This study is concerned with the lemmatic structure, thematic agenda and normative and non-normative aspects of the Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, with a view to establishing the level of coherence therein. The Mekhilta is one of the oldest exegetical Midrashim dated at the earliest circa 3rd/4th C.E. It is a Midrash which covers 29% of the book of Exodus and although commonly referred to as a ‘Midrash Halakhah’ (normative Midrash), less than half of its text is concerned with norms. Based on a fresh investigation of the entire text of the Mekhilta as presented in the Lauterbach edition, while taking into account manuscripts and early prints, I describe all the structural arrangements both external and internal, working downwards from the largest divisons – the titled tractates - through the smaller lemma-comment units (= biblical quotation + rabbinic comment) concluding with the smallest – ‘lemma-gloss components’ (= biblical quotation + immediate initial comment) which mark out the Mekhilta’s macrostructure. Within the lemma-comment units, I isolate other structural components such as the contiguous-units (=all quotations of or from one verse + commentary on all those quotations), and I identify microstructual elements such as proof quotations (= biblical quotations cited in proof of rabbinic commentary), repeated and requoted lemmata (= biblical quotations repeated for further comment) and formulaic language (= Rabbi x says introducing rabbinic statement, talmud lomar introducing biblical quotations). I also describe the ‘Stam’ structure in the Mekhilta and discuss the ‘Stam’ concept in rabbinic literature in general (chapter 1). Turning to the Mekhilta’s content, I raise the problems of categorising its themes. I distinguish themes that are exclusive to one tractate from those that are collective, that is, are scattered within a tractate or over a number of tractates (chapter 2). In an attempt to reconstruct the conventional distinction of halakhic and aggadic content, I suggest a definition of normative and non-normative material and describe various forms of these. I present tables displaying the quantities of normative and non-normative material both within the book of Exodus and within the Mekhilta. I illustrate the relevance of the analysis of literary phenomena for understanding the potential unity of the Mekhilta by examining the treatment the theme of idolatry throughout the tractates (chapter 3).Examining the possible meanings of ‘coherence’ in texts, I come to the conclusion that, when the interplay of lemmatic and thematic aspects is taken into account, the Mekhilta can be justifiably considered a ‘coherent’ text.

Thesis advisor: Ruth Langer / One of the enduring legacies supersessionism has imparted to Christianity in general, and evangelical Christianity in particular, is a complicated relationship with the legal material of the Hebrew Bible. There is a common belief that since Christians follow the New Covenant, these laws are deemed null or fulfilled by Christ, and therefore do not require attention, or at least not the same level one would grant other biblical texts. The issue with this belief is that the legal material is part of the Christian canon, and therefore—doctrinally speaking—deserves serious attention. In seeking a robust and enduring reason to engage the legal material, I propose that evangelicals adopt a rabbinic concept that interrogates and develops one’s disposition toward Torah. This rabbinic concept is תורה לשמה (Torah lishmah), or “Torah for its own sake.” In this rabbinic understanding, when one studies Torah, one should study it lishmah, “for its own sake”—and no other. I argue that Torah lishmah for a Christian can mean to study Torah—especially the legal material—not simply because it might be personally or communally beneficial, but because it is divine teaching, because it is given to be studied and known intimately in all its detail, in both its theological and embodied aspects, because studying it is an act of lovingkindness toward God, a giving of oneself out of love and loyalty. How do evangelicals learn how to adopt Torah lishmah? I suggest that we have the rabbis to guide us: a vast array of texts from late antiquity onward, documenting the attempts of numerous rabbis to engage Torah lishmah. I propose that we read these texts alongside our own biblical commentaries, so that we might learn what Torah lishmah is and how it might positively affect our approach to the legal material. To begin this process and to help illustrate my proposal, I start at Mount Sinai and the giving of the Ten Words—that is, the Decalogue, as it appears in Exod 20:2-17. The rabbinic midrashic commentary I use to engage the Decalogue is known as the Mekhilta d’Rabbi Ishmael, a tannaitic halakhic commentary on the Book of Exodus. To help contextualize and ground my explication, I compare the Mekhilta’s interpretations with those of Augustine of Hippo (354-430 CE), one of the most influential theologians and exegetes among the Church Fathers, and certainly one of the most important progenitors of evangelical Christianity. Together, the Mekhilta and Augustine’s interpretations are then brought into conversation with contemporary evangelical commentaries on the Decalogue. I compare especially each genre’s presuppositions, contexts, interests, insights, and methods. Through these comparisons, I underscore key insights Christians might learn from the rabbinic interpretations. Most importantly, through these comparisons, I determine the meaning and significance of Torah lishmah for an evangelical. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2020. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology.

No description available.