Sifre (סִפְרֵי "siphrēy", "Sifre, Sifrei", also, "Sifre debe Rab" or "Sifre Rabbah") refers to either of two works of
Midrash halakhah, or classical Jewish legal Biblical exegesis, based on the biblical books of Bamidbar(Numbers) and Devarim(Deuteronomy).
The Talmudic-Era Sifre
The title "Sifre debe Rab" is used by
R. Hananeelon Sheb.37b, Alfasion Pes.x., and Rashion Hos.ii. 1; it occurs likewise in Mak.9b, where, as Berliner says in his edition of Rashi, p. 372, בספרא is an error for בספרי; comp. " Aruk", s.v. ארבע). In regard to the reference in Sanh.86a concerning the Sifre of R. Simeon, see Mekilta de-Rabbi Shim'on; the question has likewise been raised whether, in view of the well-known close relation that existed between the school of R. Simeonand that of R. Ishmael( Yoma59a; Zeb.53b, 119b; Ḥul.69b), the words וכלהו אליבא דר"ע apply to R. Simeon's Sifre in the same degree as to the other works mentioned in this Talmudic passage (Levy, "Ueber Einige Fragmente aus der Mischnah des Abba Saul," p. 11, note 15).
The Present Sifre
Such questions, however, are unimportant in reference to the Sifre now extant; for this work is certainly not identical with the Talmudic Sifre; and, on closer investigation, it is found to be not a uniform work, but one composed of parts which did not originally belong together.
Z. Frankelin his "Darke ha-Mishnah" (p. 319) drew attention to the difference between that portion of the Sifre which refers to Numbers and that which refers to Deuteronomy, though, curiously enough, he misunderstood this difference and consequently arrived at false conclusions. D. Hoffmannhas correctly defined the relation between the two in his "Zur Einleitung in die Halachischen Midraschim." pp. 52 et seq.
The Sifre to Numbers is evidently a
midrashwhich originated in R. Simeon's school, and which has all the peculiarities and characteristics of such a work. It follows the same principles of exposition as does the Mekilta; the same group of tannaimappears, and the same technical terms are employed (see Mekilta; to the examples there given may be added טעמו של דבר מגיד מפני מה, Num.viii., for which the Sifrato Lev.xxi. 12 uses the expression להגיד מה גרם). There are also many material points of similarity with the Mekilta: thus Sifre 2 agrees literally with Mek., Mishpaṭim, 6; Sifre 65 with Mek., Bo, 5; Sifre 71 with ib. 15; Sifre 142 with ib. 5. The haggadicportions likewise contain many parallel passages (comp. the collation in D. Hoffmann, l.c. p. 54, though Sifre 64 and Mek., Beshallaḥ, 1 should not be included, since these two passages disagree on one point).
It is an especially noteworthy fact that the explanation in Sifre, Num. 7 of the law regarding a woman charged with adultery corresponds with a view expressed by
R. Ishmael, and also with the prescribed halakah, according to which, one witness being sufficient to convict, the water-test is not necessary. The explanation given in the Sifre to Numbers thus contradicts the explanation in Soṭah31a and in Sifre, Deut.188. The view expressed in Babliis curious: it cites (Soṭah 2a and 31b) the explanation of the Sifre to Numbers, and adds thereto: ואמר רחמנא תרי לית בה אלא חד והיא לא נתפשה אסורה, whereas the deduction should read to the contrary, תרי לית בה אלא חד היתה שותה. Babli, which evidently does not know R. Ishmael's view, tries to interpret the baraitain the sense of the prescribed halakah. But the baraita must in fact be interpreted in the opposite sense, namely, as following the view of R. Ishmael, who, because עד always implies "two," as appears from Yer.Soṭah 20d, demands also in the case of a woman charged with adultery two witnesses of the alleged crime.
The passage introduced by the phrase סתם ספרי (Sifre 161) likewise echoes
R. Ishmael's views; and the same is true of Sifre 21 as compared with Sifre 7. The beginning of Sifre 7 appears to be, strangely enough, an anonymous halakahexpressing the opposite opinion (comp. Yer. Soṭah16b), though this also may at need be harmonized with R. Ishmael's view. Sifre 39 likewise follows R. Ishmael's view, according to Ḥul.49a. These and other less cogent reasons seem to indicate that the Sifre to Numbers originated in R. Ishmael's school, though this does not exclude the assumption that the editor in addition borrowed much from R. Simeon's midrash (comp. D. Hoffmann, l.c. p. 54) and other less-known midrashim.
tannaimappearing in the Sifre to Numbers are:
R. Ishmaeland his pupils R. Josiahand R. Jonathan
Abba Hanan(citing R. Eliezer)
R. Akibaand his pupils R. Simeonand R. Judah
* Less frequently,
R. Meïrand R. Jose
Rebbialso is often mentioned here, as in other midrashic works
R. Judah b. Bathyra(Betera), who, as D. Hoffmannsays, is more frequently mentioned in midrashic works from R. Ishmael's school than in any others.
* A sentence of the amora
Samuel b. Naḥmaniis quoted once (No. 73).
The Sifre to Deuteronomy is of an entirely different nature. The main portion (Nos. 53-303),
halakicin character, is preceded and followed by haggadicparts, and it has all the characteristics of a midrash from the school of R. Akiba. The principles underlying the exposition are the same as those in Sifra. The term "mufneh" in the application of the principle "gezerah shawah" occurs only once, and is to be regarded as a later addition. The technical terms are largely the same in both midrashim, different terms being found only here and there in the Sifre. Moreover, the group of tannaimis different from that of the Mekilta. Those frequently mentioned in the latter, namely, R. Josiah, R. Jonathan, R. Nathan, and R. Isaac, are mentioned rarely in the Sifre; and even then their names are evidently later additions. Many passages quoted as being anonymous correspond with R. Akiba's views: e.g., Deut.270 with Yeb.52b; ib. 95 with Sanh.45b; ib. 269 with Yer. Giṭ.49b; ib. 280 with Yer. Sanh.21c.
Similarly, some halakic differences between the Sifre and the Mekilta may be pointed out: Sifre,
Deut.123 differs from Mek., Mishpaṭim, 1; ib. 122 from Mek., Mishpaṭim, 2, which latter reproduces R. Ishmael's view (comp. D. Hoffmann, l.c. pp. 68, 69). All these points indicate that the Sifre to Deuteronomy originated in R. Akiba's school; and, as several anonymous passages may be cited to express the views of R. Simeon, this midrash may with a fair degree of certainty be ascribed to him. Such anonymous passages are found in Sifre 72-74, several sections of which Mak.17a identifies as R. Simeon's interpretations. The same appears to be the case in Sifre 94, compared with Sanh.112a; ib. 103 with Ḳid.57a; ib. 121 with Sanh.46b. Sifre 166, and perhaps also 165, likewise correspond with R. Simeon's views (comp. Ḥul.136b; Tosef., Ḥul. ix. 2, x. 1); while in Sifre 303 the explanation of לא בערתי ממנו בטמא, and the omission of בכורים, also imply an agreement therewith (comp. Yeb.73b and Bik.ii. 2).
Used in the Talmud
There are, however, some exceptions to the rule; e.g., Sifre 110 compared with ib. 281 and
B. M.115a; ib. 219 with Sanh.45b (the last-cited passage, however, may also be so interpreted as to harmonize with R. Simeon's opinion). Sifre 230 likewise contradicts R. Simeon's view, according to Kil.vii. 7. But, since it has not been claimed that the Sifre to Deuteronomy represents R. Simeon's midrash in its original form, these few exceptions prove nothing. The editor certainly drew upon other midrashic works besides R. Simeon's midrash, especially upon that of R. Ishmael, as appears from a comparison with Mekiltato Deuteronomy (see D. Hoffmannin "Hildesheimer-Jubelschrift," p. 91), as well as from the fact that several passages introduced by תנא [דבי] ר"י occur in the Sifre (e.g., 71 and 75 compared with Yeb.73; ib. 229 with Shab.32a; ib. 237 with Yer. Ket.28c).
Sifre 107, however, by no means corresponds with the passage תני ר"י in
Yer. Er.20c (Hoffmann, "Zur Einleitung," etc., p. 67), but expresses just the opposite view. Sifre, Deut. 171, s.v. ד"א, corresponds perhaps with Meg.25a, s.v. תנא דבי ר"י ; and Sifre 104 with the view of R. Ishmaelin Mek., Mishpaṭim, 201, according to the correct reading of Yalḳuṭ, which has ר"י instead of ר"ש. It thus appears that the editor introduces the midrashim from R. Ishmael's midrash with the phrase ד"א. D. Hoffmann(l.c. p. 70) concludes from Pes.68a and 71a that the editors of the Babylonian Talmudpossessed the Sifre in another edition than the present one, which he takes to be a Palestinian edition. But the former passage indicates merely that the Amoraimoccasionally had not memorized the baraitotperfectly, an instance of inaccuracy with regard to the Sifre being evident in Ḥul.74a (comp. Tos.ad loc., s.v. להאי).
It may be said in general of the Sifre to Numbers and also of that to Deuteronomy that they are defective in many passages, and that the
Amoraimprobably possessed more trustworthy copies (comp. D. Hoffmann, l.c. pp. 53, 68). Even Rashiand the Leḳaḥ Ṭobquote from the Sifre passages which are no longer extant (comp. "Grätz Jubelschrift," p. 4, notes 5, 7-10). While the middle, halakicportion of the Sifre to Deutronomy belongs to Akiba's school, the haggadicportions preceding and following it seem to come from works of R. Ishmael's school. This appears clearly in the first part, which shows many formal and material similarities with the Mekilta. In regard to the latter portion, it may be said that Sifre, Deut. 344 reproduces R. Ishmael's view on the question at issue (comp. B. Ḳ.113a). As for the halakic midrash, it may be said that, in contradistinction to the haggadic part, the collector used, aside from R. Ishmael's midrash, that of R. Simeon(comp. Sifre 28 with Lev. R.i.; ib. 37 with Gen. R.lxxxv.; ib. 40 with Lev. R. xxxv.; ib. 47 with Gen. R. xii.; ib. 336 with Gen. R. lxxxii.; ib. 313 with Tan., ed. S. Buber, p. 72).
The final redaction of the Sifre must have been undertaken in the time of the
Amoraim, since some of them, e.g., Rabbai Bannaiand [Rabbi Jose ben Ḥanina, are mentioned therein. Both the Sifre to Numbers and that to Deuteronomy are divided into sections. The earliest extant edition of the Sifre is that of Venice, 1545. Other editions are: Hamburg, 1789; Sulzbach, 1802; with commentary by David Pardo, Salonica, 1804; with commentary by Abraham Lichtenstein(זרא אברהם), part i., Dyhernfurth, 1811; part ii., Radwill, 1820; ed. Friedmann, Vienna, 1864. A translation of the Sifre is found in Biagio Ugolini, "Thesaurus," vol. xv.
A modern English translation is that of
Jacob Neusner, "Sifre to Numbers" (1986) and "Sifre to Deuteronomy" (1987).
Jewish Encyclopedia bibliography
*Blau, in "Steinschneider Festschrift", pp. 21-40;
A. Epstein, Mi-Ḳadmoniyyot ha-Yehudim, pp. 50-56;
Z. Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, pp. 309 et seq.;
A. Geiger, Urschrift, pp. 434-450;
*idem, Jüd. Zeit. 1866, pp. 96-126;
D. Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung in die Halachischen Midraschim, pp. 51 et seq., 66 et seq.;
*Pick, in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1886, pp. 101-121;
I.H. Weiss, Zur Geschichte der Jüdischen Tradition.
* [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=698&letter=S Jewish Encyclopedia article on SIFRE] , by
Wilhelm Bacherand S. Horovitz.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.