relationship between memory and sacred space in the wake of exile, though the descriptions of the pilgrimage festivals in the talmudic passages read more like fantasy than memory, far from an objective or historical account. In the rabbis’ own terms, however, the stories of the ark are fashioned as memory
Philosophers have often described theism as the belief in the existence of a “perfect being”—a being that is said to possess all possible perfections, so that it is all-powerful, all-knowing, immutable, perfectly good, perfectly simple, and necessarily existent, among other qualities. But such a theology is difficult to reconcile with the God we find in the Bible and Talmud. The Question of God’s Perfection brings together leading scholars from the Jewish and Christian traditions to critically examine the theology of perfect being in light of the Hebrew Bible and classical rabbinic sources. Contributors are James A. Diamond, Lenn E. Goodman, Edward C. Halper, Yoram Hazony, Dru Johnson, Brian Leftow, Berel Dov Lerner, Alan L. Mittleman, Heather C. Ohaneson, Randy Ramal, Eleonore Stump, Alex Sztuden, and Joshua I. Weinstein.
present the temporal concepts of permanence and endurance. I do argue that increased conceptualization in the Babylonian Talmud, especially in the editorial layer, increases frequency of metaphoric applications of קבע. But rabbis using this root from the tannaitic period onward seem to have been
quoted in any Jewish source prior to that period. 4 Nevertheless, one early rabbinic source that does not quote from SY may indicate an awareness of its existence. This is a tale from the Babylonian Talmud about two sages, R. Ḥanina and R. Osha‘ya, who created a calf by using hilkhot yetzirah (laws of
:1–11). 82 It is not surprising, therefore, that Talmudic sages like Ḥoni ha-Me‘agel (the circle-drawer) are often described as disputing with God or protesting presumed divine injustice. 83 Talmudic sages, roughly speaking, adhere to this hermeneutical perspective, declaring themselves loyal heirs of
, Bland circumvents the interruption of the “modern” in order to retrieve and mobilize the value of “imagination.” We may see an analogous movement at work in “Who Thinks in the Talmud?” by Sergey Dolgopolski. Drawing on the work of de Libera and Foucault, Dolgopolski is interested in elaborating
death, includes commentaries on the Torah and other biblical books, collections of talmudic novellae and exegesis of early rabbinic works, a dream journal and mystical autobiography, a sustained commentary on the Zohar, and a mysterious code of Jewish laws and practices that pertain to everyday life and