משנה: אָמַר רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אֲנִי הָיִיתִי בָא בַדֶּרֶךְ וְהִטֵּיתִי לִקְרוֹת כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וְסִיכַּנְתִּי בְעַצְמִי מִפְּנֵי הַלִּיסְטִין. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ כְדַיי הָיִיתָ לָחוֹב עַל עַצְמְךָ שֶׁעָבַרְתָּ עַל דִּבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. MISHNAH: Rebbi Ṭarphon181The oldest of the Tannaïm of the second generation, who started his studies still before the destruction of the Temple, at the time of the ascendency of the school of Shammai. It seems that he was slow to adapt the practices he had learned as a child to those of the school of R. Yoḥanan ben Zakkai of the school of Hillel which was the only one to survive the war against the Romans. said: I was on the road and reclined to recite the Shema‘ following the school of Shammai. There I put myself in danger because of the robbers. They told him: It would have served you right to be in mortal danger since you transgressed the words of the school of Hillel.
הלכה: בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן דּוֹדִים דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים לְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה וַחֲבִיבִין כְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה. חִכֵּךְ כְּיֵין הַטּוֹב. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר ווָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן דּוֹדִים דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים לְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה וַחֲבִיבִין יוֹתֵר מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה. כִּי טוֹבִים דּוֹדֶיךָ מִיָּיִן. רִבִּי בָא בַּר כֹהֶן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה בֶן פָּזִי תֵּדַע לְךָ שֶׁחֲבִיבִין דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה שֶׁהֲרֵי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אִילּוּ לֹא קָרָא לֹא הָיָה עוֹבֵר אֶלָּא בַעֲשֵׂה. וְעַל יְדֵי שֶׁעָבַר עַל דִּבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל נִתְחַייָב מִיתָה עַל שֶׁם וּפוֹרֵץ גָּדֵר יִשְּׁכֶנּוּ נָחָשׁ. HALAKHAH: In the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan182This entire Halakhah, until the next Mishnah, really belongs to Avodah zarah 2:5 (fol. 41c) where Song of Songs 1:2, “May he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth since your friendship is better than wine”, is discussed. In the transcription here, the first word fell out. It should read: The fellows (of the Yeshivah) in the name of R. Yoḥanan.
In traditional interpretation, the Song of Songs is a dialogue between God and the people of Israel (represented by the girl); the question of the Mishnah was whether one reads דּוֹדָיִךְ (feminine) or דּוֹדֶיךָ (masculine) for “your friendship, your relations.”: The words of the scribes are related to the words of Scripture and are pleasant like the words of Scripture. (Song of Songs 7:10) “Your throat is like the good wine”; Simeon ben Abba in the name of R. Yoḥanan183The members of the Yeshivah are of the second (colleagues of R. Yoḥanan) or the third (his students) generations of Amoraïm. R. Simeon bar Abba is one of the outstanding students of R. Yoḥanan. The two Amoraïm who explain the latter’s words are of the fourth and fifth generations, respectively.
The “throat” of the Jewish people are the sayings of its sages; wine in both verses are the words of the Torah.: The words of the scribes are related to the words of Scripture and are more pleasant than the words of Scripture. (Song of Songs 1:2) “Since your friendship is better than wine”; Rebbi Abba bar Cohen in the name of Rebbi Judah ben Pazi: You can know that the words of the scribes are more pleasant than those of Scripture because if Rebbi Tarphon did not recite at all he would have transgressed only a positive commandment. But because he transgressed the words of the school of Hillel he should have suffered death since it says: (Proverbs.10.8">Proverbs 10:8) “He who breaches a fence will be bitten by a snake.”
תַּנִּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעְאֵל דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה יֵשׁ בָּהֶן אִיסּוּר וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶן הֵיתֵר. יֵשׁ בָּהֶן קוּלִּין יֵשׁ בָּהֶן חוּמְרִין. אֲבָל דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִין כּוּלָּן חֲמוּרִין הֶן. תֵּדַע לָךְ שְׁהוּא כֵן. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן הָאוֹמֵר אֵין תְּפִילִּין לַעֲבוֹר עַל דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה פָּטוּר. חָמֵשׁ טוֹטָפוֹת לְהוֹסִיף עַל דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים חַייָב. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בְרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי אָדָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי תַנְחוּם בֵּירִבִּי חִייָא חֲמוּרִים דִּבְרֵי זְקֵנִים מִדִּבְרֵי נְבִיאִים דִּכְתִיב אַל תַּטִּיפוּ יַטִּיפוּן אַל יַטִּיפוּ לָאֵלֶּה לֹא יִסַּג כְּלִימוֹת. וּכְתִיב אַטִּיף לְךָ לַיַּיִן וְלַשֵּׁכָר. נָבִיא וְזָקֵן לְמָה הֵן דּוֹמִין לַמֶּלֶךְ שֶׁשּׁוֹלֵחַ שְׁנֵי פַּלְמַטָּרִין שֶׁלּוֹ לִמְדִינָה. עַל אֶחָד מֵהֶן כָּתַב אִם אֵינוֹ מַרְאֶה לָכֶם חוֹתָם שֶׁלִּי וְסֵמַנְטֵירִין שֶׁלִּי אַל תַּאֲמִינוּ לוֹ. וְעַל אֶחָד מֵהֶן כָּתַב אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַרְאֶה לָכֶם חוֹתָם שֶׁלִּי הֶאֱמִינוּהוּ בְּלא חוֹתָם וְסֵמַנְטֵירִין. כַּךְ בְּנָבִיא כְתִיב וְנָתַן אֵלֶיךָ אוֹת אוֹ מוֹפֵת. בְּרַם הָכָא עַל פִּי הַתּוֹרָה אֲשֶׁר יוֹרוּךָ. Rebbi Ismael did formulate: In the Torah there are forbidden matters and permitted matters. There are easy parts and severe parts. But in the words of the Sages all are severe184Since their essential duty is to build “a fence around the Law”, it is in the nature of the institutions of the Sopherim, the men of the Great Assembly headed by Ezra and their successors before the period of the Rabbis, to be more restrictive than the original precepts of the Torah.. You can realize that this is so since we have stated (Sanhedrin 11:4:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sanhedrin.11.4.1">Mishnah Sanhedrin 11:5): “If he185The Mishnah speaks about the זקן ממרא, the rebellious religious leader, who does not accept the rulings of the supreme court sitting in the Temple court. If he asserts something that goes against the text of the Torah, he is not dangerous and not criminally liable since every child that has learned to read realizes his error. But if he asserts something in contradiction to an authoritative teaching of the oral law asserted by the Synhedrion, then he has committed a capital crime.
In the Babli, the reference is to Sanhedrin 10:4:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sanhedrin.10.4.1">Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:5. The interpretation of the law is much more restrictive in the Babli than in the Yerushalmi. says there is no obligation of Tefillin against the words of the Torah he is not criminally liable. If he says that Tefillin have five sections, to add to the words of the Sages, he is guilty.” Rebbi Ḥananiah, the son of Rebbi Ada186A preacher of the fourth generation of Galilean Amoraïm whose name is quoted also as Ḥanina or Ḥinnena. His teacher R. Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya was from Kefar Agin (Umm Junia) South of the Sea of Galilee., in the name of Rebbi Tanḥum the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya: The words of the Sages carry more weight than those of the prophets, since it is written (Micah.2.6">Micah 2:6): “Do not preach, they preach; Do not preach to those, that shame does not reach you.187Only false prophets will preach to such a generation, whereas the true prophet gets his orders from God not to preach. According to Rashi, טיף means “speak about your visions”, rather than the commonly used “preach”.” And it is written (Micah.2.11">Micah 2:11) “I shall preach to you for wine and liquor.”188The real inference is from the rest of the verse that is not quoted but assumed to be known to every student: “You shall preach to this people.” It follows that the prophet sometimes is ordered to be silent and sometimes to speak but the sage is ordered to teach at all times. The relation of prophet and scholar can be compared to the case of a king who sent two of his palmatars189The Arukh notes the word but gives no explanation. Mussaphia, in his Notes to Arukh, proposes the impossible Greco-Latin hybrid πόλεμο-- notarius, “secretary of war.” The best explanation seems to be that of A. Kohut, diplomatarius; the first syllable di was interpreted as Aramaic relative pronoun (Hebrew שֶׁ) and, therefore, dropped. Diplomatarius is a late (Byzantine) form of diplomarius, the holder of an imperial diploma, a “doubly folded” imperial order or privilege which gave its holder the right to use the imperial mails for transportation. The two diplomatarii arrive in the province by imperial mail but this does not imply that they are plenipotentiaries (since, sometimes, the privilege of using the mails was given to private citizens.) to a province. About one of them he wrote, if he does not show you my seal and σημαντήθιον190Hebrew word (חוֹתם) “seal” and its Greek equivalent given as parallels., do not believe him. About the other one he wrote, even if he does not show you my seal, believe him without seal and σημαντήθιον. So about a prophet is written (Deuteronomy.13.2">Deut. 13:2) “He gives you a sign or miracle.” But here it is written (Deuteronomy.17.11">Deut. 17:11): “According to the teachings that they will teach you”191The reference is to the tradition attached to v. 9, that obliges one in cases of doubt to go the the Temple and ask “the judge who shall be in those days”. Since it is impossible to ask a judge who does not live in one’s days, this is taken to mean that any chief judge, even if not the most competent one, has the same status as any other living in another time. (Babli Rosh Hashanah 25b, Sifri Devarim 153)..
הֲדָא דְתֵימַר מִשֶּׁיָּצָאת בַּת קוֹל. אֲבָל עַד שֶׁלֹּא יָּצָאת בַּת קוֹל כָּל־הָרוֹצֶה לְהַחְמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ וְלִנְהוֹג כְּחוּמְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּכְחוּמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל עַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר הַכְּסִיל בַּחוֹשֶׁךְ הוֹלֵךְ. כְּקוּלֵּי אֵילּוּ וָאֵילּוּ נִקְרָא רָשָׁע אֶלָּא אִי כְקוּלֵּי וּכְחוּמְרֵי דְדֵין. אִי כְקוּלֵּי וּכְחוּמְרֵי דְדֵין. הָדֵין דְּתֵימַר עַד שֶׁלֹּא יָצָאת בַּת קוֹל. אֲבָל מִשֶׁיָּצָאת בַּת קוֹל לָעוֹלָם הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל וְכָל־הָעוֹבֵר עַל דִּבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל חַייָב מִיתָה. תַּנִּי יָצָאת בַּת קוֹל וְאָֽמְרָת אֵילּוּ וָאֵילּוּ דִּבְרֵי אֱלֹהִים חַיִּים אֲבָל הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. אֵיכַן יָצָאת בַּת קוֹל. רִבִּי בִיבִי אָמַר בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּיַבְנֶה יָצָאת בַּת קוֹל. That means192Referring to the statement in the Mishnah, that Rebbi Tarphon was told that he incurred guilt by following the teachings of the school of Shammai (with which he probably grew up). after the divine voice193A בת קוֹל, “daughter of a voice”, is a sound carrying information of indeterminate origin. was heard. But before the divine voice was heard, 194Eduyot 2:3" href="/Tosefta_Eduyot.2.3">Tosephta Idiut 2:3 (in a different version Sukkah 2:3:2-3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sukkah.2.3.2-3">Sukkah 2:3). The main discussion in the Eruvin.6b">Babli is Eruvin 6b. The 24 instances of restrictions of the school of Hillel where the school of Shammai is more lenient are enumerated in Eduyot 2:1-10" href="/Tosefta_Eduyot.2.1-10">Tosephta Idiut 2. It is reported there that the most conscientious one of the followers of Shammai in the years before the destruction of the Temple, R. Yoḥanan ben Haḥoranit, followed the rulings of the school of Hillel in practice. The man who rebuilt Jewish learning after the destruction of the Temple, R. Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, was a student of Hillel. it was said of anyone who wanted to restrict himself and follow the restrictions both of the school of Shammai and that of Hillel: (Ecclesiastes.2.14">Eccl. 2:14) “the fool walks in darkness;” anyone who followed the leniencies of both of them195In the opinion of the Babli, only in the case of two leniencies whose theoretical bases contradict one another. Similarly, the fool is one who follows contradictory rigidities. was called an evildoer. But one had to follow either the leniencies and restrictions of one school or the leniencies and restrictions of the other. That was before the divine voice was heard. But after the divine voice was heard196This is an explanation of the Tosephta, rather than a duplication of the earlier note on the Mishnah., practice always follows the school of Hillel and everyone who transgresses the rulings of the school of Hillel merits death. We have stated: “A divine voice came and said: Both of them are the words of the Living God but practice follows the school of Hillel”.197The same statement is in Eruvin.6b">Babli Eruvin 6b. The language is tannaïtic, but the origin of the phrase is unknown. Where was the divine voice heard? Rebbi Bibi198Since in Talmudic times every ב or בּ was pronounced /v/ in Galilee under the influence of Byzantine Greek, his name probably is a shortening of Latin Vivianus, חַיִּים. R. Bibi was one of the notable students of R. Yoḥanan. in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: The divine voice came in Jabneh199The Synhedrion was at Jabneh between the two wars against the Romans and held there its first meeting when it was reconstituted after the persecutions that followed the war of Bar Kokhba. Afterwards, it moved to Galilee permanently. This gives a terminus ad quem for the adoption of the rules of the school of Hillel by all of Judaism. It seems that the exact point in time was the reconstitution of the Synhedrion after the war of Bar Kokhba.
While Talmudic literature is full of disagreements on practical points of Jewish practice, there is unanimity that the principles underlying all discussions are those fixed by the school of Hillel in Rabbinic (Pharisaic) Judaism. After the war of Bar Kokhba, we do not hear of any followers of the school of Shammai in practice, nor of Jews that are Sadducees in practice. In the Talmud (Babli Nidda 33b), R. Yose (ben Ḥalaphta) states that the Sadducees in his time follow Rabbinic practice. We know that the sect at Qumran were Sadducees and their Tefillin follow Sadducee rules; characteristically, they have many more Biblical quotes in addition to the required verses (cf. Y. Yadin, Tefillin from Qumran, Jerusalem, 1978). The Tefillin found with the Bar Kokhba letters in the caves of the Judean desert are of the same type. Hence, Sadducee practice did not completely stop until the war of Bar Kokhba. As far as Sadduceeism goes, its disappearance in practice can be dated to the aftermath of the war of Bar Kokhba.
It is not believable that a man of the stature of Rebbi Tarphon would transgress a generally accepted practice supported by a divine pronouncement and by popular consent. Hence, the episode of Rebbi Tarphon must be dated in time before the bat qol. It is generally accepted that Rebbi Tarphon did not live to see the war of Bar Kokhba. This narrows the time of the bat qol to close to that war..