In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

THE SECOND READING More often than not, the questions that are technically relevant to the second or third reading have already occurred and been asked during the first. But sometimes they have not. If new questions do arise, I ask pe0ple to write them down, to save them, to be certain that we understand the textbefore going off in other directions. We often do not understand the beginning of a discussion until we have worked through to its end. The second reading really has the same goal as the first but with greater confidence. In this regard, a second reading of our passage is not required . However, to give you some feeling for the types of issues that might be relevant in a typical second reading, I will ask a few questions concerning this passage which, although somewhat forced, might arise. So we might first ask: Which forms of the letters mem, nun, tzadi, peh, and kafare we referring to when we refer to the Prophets' innovationsthe final or middle forms of the letters? How can it be claimed, to begin with, that the letters of the alejbet were not instituted until the time of the Prophets? Aren't all forms of the letters used in the written Torah? This question is, in fact, hinted at by the Tosafot, a school of medieval Talmud commentators, from whose comments here we learn that this question is, at first sight, even more complicated than we might have surmised. We also discover that the discussion that appears here in Tractate Megillah also appears in more elaborate form in Tractate Shahbat . There it is much clearer that Rabbi I:;Iisda is referring to the dosed, or what we call the final, letters. Knowing more about the context of Rabbi l:;Iisda's statement forces us to reread the text. What, in our first reading and up to this point in our second reading, we read as two objections to Rabbi Yirmeyah turns out probably not to be two objections after all. So our second reading has, in fact, become a rereading. THE SECOND READING 45 In a second reading we might also begin to notice anomalies that arise in the text. In the case of our passage, these are readily apparent. First is the uncertainty of attribution. Does our passage begin with a teaching by Rabbi Ymneyah or by Rabbi l;liyya bar Abba? Does it make a difference? To answer these questions, we would begin to research who these two sages were, which period they lived in, what their particular individual approach to the Torah was, based on their other appearances in the Talmud separately or together. Similarly, we would learn what we could about Rabbi l;Iisda. How does his statement here fit in with his larger body of material, his general shita (perspective) on matters of Torah? What is his relation with Rabbi Yirmeyah and Rabbi l;liyya? Did they live at the same time? If not, who might their opponents or audience have been in their own day? Were they talking about the same subject? If not, why does the gemara place them together? Does a particular "subtext" begin to emerge in which the gemara is raising other issues than those on the surface of the reading? In the same vein, the center of this discussion is most certainly, from both a halakhic and a theological perspective, the question of changes instituted by the Prophets, and the subject of change in general. This leads us to ask questions concerning the choice of the word tzojim for "Prophets," rather than the usual nevi'im. Why does Rabbi Yirmeyah refer to the prophetic innovators as lithe seers," and the gemara assume he meant "the Prophets"? Thus, our second reading concludes. We have a dearer idea of what the text says. And we have, inevitably, begun to resonate to questions that are "outside" the text. Somewhere between the second and third reading, at the end of one and the beginning of the next, these questions begin to form a theme. In our sample passage the theme is easily identified : who can or cannot change the Torah tradition, who is or isn't a prophet, what is the difference between a (mere) seer and a prophet, and how does rabbinic authority fit into this picture? Although we do not know the outcome of the game, we have identified the players. In the third reading, which we typically begin with the theme in mind, we...

Share