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: The text contains a generic description of its text type by the use of the word "seder" in the expression "zeh seder tamid" in 33b. However, this self-reference is relevant for the base text (the Mishnah), while it does not tell us anything about the Talmudic tractate as such.]
1.1.2 The text speaks of itself as dealing with an overall theme (subject matter) or purpose, or as consisting of coordinated parts making a whole: The text contains a direct reference to a generic description of its contents (i.e. the technical term Tamid), but only in the base text (bTam 31b and bTam 33b).
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: In mss. Florence and Munich the Tractate is not preceded by any opening heading. However, the preceding Tractate (Keritot) has a closing heading which marks the transition to the new Tractate (Tamid). In ms. Vatican, there is again no opening heading but the first two words of the Tractate are aligned in the centre of the column and are then repeated (in a bigger font) at the top of the next column. Also, bTam is divided by the preceding Tractate (Me'ilah) by the closing heading of the latter. In ms. Florence the Tractate's ending is signalled by the presence of the closing heading "chasila' gemara' de-tamid". Ms. Vatican has "seliqa' massekhet tamid", while Munich does not seem to have a closing heading.
1.2 The text presents its internal sequence of sentences (or larger parts) as mirroring the objective relationships of components in the projected world (an objective order), or projects its subject matter as self-limiting (5.3): The text follows the sequence of parts of another text, Mishnah Tamid (although not the whole of the base text is commented upon). See further section 6.
1.4 The text signals its parts or boundaries only by implicit contrast or by some other implicit signal (1.1./2 do not apply):
1.4.2 A sentence/small unit with a contrasting form from those used in the co-text appears at the beginning or at what turns out to be a boundary/end point in the text: There are two cases, both in frame position, of appearance of literary forms contrasting with their co-text. The first one is the aggadic dialogue between the emperor Alexander and the Elders of the South. This comes at the end of the last lemmatic unit and constitutes the ending of the gemara for the tractate. The other one is the prayer concluding with Amen which is placed after the generic description of contents and text type in bTam 33b (mTam 7:3). To this prayer follows a concluding mishnah, considered by many scholars to be a later addiction (to the Mishnah but also to the Mishnah in the Bavli?), which consists in a list of psalms. The concluding one is a psalm for Shabbat which is explained by the text as being eschatological.
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).
1.5.1 There is a limited inventory of small forms which recur in a linear juxtaposition of units (e.g. 5.8).
1.5.2 The ways in which smaller units hang together or follow on from each other (section 9) are repeated again and again.
1.5.3 The themes which are verbalized together within the text are projected as interrelated objectively, albeit not in their textual sequence.
1.6 The approximate word count or other indication of comparative size is: 5331 words. Word count based on a pasted version of the text from the Bar Ilan Responsa Project CD. Approximately 2313 words (45% of the text) are from the Mishnah text.
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 ms Florence, tractate Tamid is preceded by Keritot and followed by Middot, whereas in ms Vatican it is preceded by Meilah and followed by Kinnim. In the Vilna edition, Tamid is preceded by Kinnim and followed by Middot, whereas in the Soncino translation it is preceded by Meilah and followed by Kinnim. In the Vilna edition, the numeration of folios is continuous from Meilah (2a) to Middot (37b) with Tamid covering the numbers from 25b to 33b and with Middot starting with 34a. Of the Tractate's 5331 words, approximately 2313 (45% of the text) are from the Mishnah text. Tamid is the only tractate in the Bavli which has gemara for some of its chapters but not for other. There is in fact gemara only for the first, second and fourth chapter (of the Mishnah). The Talmudic commentary of the first and fourth chapters covers about 90% of gemara material. Ms Florence, unlike Vatican, explicitly signals the end of the gemara for the tractate and signals the beginning of the mishnayot.
Top of the Page
2.1 The information conveyed in the text defines the perspective of the governing voice in the following way:
2.1.1.2 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.
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).
2.1.2.1 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.
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 2.2.4.3) and all persons/objects are mentioned from a third-person perspective.
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:
2.4.1.1 for persons mentioned or presented in narrative usage; as characters; or topics, for example: Moses, Aaron, ben Qatin, the herald Gevini (30b), ben Azra, David (the House of) in 27a, Prophets (29a), Isaac, Abraham.
2.4.1.2 for persons quoted with direct speech in a non-narrative co-text, for example: Several individual Rabbis are named, the Elders of the South, Alexander of Macedon.
2.4.1.3 for Gods/mythical figures/supernatural beings, etc., for example: various names and circumlocutions are used. For example, "ha-qadosh barukh hu'" (the Holy One, Blessed be He) in bTam 28a.
2.4.1.4 for locations, for example: the Temple, and places within the Temple, Jerusalem, Land of Seir (27b), Mount Gerizim, Jericho, Eretz Israel, Mountains of Michvar, Africa (32a), Mountains of Darkness (32a), Gan Eden, Gehinnom.
2.4.1.5 for times or calendar dates (specific to a language or culture), for example: Sabbath, Regalim (28b).
2.4.1.6 for documents, texts, books, etc. (identified through being referred to or quoted), for example: Yoma pereq Ba Lo Kohen Gadol (27b), Torah and Prophets (29a), Shema (31b), Ten Words, Birkhat Kohanim (all in 32b).
2.4.3 The text as a whole routinely employs the following language(s), knowledge of which is taken for granted: Mishnaic Hebrew and Aramaic.
2.4.3.1 Additional language(s) taken for granted in quoted speech or certain parts of the text are: Biblical Hebrew.
2.4.4 Special linguistic usages occur pervasively or prominently:
2.4.4.1 Technical expressions for a particular subject matter: There is pervasive use of technical language for the topics of priestly garments, purity rules and sacrificial procedures.
2.4.4.2 Technical expressions for presenting disputes/dialectic exchanges.
2.4.4.3 Technical expressions for the meta-linguistic presentation of another text (see 6.9.4): this includes terminology both for quoting Scripture and for quoting or talking about the Mishnah.
2.4.4.5 Other special linguistic usages: Greek loanwords are found.
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.
6.1.2 Some or many statements are presented in such a manner that it is ambiguous whether they reformulate the perceived meaning of the quotation (as in 6.1.1), or supplement, replace or correct it (as in 6.2): This occurs occasionally. See, for instance, bTam 27a where the gemara discusses the lemma "They would not sleep in the holy vestments".
6.1.3 Quotation-comment units pervasively or prominently contain meta-linguistic expressions.
6.1.4 Quotation-comment units tend to be merely juxtaposed, while the units have internal cohesion and formal independence from each other.
6.1.6 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: three further textual sources of quotations, marked as different from the quoting of individual Rabbis or groups, are: Mishnah units from elsewhere, Baraitot and Scriptural verses.
6.1.6.1 Such units play a prominent part or make up the majority of quotation-statement units in the text.
6.2 Found alongside comment statements (6.1.1), a considerable proportion of quotation-attached statements are presented as hermeneutically independent from the quotation (non-comment statements): This is rare (e.g. bTam 27b).
6.2.1 Non-comment statements regularly or prominently attract their own hermeneutically dependent comment statements or dedicated discussion.
6.2.3 Non-comment statements occur prominently towards the end of the text or towards the end of a lemmatic division of the text.
6.2.4 Most or all non-comment statements are presented as speech by named characters and groups, or from anonymous sources.
6.3 Comment statements are frequently or prominently supported by another base text-like quotation.
6.4 [The lemmatic progression is constituted simultaneously as a thematic integration or is fused with some other principle of order.]
6.4.4 [The commentary text has a division into parts which accentuates a division of the base text into larger parts than the segments receiving lemmatic treatment: This is true to some extent, in that the fabric of the Gemara respects the division of mTam into chapters by not quoting segments that cross the chapter lines, although it is hard to say whether there is any thematic or formal accentuation of the chapter division beyond this fact. The display of the Gemara in mss and prints, however, usually contains closing formulae for each chapter.]
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.
6.6.3 The size of segments (as under 6.6.1/2) tends to be, or to include:
6.6.3.1 A sentence.
6.6.3.2 Less than a sentence.
6.6.3.3 More than a sentence.
6.6.4 The segments (as under 6.6.1/2) provide coverage of the base text as follows:
6.6.4.1 There is no complete coverage of the base text. There is gemara only for the first, second and fourth chapter of the Mishnah text. With the gemara material in frame position (beginning and end) covering about 90% of all gemara material.
6.6.4.1.2 Base text not covered may have appeared less important or less problematical.
6.6.4.1.3 No manifest pattern accounts for the base text not covered. The distribution of gaps creates no manifest pattern, nor suggests a principle of deliberate selection.
6.6.6 The quoted base text segment may already have appeared earlier in the text, as part of a copy of a larger section (or the whole) of the base text found at the beginning of the relevant section of the commentary.
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:
6.7.3.3 Assigned to different speaking voices, including the governing voice.
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).
6.8.1 Quoted comment or non-comment statements regularly or prominently are themselves treated to explanations or supplementations.
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.
6.8.2.1 This grid tacitly or 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.
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:
6.9.4.4 Tacit juxtapositions of components, which cannot be read as being continuous on the same level with each other.
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.
6.10.3 Exclusively meta-linguistic comment statements are found alongside more frequent object language comments, or are used as intermediary rephrasings (6.9.4.6).
6.10.4 The text implies or explicates a hermeneutic stance concerning the accuracy of the base text:
6.10.4.1 The base text wording is tacitly or explicitly treated under the assumption that it may be inaccurate/insincere/invalid. In bTam 29a the gemara remarks that occasionally "the Sages spoke in imprecise language". The comment unit (bTam 29a) states that the quotation has not to be taken in its literal sense by defining it as גוזמא. This, is then reinforced by a named Rabbi affirming that at times the Torah, the Prophets and the Sages speak לשון הבאי.
6.11 Within the lemmatic arrangement, extended sections of text have their own principle of progression which suspends the lemmatic progression: see for example the long speech event between Alexander and the Elders of the South in bTam 32a-b.
6.11.3 Non-comment statements (6.2) can occur in the following positions:
6.11.3.1 After one or more initial quotation-comment unit with manifest or explicit hermeneutic dependency (6.1.1/3).
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: There are marked imbalances in the distribution of text quantities, in that a higher quantity of text is devoted to quotations which appear at the beginning of the text but also at the end if we take the end of the text as the point where the gemara ends.
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).
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.
7.2.4 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 is overlap between bTam and those Tosefta parts which are identical with quoted baraitot. There are also parallels with Mishnah material coming from other Tractates such as Middot and Shekalim.
7.2.4.2 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.
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: pervasive in the base text. Occasional.
8.1.2 Unconditional norm: pervasive in the base text.
8.1.4 Unit of a biblical quotation together with a hermeneutically dependent formulation; midrashic unit: frequent.
8.1.6 Speech report: frequent.
8.1.8 Reason clause: occasional.
8.1.14 Prayer, doxology, valediction or blessing: Prayer in text’s voice in frame position in 33b.
8.1.15 Wish sentence: Wish sentence in frame position (33b) if credit is given to the hypothesis that sees the last Mishnah as a later addition.
8.1.16 Descriptive sentence of a static (ocular) structure or "scientific" descriptive sentence: occasional descriptions of Temple's parts.
8.1.17 Report sentence of a singular event in the past which is not part of a narrative unit, nor of a mashal: at least once towards the end of bTam 27b.
8.1.20 Recommendation of a particular behaviour or statement of an ideal type of person in a “wisdom” or similar formulation: at least twice in in 28a and 32a-b.
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: occasional.
8.2.2 Self-contained question-answer unit in anonymous discourse: frequent.
8.2.3 Self-contained question-answer unit in discourse concerning the meaning of an earlier word/words in the same text: occasional.
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: occasional.
Top of the Page
9.1 An extended portion or substantial proportion of the thematic text (or thematic part of a non-thematic text) projects its selection and sequence of themes as mirroring an objective order in the projected world, by one of the following means:
9.1.4 By mirroring a temporal or spatial order, or the order of units of meaning in a pre-existing text: Large parts of the text (most part of the base text) mirror a perceptible temporal order without thereby becoming narrative. A progression along a temporal order is discernible but it is interrupted by other coherence features (lemmatic/dialectical). Those insertions are not uniformly distributed along the text rather they are present (roughly) only in the first half of it. The temporal sequences have a normative interdependence being unified under the common theme of the carrying out of the Tamid sacrifice.
9.5 In a number of extended dialectical passages, the governing voice differentiates between the topics/propositions of two or more initial thematic units, presented as quotations of speakers or of other text.
9.5.1 The governing voice performs this differentiation largely by quoting further voices, or by speaking on behalf of the initially quoted voices in an internal dialogue.
9.6 An extended portion or substantial proportion of the text continuously explicates local thematic transitions, by means of:
9.6.1 Use of conjunctions: Temporal indicators pervasively manage transitions in the base text. Transitions in the quoting text are less regularly managed but still logical-thematic conjunctions are often used.
9.12 Important manuscripts divide the text explicitly into parts by the use of single words or incomplete sentences which constitute sub-headings.
Top of the Page
11.1 The non-narrative text projects its thematic concern as being mainly one or more of the following:
11.1.3 Law, commandments or norms of behaviour.
11.1.5 The meaning of another text.
11.1.6 Reports of the speech of named characters.
Top of the Page
12.1 Sampling of genre labels applied to the text in secondary literature: Mishnah commentary, rabbinic work.
Top of the Page
Bibliography:
Texts and Facsimiles of manuscripts:
Ms Munich: Bayerische Staatsbibiothek BSB Cod.hebr. 95, facsimile website publication; http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00003409/images/index.html?seite=993 (accessed 27/03/09 and later);
Ms Florence: Firenze, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale , II.1.7, facsimile website publication : http://jnul.huji.ac.il/dl/talmud/bavly/selectbavly.asp
Ms Vatican: Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica , Ebr. 120-121, facsimile website publication: http://jnul.huji.ac.il/dl/talmud/bavly/selectbavly.asp
Translations: Translations: Soncino; Artscroll; Neusner
Studies/Handbooks: M. Mielziner, Introduction to the Talmud (repr. New York: Bloch, 1968)
Overview of Parts:
Top of the Page