
has
been
given
to
Moses
on
Mount
Sinai.'
In
commenting
on
this
in
what
may
not
unjustly
be
described
as
the
official
handbook
for
the
orthodox
Jewish
Religion,
the
writer
says:
'
Many
explanations
and
details
of
the
laws
were
supplemented
by
oral
teaching;
they
were
handed
down
by
word
of
mouth
from
generation
to
generation,
and
only
after
the
destruction
of
the
second
temple
were
they
committed
to
writing.
The
latter
are,
neverthe-less,
called
Oral
Law,
as
distinguished
from
the
Torah
or
Written
Law,
which
from
the
first
was
committed
to
writing.
Those
oral
laws
which
were
revealed
to
Moses
on
Mount
Sinai
are
called
"Laws
given
to
Moses
on
Mount
Sinai"'
(M.
Friediander,
The
Jewish
Religion
[revised
and
enlarged
ed.,
1900],
p.
136).
It
is
clear
from
this
that
the
Written
Law
of
the
Bible,
and
the
Oral
Law
as
contained
in
the
Talmud,
are
of
equal
TAMMUZ
authority.
The
Talmud
is
again
referred
to
as
'the
final
authority
in
Judaism
'
by
the
writer
of
a
later
ex-position
of
the
Jewish
faith
(M.
Joseph,
Judaism,
as
Creed
and
Life,
1903,
p.
vii.).
One
other
authoritative
teacher
may
be
quoted:
'
As
a
document
of
religion
the
Talmud
acquired
that
authority
which
was
due
to
it
as
the
written
embodiment
of
the
ancient
tradition,
and
it
fulfilled
the
task
which
the
men
of
the
Great
Assembly
set
for
the
representatives
of
the
tradition
when
they
said,
"Make
a
hedge
for
the
Torah"
{Aboth,
i.
2),
Those
who
professed
Judaism
felt
no
doubt
that
the
Talmud
was
equal
to
the
Bible
as
a
source
of
instruction
and
decision
in
problems
of
religion,
and
every
effort
to
set
forth
religious
teachings
and
duties
was
based
on
it.'
And
speaking
of
the
present
day,
the
same
writer
says:
'
For
the
majority
of
Jews
it
is
still
the
supreme
authority
in
religion'
(Bacher
in
JE
xii.
26).
3.
The
Talmud
and
Christianity.
—
Much
that
is
written
in
the
Talmud
was
originally
spoken
by
men
who
were
contemporaries
of
Christ;
men
who
must
have
seen
and
heard
Him.
It
is,
moreover,
well
known
what
a
conflict
was
waged
in
the
infant
Church
regarding
that
question
of
the
admittance
of
Gentiles,
the
result
of
which
was
an
irreconcilable
breach
between
Jew
and
Gentile,
and
an
ever-increasing
antagonism
between
Judaism
and
Christianity.
These
facts
lead
to
the
sup-position
that
references
to
Christ
and
Christianity
should
be
found
in
the
Talmud.
The
question
as
to
whether
such
references
are
to
be
found
or
not
is
one
which
can-not
yet
be
said
to
have
been
decided
one
way
or
the
other.
The
frequent
mention
of
the
Minim
is
held
by
many
to
refer
to
Christians;
others
maintain
that
by
these
are
meant
philosophizing
Jews,
who
were
regarded
as
heretics.
This
is
not
the
place
to
discuss
the
question;
we
can
only
refer
to
two
works,
which
approach
it
from
different
points
of
view,
and
which
deal
very
adequately
with
it:
Christianity
in
Talmud
and
Midrash,
by
R.
T.
Herford
(London,
1903),
and
Die
religiSsen
Bewegungen
innerhalb
des
Judenthums
im
Zeitalter
Jesu,
by
M.
Filediander
(Berlin,
1905).
W.
O.
E.
Oesterley.
TAMAR.
—
1.
A
Canaanite
woman,
married
to
Er
and
then
to
his
brother
Onan
(see
Marriage,
4).
Tamar
became
by
her
father-in-law
himself
the
mother
of
twin
sons,
Perez
and
Zerah
(Gn
38,
Ru
i'\
1
Ch
2',
Mt
1').
2.
The
beautiful
sister
of
Absalom,
who
was
violated
and
brutally
insulted
by
her
half-brother,
Amnon
(2S13>ff).
3.
A
daughter
of
Absalom
(2
S
14").
4.
See
next
article.
TAMAR.—
In
Ezk
47"
4,8"
the
S.E.
boundary-mark
of
the
restored
kingdom
of
Israel.
No
proposed
identification
has
been
successful,
since
no
place
of
this
name
has
been
found
in
the
region
required,
that
is,
near
the
S.
end
of
the
Dead
Sea.
It
is
possibly
the
same
place
that
is
mentioned
in
1
K
Q's
as
one
of
the
S.
fortresses
built
up
by
Solomon.
Here
a
variant
Heb.
reading
has
Tadmor
(wh.
see)
—
a
manifest
error,
which
is
perhaps
borrowed
from
the
parallel
passage
2
Ch
8*.
J.
F.
McCURDY.
TAMARISK
i'Sshel).—
This
name
occurs
in
RV
(only)
three
times;
Gn
21S3
AV
'grove,'
mg.
'tree';
1
S
22»
AV
'tree,'
mg.
'grove';
1
S
31"
AV
'tree.'
The
RV
rendering
is
based
upon
an
identification
of
the
Heb.
'Sshel
with
the
Arab.
'Othl.
RVm
gives
'tamarisk'
for
heath
of
EV
in
Jer
17i>
(cf.
48'),
but
probably
a
species
of
juniper
is
intended
here.
There
are
some
eight
species
of
tamarisks
in
Palestine;
they
are
most
common
in
the
Maritime
Plain
and
the
Jordan
Valley.
Though
mostly
but
shrubs,
some
species
attain
to
the
size
of
large
trees.
They
are
characterized
by
their
brittle
feathery
branches
and
minute
scale-like
leaves.
E.
W.
G.
Masterman.
TAMMUZ
(Ezk
8")
was
a
Babylonian
god
whose
worship
spread
into
Phoenicia.
The
name
appears
to
be
Sumerian,
Dumuzi,
Tamuzu,
and
may
mean
'son
of
life.'
