• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
G'zerah Gezerah Shavah, Second Rule of Hillel, Hillel, Paul, Sha'ul, ...http://www.haderek.ca/articles/way/gzerahshavah1.htm1 of 514/03/2009 3:00 PM
The
G’zerah Shavah
(Part I)
Rabbi Hillel was one of the greatest Jewish sages of the late SecondTemple period. He is said to have lived one hundred and twenty years andto have served as the President of the Sanhedrin during his final forty yearsof life—from 30 B.C.E. to 10 C.E. During those years, he also served ashead of one of the two great schools of Torah learning known as “BeitHillel,” i.e. the House [or School] of Hillel. He is particularly well rememberedfor his kindness, his generosity, and his care and concern for all peoples.For example, when asked by a Gentile to teach him the Torah, it was hewho said, “What is hateful to you, do not to your neighbour; that is the wholeTorah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it” (B. Talmud,Shabbat 31a). Notice how similar this insight was to what Yeshua said anumber of years later. “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that menshould do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law [Torah] and theprophets [Nevi’im]” (Mattityahu/Matthew 7:12).
Hillel and Sha’ul
One of Hillel’s many responsibilities was to preserve and safeguard theteachings of his fathers. In this regard, he is recognized as the first one whopreserved in written form, seven key principles for correctly interpretingScripture. Collectively, they are known as the Seven Rules of Hillel.But what possible relevance could these rules have to us today? To begin toanswer that question, we should realize that the “Gamaliel” mentioned inMa’aseh Sh’lichim [Acts of the Apostles] was Hillel’s grandson and spiritualheir. As such, he was charged with the responsibility of continuing to run theschool founded by his grandfather.It was this Gamaliel who taught moderation with the Notzrim. In the earlydays that followed the death and resurrection of Yeshua, some of theapostles had been imprisoned. Some had suggested that the apostles beexecuted for spreading heresy in the name of Yeshua. Luqa [Luke] wrotethe following as he described what happened. “Then stood there up one inthe council [Sanhedrin], a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law,had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostlesforth a little space; And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed toyourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men. For before thesedays rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom anumber of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; andall, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought. Afterthis man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew awaymuch people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyedhim, were dispersed. And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, andlet them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come tonought: But if it be of Elohim, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be foundeven to fight against Elohim” (Ma’aseh/Acts 5:34-39). A wise man indeed!One wonders just how sympathetic he was to the Notzrim in other situationsas well. But, even more interesting is the fact that Sha’ul [Paul] said that he
 
G'zerah Gezerah Shavah, Second Rule of Hillel, Hillel, Paul, Sha'ul, ...http://www.haderek.ca/articles/way/gzerahshavah1.htm2 of 514/03/2009 3:00 PM
learned the Torah in Beit Hillel, specifically being one of Gamaliel’sstudents. “I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia,yet brought up in this city [Yerushalayim] at the feet of Gamaliel, and taughtaccording to the perfect manner of the law [Torah] of the fathers, and waszealous toward Elohim, as ye all are this day (Ma’aseh/Acts 22:3).Clearly, since Sha’ul was taught by Gamaliel, he would have been taughtboth the Written Torah as well as the Oral Torah—what he called the“perfect manner of the Torah of the fathers.” Therefore, if we want tounderstand theKethuvei Notzrim[Writings of the Nazarenes] so that wemay better match our lives to its teachings, we need to understand howthose authors thought. That way, we can understand what they reallymeant. For example, in Sha’ul’s last letter before his execution, he wrote thefollowing to Timothy. “Study to shew thyself approved unto Elohim, aworkman [labourer] that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing theword of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).What did he mean by stating that a labourer needs to “rightly divide theword of truth”? Considering that Sha’ul was a talmid of Gamaliel, he wasprobably referring to the Seven Rules of Hillel, the “industry standard” forcorrectly interpreting, i.e. “rightly dividing,” Scripture, i.e. “the word of truth.”If this is so, then we would expect to see the Rules of Hillel used by him aswell as by other authors of the Kethuvei Notzrim.
G’zerah Shavah
: The Second Rule of Hillel
The Second Rule of Hillel is known as
g’zerah shavah 
.
 
Literally,
g’zerah shavah 
means “an equal ruling” or “an equivalent expression.” The JewishEncyclopedia defines a
g’zerah shavah 
as an “argument from analogy.Biblical passages containing synonyms or homonyms are subject, howevermuch they differ in other respects, to identical definitions andapplications.”[1]Therefore, a
g’zerah shavah 
is a word association wherein similar wordsfrom different verses are associated with each other in order to reason byanalogy. In so doing, the meaning and related context from one verse isthen imported into the other. That may
sound 
complicated, but in practice itis really not that difficult to understand at all. We will illustrate the
g’zerah shavah 
by using examples.
Were Shemu’el and Yochanan Nazarites?
In Bemidbar/Numbers 6:1-5, we find the Torah’s main regulation regardingthe Nazarite vow. “And YHVH spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto thechildren of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shallseparate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselvesunto YHVH: He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shalldrink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drinkany liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried. All the days of hisseparation shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from thekernels even to the husk. All the days of the vow of his separation thereshall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in the which heseparateth himself unto YHVH, he shall be set-apart, and shall let the locksof the hair of his head grow.”Clearly, we know of at least one Nazarite in Scripture. He is specificallymentioned as such in Shofetim/Judges 13:2-5. “And there was a certainman of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; andhis wife was barren, and bare not. And the angel of YHVH appeared unto
 
G'zerah Gezerah Shavah, Second Rule of Hillel, Hillel, Paul, Sha'ul, ...http://www.haderek.ca/articles/way/gzerahshavah1.htmof 514/03/2009 3:00 PM
the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearestnot: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son. Now therefore beware, I praythee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing:For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on hishead: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto Elohim from the womb: and heshall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.” As you know,this son was given the name Shimshon [Samson].Notice the similarity of expressions between this account and the initialaccount of the Nazarite in Bemidbar/Numbers 6. In Bemidbar 6 we have,“drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink,” and in Shofetim 13 wehave, “drink not wine nor strong drink.” Again, in Bemidbar 6 we have, “thereshall no razor come upon his head,” and in Shofetim 13 we have, “no razorshall come on his head.” Now, in this specific example, the account inShofetim 13 explicitly states that “the child shall be a Nazarite,” but what ifthe text had not explicitly stated that? Would we have understood that thechild Shimshon was born to be a Nazarite?To highlight this question, let us consider events that took place before thebirth of Shemu’el ha-Navi [Samuel the prophet]. Channah [Hannah],Shemu’el’s mother-to-be was barren. “So Channah rose up after they hadeaten in Shiloh, and after they had drunk. Now Eli the priest sat upon a seatby a post of the temple [palace] of YHVH. And she was in bitterness of soul,and prayed unto YHVH, and wept sore. And she vowed a vow, and said, OYHVH of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid,and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but wilt give unto thinehandmaid a man child, then I will give him unto YHVH all the days of his life,and there shall no razor come upon his head. And it came to pass, as shecontinued praying before YHVH, that Eli marked her mouth. Now Hannah,she spake in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice was not heard:therefore Eli thought she had been drunken. And Eli said unto her, Howlong wilt thou be drunken? put away thy wine from thee. And Channahanswered and said, No, my master, I am a woman of a sorrowful spirit: Ihave drunk neither wine nor strong drink, but have poured out my soulbefore YHVH” (Shemu’el Aleph/1 Samuel 1:9-15).Can you see the similarities in wording between this account and the otherones? Here, we are specifically told that “there shall no razor come upon hishead.” Why would Channah say that? Using the principle of
g’zerah shavah 
,we understand that the intent and context of the Nazarite vow in Bemidbar 6is to be imported into this story. And if that is not enough, consider thefollowing. What possible relevance is there in knowing that Channah statedthat she had “drunk neither wine nor strong drink”? If we consider theaccount of the Nazarite vow, an answer comes into sharp focus. In order forShemu’el to be born a Nazarite, she needed to ensure that her womb wasproperly prepared so that, not even a drop of alcohol would make its wayacross the placenta into the baby’s bloodstream.Therefore, even though we are not explicitly told anywhere that Shemu’elwas a Nazarite, if we correctly use the principle of
g’zerah shavah 
, we mayconclude that he was a Nazarite even from birth—just as Shimshon.Now, what about Yochanan ha-Matbil [John the Baptist]? We are neverdirectly told that he was a Nazarite, yet does Luqa give us clues? In Luqa1:13-15, we read the following account of what an angel told Yochanan’sfather-to-be. “But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zachariah: for thyprayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shaltcall his name Yochanan [John]. And thou shalt have joy and gladness; andmany shall rejoice at his birth. For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord,and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with
ruach ha-qodesh 
[the set-apart spirit], even from his mother’s womb.”
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...