Misplaced Pages

RabbiNathan ben Abraham
Mishnah Commentary of Rabbi Nathan
Title	President of the Academy
Personal life
Born	נתן בן אברהם late 10th century CE Jund Filastin district, Bilad al-Sham province, Fatimid Caliphate
Died	circa 1051 CE Jund Filastin district, Bilad al-Sham province, Fatimid Caliphate
Parent	Abraham (father)
Religious life
Religion	Judaism
Profession	Rabbi

Nathan ben Abraham, known also by the epithet President of the Academy (Hebrew: רבינו נתן אב הישיבה) in the Land of Israel (died ca. 1045 – 1051), was an 11th-century rabbi and exegete of the Mishnah who lived in Ramla, in the Jund Filastin district of the Fatimid Caliphate. He was the author of the first known commentary covering the entire Mishnah.

Biography

A critical analysis of the time-frame in which the author of the Judeo-Arabic Mishnah commentary lived places him in the early 11th century. Assaf suggests that he was Rabbi Nathan the second, the son of Rabbi Abraham who was called the Pious, a contemporary of Rabbi Abiathar, who served in the geonate of the Land of Israel in 1095 CE. This view has been rejected by more recent scholars, such as Gil (1983), Friedman (1990), Danzig (1998), Amar (2011) and Fox (1994), who put him two generations earlier. In around 1011, Nathan travelled to Qayrawan, to attend to his family inheritance, and while there he studied under the illustrious Rabbi Hushiel ben Elhanan, one of the greatest Jewish scholars of the time. During this time he would travel to Fustat (Old Cairo), in Egypt, where he had certain business engagements, and where it was that he'd meet his future wife, the daughter of Mevorakh ben Eli, a wealthy citizen of Fustat. Nearing the age of forty, he returned to his native Palestine and, after settling in Ramleh where he vied with the Gaon Solomon ben Judah of Jerusalem between the years 1038 and 1051 over the position of gaon, he was eventually appointed the Av Beit Din (President of the court) in Palestine, a position only second to that of the gaon, and which post he held until his death. During his years of public service, Rabbi Nathan had garnered the support and backing of Diaspora communities, although Solomon ben Judah had secured the backing of the local community, as well as the Fatimid governor of Ramleh. In Palestine, he compiled a commentary on the Mishnah, which commentary enjoyed widespread circulation in the Jewish world in the late 12th and early 13th centuries.

Commentary

Rabbi Nathan's work is one of the first known commentaries of the Mishnah, ranking with that of Rabbi Hai Gaon's commentary on Seder Taharot in the Mishnah (and is the oldest existing commentary encompassing the entire Six Orders of the Mishnah). Scholars have ascribed this commentary a unique significance, saying that by virtue of its composition in the Land of Israel, its interpretations are believed to embody an unbroken Palestinian-Jewish tradition on the meanings of difficult words. The treatise also sheds light on the diachrony of Hebrew words.

The entire work was rendered into a Hebrew translation by Rabbi Yosef Qafih, with an abridged first edition being published between the years 1955 and 1958, and the second edition in 1965. Even so, the work has not seen widespread circulation.

Anonymous copyist

Nathan's original Judeo-Arabic commentary of the Mishnah served as the basis for a later recension made by a 12th-century anonymous author and copyist, believed to be of Yemenite Jewish provenance. It is doubtful that his work would have survived, had it not been for the faithful copyist, whose innovation was to interweave in the existing text the divergent views held by several geonim and the explanations given by them for words and passages in the Mishnah. The author's introduction reads: "I found the commentaries of Rabbi Nathan, the President of the Academy, for explicating the different language usages in the Mishnah, and I have seen fit to add thereto others besides, drawn from the commentaries of Israel's sages." The anonymous copyist is said to have lived between 1105 – 1170 CE, making him a contemporary with Rabbi Isaac Alfasi and Nathan ben Jehiel of Rome, the author of Sefer Arukh. He is the first to introduce the work as being a commentary of the Mishnah, written by "Rabbeinu Nathan, Av ha-Yeshiva" (the President of the Academy), whom he calls "the son of Abraham ha-Ḥasīd" (Abraham the Pious). This last epithet is believed to have been an error by the copyist, who mistook its true author, Nathan ben Abraham (of the 11th century), with Nathan ben Abraham II, the grandson of the former. He then proceeds to bring down a long introduction wherein he spans the history of the written and oral Laws, writing in Judeo-Arabic and commencing with the words, qāl ğāmiʿuh (= "So said the gatherer ," etc.), covering the Torah's reception at Sinai and how it was transmitted down throughout successive generations, naming some thirteen generations from the time of Israel's return from the Babylonian exile to the time of Rabbi Judah HaNasi who compiled the Mishnah in 189 CE. In all this, he never once mentions his own name, but chooses to remain anonymous. He also explains some of the terminology used in the Talmud, such as when a saying is meant to be understood as an external teaching (Baraitta) outside of the Mishnah, and when it is to be understood as a teaching strictly derived from the Mishnah compiled by Rabbi Judah HaNasi. He then mentions the redaction of the Babylonian Talmud under Rav Ashi as occurring in the year 841 of Seleucid era (corresponding with 530 CE), and names the great exegetes that followed this period, namely: the author of Halakhot Ḳetu'ot and Halakhot Pesuḳot, Rabbi Yehudai Gaon; the author of Halakhot Gedolot, Rabbi Shimon Kiara; the author of the Beramot (a term applied to the book Sheëltot of Rav Aḥai, the Gaon of Shabḥa); Rabbi Hai Gaon; Rabbi Isaac ibn Ghiyyat of Lucena; Rabbi Nissim, the author of Sefer ha-Mafteaḥ, Rabbi Samuel ben Ḥofni, Rabbi Hananel, and Rabbi Isaac Alfasi. A certain book entitled Kitāb al-Ḥāwī ("the Compendium") is cited four times, composed by a certain R. David b. Saadiah.

Three of the author's more extensive commentaries exist for the tractates Berakhot, Shevu'ot and Avot. Since the anonymous copyist makes use of other sources in the original work bequeathed by Rabbi Nathan, it is not uncommon for him to give one explanation for a word in one tractate, but in a different tractate give a different explanation for the same word. The anonymous copyist deviated from the set order of the Mishnah, bringing down the order as follows: (Seder Zera'im) Berakhot, (Seder Mo'ed) 'Eruvin, Pesahim, Sheqalim, Kippurim, Sukkah, Betzah, Rosh Ha-Shannah, Ta'anith, Megillah, Hagiggah, Mo'ed Qatan, etc. Occasionally, the explanation given for a certain word or phrases found in one Mishnaic verse is explained by the author in one of the subsequent verses, such as the teaching about the dried figs and fig-cakes of Mishnah Terumah 2:4 being explained in Mishnah Terumah, chapter 3.

An early reference to Nathan ben Abraham's Mishnah commentary is brought down by Rabbi Moses ben Nahman (1194–1270), who cites the commentary in his own Talmudic commentary, saying: "Likewise, I found written in the glosses of old copies of the Mishnah composed in the Land of Israel where they explained the meaning of sippūq (Heb. ספוק) as having the connotation of adā, in the Arabic tongue, , he that grafts a tree upon a tree." The reference here is to Nathan's commentary in Tractate Orlah (1:5).

Vocabulary

Rabbi Nathan's method of elucidating Hebrew words is mostly similar to that of Maimonides' Mishnah commentary - the two often complementing each other, but differing in several key areas. A comparative study gives readers a glimpse into words that carried different connotations in that period, with occasional words whose identification can have a significant halachic bearing, depending on how they are explained. There are above one-hundred entries of plants mentioned in the Mishnah that have been identified by Rabbi Nathan. In some entries, two different explanations are given for one word, the one perhaps under the authority of another rabbinic sage.

Occasionally, Nathan ben Abraham relates to the practical usages of plants in the Land of Israel and in the region of Syria, writing, for example, that either Judas tree florets (Cercis siliquastrum) (Judeo-Arabic: דאד'י) or violets (Viola odorata) (Judeo-Arabic: אלבנפסג) were placed in flagons of wine to impart their flavor, while rose florets (Rosa) were used to impart flavor to olive oil and to sesame seeds.

Modern Hebrew usages

In Modern Hebrew nomenclature, some of the plant identifications have changed since medieval times. For example, the Modern Hebrew word for cucumber is melafefon (a word formerly used for "melon"). The word kishū’īm (formerly "cucumbers") is now applied to zucchini squash (Cucurbita pepo var. cylindrica), a plant native to the New World. In modern colloquial Hebrew, the word ḥazeret (formerly "lettuce") is now used to denote horseradish (Armoracia rusticana). Karkūm, formerly used in Hebrew to denote only saffron, is now used also for turmeric. Lūf (formerly Arum palaestinum) is now used in modern colloquial Hebrew to denote the broadleaf wild leek (Allium ampeloprasum). Modern botanists in Israel now call Clover (Trifolium) by the name tiltan, which word formerly meant "fenugreek" (Trigonella foenum-graecum). Modern Hebrew now calls cork (Quercus suber) by the name "sha'am," although in Rabbi Nathan's day it had the meaning of "bamboo." Afūnna (der. of afūnnin) is now used in Modern Hebrew as a generic word for all kinds of garden peas, when formerly it was used strictly for chickpeas (Cicer arietinum). Cauliflower is now called krūvīt in Modern Hebrew, but which formerly was known as therūḇtor. In many cases, Arabic names are used to identify plants. Most Hebrew speakers will call the frothy relish made from fenugreek by its Arabic name, ḥilbah. So, too, the biblical hyssop, eizoḇ, is now popularly called by its Arabic name, zaatar. The Arabic word sabōn which is now used for soap (borit) is related to the Aramaic word ṣap̄ona = ܨܦܘܢܐ (soap). In other cases, Eliezer Ben-Yehuda invented new words, such as ḥatzilīm (egg-plants; aubergines), to take the place of Hebrew words long forgotten, but what Nathan ben Abraham understood as being called qīnras.

Difficult words

Some referents of Hebrew words have become so entrenched in rabbinic disputes that it is now difficult to ascertain what their original meanings may have been, such as the adjective qamūr (Hebrew: קמור / קמורה), in Mishnah Ohalot 3:7, op. cit. 5:1 and Eruvin 8:10. Rabbi Nathan (Ohalot) explains the word as meaning "plastered," (such as with gypsum and which repels water), but Maimonides explained the same word as meaning "dome-shaped." For one, the mouth of an earthenware oven which projected outside the house would be protected from the elements by virtue of its dome-like structure, while, for the other, because of its plastering. R. Hai Gaon explained it differently, saying that qamūr was an opening built at its base near to the ground so that the influx of air will cause the fire to burn well, in the case of the oven, or allow for a drainage pipe to air out.

Modern discovery

The manuscript was retrieved in ca. 1927 by Rabbi Yihya al-Qafih, from the place used by the Jewish community in Sana'a to bury old and worn-out sacred literature (genizah), within the Jewish cemetery itself on the outskirts of the city. Three copies were made of the original manuscript, before it was sold to a certain Shelomo Halevi Busani (later of Tel-Aviv), who, in turn, sold the manuscript to the Schechter Library in New York. Today, the original manuscript is housed at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, under JTS Rab. 1492. One of the three remaining copies, copied in 1930 by Qafih's grandson, was acquired by the Hebrew University library, from which a comprehensive study was made of the text by Professor Simcha Assaf who published his findings in the periodical Kiryat Sefer, in 1933.

The British Museum possesses a partial copy of Nathan ben Abraham's Judeo-Arabic commentary of the Mishnah (with only the Mishnaic Orders of Zera'im, Mo'ed and Neziqin).

Among the manuscripts and incunabula collected by David Solomon Sassoon is a two-page Judeo-Arabic copy of the Introduction taken from Rabbi Nathan's commentary, believed to have been singled-out because of its more profound nature. Rabbi Yosef Qafih has provided a Hebrew translation of the Introduction in the Mishnah published by El ha-Meqorot.

Publications

The earliest modern-day printing of Rabbi Nathan's work came in 1955, when the El Meqorot publishers of Jerusalem printed the Hebrew translation of Rabbi Nathan's commentary, yet only as a supplement to other commentaries. In 1958, the same publishers published a single edition, edited by Mordechai Yehuda Leib Sachs. A third edition was published by them in 1965. The Harry Fischel Institute in Jerusalem published the Mishnaic order of Zera'im. In 1973, Me'orot publishers of Jerusalem published an edition of the commentary, although it too was not an exclusive edition, but incorporated other commentaries.

See also

• Palestinian Gaonate
• Talmudic Academies in Syria Palaestina
• List of native plants of Flora Palaestina (A-B)
• List of native plants of Flora Palaestina (C-D)
• List of native plants of Flora Palaestina (E-O)
• List of native plants of Flora Palaestina (P-Z)
• Wild edible plants of Israel / Palestine

References

1. ^ Friedman, Mordechai A. (1990a), p. 44
2. Assaf, S. (1933–1934), p. 383; Encyclopaedia Judaica (3rd edition), vol. 12, Jerusalem 1974, s.v. Nathan Ben Abraham II; Pirushei ha-Rishonim (Tamid - part 1), Benei Barak 2001
3. Friedman, M. (1990a), p. 44 , note 37
4. Gil, Moshe (1983), pp. 582–583, 604.
5. Stillman, N.A. (2010), pp. 558–559
6. Encyclopaedia Judaica (3rd edition), vol. 12, Jerusalem 1974, p. 858 (s.v. Nathan ben Abraham I).
7. Friedman, M. (1990a), p. 43 , note 37
8. Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 11
9. Besides the Harry Fischel Institute that has reprinted sections of the invaluable work, namely, the entire Mishnaic Order known as Zera'im (Seeds), the commentary is relatively unknown among the Yeshivas.
10. Schlossberg, E. (2005), p. 281
11. Assaf, Simcha (Kiryat Sefer 1933) presumes that the copyist and redactor lived between the years 1105 CE and 1170 CE, based on the fact that the last of the exegetes mentioned by the copyist is Rabbi Isaac Alfasi (1013–1103), while not mentioning at all in his work the explanations given by Maimonides (born 1135), who also compiled a Judeo-Arabic commentary on the Mishnah (see: Nathan ben Abraham (1955), vol. 1, Preface written by Mordecai Yehudah Leib Sachs, appended at the end of the book).
12. Such is the opinion of Rabbi Yosef Qafih and others, based on the author's choice of Arabic words and which tend to show a dialect of Arabic used in Yemen, as well as the manuscript's place of discovery, viz. Yemen. However, this conclusion is not agreed upon by all, since many of the words brought down by Qafih to prove this point and which, according to him, are of a "pure" Yemeni dialect, are also Arabic words used in Iraq. Simcha Assaf, however, has presumed that the copyist was originally from Egypt.
13. Qafih, Y. (2018), pp. 28–29
14. Nathan ben Abraham (1955), vol. 1, p. 13 (end of introduction), appended at the end of the book.
15. Assaf, S. (1933–1934), pp. 383–384
16. Such is the conclusion reached by a host of scholars, as mentioned by Zohar Amar (2011).
17. Assaf, S. (1955), pp. 319–322 (= Kiryat Sefer, X , 542–545); Friedman, Mordechai A. (1990a), p. 41 –42 . Simcha Assaf and Mordechai A. Friedman are in dispute over whether it was Rabbi Nathan or his Yemenite copyist who quotes from R. David.
18. vide Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashannah 10a
19. See: Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 13 (note 24), who brings down the classic example of one of the five grains, shibbolet shu'al (Heb. שבולת שועל), mentioned in Mishnah Pesahim 2:5 and in Mishnah Menahot 10:7, whose leaven is prohibited during Passover. While the Talmudic exegete, Rashi, holds this to be oats, and Maimonides holds it to be a type of "wild barley," Nathan ben Abraham (1955) called it by its Arabic name sunbulat al-tha'alib (Fox's spike). Another one of the five grains whose leaven is prohibited at Passover is the shiffon (Heb. שיפון), which Nathan ben Abraham (1955) explains in Mishnah Menahot 10:7 as meaning al-sāfeh (Judeo-Arabic: אלסאפה) and which word, according to Amar, is synonymous with the Arabic word dowsir (Ar. دوسر) - i.e. either one of the cultivated oats (Avena sativa) or Ovate goatgrass (Aegilops geniculata). It is to be noted that Rashi, in his commentary on the Babylonian Talmud (Pesahim 35a), thought that the Hebrew word shiffon meant שיגל"א (= seigle), or what is actually rye (Secale cereale), a grain crop that is not endemic to Israel.
20. Compiled by Nathan ben Jehiel of Rome (c. 1035 – 1106)
21. Epstein (1945), pp. 77–82 thinks that the work here cited in the name of Rabbi Hai Gaon was actually written by Simeon Kayyara in the geonic period.
22. Also in Mishnah Ma'aserot 1:3.
23. The word al-’inğāṣ (Judeo-Arabic: אלאנג'אץ) is now commonly used to describe a "pear tree." In Yemen, however, the word al-’inğāṣ was used solely for plum (Prunus domestica). See Rabbi Yosef Qafih's comment on this matter in Maimonides (1963–1967), vol. 1, s.v. Kila'im 1:4, note 34.
24. Schlossberg, Eliezer (1993), p. 148, brings down the words of Rabbi Isaac ben Melchizedek of Siponto (c. 1090–1160), one of the earliest commentators on the Mishnah (only Seder Zera'im survives), who wrote: "’Iğûs , the Arabic word is written with a ṣâd (ץ) at the end, but when people ceased to distinguish between the stressed consonant (צ) and the vowel shuraq that is sounded-out before the semakh (ס), it has caused the interchanging of these consonantal sounds one with the other."
25. Ibn al-'Awwam, the 12-century Andalusian author of The Book on Agriculture (Kitāb al-Filāḥa), vol. 1, chapter 7, article 42, like Maimonides, explains that plums were called in Arabic by the name al-’inğāṣ [sic], adding that this fruit was also known by them under the name ʻiyūn al-baqar, meaning, "bull's eye." Cf. Rabbeinu Hananel's commentary (11th-century) on Babylonian Talmud (Berakhot 39a), where he uses the same description to describe the Damascene plum (damson). Ibn al-'Awwam, however, clearly disagreed with Maimonides' identification of this fruit as being called "al-barqūq," writing in the above work (1802, p. 336 of vol. 1, chapter 7, article 40) that "al-barqūq" had the connotation of apricot (Spanish: albaricoque), also known as the "Armenian apple tree," or what is also called "meshmesh" in Arabic.
26. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 39–40.
27. In the above diachronic analysis, Maimonides informs his readers that, in the Maghreb, the name of this fruit tree had changed in meaning over the years. In the Maghreb, אגס was understood as meaning Plum (Prunus domestica) . This view, however, stands in direct contradiction to an old midrashic work, Alpha Beta la-Ben Sira, where it lists thirty or so trees that were planted by the First Man in Babylonia; ten of which fruits are eaten whole, ten of which are eaten only in their outer fleshy part (mesocarp), but whose inner kernels (endocarp) are discarded, and ten of which fruits are eaten only in their inner, fleshy parts, but whose outer husks are discarded. There, it states explicitly that the אגס was among the fruit eaten whole; hence: "pear" as explained by most commentators. Had the אגס been a plum, as Maimonides alleges, it would have been named in the midrashic work in a different category.
28. ^ Hai Gaon (1924), Mishnah Uktzin 1:6
29. Kapah, E. (2007), p. 22
30. The Mishnah, with Maimonides' Commentary, Nega'im 14:6
31. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 43.
32. Cites Hebrew sources, without explaining what the herb is.
33. Also in Mishnah Ohelot 8:1.
34. Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 14
35. Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 44–45. Amar (ibid.) thinks that the original Judeo-Arabic word may have been related, etymologically, to the Iris plant: sisan (= iris) + bar (= wild). In any rate, according to Amar, Maimonides held the "erus" to be a type of "wide-leaved mint," rather than the iris plant itself, since the upper stem of the "erus" plant exists in both winter and summer, unlike the iris that exists for the most part only in winter. According to Amar, the Arabic word sayasnabir was used in the Middle-Ages to describe various plants of the family Lamiaceae. In some Arabic dictionaries, the name is applied to wild bergamot mint (Mentha aquatica var. citrata).
36. Rabbi Solomon Sirilio, in his commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im 5:7), explains: “Erusa. In the Arukh it has been explained as susimbro (Sisymbrium officinale ?), in a foreign language, they being kinds of condiments that are put in the cooked dish, although others explain that it is an herb; whenever it yields seed the seed rattles as a sort of bell, this being the principal .” Cf. Smith, William (1872), p. 899, who writes on the sisymbrium (σισύμριον): "...there can be no doubt that it was a species of mint, probably the Mentha sylvestris, as Anguillara contends. The other species is unquestionably the Nasturtium officinale, or Water-cress." Ibn al-Baitar (1989), p. 186, wrote that this plant was the water-cress (Nasturtium officinale). Cf. Geoponika (1806), p. 131, who brings down a description of the plant sisymbrium.
37. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Ohelot 8:1. Rabbi Hai Gaon's explanation follows the explanation given in the Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im, end of chapter 5), which, in the Leiden MS. of the Jerusalem Talmud, is written as אירסיה. The Vatican MS. of a late 13th-century, early 14th-century copy of the Jerusalem Talmud (Vat. ebr. 133) , however, writes in the margin for the same word אירוסה.
38. Cf. Tosefta Demai 4:5
39. The sense here is to a concoction made from boiling the stripped leaves and stalks of vegetables (still in the ground), used medicinally, but especially for warding off the effects of drunkenness. Not to be confused with the vegetable Asparagus officinalis, although derived from its Greek name.
40. Maimonides (1965), vol. 2, s.v. Nedarim 6:8 (p. 97).
41. See frame f.6r in Sefer ῾Arukh - A talmudic lexicon, s.v. אספרגוס, British Library (Add MS 26881). The author of the Arukh brings down this teaching in the name of Rabbi Hai Gaon. Compare the Tosefta (Demai 4:5) which states: "Rabbi Jose says: Karūb whose stripped edges were taken up to make thereof asparagos and to be discarded thereafter are permitted (i.e. without the necessity of separating therefrom the Demai tithe)."
42. The original source is now unknown, but cited by the author of Sefer Arukh, Rabbi Nathan ben Jehiel, s.v. אספרגוס.
43. Also in Mishnah Peah 3:3; Kila'im 3:2; Tevul Yom.
44. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 47–48.
45. Also in Mishnah Nega'im 2:1.
46. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 51.
47. Sefer Arukh, s.v. אשכרע, British Library (Add MS 26881).
48. Hai Gaon (1924), Mishnah Nega'im 2:1
49. ' Sefer Arukh, s.v. בכריא (the word כנגר is corrected to read בנגר), British Library (Add MS 26881).
50. Also in Mishnah Shabbat 9:5.
51. “a generic term for several kinds of saltwort”
52. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 53.
53. Sefer Arukh, s.v. אהל (describing borith)
54. Hai Gaon (1924), p. 114 (note 25), on Mishnah Niddah 9:6. According to Jastrow's Dictionary, this is an Aramaic word meaning "an alkali used for cleansing."
55. Also in Mishnah Avodah Zarah 1:5 and in Demai 1:1
56. According to Mordechai Yehuda Leib Sachs, one opinion states that the first man, Adam, and his wife, Eve, had eaten from the fruit of the banana tree, and that it is alluded to in the Talmud (end of Berakhot 40a) when it speaks of "figs" being the fruit that they were commanded not to eat, insofar that many years ago they used to call bananas by the name of "figs of Eve" (A Commentary of the Six Orders of the Mishnah, vol. 1, p. 48, note 1). According to Feliks, Jehuda (1973:175), "banot-shūaḥ" have a ripening period of three-years. Andrew Watson, in his work The Arab Agricultural Revolution (1974), proposed that bananas were only lately introduced into the Mediterranean regions by the Arabs between the 8th and 12th centuries CE, but there is no real evidence for this claim.
57. In yet another place, Maimonides explains the fruit banoth shuaḥ as "a kind of white figs who produce fruit once in every three years" (Amar, Z. (2015), p. 165).
58. Also in Mishnah Baba Bathra 2:11, et al.
59. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 161–162.
60. Sefer Arukh, s.v. צילצי, British Library (Add MS 26881).
61. Rabbi Nathan's description of this word follows that of the Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 40b, where it is described as “the very last (late-ripening) grapes on the vine.” The same view is held by the great commentator on the Jerusalem Talmud, Rabbi Moses Margolies.
62. Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 57–58.
63. Amar thinks that the sense here is to Florence fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), being the identification given for this plant in the Jerusalem Talmud (Demai 1:1). The same view is held by the great commentator on the Jerusalem Talmud, Rabbi Solomon Sirilio, who calls it "fennel" (Sp. hinojo).
64. Widespread vine species in Emilia, which produces a black grape with a sour taste, with which the homonymous red or rosé wines are obtained
65. It stands to reason from Rabbi Nathan's explanation that although this fruit is merely a cultivar of melon, it was facetiously called in the Hebrew tongue an "Egyptian gourd," or "Egyptian pumpkin," by way of belittling the fruit's outward appearance. The teaching in Mishnah Kila'im 1:5 comes to warn about the "Egyptian gourd" being a diverse kind with the Grecian gourd (Lagenaria vulgaris), although they are similar in taste
66. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 64.
67. Variant spellings, עוזרד; חזרור
68. According to this opinion, "ḥuzrad" is another cultivar of pear. While the Mishnah in Kila'im 1:4 mentions grafting a cultivar of pear known as "krustemelo" with the native pear, it says nothing about the allowance of other pear cultivars. The Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im 1:4) questions what would happen if the scion of a different cultivar of pear were grafted onto the native pear. The question was answered by bringing down a case where the people in the vicinity of Arieh were grafting a scion of apples onto a cultivar of pear known as "ḥuzrad," and when they were confronted by a certain disciple who said that they were not permitted to do so, they immediately cut down the tree. Upon inquiry, they learnt that they did right in cutting down the tree, since their grafting was done with diverse kinds, in direct violation of the Torah. However, to take the scion of the tree "ḥuzrad," and to graft it onto the rootstock of a native pear (Hebrew: אגס), it is permissible and does not come under the biblical prohibition of diverse kinds.
69. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 76.
70. Sefer Arukh, s.v. חזרר, British Library (Add MS 26881).
71. Also in Mishnah Pesahim 2:6; Uktzin 1:2, et al.
72. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 77.
73. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 1:2
74. Identity uncertain. The Mishnah seems to be referring to the root of such a plant, and which root is not used as livestock fodder, nor for human consumption. In Tosefta Kila'im 3:12 a teaching states that it is forbidden to maintain this plant in a vineyard, because of the prohibition of diverse kinds. Zohar Amar, in Rabbi Yosef Kafiḥ's Notebook on the Plants of the Mishna (Jerusalem 2005, p. 43, note 47), writes in the name of 'Aissa, p. 89, that the name al-rāziq is "one of the names given for the cotton plant." The word rāziq, in some dialects of Arabic, refers to the leaves of a plant that are said to resemble sage, with the same medicinal properties, but more bitter, used as an infusion in teas and drunk to help soothe upset stomachs. The leaves are said to be thick like those of sage (Salvia).
75. In the Jerusalem Talmud (Shevi'it, ch. 7) it was asked: "What are ḥalbiṣin (חלביצין)?" To which question, the answer was given: "They are the eggs of neṣ ḥalab (נץ חלב)." This too is explained by Solomon Sirilio as meaning, "the egg-shaped roots of the neṣ ḥalab."
76. A word synonymous with הרגילה of Mishnah Shevi'it 7:1.
77. The reference here probably to the yellow inflorescence of Portulaca oleracea.
78. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 79–80.
79. Sefer Arukh, s.v. חלגלוגות
80. Hai Gaon (1924), p. 143 (on Mishnah Uktzin 3:2).
81. Variant spelling, חמם.
82. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 83.
83. Hai Gaon (1924), Mishnah Uktzin 3:5
84. Also in Mishnah Kila'im 1:5; Peah 3:2; Shevi'it 9:1; Ma'aserot 4:6, et al.
85. ^ Amar, Z. 2015, p. 86.
86. Cites Hebrew source, without explaining what the plant is.
87. Variant spelling: חרחבינא
88. Modern Arab lexicographers have explained al-ḥandaqūq / al-ḥindaqūq as being of the Legume family of plants (Fabaceae, also called Leguminosae), and which word in Arabic applies to various species of clover. See: Kapah, E. (2007), p. 48.
89. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 88.
90. It is important to note, in the case of this herb, that there are two different stages of development: the young stage in which the leaves are green and large and edible, and the mature stage in which the plant becomes thorny without any resemblance to its first appearance.
91. ^ Cites Hebrew sources, without explaining what the vegetable is.
92. Also in Mishnah Uktzin 3:5
93. Amar & Kapah 2011b, pp. 14–15.
94. The species of safflower which is most common in the Land of Israel is Carthamus tenuis
95. Amar, Z. (2011b), pp. 14–15, thinks that there may have been a copyist error here, where instead of writing כ'רנע, the word for Safflower in the Yemenite dialect, the copyist wrote כ'רוע, meaning, castor bean plant.
96. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 89.
97. Hai Gaon (1924), p. 143 (on Mishnah Uktzin 3:5).
98. Also in Mishnah Tebul Yom 1:2; Peah 5:3; ibid. 6:7
99. Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 91–92; 128. Amar explains that טופח was one of the legumes, similar to Lathyrus; cf. Maimonides' commentary on Mishnah Peah 5:3
100. Maimonides (1963), s.v. Kila'im 1:1 (explained by Qafih as being a subspecies of Lathyrus).
101. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Tebul Yom 1:2
102. The Mishnah specifically speaks about ירבוזין השוטין, literally, "wild yarbūzīn," to distinguish from the cultivated variety. In any case, both are yarbūzīn. Rabbinic literature brings down conflicting opinions as to the identification of this one herb. Rashi, in Sukkah 39b (s.v. הירבוזין) opines that it is הנפל"ש, meaning sorrel (Rumex), and that what all other commentaors understood to mean "wild" (Heb. שוטין) was understood by Rashi to mean "asparagus". Maimonides explains yarbūzīn as meaning a type of wild Goosefoot (Blitum virgatum and Chenopodium murale), to be distinguished from the cultivated variety, Amaranthus blitum var. silvestre. Sefer Arukh and Moses Margolies, in his commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud (Shevi'it 9:1; Ma'aserot 5:3), have explained the yarbūzīn to mean "wild asparagus" (Asparagus aphyllus).
103. Amar, Z. (2000), p. 278. Amar cites Ibn al-Baitar's “Tafsīr Kitāb Diāsqūrīdūs”, who writes that the Greek term for this same herb is blita = (Modern Greek: βλίτα), (Amaranthus blitum var. silvestre). Today, the name is also applied to Goosefoot (Blitum virgatum and Chenopodium murale).
104. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 94.
105. The intent here is to the cultivated variety, although Mishnah Shevi'it 9:1 refers specifically to "wild asparagus" (Asparagus aphyllus), endemic to the Land of Israel.
106. Also in Mishnah Kila'im 1:1; Kila'im 1:9; Peah 8:5; Hallah 1:1, et al.
107. Amar, Z. (2011a), pp. 45–48. According to Amar, the word may also apply to Spelt (Triticum spelta). Amar (ibid.) brings down a description of the grain in Ibn Sidah's 11th century Arabic classical vocabulary, Kitāb al-Muḫaṣṣaṣ (Cairo 1901), the translation of which follows: “Al-'alas ---- a fine wheat whose color is dark brown; very difficult to separate its husks and it cannot be separated except in a mortar. The bread made therefrom is tasty and its flour is like unto qurshiyah (?). The flour produced therefrom is fine, and its spike is fragile; despite which, it produces meager fruit. Some say that the kernels of ʿalas are joined together two by two; they are not separated one from the other until they are pounded in a mortar, being the mahārīs; meaning, one cannot separate the husks from the grain , or pound it . It is like unto wheat in terms of its foliage and stalk.” According to Ibn al-Baitar (1989), pp. 174–175 (item no. 75), the grain known as al-ʿalas may apply to both Triticum dicoccum and Triticum monococcum.
108. This word follows Saadia Gaon's Judeo-Arabic translation of the word כסמת in Exodus 9:32, which he translated as אלכרסנה (= vetch). The 15th-century Bible exegete, Sa'id ben David al-Adeni, who wrote one of the earliest commentaries on Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, has cautioned his readers about confusing כוסמין, i.e. the grain known as wild emmer (Arabic: al-`alas), with אלכרסנה (vetch), saying in chapter 3 of Hil. Berakhot that כוסמין is al-`alas, but it is not אלכרסנה (vetch).
109. Amar, Z. (2015), p. 96. According to Amar (ibid.), Maimonides' intention here is either to Emmer (Triticum dicoccum), or to Spelt (Triticum spelta).
110. The sense here is to the resinous pitch which exudes from the Storax tree (Styrax officinalis); not to be confused with the modern-Arabic word for camphor.
111. It is to be noted that Maimonides' view here mirrors that of Rabbi Saadia Gaon in his Judeo-Arabic translation of Song of Songs 1:14, who explains "a cluster of kofer" as meaning a "cluster of henna."
112. Also mentioned in Mishnah Terumot 11:4; Uktzin 3:2.
113. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 54.
114. The kaf (כ‎) seems to have been interchanged with bet (ב‎), invariably giving a different meaning to the word. Balas, in Arabic, is a type of fig.
115. ^ Cites Hebrew sources, without explaining what the fruit is.
116. Alfasi, I. (1960:38) also explains kelisim as having the connotation of al-anabrud (= pears).
117. Also mentioned in Mishnah Nedarim 6:8
118. The sense here is to קלם (kalim).
119. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 100, 172.
120. The sense here is to the flower from which is extracted the stigmas which are dried and used as a spice. The kind of saffron which is endemic to the Land of Israel is Crocus hyemalis.
121. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 102–103.
122. Hai Gaon (1921), s.v. Kelim 15:2.
123. According to Amar, most scholars today hold that the "luf" of the Mishnah also refers to Arum (Arum palaestinum), which is endemic to the Land of Israel and of the same family as colocasia. The Arum is also called "luf" in the Arabic dialect, of which there are several varieties. See: Amar, Z. (2015), p. 107 (note 494).
124. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 107.
125. According to Amar, in Maimonides' earlier writings he identified this plant with Colocasia antiquorum, but in his later writings he simply wrote that it was "one of the species of onions."
126. Sefer Arukh, s.v. לוף, British Library (Add MS 26881).
127. ^ Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 3:4
128. Variant spelling, לוטם; לוטס.
129. Nathan ben Abraham (1955), who makes note elsewhere in his work that the לטום was believed to be a cross-breed between an oak tree and a terebinth tree. In any rate, from an etymological standpoint, the word has undergone changes in meaning over the years. According to Jastrow, M. (2006), s.v. לטום, the word may have formerly meant a type of tree resin, such as gum-mastic or rosin, although by the 5th-century CE it was understood as being a fruit, and which fits the Talmudic description in Niddah 8a which alludes to all the named products being fruits of trees, excepting קטף. The Aramaic Targum of Onkelos, on Genesis 43:11, translates לט as לטום, and which same biblical word is explained by the Greek LXX as being "stacte," a Greek word meaning any gum resin that exudes in drops from certain trees, such as rosin.
130. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 105–106.
131. Also known as "chard."
132. Nathan ben Abraham (1955), elsewhere in his seminal work, explains leʿunīn as "a variety of chard." Talmudic exegete, Solomon Sirilio, thinks that this may have been spinach.
133. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 108.
134. It is worthy of noting that Talmudic exegete Solomon Sirilio, in his commentary on Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im 1:3) explains that Maimonides understood the meaning of לעונין as implying the Spanish word armuelle, meaning Orache.
135. Sefer Arukh, s.v. לעין, British Library (Add MS 26881)
136. Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 19.
137. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 109.
138. Sefer Arukh, s.v. לפסן, British Library (Add MS 26881)
139. Based on Solomon Sirilio's identification of this word in the Jerusalem Talmud, Kila'im 1:5, where he writes for לפסן = marrubio (מארוביו).
140. Also mentioned in Mishnah Terumot 2:6.
141. Kapah, E. (2007), p. 74. The Hebrew word used here is a Greek loanword, מלפפון (melephephon). The Jerusalem Talmud (Kilayim 1:2) relates an ancient belief that if one were to take a seed from a watermelon and a seed from an apple, and then place them together in an impression made in the earth, the two seeds would fuse together and become diverse kinds. "It is for this reason," says the narrator of the Talmud, "that they call it (i.e. the fruit) by its Greek name, melephephon. The old Greek word for "melon" was actually μήλο = mêlo(n) apple + πεπόν = pépōn melon, meaning literally "apple-shaped melon" (see: Random House Webster's College Dictionary, s.v. melon). This fruit, muskmelon (Cucumis melo), was thought to be a cross-breed between a watermelon and an apple. Maimonides, however, calls "melephephon" in Mishnah Kilayim 1:2 and Terumah 8:6 by the Arabic name, al-khiyyar, meaning "cucumbers" (Cucumis sativus) – far from being anything related to apples and watermelons. On the etymology of this word, see Dalman (2020), pp. 250–251, 334. Today, in Modern Hebrew, the word melephephon is now used to denote "cucumbers," based on Maimonides' identification.
142. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 111.
143. Talmudic exegete, Solomon Sirilio (1485–1554), mentions in his commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im 1:2) that Maimonides explained melephephon to mean in Spanish pepinos = cucumber (Cucumis sativus), which, in the opinion of an early Mishnaic exegete, Rabbi Isaac of Siponto (c. 1090–1160), was really to be identified as “small, round melons” (Cucumis melo), since Rabbi Yehudah in our Mishnah holds that it is a diverse kind in relation to kishūt (a type of cucumber). Moreover, had the melephephon simply been a subspecies of kishūt, explained by Maimonides as having the meaning of al-fakous (Egyptian cucumber = Cucumis melo var. chate), they would not have been considered diverse kinds with respect to each other, similar to a black ox and a white ox that plough together are not considered diverse kinds.
144. Although Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham identifies nefos as being al-jazar (Arabic for carrot / parsnip), he may have actually been referring here to Brassica napus, which vegetable has roots similar to those of carrots (See next two entries under Maimonides and Sefer Arukh).
145. Although the vegetable known as nefos was called by Maimonides by its idiom, "Syrian radish," it was actually not a radish at all, since it is listed in Mishnah Kilaim 1:5 as being a diverse-kind (kila'im) in relation to the true radish (Heb. צנון). Zohar Amar suggests that it may have actually been Brassica napus (see Amar, Z. (2015), p. 113). One is to bear in mind that Brassica napus has roots resembling those of carrots, for which reason medieval Hebraists and philologists would have classified the vegetable as a carrot. It is to be noted, furthermore, that in foliage, Brassica napus and turnip (Brassica rapa) have similar leaves, for which reason they are not considered diverse-kinds with respect to each other.
146. Thus, he explained, in Mishnah Uktzin 1:2.
147. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 114.
148. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 3:2
149. Rabbi Hai Gaon explains neṣ ḥalav (Hebrew: נץ חלב)) as being what is called in Arabic ḥarshuf, variant ḥurfesh, which means artichoke, whose cultivated species (Cynara scolymus) is now allotted to people as ḥurfesh beni adam, while its wild variety (Cynara syriaca) as ḥurfesh el-ḥamir is left for donkeys.
150. Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 19. Such explanation is also found in the Judeo-Arabic lexicon compiled by Rabbi Tanḥum ben Joseph Ha-Yerushalmi (c. 1220–1291), entitled Murshid al-Kafi, where he explains נקלבס as meaning "a very precious type of grass used in worship," but adds that some say that it is "a thing mixed with spices, while others explain its meaning as גוארשן (i.e. millet)."
151. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 114–115.
152. Sefer Arukh, s.v. נקלווס, British Library (Add MS 26881).
153. The Arukh explains that members of the Nasi's family would send this kind of produce to certain of their friends who would leave it to be eaten after the main course of the meal, in which case they would then make a blessing over it before eating it, and another blessing over it after eating it (End Quote). Other rabbis, namely, Solomon Sirilio and Elijah of Fulda (renowned scholars of the Jerusalem Talmud), thought that this produce was none other than "highly-valued dates" from the date-palm tree. See Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aser Sheni 4:1, p. 34a in Oz ve-Hadar edition).
154. ^ Also in Mishnah Shevi'it 8:1 and Ma'aserot 3:9
155. Identity uncertain. However, si'ah (Heb. סיאה) is explained in the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 128a) as having the connotation of the Aramaic word צתרי. This word, in turn, is explained by Payne Smith, J. (1903) in her Thesaurus Syriacus (p. 485, s.v. ܨܬܪܐ) as having the meaning of satureia thymbra, a view shared by Marcus Jastrow (Dictionary of the Targumim, s.v. צתרי), who, citing Immanuel Löw and William Smith, writes that the word has the meaning of Satureia (=savory).
156. ^ Amar, Z. 2015, p. 115.
157. Cf. Rashi's commentary on Babylonian Talmud (Niddah 51a), s.v. סיאה, where he explains this herb as meaning in Old French poliol (=pouliot), or what is in English pennyroyal (Mentha pulegium). Isaac ben Melchizedek, likewise, in his commentary on Mishnah Shevi'it 8:1, explains סיאה as having the Italian meaning of Pòlio, but the Greek meaning of βλήχων (= pennyroyal), although not conclusive. In addition, Ben Melchizedek wrote that others suggest that it is Salvia (Sage), while others say "susimbro".
158. ^ Sefer Arukh, s.v. סאה, British Library (Add MS 26881).
159. According to Pliny the Elder (Natural History, Book XX, ch. XCI), the word Sisymbrium was related to a kind of savory (Latin: thymbraeum). Cf. Smith, William (1872), p. 899, who writes on the sisymbrium (σισύμριον): "...there can be no doubt that it was a species of mint, probably the Mentha sylvestris, as Anguillara contends. The other species is unquestionably the Nasturtium officinale, or Water-cress." Ibn al-Baitar (1989), p. 186, wrote that this plant was the water-cress (Nasturtium officinale).
160. Being a play on words. Where most commentators acknowledge the sense of sinnariyot (Hebrew: סנריות) in the Mishnah, plural for sinnaria, to be a kind of wild vegetable, Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham digresses and explains the sense as meaning the outfit sīnar worn by women, and which was enacted by decree of Ezra the Scribe to be worn by all women (Baba Kama 82a). According to this explanation, when women who wear such outfits cease to be seen harvesting wild vegetables in the Beit Netofa Valley during the Seventh Year, that is when all other vegetables gathered during that same year must be discarded from the house, under the Seventh Year laws of removal.
161. Sefer Arukh, s.v. סנר, British Library (Add MS 26881).
162. The great mishnaic exegetes Isaac ben Melchizedek, Solomon Sirilio and Shlomo Adeni have all cited the Arukh and its explanation of this Hebrew word. German orientalist Gustaf Dalman (2013:350) notes that an edible wild thistle, known to the Arabs by the name sinnāria, and which in modern taxonomy is called Scolymus maculatus (Spotted golden thistle), grows in Palestine and was sometimes eaten raw.
163. According to Z. Amar, al-aqṭan in the Yemeni dialect is mung bean.
164. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 116.
165. ^ Sefer Arukh, s.v. פול, British Library (Add MS 26881).
166. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 117.
167. Sefer Arukh, s.v. עדל, British Library (Add MS 26881).
168. Variant spelling: סיטרג זרקופת
169. Also in Mishnah Kila'im 1:4
170. In some texts, there is a variant spelling, עוזרד; עזרר
171. According to Bos (2016), p. 200, citing Jonah ibn Janah, the zu'rūr is the medlar (Mespilus germanica)
172. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 118.
173. Sefer Arukh, s.v. עזרר, British Library (Add MS 26881).
174. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 1:6
175. Also mentioned in Babylonian Talmud, Betza 34a, and in the Midrash Rabba (Genesis Rabba §20).
176. ^ Amar, Z. 2015, p. 121.
177. See Dalman (2020), pp. 377–378, who writes of the ʻakkābiyyōt mentioned in Mishnah Uktzin 3:2 that "the Hebrew name points to Arabic ʻakkūb, thus to Gundelia tournefortii, which in Palestine is also named kaʻūb." It is a wild, edible thorn that is still widely eaten in Palestine (aka Israel) today.
178. On the ʻakkabit, see Dalman (2013), pp. 349, 356.
179. Sefer Arukh, s.v. עכביות, British Library (Add MS 26881).
180. Also in Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 2:3. The words, עץ שמן, not only appear in the Mishnah, but also in the Hebrew Bible, in three places: Isaiah 41:19, I Kings 6:23, and Nehemiah 8:15.
181. The Arabic word, al-ṣanawbar, may also refer to any of the other pine nut bearing trees, such as the Pinus pinea. Some Talmudic scholars thought that עץ שמן was to be identified with oleaster (Elaeagnus angustifolia), based on an earlier Greek translation of one of the Apocryphal books, but Amar, Z. (2012), pp. 167–168, contends that this identification is in error, since the tree is very rare in Israel, and can only be found in a valley near Akko and in the Mount Hermon region. Moreover, Amar cites a reference to the עץ שמן in the Jerusalem Talmud (Rosh Hashanah 2:3), where it says that the tree is the same as the dadanim, a Greek loan-word said to have the meaning of Pinus.
182. Sefer Arukh, s.v. עץ, British Library (Add MS 26881).
183. Also in Mishnah Shevi'it 7:2
184. Variant spellings: ערקבנין and עקרבלין.
185. Amar, Z. (2015), p. 122, who writes that this plant is Hart's tongue, having the taxonomic name of Phyllitis sagittata, which is a synonym for Scolopendrium hemionitis. Amar's identification follows that of Ibn al-Baitar (1989), chapter 3, section 129 (p. 258), who identifies the asplênos mentioned in Dioscorides' Materia Medica (Book 3, § 121) with what is called in Arabic ʿaqrabān, which is hart's tongue (Scolopendrium vulgare). Ishtori Haparchi (1280–1355), in his seminal work Kaftor Vaferach (vol. 3), Chapter 48, Jerusalem 1999, p. 172, also brings down the Spanish name for the plant עקרבן, which he calls סקולו פנדריון (Scolo pendrion).
186. Sefer Arukh, s.v. אצווה, British Library (Add MS 26881). In the printed edition of Sefer Arukh, published in Venice in year 1531, the words, "being aṭan in the Arabian tongue," were added by a later hand at the end of its description, a plant identified with the Creeping Thistle (Cirsium arvense), and other related thistles, such as the Silver Thistle (Carduus argentatus).
187. Amar, Z.; Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 16
188. Cf. Dalman (2020), p. 314
189. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 124–125.
190. Also in Mishnah Uktzin 1:2 and Kila'im 1:8
191. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 129–130.
192. Sefer Arukh, s.v. פגם, British Library (Add MS 26881).
193. Thus explained by Rabbi Hai Gaon in his commentary on Mishnah Uktzin, chapter 1:2
194. Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 16
195. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 130.
196. The author's opinion here is supported also by a Cairo Geniza document where "peragin" are said to have a growing period of six-months before they become edible; See Feliks, Jehuda (1973:165), where Prof. Jehuda Feliks argues effectively in favor of this identity, saying that the Mishnah (Shevi'it 2:7) clearly states that "peragin" are able to take root before Rosh Hashanah, which would mean that the "peragin" are a summer crop, rather than a winter crop. Moreover, peragin are mentioned alongside of rice, millet and sesame, and that all of them are plants that grow in the summer months, which would rule out peragin as being poppy seeds (Papaver somniferum) since the genus known as Papaver grow in the winter months. Moreover, he notes that in the Syriac language, the word peraga = ܦܪܓܐ means "a type of millet" (cf. Payne-Smith, Syriac Lexicon, p. 457), and since the growing season for peragin in the Genizah manuscript is given at six-months, it would eliminate ordinary millet (Panicum miliaceum) and Setaria italica whose growing seasons are merely at two months. Sorghum vulgare does, however, have a growing season of six months.
197. Andrew Watson, in his work The Arab Agricultural Revolution (1974), proposed that sorghum was only lately introduced into the Mediterranean regions by the Arabs between the 8th and 12th centuries CE, but there is no real evidence for this claim.
198. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 132.
199. Also in Mishnah Ma'aserot 1:3; Uktzin 1:6.
200. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 132–133.
201. Sefer Arukh, s.v. פריש, British Library (Add MS 26881).
202. Variant spelling, פתילת האידן.
203. Sefer Arukh, s.v. עמר, British Library (Add MS 26881).
204. Literally: "desert wick," and which is explained in the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 20b) as having the meaning in Aramaic of שברא (Aramaic: shavra), and which word has been explained in J. Payne Smith's Syriac Dictionary as: "Peganum harmala, Syrian rue used for wicks, a wick."
205. Amar, Z. (2015), p. 134, and which Amar suggests could have been one of many herbal wicks, such as mullein (Verbascum spp.) and lampwick plant (Phlomis ssp.). Elsewhere, Zohar Amar and Avivit Shwiky write in Bamme Madlikin (Bar-Ilan University, 2003, pp. 54–55), that certain of the geonim have identified the plant with שברא, said to be harmal (Peganum harmala).
206. ^ Amar, Z. 2015, p. 140.
207. By Maimonides' writing that "some of the commentators having explained it as meaning safflower," it is evident that he was uncertain of its identification. Elsewhere (Mishnah Kila'im 2:8), Maimonides wrote that חריע was the Hebrew word for "safflower". There seems to have been great confusion concerning this one word. Rashi gives two different explanations for the word: In the Babylonian Talmud (Baba Kama 101b and Niddah 50a), he wrote of the dyestuff קוצה that it is g(u)esde (= guède), meaning Dyer's woad (Isatis); in Shabbat 68a, Rashi wrote that קוצה is Warance (Old French), or what is now called garance (= Dyer's madder).
208. Sefer Arukh, s.v. קוצה, British Library (Add MS 26881).
209. Transliterated, qūrnīth.
210. Identity uncertain. Thought by many to refer to a kind of Thyme (Solomon Sirilio). The Hebrew word (qūrnīth) and the Arabic word used in Israel/Palestine (qūrniyya) are cognate words, from which latter word's meaning one may learn about the former. In the Arabic language spoken in Palestine the name is applied to the herb White-leaved Savory (Micromeria fruticosa). See Witztum, A. (1992), p. 149.
211. Amar, Z. thinks that Maimonides may have been referring to thyme.
212. The anonymous copyist writes in this case: "The kofer is like a gum resin (Ar. as-samigh), while the qaṭaf (oleoresin of the Styrax officinalis) itself is the most important of all the chief aromatics, and its manner is to harden and form into pieces, and when it spoils it no longer hardens but remains in the liquid-state, and is called `the oil of al-kāffūr`." Earlier, in the same tractate, either by the authority of Rabbi Nathan, the President of the Academy, or by the authority of the copyist himself, the same word qaṭaf is explained as balsān (balsam).
213. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 141–142.
214. Also in Mishnah Uktzin 1:6
215. Variant spelling קרנס.
216. Sefer Arukh, s.v. עכביות, explains, at the end of chapter 'He that brings flagons of wine' (Betza 34a), that it has been cited: "...but they make palatable the kinras and the ʿakaviyyot, meaning, vegetables that are bitter and require being made palatable by the fire, through boiling, for although they are unfit for eating before they are made sweeter, he is permitted to carry them in order to make them palatable for eating." Rabbi Samson of Sens, in his commentary on Mishnah Uktzin 1:6, also cites from the Sefer Arukh on the meaning of the word kinras and its preparation before eating. The sense here of אבאדנגאן (aubergine) may have been to the "wild aubergine" (Solanum elaeagnifolium) which is also native to the Middle East. It is to be noted, however, that the vast majority of Talmudic exegetes explain the sense of this word as meaning Cynara (= artichoke), derived from the Greek κινάρα. Andrew Watson, in his work The Arab Agricultural Revolution (1974), proposed that artichoke (Cynara scolymus) was only an Islamic introduction to the Mediterranean regions, but this view has largely been rejected by Decker, Michael (2009). "Plants and Progress: Rethinking the Islamic Agricultural Revolution". Journal of World History. 20 (2). University of Hawai'i Press on behalf of World History Association: 201–202. JSTOR 40542757.
217. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 143.
218. Cf. Bos (2016), p. 189, citing Jonah ibn Janah, who says that the qannāriya is none other but the artichoke (Arabic: ḥaršuf).
219. Also in Mishnah Kila'im 9:7; 2:5
220. Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 144–145, who explains the Judeo-Arabic word אלקנאב as meaning hemp (Cannabis sativa).
221. Also in Mishnah Sukkah 1:4.
222. Variant spelling, קיסום
223. The Judeo-Arabic word לבלאר is also used for ivy (Hedera). Zohar Amar has written that the Arabic word לבלאר is a generic word for many different climbing vine-like plants, which would include the common ivy (Hedera helix) and the lablab bean (Dolichos lablab). See Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 143–144. At least sixteen species of Convolvulus are known to grow in Israel, one of the more common being Convolvulus arvensis.
224. Al-ʿalfiq is a provincial Arabic name given for a plant similar to treebine (Cissus rotundifolia) and which grows in the area of Taiz, in Yemen.
225. The Judeo-Arabic word לבלאר is also used for ivy (Hedera). Zohar Amar has written that the Arabic word לבלאר is a generic word for many different climbing vine-like plants, which would include the common ivy (Hedera helix) and the lablab bean (Dolichos lablab). See Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 143–144.
226. Printed editions erroneously reads הילבאנא. Corrected here to read חולבאנא. So explained by Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Ohelot 8:1
227. Also in Mishnah Maaser Sheni 2:1, Nedarim 6:9, et al.
228. A Greek loanword, χεφάλωτον (chefáloton), meaning, "leeks"; "chives"
229. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 101, 146.
230. Also in Mishnah Uktzin 1:6.
231. Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham's commentary brings down two different explanations, one thought to be his own, and the other by the anonymous copyist. Since the Mishnah mentions אגסים and קרוסטמלין as not being heterogeneous to each other, and since אגס is largely recognized as being a pear, it follows that קרוסטמלין must also be a kind of pear, hence: כמתרי = "wild Syrian pear." This view is supported by the Jerusalem Talmud (Kila'im 1:4), where it cites Tosefta Kila'im 1:4, saying that, in the marketplace of Sepphoris, they had grafted "krustemelo" onto a native pear, but when told by a certain disciple that it was wrong to do so, they immediately cut down the tree. Upon inquiry of the matter at Yavne, they learnt that it was not necessary to cut it down, since "krustemelo" was accounted as another kind of pear. Solomon Sirilio, in Jerusalem Talmud (Ma'aserot 1:3 and Kila'im 1:4) explains the same episode by saying that "krustemelo" was a cultivar of "apple" made by grafting the scion of a wild variety of "apple" that had no belly onto the rootstock of a native apple whose fruit was round-bellied. Its name, he said, is of Greek origin, having the connotation of κάστρο + μήλο = "town-apple." In any rate, based on the parent-text in the Tosefta, it is evident that one is permitted to take the scion of a hybrid "krustemelo", in this case a pear cultivar, and graft it onto the rootstock of a native pear. Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham, speaking of "krustemelo" (Heb. קרוסטמלין), says that this fruit tree was called in the Land of Israel by the name al-faṭūmī. Ishtori Haparchi (1999:263), citing an old Judeo-Arabic commentary on the fruits mentioned in Mishnah Kila'im, chapter 1, says of the "krustemelo" (Heb. קרוסטמלין) that it is a "pear" and that it also bears the colloquial name al-farṭemī, and that it is only to be found in the land of Canaan, rather than in Babylonia.
232. According to Ben Melchizedek, Isaac (1975), p. 79, the fruit which is here intended is Pere calaprice, also known as "mandolin pear". Schlossberg, Eliezer (1993), pp. 150–151, commenting on this early commentary of the Mishnah written by Rabbi Isaac ben Melchizedek of Siponto (c. 1090–1160), wrote that "krustemelo" was "an exquisite type of pear which was customary to graft onto a local pear."
233. Kapah, E. (2007), p. 106. This second explanation is thought to be that of the anonymous copyist of our manuscript. The explanation of al-barqūq here follows the use of this word in Yemen, where it had the connotation of "apricot." See Rabbi Yosef Qafih's commentary in Maimonides (1963–1967), vol. 1, Kila'im 1:4, note 34. According to Amar, Z. (2015:39–40), in the Maghreb and in Andalusia the same word al-barqūq had a different connotation and meant "plum". Ibn al-'Awwam, the 12-century Andalusian author of The Book on Agriculture (Kitāb al-Filāḥa), clearly disagreed with Amar's identification of this fruit as a plum, writing in the above work (see Ibn al-'Awwam 1802, p. 336 of vol. 1, chapter 7, article 40) that "al-barquq" had the connotation of apricot (Spanish: albaricoque), also known as the "Armenian apple tree," or what is also called "meshmesh" in Arabic, whereas the plum he describes in a different section.
234. Maimonides explains that in the colloquial Arabic of his time the same fruit known as al-kummathra (pear) was also called in the Maghreb אלאנג'אץ (al-’inğās = pear).
235. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 1:6.
236. Also in Mishnah Terumot 2:6, Uktzin 2:1, et al.
237. Kapah, E. (2007), p. 102; Amar, Z. (2000), p. 286
238. According to Dalman (2020), p. 250, the quththā is the same plant as the faqqūs.
239. Maimonides (1963), s.v. Kila'im 1:2 and Terumot 2:6. See: Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 111, 149
240. Maimonides (1967), s.v. Uktzin 2:1 (being also a type of cucumber).
241. On this plant and its description, as well as sowing season, see Dalman (2020), pp. 244–245, 335. "This species of cucumber is long and thin, 24 cm long and 3½ cm thick, but up to 80 cm long, always bent, sometimes almost curled, light green with 10–17 darker stripes, slightly juicy."
242. Thus explained by Sefer Arukh, s.v. כשות (although here corrected from the copyist's error, who wrote אלנואר instead of אלכיאר, when explaining Mishnah Uktzin 2:1).
243. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 2:1
244. Also in Mishnah Kila'im 1:4, et al. Mishnah Kil'ayim 1:4 mentions different pairs of trees, such as the peach tree (Prunus persica) and the almond tree (Amygdalus communis; syn. Prunus amygdalus), and the trees known in Hebrew as shizǝfīn (Ziziphus jujuba) and rīmmīn (Ziziphus spina-christi), saying that "although they are like each other, they are considered diverse kinds (kila'im)."
245. The sense here is to Christ's thorn (Jujube), not to be confused with another species, called simply Jujube (Ziziphus jujuba).
246. Nathan ben Abraham (1955), s.v. Demai 1:1, which is another Arabic word for nabaq (Jujube)
247. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 150.
248. Sefer Arukh, s.v. רמי, British Library (Add MS 26881).
249. Variant spelling, אלבחם.
250. ^ Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 17
251. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 150–151.
252. Dalman (2020), p. 357
253. Possibly the absinthe wormwood (Artemisia absinthium)
254. ^ Also in Mishnah Kila'im 1:1.
255. Literal translation of the Arabic. Possibly what the Bedouins in Israel call shaʿir eḥṣeinī (Fox's barley), being Hordeum spontaneum K.Koch. See Dalman (2020), p. 300 who names the same specie of wild barley. In tractate Kila'im, either Nathan ben Abraham or the anonymous copyist explains: "Barley (השעורים) and fox's spike (שבולת שועל), al-shaʿir and sunbulat al-thaʿalib, respectively, are permitted to be sown together, since all of them are barley, only that the one is pointed at its two sides, while the other at its four sides." Note: In Modern Hebrew, the words shibbolet shuʿal are now used for oats (Avena), which is a carry-over from Rashi's explanation of this grain in his commentary of the Babylonian Talmud (Pesahim 35a), where he wrote אביינ"א (= avoine), oats. Maimonides and Nathan ben Abraham, disputing Rashi's view, say that שיפון (shiffon) is rather to be understood as oats (Avena) or goatgrass (Aegilops).
256. Amar, Z. (2011a), p. 62 (note 184); 113–116, believed to be Hordeum spontaneum.
257. Sefer Arukh, s.v. שבל, British Library (Add MS 26881).
258. Amar, Z. 2015, p. 156.
259. Thus is it explained by Isaac ben Melchizedek in his commentary on Mishnah Kila'im 5:8, in the name of the Arukh. The word "shoshannah" having the meaning of the Greek word κρίνου, meaning "lily."
260. Sefer Arukh, s.v. ששן, British Library (Add MS 26881).
261. Amar, Z. & Kapah, E. (2011b), p. 17.
262. Thus explained by Maimonides in Mishnah Kelim 9:8
263. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 157–159.
264. Amar, Z. (2015), p. 160. Amar notes that in Modern Hebrew, the word שעועית is now used for "beans" (Phaseolus) and which were mostly endemic to the American continent. David ben Yeshaʿ Halevi, in his 15th-century lexicon, al-Ǧāmaʿ (ed. Shalom Gamliel, Jerusalem 1988), explains Maimonides' use of the legume אללוביא for שעועית as having the connotation of דגרה (= Vigna sinensis).
265. The Aramaic word given for שעועית.
266. Nathan ben Abraham (1955) brings down its variant spelling, "shegamin"; cf. Jastrow, M. (2006), s.v. שעם (var. שגם)
267. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 163–164.
268. Sefer Arukh, s.v. שעם, British Library (Add MS 26881).
269. Hai Gaon (1921), s.v. Kelim 14:5
270. Also in Mishnah Shevi'it 9:2, Baba Metzi'a 9:9, et al.
271. Also in Mishnah Terumot 10:5; Orlah 3:6; Niddah 2:6, et al.
272. Can actually be one of many known species. See Trigonella berythea for a description into its use.
273. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 168–169.
274. Sefer Arukh, s.v. תלתן.
275. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Niddah 2:6
276. Although an edible herb, the Arabic word used here is largely unidentified. The Arabic word shaylam (Ar. الشَيْلَم) is often used to refer to darnel (Lolium temulentum), but it is thought to have been a generic word for tares or weeds. See: Amar, Z. (2011a), p. 56. The Jerusalem Talmud (Pesahim 2:5 ) calls the תמכה by the name גנגידין (Gingidium), which, according to Dioscorides (Book II-167) - as explained by late horticulturalists - is said to be a kind of chervil, and can apply to any of the following genera: Chaerophyllum, Anthriscus, Chaetosciadium and Scandix. Of these, the most commonly grown chervil in Israel is Chaetosciadium trichospermum. Ibn al-Baitar (1989), p. 189, citing Galen, explains Gingidium as rather meaning a species of wild carrot (e.g. Daucus gingidium, or something similar), and rejected the opinion of Aṣṭifan ben Basil who said that the word Gingidium meant Shah atarj ("the king's herb"), in Arabic, or what is known as fumitory (Fumaria officinalis). In any rate, chervil and wild carrots are both umbels (Umbelliferae) and bear similar foliage, which may have added to the confusion. A sixth-century drawing of the Gingidium in Dioscorides' De Materia Medica (the Juliana Anicia Codex of 512), now in the Austrian National Library in Vienna, shows what appears to be the wild carrot (Daucus gingidium), also known as the Cretan carrot. Pliny the Elder (1951), book XX, ch. XVI, wrote: "In Syria very great pains are taken over kitchen-gardens; hence the Greek proverb: 'Syrians have plenty of vegetables.' They sow a vegetable called by some gingidion that is very like staphylinus (=parsnip; carrot), only it is slighter and more bitter, though its properties are the same. It is eaten, cooked or raw, with great advantage to the stomach, for it dries up all its humours, however deep these may lie."
277. Amar, Z. 2015, pp. 169–171.
278. Although inconclusive, the reference here may have been to Scolymus maculatus, an edible plant eaten either raw or cooked, and known as cardogna macchiata in Italian, cardo borriquero in Spanish.
279. The author of Tosafot Yom Tov (c. 1579–1654) thought this word to mean cren, or what is known in English as horseradish (Armoracia rusticana).
280. Also in Mishnah Terumot 10:11; Orlah 3:7; Uktzin 1:4
281. On this plant and its season of planting in Palestine, see Dalman (2020), p. 336.
282. Amar, Z. (2015), p. 172.
283. Sefer Arukh, s.v. אנגרון.
284. Hai Gaon (1924), s.v. Uktzin 1:4
285. Variant spelling: תרובתור
286. Amar, Z. (2015), p. 172. Amar notes that, according to Maimonides' description, he may have been referring to the regular headed cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata), and that it is only called "wild cabbage" insofar as the cultivar was less favorable than the leafy variety, especially kale (Ar. karnub). .
287. Cf. Ibn al-'Awwam (1864), ch. 7, article 34 (p. 303)
288. Amar & Serri (2000–2001), p. 285 (note 47)
289. Nathan ben Abraham (1955), vol. 1, s.v. Shevi'it, ch. 7, p. 26a
290. The actual procedure of using aromatics to flavor wine, though not described by Nathan ben Abraham, has been laid down in a different ancient work, entitled Apicius: De Re Coquinaria, where it describes the flavoring process as follows: "...rose-petals, the lower white part removed, were sewn into a linen bag and immersed in wine for seven days. Thereupon, add a sack of new petals which allow to draw for another seven days. Again, remove the old petals and replace them by fresh ones for another week, then strain the wine through the colander... Take care that only the best petals free from dew be used for soaking. In a similar-way as above like the rose wine, violet wine is made of fresh violets, etc." (Apicius, Book I - The Careful Experienced Cook, 4. Rose Wine). Geoponica, Agricultural Pursuits (vol. 1, book VIII, ch. 1), adds that rose petals were first dried and pounded before being placed in a cloth and inserted into the wine. The process of applying an aromatic scent to oil differs, and is described by Geoponica, Agricultural Pursuits, vol. 1, Book IX, chapter XX; (pp. 289–290), where he writes: "Eight sextarii of sweet wine (called must) and a good quantity of pounded iris , and two sextarii of -oil are put into a jar and allowed to remain there for ten days. Afterwards, when oil has been percolated, take-up and use."
291. The actual process of imparting flavor to sesame seeds is not described by Nathan ben Abraham. However, Al-Tamimi the physician (10th century) describes the process with respect to the florets of spiny broom (Arabic: القندول‎) as follows: After collecting the yellow florets of the spiny broom, they were spread out over thickly woven sackcloth which lay out in the hot sun. Upon the florets was poured hulled sesame seeds and covered with linen sheets. They were left in this condition until the moisture in the florets had evaporated. In this manner, the sesame seeds would absorb the sweet fragrance of the florets. After one or two days, the florets and sesame seeds were then separated, the sesame placed on clean linen garments, being allowed to further dry-out from the moisture absorbed by the florets. This process was repeated up to 3 or 4 times, with a fresh batch of florets set out to dry, until at length the pungent flavor of the florets (resembling the taste of vanilla) had been fully imparted to the sesame seeds.
292. The first to propose that tiltan may be clover (Trifolium) seems to have been Ephraim Rubinovich (Plant Names of Ereẓ Israel שמות צמחי ארץ ישראל, Jerusalem 1917, p. 20), who presumably based his identification on the Hebrew root, tiltan = "consisting of three" and which was believed by him to be the three-leaf clover, albeit, with disregard to the early rabbinic tradition on the plant's identification.
293. Nathan ben Abraham (1955), s.v. Mishnah Shabbat 21:3. See also Amar, Z. (2015), pp. 47–48; Sefer Arukh, s.v. אפונין; Isaac ben Melchizedek, s.v. Peah 3:3; Maimonides (1963), s.v. Peah 3:3 and Shabbat 21:3, who writes that the word means garbanzo beans (Cicer arietinum), and who uses the Judeo-Arabic word אלחמץ (garbanzo beans) for this plant.
294. Based on the Judeo-Arabic translation of the word in the works of Rabbi Saadia Gaon (in his Tafsir, a translation of the Pentateuch, Exo. 12:22); Al-Fasi, D. (1936), vol. 1, s.v. אזוב; Ibn Ǧanāḥ, Yonah (1896), s.v. אזב - aleph, zayn, bet; Maimonides (1967), s.v. Nega'im 14:6; and Nathan ben Abraham (1955) in Mishnah Uktzin 2:2. The problems with identification arise from Jewish oral tradition where it expressly prohibits Greek hyssop, and where the biblical plant is said to have been identical to the Arabic word, zaatar (Origanum syriacum), and which word is not to be associated with other ezobs that often bear an additional epithet, such as zaatar farsi = Persian-hyssop (Thymbra capitata) and zaatar rumi = Roman-hyssop (Satureja thymbra). See: The Mishnah (ed. Herbert Danby), Oxford University Press: Oxford 1977, s.v. Negai'im 14:6 (p. 696); Parah 11:7 (p. 711).
295. Likewise, the word aspethei (Hebrew: אַסְפְּתֵי) in Mishnah Ohalot 13:4, is another disputed term. According to R. Isaac of Siponto and R. Shimshon of Sens, the word was used for a weaver's stave; derived from the Greek word σπάθη, and being no more than the sword-like batten (beater) used in the weaver's loom for packing of the weft yarn (filling yarn). Since the batten in many cultures is a flat board of wood that is tapered to a thin edge all along its broad side, it is actually called in some countries "sword." Maimonides thought the word aspethei to mean "nail," while his disputant, Rabbi Abraham ben David, thought the same word to mean a "pair of sconces" used as an accessory to a candlestick that hung from a wall. Cf. Abraham ben David's gloss in Maimonides' Mishne Torah (Tum'eoth ha-Met 14:7)
296. Rabbi Yosef Qafih, recalling the event, describes it as follows: "There is a custom had among most of the people who assume oversight over the synagogues in Yemen that any book that has become worn-out or become very old they'd store it away in the vault situated beneath the hekhal (Ark) and this is its genizah. From time to time, when a sufficient quantity of books, fragments of books, pages and worn-out leaves has been amassed there, they collect them, place them inside earthenware jars and bury them in the cemetery, near one of the righteous men, and occasionally there are buried books, pages and leaves of valuable worth, which the same person who is meant to oversee has not fully appreciated their worth. To our happiness, many times the grave diggers are too lazy to dig deep, well beneath the earth. Wherefore, occasionally, after the rainy season, especially in the years that are blessed with plenty of rain, the heads of these jars are exposed because of rain erosion, where it eroded and made thin the upper layer of earth. My grandfather who is now deceased, the Rabbi Yihya Qafih, of blessed memory, would complain about the overseers of the synagogues and reprimand them over burying in the genizah things which contain pearls of great beneficial use, and of invaluable worth, without allowing for a man who is more adept and who knows how to examine them first and to determine what is worthy of being buried and what is still worthy of being used by the coming generations, so as to give some merit to the congregation. He commanded one of the caretakers of the cemetery that, in the event that the heads of the jars such as these should ever be exposed, he was to inform him, before he proceeded to dig deeper in order to bury them once more. I remember when I was about ten years old, the man came to inform my grandfather, of blessed memory, that such that had been buried was now exposed. I remember that it was on a Thursday, before nightfall. On the next day, on Friday morning, my grandfather took me with him, and we went out together to the place of the genizah, according to where the informant had directed us. Now since my grandfather, of blessed memory, was already old, above eighty years in age, and it was difficult for him to bend down, I was the one who took out books and fragments of books, and ordinary pages that were wet and moldy, dusty and muddy, both hand-written manuscripts and printed texts; my grandfather, of blessed memory, sitting throughout all this time upon a stone, examining them and sorting them, one by one, until the early afternoon, and then we returned the rest inside the jar and covered it up. We took with us what we had sorted and returned to the city. At the departing of the Sabbath, my grandfather sat down to sort through his spoils, to take-apart the pages that had already stuck together because of the wetness from the rains that had penetrated within the jar. In this genizah we found hand-written pages from the Babylonian Talmud, and also fragments from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, from Mishnah commentaries, from the commentaries of Rabbi Saadia Gaon, from the Midrash Hagadol, and many more. Whatsoever our hook brought up on that blessed day is today in my possession. Some of them still show upon them the vestiges of the soil and clay to this very day. Among the spoils, we found an old hand-written book, the majority of whose pages were already sticking together, clumps upon clumps. My grandfather sat a long time, slowly soaking them in water and with great patience, after he had checked and saw to his satisfaction that the letters were not being erased by soaking them in water. I still remember how the pages were strewn across the entire room of my grandfather's workshop, of blessed memory, so that they could dry. After drying and arranging the pages, it was clear that this was the very Mishnah commentary which we now present before our readers. This book was the only surviving sort of its kind in the world, which, had it not been for this action, it would have been lost to the world. The book was missing a few pages, in the Order known as Moed, at the introduction to Tractate Shabbat, it was missing perhaps one page, and in Tractate Pesahim it was again missing perhaps one page, as also in Tractate Yoma it was missing perhaps one page, but the remainder of the book, to our delight, was found altogether complete, from beginning to end" (See Nathan ben Abraham (1955), vol. 1, s.v. Appendix: Perush Shishah Sidrei Mishnah , p. 6).
297. Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Microfilm 6008. A microfilm of the same is available at the Hebrew University National Library (Manuscripts Department), listed as Microfilm no. F-35334. The pages of the MS., however, show some disorder.
298. A Judeo-Arabic copy of the original; three microfilm copies can be seen at the National Library of Israel in Jerusalem: microfilm # F-4850, F-72437 and JER_NLI_593=38. See library's Permanent Link
299. British Library, Or. 11117. A microfilm of the same is available at the Hebrew University National Library (Manuscripts Department), listed as Microfilm no's. F-6639 and F-8333. Unlike the disordered pagination in the Yemenite MS., the British Library MS. is collated in its proper order, although part of the Introduction is missing.
300. Sassoon, D.S. (1932), pp. 1061–1062. Sassoon dated the copy to the 15th-century, but not knowing the full nature of the work, thought it to be an Introduction to the Talmud, and which he surmised was written by Joseph ben Judah ibn ʿAḳnin.

Bibliography

• Al-Fasi, D. (1936–1945). Solomon L. Skoss (ed.). The Hebrew-Arabic Dictionary of the Bible, Known as 'Kitāb Jāmiʿ al-Alfāẓ' (Agron) (in Hebrew). Vol. 1–2. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Alfasi, I. (1960). Yosef Qafih (ed.). R. Yitzhak Alfasi's Commentary on Tractate Hullin (Chapter Kol ha-Basar) (in Hebrew). ha-Agudah le-Hatzalat Ginzei Teiman. OCLC 745065428.
• Amar, Z. (2000). Agricultural Produce in the Land of Israel in the Middle Ages (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute. ISBN 965-217-174-3.
• Amar, Z.; Serri, Yaron (2000–2001). "Compilation from Jonah Ibn Ǧanāḥ's Dictionary of Medical Terms / ליקוטים ממילון שמות הרפואות של ר' יונה אבן ג'נאח". Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects (in Hebrew). 63 (3/4). Academy of the Hebrew Language: 279–291. JSTOR 24330601.
• Amar, Z. (2011a). Five Types of Grain: Historical, Halachic, and Conceptual Aspects (Ḥameshet Mine Dagan) (in Hebrew). Machon Har Beracha. ISBN 978-965-908-187-5.--(ISBN 978-965-90818-7-5)
• Amar, Z.; Kapah, E. (2011b), "The Yemenite Commentary of Rabbi Nathan, President of the Academy, on the Identification of Flora in the Mishnah", in Ayelet Oettinger; Danny Bar-Maoz (eds.), Mittuv Yosef – Yosef Tobi Jubilee Volume, The Jews of Yemen: History and Culture, vol. 2, Haifa: University of Haifa (Center for the Study of Jewish Culture in Spain and in Islamic Countries), OCLC 713933314
• Amar, Z. (2012). Flora of the Bible - A New Investigation Aimed at Identifying All of the Plants of the Bible in Light of Jewish Sources and Scientific Research (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Rubin Mass Ltd. OCLC 783455868.
• Amar, Z. (2015). Flora and Fauna in Maimonides' Teachings (in Hebrew). Kfar Darom. OCLC 783455868.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Assaf, Simcha (1933–1934). "Miginzei beit ha-sefarim - A Commentary on the Six Orders of the Mishnah belonging to R. Nathan, the President of the Academy". Kiryat Sefer (Year 10) (in Hebrew). Jerusalem.
• Assaf, Simcha (1955). Tequfat ha-Geonim we-Sifrutah (The Geonic Era and its Literature) (in Hebrew).(= Kiryat Sefer, X )
• Ben Melchizedek, I. (1975). Nisan Zaks (ed.). Mishnah Zera'im, with the Commentary of Ribmaṣ (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Makhon ha-Talmud ha-Yisraeli ha-Shalem. OCLC 745167494.
• Bos, Gerrit ; Käs, Fabian (2016). "Arabic Pharmacognostic Literature and Its Jewish Antecedents: Marwān ibn Ǧanāḥ (Rabbi Jonah), Kitāb al-Talḫīṣ". Aleph. 16 (1). Indiana University Press: 145–229. doi:10.2979/aleph.16.1.145. JSTOR 10.2979/aleph.16.1.145. S2CID 171046217.
• Dalman, Gustaf (2013). Work and Customs in Palestine. Vol. I/2. Translated by Nadia Abdulhadi Sukhtian. Ramallah: Dar Al Nasher. ISBN 9789950385-01-6. OCLC 1040774903.
• Dalman, Gustaf (2020). Nadia Abdulhadi-Sukhtian (ed.). Work and Customs in Palestine, volume II. Vol. 2 (Agriculture). Translated by Robert Schick. Ramallah: Dar Al Nasher. ISBN 978-9950-385-84-9.
• Danzig, Nahman (1998). Catalogue of Fragments of Halakhah and Midrash from the Cairo Genizah in the E.N. Adler Collection of the Library of JTS: the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York 1998, p. 47
• Epstein, J.N. (1945). "The Supplement to the Gaonic Commentary to Taharot". Tarbiẕ (in Hebrew). 16 (2/3). JSTOR 23585385.
• Feliks, Jehuda ; Margalioth, Mordecai (1973). Hilkhot Erets Yisra'el min ha-Genizah (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook. OCLC 19497945.
• Fox, Menahem Zvi (1994). Ha-mishnah be-teman, kettuv-yad miperush rav nathan av ha-yeshivah, Assufot (Year Book), , pp. 161–167
• Friedman, Mordechai A. (1990a). "Responsa of R. Abraham Maimonides from the Cairo Geniza a Preliminary Review". Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research. 56. American Academy for Jewish Research, Ann Arbor, MI: 29–49. doi:10.2307/3622642. JSTOR 3622642.
• Friedman, Mordechai A. (1990b). "Masa u-matan bayn hakham miteman le-rabbi avraham ben ha-rambam 'al kesef ha-ketubbah ve-'al samkhut ha-masoret", Te'udah (14), pp. 139–192
• Geoponika - Agricultural Pursuits. Vol. 2. Translated by Owen, T. London: University of Oxford. 1806.
• Gil, Moshe (1983). Eretz yisrael bit'kufah ha-muslamit ha-rishonah (634–1099) , Tel-Aviv, pp. 582–583
• Hai Gaon (1921–1924), "Hai Gaon's Commentary on Seder Taharot", in Epstein, J.N. (ed.), The Geonic Commentary on Seder Taharot - Attributed to Rabbi Hai Gaon (in Hebrew), vol. 1–2, Berlin: Itzkowski, OCLC 13977130 (Available online, at HebrewBooks.org: The Geonic Commentary on Seder Taharot - vol. 1; The Geonic Commentary on Seder Taharot - vol. 2)
• Ibn al-'Awwam (Abu Zacaria), Iahia (1802). Libro de Agricultura (Kitāb al-Filāḥa) (in Spanish and Arabic). Vol. 1. Translated by Josef Antonio Banqueri. Madrid: Imprenta Real. p. 336 (ch. 7 - article 40). OCLC 476348685.
• Ibn al-'Awwam, Yaḥyá (1864). Le livre de l'agriculture d'Ibn-al-Awam (kitab-al-felahah) (in French). Translated by J.-J. Clement-Mullet. Paris: A. Franck. OCLC 780050566.
• Ibn al-Baitar (1989). Ibrahim Ben Mrad (ed.). Tafsīr Kitāb Diāsqūrīdūs (in Arabic). Beirut: Dar Algharb Al'Islami. OCLC 957197903.
• Ibn Ǧanāḥ, Yonah (1896). A. Berliner (ed.). Book of the Roots (Sepher Haschoraschim) (in Hebrew). Berlin.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Ishtori Haparchi (1999). Avraham Yosef Havatzelet (ed.). Sefer Kaftor Ve'ferah (in Hebrew). Vol. 3 (chapter 56). Jerusalem: Bet ha-midrash la-halakhah ba-hityashvut. OCLC 32307172.
• Jastrow, M., ed. (2006), Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, OCLC 614562238
• Kapah, El'ad (2007). The Identification of the Mishna Plants According to Rabbi Nathan's Commentary of the Mishna (in Hebrew). Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University.
• Maimonides (1963–1967). Mishnah, with Maimonides' Commentary (in Hebrew). Vol. 1–3. Translated by Yosef Qafih. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook. OCLC 741081810.
• Nathan ben Abraham (1955), "Perush Shishah Sidrei Mishnah - A Commentary on the Six Orders of the Mishnah", in Sachs, Mordecai Yehudah Leib (ed.), The Six Orders of the Mishnah: with the Commentaries of the Rishonim (in Hebrew), Jerusalem: El ha-Meqorot, OCLC 233403923
• Payne Smith, J. (1903). A compendious Syriac Dictionary: founded upon the Thesaurus Syriacus of R. Payne Smith (in Syriac and English). Oxford: Clarendon Press. OCLC 251355373.
• Pliny the Elder (1951). Natural History. Vol. VI: Books 20-23. Translated by W. H. S. Jones. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press: Loeb Classical Library.
• Qafih, Y. (2018), "Yemenite Jewry's Connections with Major Jewish Centers", in Yedid, Rachel; Bar-Maoz, Danny (eds.), Ascending the Palm Tree – An Anthology of the Yemenite Jewish Heritage, Rehovot: E'ele BeTamar, OCLC 1041776317
• Sassoon, D.S., ed. (1932), Ohel Dawid - Descriptive Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samaritan Manuscripts in the Sassoon Library, vol. 2, London, OCLC 71513156{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Schlossberg, Eliezer (1993). "Arabic Words in the Commentary of R. Yiẕḥaq ben R. Malkiẕedeq of Simponto to Mišna Zěraʿim". Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects (in Hebrew). The Academy of the Hebrew Language: 147–155. JSTOR 24346981.
• Schlossberg, Eliezer (2005). "On Maimonides' Commentary on the Tractate Shabbat". Pe'amim: Studies in Oriental Jewry (in Hebrew). 101/102.
• Smith, W., ed. (1872), "sisymbrium (σισύμριον)", Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (3rd ed.), New York{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Stillman, N.A., ed. (2010), Encyclopedia of Jews in the Islamic World, vol. 3, Leiden: Brill, OCLC 650852958
• Witztum, Allan (1992). "Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic Names for Plants in the Mint Family". Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects (in Hebrew): 147–151. JSTOR 24345785.

External links

• Rabbi Nathan's Mishnah Commentary (online), translated into Hebrew from the original Judeo-Arabic
• Mishnah
• Rabbi Nathan's Mishnah Commentary (in PDF format)

• Commentaries on the Mishnah
• Medieval Hebraists
• Rabbis of the Land of Israel
• 11th-century people from the Fatimid Caliphate
• 11th-century rabbis
• Jews from the Fatimid Caliphate
• Medieval Jewish writers
• Jewish Yemeni history
• People from Ramla
• Manuscripts of the National Library of Israel