Derek Ereẓ Rabbah

One of the small treatises () of the Talmud. In the editions of the latter the treatise Derek Ereẓ consists of three divisions: (1) Derek Ereẓ Rabbah (Large Derek Ereẓ); (2) Derek Ereẓ Zuṭa ("Small Derek Ereẓ"); (3) "Pereḳ ha-Shalom (Section on Peace"). This division is correct in that there are really three different works, but the designations"Rabbah" and "Zuṭa" are misleading, since the divisions so designated are not longer and shorter divisions of one work, but are, in spite of their relationship, independent of each other. The ancient authorities, who have different designations for this treatise, know nothing of the division into "Rabbah" and "Zuṭa"; the "Halakot Gedolot" (ed. Hildesheimer, p. 647) even includes a large part of the Derek Ereẓ, Zuṭa under the title "Rabbah."

Summary of Contents.

According to the usual division, Derek Ereẓ R. consists of eleven sections ("peraḳim"). It begins with a halakic section on forbidden marriages ("'arayot"), to which are appended some ethical maxims on marriage. The second section consists of two entirely different parts, the first of which contains reflections on twenty-four classes of people—twelve bad and twelve good—with an appropriate Bible verse for each class; while the second enumerates the sins that bring about eclipses of the sun and moon, as well as other misfortunes, the whole ending with some mystic remarks concerning God and the 390 heavens. The section "Ben 'Azzai," as the ancients called the third pereḳ, contains some moral reflections on the origin and destiny of man. Sections iv. and v., each beginning with the word "Le'olam" (Forever), contain rules of conduct for sages and their disciples, the respective rules being illustrated by Biblical events and occurrences of the time of the Tannaim. Sections vi. and vii., which seem to have been originally one section, illustrate, by means of several stories, the correctness of the rule of conduct, never, in society or at table, to act differently from others that are present. Sections viii. and ix. also treat of rules of conduct during eating and drinking, especially in society; and it must be noted that sections vi. and viii. begin with the same word "Ha-niknas." Section x., on correct behavior in the bath, also begins with the same word, showing that all these sections, although they differ in content, were composed after one pattern. The last section begins with the enumeration of different things that are dangerous to life, and continues with the enumeration of actions and customs that are very dangerous to the soul.

This short summary of the contents shows that the work is of very diverse origin and that each section has its own history. It is clear that the first section can not, in view of its halakic content, belong with the rest of the treatise, which deals exclusively with morals and customs. Elijah of Wilna was therefore undoubtedly right in assigning this section to the treatise Kallah, which precedes the Derek Ereẓ, and deals entirely with marriage and the rules connected with it. The whole section is merely a later compilation, although some of its passages can not be traced back to the Talmudim and the Midrashim, as, for instance, the interesting parody on the hermeneutic rule of "ḳal we-ḥomer" (compare Joseph b. Tadai).

Composition and Component Parts.

Entirely different in origin is the first part of the second section, drawn undoubtedly from an old tannaitic source. Four sentences of this section are cited in the Talmud as being taken from a Baraita (B. B. 90b; Sanh. 76b; Shab. 88b), and one in the name of Abba Arika (Sanh. l.c.), who often quoted old sentences and maxims ('Er. 54a). The composition shows that this section is not taken from the Talmud, for the division into twelve good and twelve bad classes of men is not found in the latter. The other half of this section, however, is probably a later interpolation, belonging properly to the third section. For this section begins with a saying of Ben 'Azzai concerning four things the contemplation of which would keep men from sin: hence the four classes of four things each that are enumerated in the second section.

Ben 'Azzai mentioned four things in connection with the four sayings. They are drawn from the Talmud (Suk. 29). The third section seems to have been in ancient times the beginning of Derek Ereẓ R. (Rashi on Ber. 22a; Pes. 86b; Tosef. 'Er. 53b), for which reason the old writers called the whole treatise "Pereḳ ben 'Azzai." Yet it is difficult to understand how this section came to be taken as the introduction to the treatise, which otherwise, beginning with the fourth section, forms a connected whole, and has totally different contents from the Pereḳ ben 'Azzai.

Date of Composition.

Therefore, as regards date and composition, only sections iv.-xi. need be considered, since the first three sections were not originally integral parts of the treatise. Sections iv.-xi. are not only similar in content, in that both set forth rules of behavior for different walks of life, and illustrate their meaning by examples from history, but their whole arrangement and composition also show the hand of the same author. Although the name of this author is not known, his date can be fixed approximately. Among the sixteen authorities quoted in the part which has been designated above as the treatise Derek Ereẓ R. proper, there is not one who belongs to a later time than Rabbi, the redactor of the Mishnah. The Yerushalmi quotes a sentence, found in the Derek Ereẓ, R., with the formula "Tene be-Derek ha-Ereẓ" (Shab. vi. p. 8a, bottom); from this it appears that in the time of the Amoraim a tannaitic collection of the name "Derek Ereẓ," was known, and there is absolutely no reason for considering the present as a different treatise from the Derek Ereẓ quoted in Yerushalmi. Nor is there any cogent reason for not considering this treatise as the source of the many quotations from Baraitas in Babli, which are found in Derek Ereẓ. R. also (compare Isaiah Berlin's glosses to the treatise), although it must be admitted that a great many of the quotations existed in different collections of Baraitas, and that the Talmud drew sometimes from one source and sometimes from another.

A contemporary of Rabbi, therefore (about 160-220)—hardly Rabbi himself—may have been the author of the Derek Ereẓ, R., the first three sections being added much later. A collection known as "Hilkot Derek Ereẓ" existed even in the school of Akiba (Ber. 22a); but, as the term "Hilkot" indicates, it was composed entirely of short sentences and rules of behavior and custom, without any references to Scripture and tradition. It is evenhighly probable that the treatise was based on the older collection, and that the work of the later editors consisted merely in the addition to the old rules of illustrations from the Bible and from history. For example, in the old collection there was a rule, "No one must enter the house of another without due announcement." This sentence was amplified by a later editor, who added: "This rule of behavior is taught out of the mouth of God Himself, who stood at the gate of paradise and called to Adam, 'Where art thou?'" (Gen. iii. 9); and to this is added the story of a journey of Jewish scholars to Rome, and how they comported themselves there (section v.).

Stories.

It is characteristic of this treatise that in order to emphasize its rules, it relates many stories of the private life of the Tannaim. A most interesting one is the following, which is used as an illustration to the rule, always to be friendly and obliging: "Once Simon ben Eleazar [probably more correctly Eleazar b. Simon; compare Ta'an; 20a] met a very ugly man, and could not help exclaiming: 'How ugly are the children of our father Abraham!' The man answered: 'What can I do about it? Will you go and tell the Master who has created me?' Then Simon b. Eleazar fell down at the man's feet, asking his forgiveness. But the latter said: 'I will not forgive you until you have gone to the Master who has created me, and have said to Him, "How ugly is the creature which you have created!"' Only after much beseeching would the man forgive him; and on the same day Simon pronounced these words in the schoolhouse: 'Be always pliable as the reed, and not hard as the cedar. Although the reed bends to the gentlest wind, it resists the fiercest storm; but the cedar, at first proud and inflexible, in the end yields to the wind, and is uprooted.'" Stories of this nature lend a peculiar charm to the Derek Ereẓ. Rabbah.

The version of the treatise found in the Maḥzor Vitry (pp. 724 et seq.) is different from that in the editions of the Talmud. Instead of the first part of the second section, there is in the former version a collection of sentences and reflections on various subjects, arranged according to numbers. The version of the treatise Kallah, in Coronel's "Ḥamishah Ḳunṭresim," Vienna, 1864, contains the greater portion of the Derek Ereẓ R.; namely, the whole of sections iii., iv., v., and parts of the following sections. Aside from the variants found here, Coronel's version has also a kind of Gemara to the text. This Gemara, however, is of very late origin, being in all probability a product of the tenth century, although it contains matter of great value and of very ancient (Essene or Ḥasidean) origin. The Gemara, which is quoted by Isaac Aboab in "Menorat ha-Ma'or," is printed in the Wilna edition of the Talmud (Romm, 1889).

Bibliography:

  * The treatise Derek Ereẓ R. was printed for the first time in the third Venetian edition of the Talmud (1546-1551);
  * see also Goldberg, Der Talmud. Tractat Derek Ereẓ Rabbah, Breslau, 1888, which contains a critical edition and a German translation;
  * Krauss, in Rev. Etudes Juives, xxxvi. 27-46, 205-221; xxxvii. 45-64;
  * Weiss, Dor Dor we-Dorshaw, ii. 249-250:
  * Zunz, Gottesdienstliche Vorträge der Juden, 2d ed., pp. 116-118.



S. S. L. G.