Skip to navigation | Skip to main content | Skip to footer
Search by multiple inventory points or book comparison
Full Inventory point list:
44 books found
Sifre Deuteronomy (Researcher: Robert Hayward):
Selected Inventory point(s):
1.1 [The text refers to itself as verbal entity (with implied or explicit boundaries).]

Full profile (Bibliography at the bottom):
1.1 [The text refers to itself as verbal entity (with implied or explicit boundaries).]

1.1.1 [The text refers to itself using a genre term, speech act term, verb or other term implying verbal constitution: twice in section 318 it may refer to itself as a baraita' of "And these are the words", namely Deuteronomy. If this term is an integral part of the original text, then it may well be self-referential. The possibility that it might represent a scribal title, however, cannot be excluded.]

1.1.5 Important text witnesses attest to a heading which is not integrated with the body of the text or with any introductory frame, implying one or more of the kinds of information under 1.1.1–4: The text of the Biblical book Deuteronomy gives this text its particular form: its opening statement in all witnesses recorded by Horovitz consists of the opening words of Deuteronomy, and its closing words are constituted by a direct quotation of the closing words of the same Biblical book. The text consists predominantly of comments on the text of Deuteronomy, which itself is quoted in sequence, and divided into sections corresponding to the "parashah" read in the Sabbath service of the synagogue. Within these large sections, smaller individual sections of varying lengths are indicated as having reached their conclusion with the formula slyq psq'. The ending of the text as whole is marked in the base ms. utilised by Horovitz (Assemani 32) with slyq psqa hzq wnthzq; he records also the note appended in the first printed Rabbinic Bible (Venice 1516/1517), slyq mkylt' sypr' wspry thlh l'l hy tzwry. All witnesses to the text seem to begin with "and these are the words", although ms. Assemani 42 has a scribal preamble which does not indicate any heading for the text.

1.5 The text presents a certain homogeneousness of form and/or contents, without claiming or projecting boundedness, and without being unified by a poetic or rhetorical form (i.e. 1.1, 1.2. and form-bounding points under 3 do not apply): The text of the biblical book Deuteronomy gives this text its particular form, inasmuch as it consists predominantly of comments on the text of Deuteronomy, or observations on the text of Deuteronomy, which itself is quoted in sequence.

1.5.1 There is a limited inventory of small forms which recur in a linear juxtaposition of units (e.g. 5.9): Approximately twenty small forms are catalogued in section 8, although of these about half are frequent or pervasive.

1.5.2 The ways in which smaller units hang together or follow on from each other (section 9) are repeated again and again: The text presents a regular, "even" surface, with forms and formulae frequently recurring, creating the impression of a sustained and systematic treatment of the base texts under consideration.

1.6 The approximate word count or other indication of comparative size is:

1.7 The text’s Inventory profile should be seen in the light of the following further information on completeness, thematic progression, aesthetic effects, etc.: In addition to the information given above under 1.1.5, it should be noted that the extent and amount of the commentary can vary from one "parashah" to another. Sometimes this disparity in coverage can be dramatic, as in the case of commentary on Ha'azinu, which covers almost every verse, contrasted with the example of commentary on Nizavim, which is confined to a few selected verses.

Top of the Page

2.1 The information conveyed in the text defines the perspective of the governing voice in the following way:

2.1.1 The text does not thematize how the governing voice comes to know the text’s contents (or its right to command obedience from the addressee), but suggests that its knowledge (or authority) is unlimited. The text is not narrative but the governing voice refers to utterances on the basis of unexplained knowledge of speech events of diverse periods and places: The speakers are predominantly presented as Rabbis, sometimes named, sometimes anonymous ("the Sages"). The text’s governing voice speaks from the perspective of unlimited authority in commanding the addressee’s obedience.

2.1.2 The governing voice thematizes how it comes to know the text’s contents or its right to command obedience from the text’s addressee. Its perspective is presented as limited, referring either to evidence, or to personal experience (mere human knowledge). The governing voice presents or discusses norms whose commanding force is unlimited, but speaks from a perspective clearly distinguished from that of the ultimate law-giver: Thus certain norms are presented simply as mitzvot (for example, 151): these do not derive from the governing voice, but from Scripture itself.

2.1.7 The governing voice (whether first or third person) is anonymous, that is, is not presented as tied to a specific personal identity (or to personhood in general).

2.1.8 The governing voice speaks at no point in the first person (except for any and all persons/objects are mentioned from a third-person perspective. The first person is used but represents a generic “I” (“we”) of discourse and discussion, not the projection of a specific persona: Note, for example, repeated formulations like shomea' 'ani, "I might suppose"; matzinu, "we find"; lephi she'amarnu, "according to what we have asserted ", and so on.

2.4 The governing voice defines a horizon of knowledge as shared with the projected addressee by taking for granted the following linguistic usages or references (in selection):

2.4.1 Persons or unique objects referred to by proper name or by technical expression: for persons mentioned or presented in narrative usage; as characters; or topics, for example: biblical characters are frequently mentioned outside Scriptural quotations as characters in narrative sections, and to illustrate topics. Non-biblical characters, with the exception of the Rabbis, are not nearly so common, and include Herod (241); Agrippa (157); Titus and Vespasian (328); Agnitos (351); Naqdimon ben Gurion (305); Marta daughter of Boethus (281); and the Sadducees (190). for persons quoted with direct speech in a non-narrative co-text, for example: These are predominantly Sages, most often with the honorific title "Rabbi" or, occasionally, "Rabban". for Gods/mythical figures/supernatural beings, etc., for example: the God of Israel is mentioned under a number of titles, such as Shekhina (for example, 173); Heaven (for example, 177); Maqom (for example, 49); the Holy One, blessed be He (for example, 304); Lord of the World (especially in prayer; for example, 304); He who said, and the world was (343); "root" or "principle" (221). The notion of the Divine Name in itself is emphasized (for example, 222 end; 49). The Holy Spirit is often mentioned (for example, 173, 176, 355), along with Dibbur (343). Angels in general (for example, 306, 315) may be defined further as "ministering angels" (306,, 339, 355), Serpaphim (306), and the angel of death (305). Messiah is mentioned at 310, 318, 332. There is possibly a reference to Metatron as "finger" of the Almighty at 338. for locations, for example: places are predominantly those also mentioned in the Bible. But non-biblical place names are mentioned more frequently than non-biblical characters, for example, Yavneh (153, 154, 247); Usha (344); Rome (353); Asya (356); Sikhni (316); Gischala (316); Sepphoris (316); Caesarea and Beth Ilias (306); Barbaria and Mauretania (320). for times or calendar dates (specific to a language or culture), for example: the three pilgrimage festivals (168); Sabbath (203); New Moon (171); Pentecost, Pesach, and Hannukah (297); Tabernacles (302). There is mention of calendrical intercalation at 306. for documents, texts, books, etc. (identified through being referred to or quoted), for example: The Torah, as a document (pervasive), and with reference to scrolls of the Torah in the Temple court (356). Scripture is referred to as Miqra' (for example, 161; see especially 355). The Mishnah is in some places evidently text which the reader is expected to know, referred to with the abbreviated form mtny' (228, 269 twice, 283, 288). Otherwise the form "mishnah" may refer to oral material (161, 306, 317, 355). Two sedarim (of the mishnah) are mentioned at 306. "Targum" is mentioned at 161. "Talmud", 161, 306, 317, is mentioned, as are midrash (344) and halakhoth (294), though whether as written documents is anything but clear. Parts of the Hebrew Bible may be specifically singled out, like "the Ten Utterances" (313); also those parts of the Hebrew Bible which make up liturgical texts recited in public and private prayer, like the Shema' (248, 333). References to halakhot and haggadot (for example, 306) and responsa (317) may presume that these are in written form, though this is by no means certain. The reference to Baraita on Deuteronomy (bryyt' b'lh hdbrym) at 318 is also to be noted: it may be originally self-referential (so Neusner). If this is not the case, it might be a scribal title for the text.

2.4.3 The text as a whole routinely employs the following language(s), knowledge of which is taken for granted: Hebrew, referred to as the holy language (literally: "language of the sanctuary"), for example, 210, 291, 301. Occasional Aramaic forms occur (as, for example, the abbreviated mtny' mentioned above; and the formula hyky dktyb' at 318). Additional language(s) taken for granted in quoted speech or certain parts of the text are: the text refers to "the Canaanite language" (306), and mentions also the "Roman language", "Arabic language", and "Aramaic language" (343) without implying that the reader may know these tongues. See, however,

2.4.4 Special linguistic usages occur pervasively or prominently: Technical expressions for a particular subject matter: Technical expressions relating to Jewish ritual as delineated in Scripture; technical terms for parts of the Synagogue Service (for example, the 18 Benedictions, 343); for the business of Scriptural exegesis; and for halakhic discussion are prominent. Technical expressions for presenting disputes/dialectic exchanges: Thus, for example, the very frequent use of yakhol, ("one might argue"); din in the sense of "argument" or "conclusion"; less often hilluph, "the contrary" in argument; 'o kallekh laderekh zo, "or argue in this way" in dispute. Note also the frquent use of the expression mik'an 'amru "on this basis they stated", often introducing an argument from the Mishnah. "Stam" is represented at (for example,)155. Frequent is the statement "has it not already been stated...?" Common also is mashma' in the sense of "implication". Technical expressions for the meta-linguistic presentation of another text (see 6.9.4): Some "middot" for interpretation are well represented: thus binyan 'av (148); gezerah shavah (149; 171; 190); qal vahomer (158, prominent throughout). Note also 'al tiqre', variously expressed (for example, 305, 321, 322, 343); the principle of heqesh (frequent), analogy based on biblical information; and kelal u-pherat (rare: see 306). Informative is 313, stating that the Word sent forth at Sinai contained so many "halakhot, qal wahomers, gezerot shavot". Other special linguistic usages: a marked use of Greek and Latin loan-words. Bietenhard (pp. 897-904) lists approximately 120 Greek loans, and approximately 40 Latin loans, some words in his lists being marked as doubtful.

2.5 The text contains deictic or other expressions referring to the governing voice’s time or place, or place it after/before some key event:

2.5.1 as part of the words of the governing voice: Technical terms for weights and measures, such as litra and tarqab (294), lethek and se'ah (343).

2.5.2 as part of the words of a quoted character, but with probable implications also for the governing voice: Section 300 refers to "all the time that you have an altar", contrasting this with times when the altar is no more; section 310 speaks simply of "former times". References to currency may also apply here: note the dinar and zuz (295, 305), sela' and sheqel (294); also terms for weights and measures, such as qab (303).

2.6 The text presents itself as speaking to certain persons, groups or entities, explicitly projecting a certain image of its addressee.

2.6.2 The projected addressee is characterized as having a certain moral or epistemic stance, or as standing in contrast to another group’s moral or epistemic stance: Occasionally this is strongly implied: thus the addressee is supposed not to agree with Sadducees (190); Samaritans (331); and those who suppose that there are either no authorities, or two authorities in heaven (329).In the last cited example, the governing voice clearly assumes that the reader is not on the side of those who suppose either no, or two, authorities in heaven.

2.7 The epistemic stance, knowledge horizon, moral stance and identity of the governing voice, and of the projected addressee, do not become thematic in the text.

Top of the Page

6.1 The text’s most basic thematic progression consists of alternations of (a) quotations from a base text in their original sequence, and (b) statements which comment on or add to the meaning of these quotations.

6.1.1 Most or many statements are dependent reformulations (paraphrases) of the quotations, or meta-linguistic observations on them.

6.1.3 Quotation-comment units pervasively or prominently contain meta-linguistic expressions: Specialized terminology is often used to introduce such meta-linguistic comment, as detailed at

6.1.4 Quotation-comment units tend to be merely juxtaposed, while the units have internal cohesion and formal independence from each other.

6.1.5 Only base text segments in their lemmatic sequence are quoted and receive a statement.

6.1.6 The text also contains quotation-comment units which relate: (i) to texts other than the base text, and/or (ii) to the base text but not in its lemmatic sequence: These are predominantly Scriptural texts, quoted in a position following the lemma to initiate or to illustrate discussion of a point contained within the lemma. Occasionally, the quotation comment unit will also involve a marked citation from the Mishnah: see details in Such units play a prominent part or make up the majority of quotation-statement units in the text.

6.3 Comment statements are frequently or prominently supported by another base text-like quotation: This feature is most noticeable in comments on Ha'azinu, a poetic section of the Hebrew text, where the comment units can considerably expand the information perceived in the lemma by introducing further biblical quotations, which in their turn are expounded. See particularly section 306.

6.3.1 Such supporting text quotations regularly or prominently attract their own comment statements in turn: although these comments are not so extensive as to lead so far away from the original lemma that some kind of "return to the basic discussion" is required.

6.6 The extent of the base text segment is evident as follows:

6.6.2 There is no regular distance in the base text from the beginning of one quotation to the beginning of the next quotation. With the extent of the quoted verbal matter coinciding with the limits of the verbal matter targeted by comment statements: [Note: wagomer seems to be used sparingly in this text.]

6.6.3 The size of segments (as under 6.6.1/2) tends to be, or to include: A sentence. Less than a sentence. More than a sentence. Two different sizes for adjacent interpretations of the same piece of base text. The size of some unit other than the sentence (Masoretic verse, proverb).

6.6.4 The segments (as under 6.6.1./2) provide coverage of the base text as follows: There is no complete coverage of the base text. Base text not covered may have appeared less important or less problematical. The text does not project complete lemmatic coverage as its overarching theme (6.2 or 6.6.2 apply, or there are many smaller “gaps” in the coverage, while applies): Parashah Nitzabim receives scarcely any comments. Despite all this, however, the beginning and the end of the text of Deuteronomy are quoted as the opening and closing words of Sifre. No manifest pattern accounts for the base text not covered.

6.7 There occur multiple comment statements for the same quoted base text segment:

6.7.1 Interpreting the same expression within the same base text segment.

6.7.2 Interpreting different expressions within the same base text segment.

6.7.3 The multiple comment statements are set off from each other by being: Introduced by terms of transition: the most frequent of which is the pervasive davar acher. Assigned to different speaking voices, including the governing voice: Section 306 offers several examples of this procedure. Marked explicitly as constituting disagreement: Disputes are very frequent, two or more Rabbis offering divergent interpretations of a lemma. Set off only by being linguistically or logically discontinuous with the interpretation immediately preceding.

6.8 Comment or non-comment statements are prominently or frequently presented as quotations of speech acts by individuals, groups or by anonymous speakers (without emplotment): "those who say" (for example, 309)

6.8.2 Comment or non-comment statements are frequently or prominently presented as speech acts outside any connecting narrative framework, but in a manner that takes for granted a unified grid of unique places, times and persons: Knowledge of the Rabbis and their biographies seems taken for granted, as also a sense of the times in which they operated. This grid tacitly and explicitly links quoted characters to each other as commentators on the base text.

6.9 The text distinguishes the level of the base text quotations from the level of the statements, whether comments or non-comments, as follows:

6.9.2 Base text quotations have no quotation formula, but tend to be found at the beginning of a new textual unit, marked by the appearance of an incomplete or grammatically isolated sentence, a new theme, and/or a different language/style: This is very common.

6.9.3 The sequence of components within interpretation units is: 1. quotation from base text – 2. comment statement – 3. supporting base-text like quotation (if any); or: – 3. explanation or supplementation of comment statement (if any).

6.9.4 The text employs terms/formulae, signals of transition, hermeneutic techniques, or separation markers, including the following: Specialized terminology separating quotation from comment: This may include expressions such as: "From here (i.e., this verse/segment) they have stated..."; "I have information (sc. in these quoted words) only about X..."; "one might conclude (sc. on the basis of the quoted words)that..."; "[implied: this word/ these words] teach you/us...". Speech reports introducing the statement, used as separator. Other signals of the transition between quotation and comment: Very frequent (even pervasive) are questions introduced by "why... ?"; "what...?"; and "how...?" with direct reference to the words just quoted. The question-answer unit thus formed is mostly a self-contained unit, sometimes involving named Rabbis in dialogue. The simple demonstrative may also be used, following a quotation, to indicate "this refers to such-and-such)", separating quotation from comment. Tacit juxtapositions of components which cannot be read as being continuous on the same level with each other: Scriptural words may be quoted and followed immediately by what is clearly not Scriptural, but words of interpretation without introduction: see (for example) 156, 157, 160, 161, 321, 325. Expressions of a hermeneutic operation: These are very common; for example, the use of yakhol to introduce comment; the appearance of "you shall not be reading X, but rather..."; "to what may this be compared?"; "the words are [to be interpreted] as they are written" (for example, 237).

6.10 Comment statements reveal hermeneutic attitudes towards the base text as follows:

6.10.1 Comment statements tend to speak directly, in object-language, about the base text’s themes. The perspective of any first-person speaker character of the base text segment may be reproduced in the comment statement: This is particularly the case with divine speech and the words of Moses.

6.10.3 Exclusively meta-linguistic comment statements are found alongside more frequent object language comments, or are used as intermediary rephrasings (

6.10.4 The text implies or explicates a hermeneutic stance concerning the accuracy of the base text: The base text wording is tacitly or explicitly treated under the assumption that it cannot be inaccurate/insincere/invalid.

6.11 Within the lemmatic arrangement, extended sections of text have their own principle of progression which suspends the lemmatic progression:

6.11.1 The base text quotation becomes the starting point of a set of local thematic shifts involving further quotations plus explanation/supplementation: This does not apply until parashah Ha'azinu is reached, where further quotations with comments attached can lead to the development of particular themes: see, for example, 313 on "He found him in a desert land".

6.12 There are marked imbalances in the distribution or positioning of base text quotation-statement units at certain strategic points in a 6.1 text. Or, regarding a 6.13 text, there are marked differences in the amount of additional verbal matter provided in another language (6.13.3–5) for passages of base text of the same length between different points in the text.

6.12.3 Higher density is found at some other defined or strategic text position of the base text, the commentary or the rendering text: The increased density of comment for the whole of Ha'azinu is marked; and this applies also to the comment on the final parashah wez'ot haberakhah in places (for example, 355 on retzuy 'echaw).

Top of the Page

7.1 Narrative or thematic correspondences, or overlap of specific wording, occur between a non-biblical text and one or more biblical texts in a manner that is prominent or pervasive.

7.1.3 There is prominent use of explicit quotations of biblical wording, whether in non-narrative or in narrative (but not in biblical commentary, for which see section 6): These serve, within the comment sections of Sifre, both as supports for positions in argument, and as illustrations or amplifications of the commentary explicating the text under discussion.

7.1.4 The text shares features of language with the Hebrew Bible, or exhibits tacit overlap with specific biblical wording, whether narrative or not. The text contains prominently, but not necessarily frequently, the wording of specific biblical passages such as whole sentences or unique biblical phrases, used in a tacit manner. See also See, for examples, section 51 on Deuteronomy 11:24, "every place on which the soles of your feet have trod" and uncited, but intended allusion to 2 Samuel 10:13-19; section 107 on Deuteronomy 14:25, "then you may render it into money" and unmarked use of Leviticus 27:11-12; section 165 on Deuteronomy 18:3, using biblical wording found in Leviticus 7:31-33; and the end of section 280 on Deuteronomy 24:16, which refers without citation to Ezekiel 18:20.

7.1.8 The non-narrative text pervasively or prominently presupposes the narrative fabric of biblical events/reported speech, beyond the contents of any specific biblical wording it may quote. The text presupposing biblical narrative fabric is a lemmatic sequential commentary on some part of the Hebrew Bible: The text is a lemmatic sequential commentary on Deuteronomy, the text of the latter being virtually identical with the consonantal Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible.

7.2 Narrative or thematic correspondences, or overlap of specific wording, occur between the non-biblical text under discussion and other non-biblical texts in a manner that is prominent or pervasive.

7.2.3 There are explicit quotations or instances of explicitly marked expressive use of wording from a non-biblical partner text: Thus Sifre quotes the Mishnah at 228 with regard to m.Hullin 12:4-5; at 269 end with regard to m. Gittin 8:1; and at 283, 288, 294, and many other places: for a recent analysis of 186-187 and its quotation of m.Makkot 2:6, see M. B-A. Siegal, "The Unintentional Killer: Midrashic Layers in the Second Chapter of Mishnah Makkot", JJS 61 (2010), pp. 30-47.

7.2.4 The wording or specific theme of self-contained thematic units is occasionally identical to those of another non-biblical text (or part-text), without being marked as quotations from that other text (does not apply if 7.2.6, 7.2.8 or 7.2.9 applies; not applied to Mishnah/Tosefta Tractates): There are numerous parallels between Sifre Deut. and other rabbinic writings: most especially evident are affinities with passages in the Babylonian Talmud. Parallels with the Tosefta are also common, as, too, with Sifre Numbers; less marked are similarities between Sifre Deut. and Sifra. Parallels with the Palestinian Talmud are also found. In both narrative and halakhic passages, we find that the Palestinian Targumim offer parallels; haggadic material in the Sifre is also found in Tanhuma and texts such as Aggadat Bereshot. Such overlapping units are found in text types which differ from each other in their thematic arrangement: This applies to parallels between Sifre Deut. and the Tosefta, both Talmuds, Sifra, and Sifre Numbers. [The parallels with the Targumim tend to occur in the same verses on which the Sifre also offers comments.] It is common for such overlapping units to be marked as the speech of a character or as anonymous quoted speech in one or both of the non-biblical texts. Such self-contained overlapping units occur within what is, by other structural signals, manifestly the same text: Identical, or near identical comments are sometimes repeated, attached to different segments of the text. The comments may include Scriptural quotations.

Top of the Page

8.1 Standard forms or contents formulated in set phrases, set sentence formats, or clauses in a standard syntactic connection.

8.1.1 Conditional norm or hypothetical legal case: frequent.

8.1.2 Unconditional norm: frequent.

8.1.4 Unit of a biblical quotation together with a hermeneutically dependent formulation; midrashic unit: pervasive. A large number of the comments in Sifre Deut. involve biblical quotation. The expressive use of unmarked biblical wording whose function in the text’s discourse is enhanced or achieved by it being recognised as coming from a Scripture: examples of this are given at

8.1.5 Simile used in hermeneutic function: occasional, see for examples 324, 329.

8.1.6 Speech report: pervasive.

8.1.8 Reason clause: occasional, see 197.

8.1.9 The a fortiori argument: frequent.

8.1.10 List sentence enumerating items by words or phrases: frequent.

8.1.11 List enumerating items by whole sentences/interpretation units: frequent.

8.1.13 Declamatory sentence, confession, proclamation or affirmation: occasional. See exclamatory "By the Temple Service" in 1 as an example.

8.1.17 Report sentence of a singular event in the past which is not part of a narrative unit, nor of a mashal: occasional, as at 247.

8.1.20 Recommendation of a particular behaviour or statement of an ideal type of person in a “wisdom” or similar formulation: occasional.

8.1.22 Statement praising Torah in a “wisdom” or similar formulation: occasional.

8.2 Non-narrative small literary forms that impose on their components a standard functional relationship to each other, while grammar and syntax may vary:

8.2.1 Dispute unit: frequent.

8.2.2 Self-contained question-answer unit in anonymous discourse: These are very frequent, and often follow immediately upon the citation of the lemma, serving to distinguish between lemma and comment. Further question-answer units may then, within the same comment, be used to further an argument or to illustrate and explicate a detail in preceding comment.

8.2.4 A clause or phrase which links two statements/themes explicitly as being similar: occasional, as in use of kayotse bo' at section 1.

8.2.5 The summary exposition, in a number of sentences, of theological ideas: occasional, as in Rabban Johanan b. Zakkai's summary statement in 305.

8.3 Forms with internal emplotment relationships, or character-centred small literary forms or motifs:

8.3.1 A ma'aseh or pared-down narrative of a unique event with normative-probative function: rare; see 305.

8.3.2 A mashal or other minimal (two-stage) narrative employed to model the emplotment of a biblical or other event: rare; see 305.

Top of the Page

9.6 An extended portion or substantial proportion of the text continuously explicates local thematic transitions, by means of: This is rare, and requires further comment:

9.6.4 Use of discourse deixis (e.g., “below”, “following”) which indicate parts, or of cross-references: use of cross-reference is rare, but occurs in those passages which refer to the text as a Baraita of "these are the words", twice at 318. See further the entry uder

9.8 The text has a tendency to juxtapose immediately thematic units which fulfill the same literary, evidential, hermeneutic or narrative function, without explicitly integrating them with each other.

9.8.1 There is more than one quotation-comment unit or midrashic unit for the same lemma.

9.8.2 There is more than one biblical quotation supporting the same statement within a single midrashic unit.

9.8.5 There is more than one mashal (parable) for the same thematic or hermeneutic point.

9.12 Important manuscripts divide the text explicitly into parts by the use of single words or incomplete sentences which constitute sub-headings: Important manuscripts have sub-headings articulating the text explicitly into parts through the use of the word "parashah" followed by the incipit of the relevant section of text which would be read as a Torah lesson in the Synagogue service.

9.12.1 This division involves the use of meta-textual terms: These sub-headings also involve the use of the meta-textual expression slyq pisq' to mark the the end of sections of various sizes, some long, some very short, within a given parashah. These notes, however, are not structural, and can occur at the end of comments of greatly varying sizes. Thus Parashah Netzavim, which comments on a mere handful of verses from the Torah reading normally designated by that term, consists merely of two sections, one very brief (304), the other long (305).

Top of the Page

11.1 The non-narrative text projects its thematic concern as being mainly one or more of the following:

11.1.5 The meaning of another text: the biblical book Deuteronomy.

11.1.6 Reporting of the speech of named characters: most frequently named Rabbis or anonymous Sages.

Top of the Page

12.1 Sampling of genre labels applied to the text in secondary literature: Tannaitic midrash; midrash halakhah; exegetical-halakhic midrash.

Top of the Page


Text:  H. S. Horovitz and L. Finkelstein, Siphre ad Deuteronomium (Berolini: In Aedibus Juedischer Kulturbund in Deutschland E.V. Abteilung Verlag, 1969). Translations: English - R. Hammer, Sifre: A Tannaitic Commentary on the Book of Deuteronomy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986); J. Neusner, Sifre to Deuteronomy. An Analytical Translation, 2 vols (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987). German - H. Bietenhard and H. Ljungman, Der Tannaitische Midrasch Sifre Deuteronomium uebersetzt und erklaert (Berlin-Frankfurt-Nancy-New York: Peter Lang, 1984).

 Studies: S. D. Fraade, From Tradition to Commentary. Torah and Its Interpretation in the Midrash Sifre to Deuteronomy (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1991); J. Neusner, Sifre to Deuteronomy. An Introduction to the Rhetoric, Logical, and Topical Program, Brown Judaic Studies 124 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987).

Top of the Page