Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Leib Moscovitz (2020)
Talmudic Reasoning
Shana Schick (2017)
Mitzvot Eyn Tzerikhot Kavvanah: The Radical Reconceptualization of RitualJewish Studies Quarterly, 24
Yair Furstenberg (2015)
Controlling Impurity : The Natures of Impurity in Second Temple Debates
M. Siegal, Avi Shmidman (2018)
Reconstruction of the Mekhilta Deuteronomy Using Philological and Computational Tools1Journal of Ancient Judaism, 9
The Spectrum of Priestly Impurity
J. Milgrom (1998)
Leviticus 1–16
Sonja Pilz (2017)
The Earth is the Eternal’s and the Fullness Thereof: Jewish Food Culture and the Blessings before EatingLiturgy, 32
Jeffrey Rubenstein (2016)
On Some Abstract Concepts in Rabbinic Literature
Mira Balberg
71, 16
Impurity without Repression: Julia Kristeva and the biblical possibilities of a non-eliminationist construction of religious purity.
D. Halivni, Jeffrey Rubenstein (2013)
The Formation of the Babylonian Talmud
The Male Control of Society – Danger, Power, and Pollution
Yaakov Elman (2008)
Hercules Within the Halakhic Tradition
M. Douglas (2018)
Deciphering a MealFood and Culture
Mira Balberg (2017)
Ritual Studies and the Study of Rabbinic LiteratureCurrents in Biblical Research, 16
David Biale (2003)
Does Blood Have Gender in Jewish Culture, 33
R. Neis (2012)
‘Their Backs toward the Temple, and Their Faces toward the East:’ The Temple and Toilet Practices in Rabbinic Palestine and BabyloniaJournal for The Study of Judaism, 43
AbstractThe Babylonian Talmud conceptualizes the proscription against consuming the tereifah/mauled animal (Exod 22:30) and reformulates it as a rule prohibiting any entity that has exited hutz limhitzato, “outside its [proper] bound.” Through a close analysis of the half-dozen sugyot that utilize this rule and their precursors, this article considers the gradual development of this conceptual category throughout the strata of rabbinic literature, concluding that the fullest development of this concept is manifest in the Stam (anonymous layer of the Babylonian Talmud). The developed conception behind the rule can be best understood in light of Mary Douglas’s conception of “matter out of place.” The rabbis make a Douglas-style argument, that, at times, the location of matter outside its proper place suffices to explain an item’s prohibited status. An appendix demonstrates that a seeming early appearance of the term hutz limhitzato in Mekhilta de-Rashbi is of medieval, rather than Tannaitic, provenance.
Journal of Ancient Judaism – Brill
Published: Jan 9, 2023
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.