Shabbat

Estudio bíblico sobre el Shabbat. El sábado es el verdadero día de descanso para los creyentes y seguidores de la Biblia. Jesús guardó el Shabbat y también lo hicieron los apóstoles y la Iglesia en los Hechos. Las fiestas del Señor son proféticas. Es importante obedecer el cuarto mandamiento así como los otros. El Shabbat es una señal entre YHVH y Su pueblo, y es un mandamiento perpetuo: Guardaremos el Shabbat en el Milenio. Además, Jesús no abolió la Ley, y la Novia necesita entender esto y "escuchar y obedecer", ya que ella es Israel, el pueblo de YHVH. El texto también recorre la Historia para mostrar cómo muchos han guardado el Shabbat en siglos anteriores, y para mostrar que incluso los católicos admiten que el cambio al domingo no está autorizado por la Biblia.

Bible study about the Shabbat. Saturday is the true rest day for Bible believers and Bible followers. Jesus kept the Shabbat and so did the apostles and the Church in Acts. The Feasts of the Lord are profetic. It is important to obey the 4th commandment as well as the others. The Shabbat is a sign between YHVH and His people, and it is a perpetual commandment: We will keep the Shabbat in the Millenium. Besisdes, Jesus did not abolish the Law, and the Bride needs to understand this and "hear and obey", as she is Israel, the people of YHVH. The text also goes through History to show how many have kept the Shabbat in previous centuries, and to show that even Catholics admit that the change to Sunday is not Bible-authorized.

מספר "אלכאפיה אלעאבדין" - המספיק לעובדי ה' - של רבי אברהם, בנו יחידו של הרמב"ם, אבדו חלקים רבים. הפרק העוסק במלאכת הוצאה בשבת הועתק על ידי נינו, ר' דוד ב"ר יהושע הנגיד, בגליונות חיבורו של רבי יעקב אמאשטי להלכות שבת. הגליונות לוקטו, צורפו לכדי פרק שלם, ולהם נלווה זיהוי של קטע מהגניזה הקהירית.
רבי אברהם מתבסס על דברי אביו בחיבוריו השונים, מפרש אותם ומוסיף עליהם.

כולל משנה תורה לרמב"ם לפי עדי נוסח מבית מדרשו שבמצרים,

פירוש רבי יעקב אלאמאשטי, הנדפס ברמב"ם פרנקל תחת "פירוש קדמון ממצרים", כשבס"ד זכינו להכפיל את כמותו מכתבי יד אחרים;
אסופת "קול נגידים" ובה פירושים וחידושים ממשפחת הרמב"ם הנגידים, בהם שרידי פירושו של מחותנו, רבי חננאל בר שמואל, ראשון מפרשי המשנה תורה, ועוד;
ובסופו מהדורות של שיעור הרמב"ם, ושרידי "המספיק לעובדי ה'" לרבי אברהם על הלכות שבת.

Dr Marc Gafni discusses the verse in Songs of Songs, “It’s Insides are Lined with Love” in volume one of his Radical Kabbalah. (See Gafni, Radical Kabbalah, Vol. 1 pp. 120-123) which talks about what is described there as a Hasidic expression of Acosmic Humanism, or what he also refers to in that writing as Nondual Humanism, grounded in the reality of love between divinity and humanity– and interconnecting all of reality– all participating in the same current of One Love, One Breath and One Eros. 
These ideas are grounded in Gafni’s, The Mystery of Love, Simon and Schuster, 2003, and the thirty pages of primary source footnotes prepared by Gafni and Avraham Leader to that volume. The Mystery of Love is the volume we are sharing here.  It is perhaps worth noting that these readings in The Mystery of Love were recognized and well received in both the world of Kabbalah scholarship and the leading edges of the mainstream and Neo-Hasidic worlds of Hebrew wisdom. This is crucial, because it validates the readings in The Mystery of Love as being original and even brilliant but non eccentric. Rather, in The Mystery of Love Gafni is uncovering and sharing a crucial esoteric lodestone in the Hebrew wisdom lineage.
In this regard, therefore, it is worth noting that Gafni discussed this volume and its general parameters in 2002 with Moshe Idel, one of his thesis advisors and a leading scholar of Kabbalah at the Bar Ilan Library, Oxford University. Idel enthusiastically validated Gafni’s direction and readings in general terms - Eros as the animating force of Cosmos in which we participate, as well as sharing with Gafni that he was working in a parallel direction. Idel published his magisterial expression of this core notion of Its Insides are Lined with Love, under the title Kabbalah and Eros, Yale University Press, 2005.
Another leading Kabbalah scholar, Eliot Wolfson, who Gafni did not know personally, also contacted Gafni after stumbling across a copy of the book, (after the first hardback edition was published before the paperback) expressing appreciation for textual readings, and generously added an approbation to the paperback work calling it “A beautiful book that will undoubtedly inspire many people and perhaps even bring some healing to a desperately ill world”.
Kabbalah scholar Daniel Abrams wrote about the book, “…an important book which unpacks with depth, power and clarity and important strain in Kabbalistic thought. [Gafni’s] original readings engage and provoke both scholar and layman alike.” 
Zalman Shalomi Schachter the founder and Rebbe of the Neo-Hassidic Jewish renewal movement wrote, “Reb Mordechai Gafni’s torah on love and eros is l’eyla u’layla, the highest of the high. Everyone needs to hear it.” 
From the leadership of the educational community, Irwin Kula, president of the Jewish Federation Center for Learning and Leadership, which serves the mainstream leadership of the American Jewish community, called it a “tour de force.”
Peter Pitzele, founder of Bibliodrama, on the faculty of Jewish Theological seminary, called it “an act of ecstatic scholarship. Reb Gafni comes among us a dancing ecstatic sage”.
Leading mainstream author Rabbi Joseph Teluskin called it radical and profound, with similar approbations from Noam Zion of the Shalom Hartman Institute, Rabbi Bradely Shavit Artson of the University of Judaism, Rabbi Roly Matolon of the leading-edge Congregation Kehillat Jeshurun in New York.
All of these approbations appear in the book itself. 
A related set of ideas (which however bypassed the relationship of the Erotic to the sexual, and with a somewhat different set of sources) was written by Arthur Green published as an essay called “Judaism as a Path of Love,” published in Judaism for the World, Reflections on God, Life and Love, Yale University Press, 2020.
Leading Kabbalah Scholar Yehuda Liebes and his student Melila Eshed Helner extending his work, are similarly crucial voices in the Interior Sciences of this tradition, in establishing this set of what Gafni calls, first principles and first values, which sees Eros as the motivational architecture of reality.
The point of this information about the reception of these ideas in Gafni’s work and the other key writers, is that this reading, while striking and original, is not idiosyncratic; but rather an accurate reading of the mystery tradition of one of the great traditions of Interior Science. A more advance version of some of these ideas was published by Gafni and Kincaid in 2016 with a mainstream publisher under the title A Return to Eros that was reviewed extensively in the academic journal, Integral Review by Dr. Zachary Stein in an article entitled, “Love in a Time Between Worlds: On the Metamodern ‘Return’ to a Metaphysics of Eros.” Stein has called Gafni’s work, the kind that comes along “once in a generation”. He saw Gafni and Kincaid’s A Return to Eros as a seminal expression of the kind of new thinking that is so urgently needed in this time between worlds that we all now live in. Dr. Gafni, along with a brilliant circle of close colleagues and students, is now completing a new set of works which are the next stage in unfolding of the new world view of Cosmo-Erotic Humanism.
A public presentation of core ideas in The Mystery of Love, is available on CD; The Erotic and the Holy is available here. https://centerforintegralwisdom.org/media-store/product/the-erotic-and-the-holy-workshop/
This abstract was written by Jamie Long, a student and colleague of Dr. Gafni, who has taken responsibility for on the responsibility for managing his Academia.edu page.

Esse pequeno livreto é uma adapatação de uma sérire de mensagens pregadas na Igreja Nova Aliança, Filadelfia, Paraguai. Ele tem como objetivo esclarecer algumas dúvidas com respeito às leis do AT. Qual a importância dessas Leis atualmente? Ainda devemos obedecer-las? Todas? Algumas? Quais? Se você também procura respostas a essas perguntas, continue lendo.

La Corte Suprema de Justicia tiene en sus manos un interesante caso, en el que ha llamado a amicus curiae para pedir opiniones, acerca de un tema sensible para muchos pero acaso poco estudiado entre nosotros: la obligatoriedad del cierre de comercios e industrias en un día determinado (domingo) como forma de cumplir con el descanso laboral semanal 1. La cuestión presenta múltiples aristas (por ejemplo, la competencia para disponer el cierre obligatorio, que en el caso en cuestión ha sido dispuesto por ordenanza municipal) que no he de abordar aquí. En estas líneas solamente deseo resaltar algunos aspectos que deberían ser tenidos en cuenta a la hora de la decisión, y que se vinculan con el origen y fundamento del descanso semanal obligatorio, que tiene una innegable connotación religiosa. Por supuesto, a partir de tal fundamento son posibles distintas soluciones concretas que el legislador (y en el caso, el juez) puede disponer prudencialmente. Pero es de la mayor relevancia que al hacerlo, no se olvide aquella razón fundante, que naturalmente debe incidir a la hora de la decisión.

Este breve Sidur de Shabbat es para ser preparado por la familia, para lo cual se prepara la mesa con un mantel, el candelabro de dos velas, la copa para bendición del vino, el plato para colocar el pan y la sal en un platillo y un jarro para el agua y lavatorio para el lavado de manos.
Se realizan las oraciones de gratitud, el Shema Yisrael, las oraciones de bendición de pan , vino e hijos.

mBets 5:2 lists a series of activities prohibited on the Sabbath under the category of shevut (rest) laws because they are not conducive to the restful Sabbath atmosphere. Second Temple sources already proscribe some of these activities, and tannaitic sources consider them prohibited by biblical mandate. The Bavli, however, reinterprets these laws as rabbinically-enacted safeguards (gezerot) lest one come to violate a biblical law. For example, bBets 36b teaches that one may not swim on the Sabbath lest one come to make a flotation device, and one may not clap lest one come to fix a musical instrument. As the strangeness of these seemingly far-fetched worries suggests, and as earlier sectarian and rabbinic sources confirm, the Bavli’s explanations are not the original reasons for these laws. This prompts us to wonder why the Bavli demoted them to the status of rabbinic laws and resorted to such circuitous reasoning to explain their prohibition. This analysis will help explain the Bavli’s curious explanations for the shevut laws, and also serve as a case study for understanding some of the motivations and mechanisms of rabbinic legislation and interpretation. This example will also shed light on how the rabbis succeeded in imbuing the rabbinic legal system in general with authoritative status.

Dieu dit : « Souviens-toi ! ».  Mais, évidemment, l'homme a oublié le rendez-vous divin que Dieu fixa avec lui il y a plusieurs siècles. La fréquentation de l'église diminue rapidement dans le monde entier. Seulement 5% de la population française et 2% en Angleterre vont toujours à l'église. Bien que certaines églises en Amérique aient connu une augmentation de la fréquentation, beaucoup de plus grandes dénominations ont des difficultés à attirer les membres à n'importe quel service, à l'exception des cérémonies spéciales pour les grands jours de fête. Récemment, une église a offert un prix à cette famille qui irait à l'église avec les moyens de transport les plus inhabituels !
La plupart des gens se soucient tellement de vivre heureux et de s'amuser, qu'ils ont oublié leur Créateur. L'agenda que beaucoup ont programmé est trop serré pour vraiment « vivre ». Est-il possible que Dieu ait su et compris que la pression et les problèmes auxquels l'homme serait confronté, lui feraient facilement oublier sa source d'amour, et pour cette raison il aurait commencé le quatrième commandement avec un « souviens-toi » ?

The original sacred texts of Torah promoted veganism!  Proofs for where Rome changed how one reads their Bible version and promotes a meat sacrifices and diets are in this draft.  A review of historical quotes from the past that include evidences the prophet Mohammad PBUH was preaching vegetarianism and warning about the diet of dead flesh of animals.  The Torah proofs are offered as evidence of Roman tampering. This expanded document explores the antique dictionary definition of Khanzir and also the ancient warnings about vaccinations.  This document explores some of the areas where Edom-Rome has tampered with how one understands the religious texts whether of Contemporary Quran or Bible Versions.  This document also introduces what really was meant "By Grace Saved."  This document also presents additional evidence of the Ark of the Covenant from the time of patriarch Abraham!

On the sanctification of East European foods served at the Chasidic Rebbe's Tish, or Shabbes table. Stranger than fiction, but this is not a Haskalah satire. The sources are all authentic Hasidic sources, including those explaining how the Tsadik (Rebbe) = Yesod (the Divine phallus, as represented among the 10 Kabbalistic Sefirot = KUGEL, so do not eat it with your hands !!! Gives entirely new meaning to Pey-Tsadik…..,

התרבות הקיבוצית צמחה מתוך התנגדות ליהדות הקלאסית המזרח אירופאית ומתוך מחויבות ליצירת היהודי החדש בארץ מולדתו. חברי הקיבוצים עזבו מאחוריהם את המסורות הדתיות והליטורגיות והתנסו ביצירת מסגרת הנותנת מענה לכל מימדי החיים של חבריהם – הכלכליים, החברתיים והתרבותיים. על אף שרוב הקיבוצים היו חילוניים, ולעתים אף אתיאיסטים במפורש, כמה מן הניסיונות היצירתיים ביותר ברוחניות יהודית בישראל, באו לידי ביטוי בקיבוצים. גם כיום, לכמה מן הטקסים ומנהגי החגים המקוריים ביותר בישראל יש שורשים עמוקים בתרבות הקיבוצית.
מאמר זה בוחן את קבלות השבת המשותפות שצוינו בקיבוצים רבים בערב שבת בחדר האוכל לפני הסעודה. הוא בוחן את הדיונים ואת הויכוחים שליוו את קבלות השבת, ובעיקר את הדלקת הנרות ואת הברכות החילוניות המיוחדות שנוצרו בקיבוצים לצורך זה.
המאמר דן בהופעת תופעת קבלות השבת הקיבוציות בהקשרן ההיסטורי, את התבססותן ואת היעלמן ההדרגתי או שינוי צורתן עם הפרטת רוב הקיבוצים.

This article consists of a detailed lexicological and lexicographical study of the
different terms given to the Jewish pot for Sabbath in Spanish, such as adafina,
ḥamin, caliente(s), and other lesser known variants. This dish was a fundamental
differentiating and discerning socio-religious element in the Jewish and Converso
population of the Middle Ages

D'après les enseignements des Rabbanim de AskNoah international :
Rav Michael Schulman (directeur)
Rav Moshé Weiner (auteur du Code de Lois pour bnei Noah-sefer sheva mitsvoth HaShem [en hébreu] The Divin Code [en anglais])
Rav Ya'aqov Imannuel Schochet z''l (premier Rav superviseur de AskNoah International)

את דברי המקרא "כִּי שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים עָשָׂה ה' אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת הָאָרֶץ וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי שָׁבַת וַיִּנָּפַשׁ" (שמות לא, יז), דורש ספר הבהיר כרומז לבריאת נפשות חדשות בכל שבת: "ביום השביעי שבת וינפש, מאי וינפש, מלמד שיום השבת מקיים כל הנפשות".  השבת היא למעשה 'אם גדולה' שמרחמה מגיחות נשמות ובקרבה צומחים חיים. באיכותה המיוחדת, היא מעניקה כוח לכל המציאות להתמיד בקיומה. בדברים הבאים אבקש לעמוד על כוח ההתחדשות של השבת והיבטיה הנשיים בהשראת מקורות המדרש והקבלה. לסיכום אציג כמה מחשבות על קבלת השבת בימינו, ועל התרומה הנשית לטקסים אלו.

Recent scholarship has shown how investigations into food and poverty contribute to our understanding of late-antique Judaism and Christianity. These areas of inquiry overlap in the study of charity, as providing food was the preeminent way to support the poor. What foods and foodways do the earliest texts of rabbinic Judaism prescribe for the poor? This article examines Tannaitic discussions of the foods that should be given as charity, reading these texts within their literary and historical contexts. I find that they prescribe a two-tiered system whereby foods for the week aim to meet the poor’s biological needs, while those for the Sabbath fulfill religious requirements. These rabbinic instructions, however, also reinforce social separation and deepen the poor’s sense of exclusion. This article contributes to scholarship on poverty and charity in late antiquity, the use of food in the construction of rabbinic identity, and the tensions that arise from establishing material requirements for religious observances.

This article advances an old–new reconstruction of the debated line 9 of the " List of False Prophets " (4Q339) on the basis of a fresh look at the text, made possible by the new photographs published by the Leon Levy Digital Library project. This reconstruction is then reinforced by arguments from the field of the study of lists that are brought into the discussion of this text, as it engages several claims previously made in scholarship regarding the form of the List of False Prophets and the internal order of prophets therein.

The Pentateuch and later Jewish tradition associates the key pilgrimage festivals with stories about Israel's past. Nevertheless, these festivals all began as agricultural or seasonal festivals. Using comparative evidence from the ancient Near East, and looking at the Covenant Collection, the earliest biblical law collection, through a redaction critical lens, we can uncover the early history of these festivals and even how they developed in stages. A similar process is evident with the Sabbath, which appears to have begun as a moon festival, as per certain biblical references and from comparative evidence, but which eventually developed into the seventh day of rest as part of the institution of the week, and then comes to be associated with the story of God resting after creation. These developments, from celebrating agricultural and lunar cycles to celebrating mnemohistorical events, can be seen as part of two parallel processes: the coalescing of Israelite cultural memory and the institution of the linear calendar as the dominant conception of time.

These are the 2009 J.J. Thiessen Lectures presented at Canadian Mennonite University Oct. 21-22, 2009, with a generous forward by Harry J. Huebner.  Here is a long, two-part abstract. In the first part I offer a brief abstract about the contents of these four lectures, as edited for book publication: (I) “the book on its own terms,” (II) “the background to my work in Mennonite thought.” (For CD of the lectures, see https://www.commonword.ca/ResourceView/82/12251)

(I) The book on its own terms: excerpts from the book’s epilogue
a. my goal in lecture one was simply to introduce my model of Christian post-liberalism and apply it to my praise-and-challenge of Yoder’s study of the Jewish Christian schism.
b. In lecture two I offer a somewhat different model of rabbinic Judaism than Yoder offers. I argue that to repair schism is not to seek unity as non-difference, but to honor unity-in-difference. To do this would be to honor the practices of rabbinic scriptural interpretation (midrash) that are displayed in Talmudic literature and not to construct universalized, conceptual models of what rabbinic Judaism “really is.”
c. In Lecture 3, I “sing” of the Sabbath (שבת) as a cosmic and ritual embodiment of unity-in-difference. Out of rabbinic sources, I comment that the days and also daily moments of Shabbat enable the possibility of direct encounter with the divine presence along with those who share relations of unity-in-difference, which I identify with relations of peace.
d. In Lecture 4, I suggest that “Israel-and-Palestine” is an icon at once of failed modern models for pursuing peace and also of the eschatological goal of peace were conducted as a pursuit of unity-in-difference. This is an end time goal but one that can be approached in this world just as Shabbat is both life and the fullness of time and life here and now the presence of God.
A personal note: I sensed that my kind audience at CMU was pleased with the first three lectures but somewhat challenged or even unsettled by the fourth.
(II)      Some background to my work in Mennonite belief and practice.
I am a Jewish philosopher who trusts just about anything dear Stanley Hauerwas tells him to do. Because Hauerwas spoke so much to me about John Howard Yoder and pacifism, and because  my Charlottesville home is not so far from Eastern Mennonite University, I decided to devote a good number of years to checking out what Yoder's work is all about and what its consequences may be for studies of peace and also of Scripture at EMU. My many visits to EMU were met with warm hospitality and engagement, for which I remain grateful. these visits also led to my engaging a circle of EMU folks in practices of Scriptural Reasoning (SR), including SR events in Dubai (including some EMU participants), and a range of meetings closer to home. Several years of reading Yoder's work were a good test for my interests or not in pacifism. I could see in his work what attracted Hauerwas, which meant a good part of it would attract me. Over time, I found a couple of parts that did not attract me, including his rendering pacifism into a universalizable concept and his tendency to over-drawing or overgeneralizing go scriptural and worldly observations and claims. Pressing Stanley on these concerns, he acknowledged that yes, for him (Stanley H) Pacifism is not a concept but is the fact of what happens as Jesus stands before him: facing Jesus, Stanley cannot license state-sponsored killing; he must honor the presence of peace. But, he added, "if as a Jew you do not face Jesus, then I cannot presume that you are commanded to lay down all arms in all circumstances."  I believe I can say that for both Stanley Hauerwas and me, words of Scripture and commentary command, humanly constructed concepts do not. We both study and use philosophy, but we use it as an instrument for clarifying commands not for delivering them in philosophic or conceptual terms.
In the middle of these years of conversation and study, I very happily met Michael Cartwright and soon found myself invited to join him in the task of editing and publishing Yoder's, The Jewish-Christian Schism Revisited, which we eventually published in the SCM/Eerdmans series that Hauerwas and I founded and edited: "Radical Traditions." I probably caused a little problem, however. I was fascinated and deeply pleased by Yoder’s effort to counter Christian and also Mennonite traditions of either anti-Judaism or great wariness about postbiblical Judaism, as well as by his effort simply to study and learn about rabbinic Judaism (the source of almost all medieval and modern Judaisms) as part of the commentarial tradition and therefore something to be treasured by Christian readers of the unified Canon. But I also encountered what I considered another expression of Yoder’s conceptualism. He gave himself license to offer broad, conceptualized generalizations about the meaning and force of rabbinic of us praising of us praising pacifism of Jesus and of what became the Free Church and Mennonite Christian pacifism. I  decided I could not participate in publishing Yoder’s book in our series unless we added footnote commentaries for readers who might wonder why a scriptural-tradition-based series like Radical Traditions would feature this kind of extra-traditional reading of Jewish scriptural commentary. One goal of our series, after all, was to help promote publications in scripture-based reasoning that the Academy might otherwise fail to publish, judging that such reasoning went against the norms of the modern guilds. I judge that this particular dimension of Yoder’s work was an unintentional conduit for modern conceptualist thinking. Michael and Stanley accepted my conditions, so we published the entirety of Yoder’s essay, but with an introduction and with Michael’s and my commentaries after each chapter: both of us praising the work but also adding our concerns about the tendency I just mentioned. I say that I caused a little problem, because several Mennonite scholars wrote positive reviews of Yoder’s text but with somewhat angry comments that the coeditors would presume to burden the publication with our own thoughts of this kind.  I do not regret our effort, because we did indeed enable Yoder’s work to have a broad readership, and because I think that, over time, the concerns we expressed retain their importance.
Some years after the publication, the very kind and deeply thoughtful Harry J. and Chris Huebner hosted an invitation to deliver the Thiessen Lectures at Canadian Mennonite University. This was a distinct honor for me and I was warmed by my hosts’ graciousness.

PS: for helpful responses to my work on Yoder see the 2015 MTS Thesis: Zacharie Klassen,  A Jewish Repair for a Free Church Vision:  Reforming Restitutionist Hermeneutics With Peter Ochs.  Klassen's responses are extended in several discussions within his 2020 PhD Thesis: Zacharie Klassen, Theologies Of Israel And Judaism After Barth.

Redemption and Redeemer in Hebrew biblical terminology. Biblical justification for redemption. Shabbat as a pattern of redeemed reality. Waiting for the messianic redemption. Time-space of the redemption. Apocatastasis of the cosmos. Death and Sheol as a soteriological problem. Paradise as a world for the righteous. The matter of the redemption of the biblical landscape. The main elements of the Old Testament vision of redemption. / Odkupienie i Odkupiciel w hebrajskiej terminologii biblijnej. Biblijne uzasadnienie odkupienia. Szabat jako wzorzec rzeczywistości odkupionej. Oczekiwanie na odkupienie mesjańskie. Czasoprzestrzeń odkupienia. Apokatastaza kosmosu. Śmierć i Szeol jako problem soteriologiczny. Raj jako świat dla sprawiedliwych. Sprawa odkupienia biblijnego krajobrazu. Główne elementy starotestamentalnej wizji odkupienia.

The commandment about “keeping Shabbat” is the most literarily developed composition in the context of the Decalogue. This authoritative statement has been handed down in Exodus 20:8-11 and Deuteronomy 5:12-15 in the form of a text that has quite a few dissimilarities. Moreover, in both places, a number of textual variants are apparent in biblical manuscripts. This contribution assesses these textual variations in terms of the normative and argumentative parts of the declaration’s composition, and, at the same time, considers other relevant biblical texts about “keeping Shabbat.” This study defends the thesis that the objective core, i.e., the normative proposition, of the commandment about Shabbat in the Decalogue is not its first sentence (“Remember the sabbath day”); rather, it is the central sentence (“you shall not do any work [on Shabbat]”). In this proposition, both variants of the declaration in the Decalogue are totally congruent; the dissimilarities only pertain to its rationale or motivation. In the logic of the relationships that constitute this unique combination of normative and variable elements, basic outlines may be seen of the dynamic process by which biblical texts arose, and were formed and transmitted as an authoritative tradition.

המנוחה בשבת, מנוחת האל ומנוחת האדם, היא עיקרה ומהותה של מצוות השבת. אך מה משמעותה של מנוחה זו? מדוע נצטווה האדם לנוח, ומה משמעות הדבר שהאל נח בשבת? בהרצאה זו אעקוב אחר גלגוליהם של פתרונות פרשניים ודרשניים לשאלות אלה בין עולמות יהודיים ונוצריים ואבחן את דרכי שילובן בתוך הקשרים ספרותיים ומגמות רעיוניות שונות ולעתים מנוגדות.

The rest of God and man on the Sabbath is the essence of this holy day. However, what is the meaning of this rest? Why was the People of Israel given a commandment to rest on Sabbath, and what does God's rest on this day signify and imply? In this lecture I present several answers given to those questions by ancient interpreters alongside their evolution and development throughout different Jewish and Christian milieus, in order to demonstrate how they function in various contexts and serve different, sometimes contradicting, agendas.

במאמר קצר זה מוהדרים לראשונה דברי רבי אברהם בן הרמב"ם בסוגיית בין השמשות. עד כה נודעו דבריו רק מתוך תרגום חלקי בשו"ת מהר"ם אלשקר. לדבריו נודעה השפעה רבה על פולמוס זמן צאת הכוכבים (הידוע בשם "מחלוקת הגאונים ורבינו תם), והוצעו פירושים שונים בדעת רבי אברהם. כעת, עם חשיפת דבריו במקורם הערבי, מתלבנים מספר נקודות עמומות בדעתו.

Abstract : This communication focuses on the Sunday Schools' "recreational system". Could the observation of a playground serve as an indicator of the pedagogical model and of the teachers' educational ideas? In other words, can we say:"Show me your playground and I will tell you who you are"? Using a hermeneutic methodology, baesd on iconography, pedagogical writings and reports on the 3 French Sunday School recreational festivals in the 19th century, we tried to understand what recreation reveals about the pedagogy of this actors movement whose schools are devoid of playgrounds.

Résumé : Cette communication qui s’inscrit dans le champ de l’histoire des idées éducatives s’intéresse au « système des récréations » des Écoles du dimanche. Nous nous sommes demandée si l’observation d’une cour de récréation pouvait servir d’indicateur, de révélateur du modèle pédagogiques et des idées éducatives des pédagogues de l’école. Autrement dit, peut-on affirmer : « Montre-moi ta cour de récréation, et je te dirai qui tu es » ? Selon une méthodologie herméneutique, à partir de l’iconographie, des écrits pédagogiques et des rapports sur les trois fêtes récréatives des Écoles du dimanche françaises au XIXe siècle, nous avons cherché à comprendre ce que dévoile la récréation sur les acteurs de ce mouvement d’éducation populaire protestant dont les écoles sont dépourvues de cours de récréation.