טעות לעולם חוזרת

The medieval sages invested much effort in clarifying the correct text of the Babylonian Talmud and other works of Rabbinic literature. Often, they did not reveal their thought processes or document the way they determined the correct reading. However, occasionally they do present different possible versions of a passage and explain the considerations that led them to determine which of them is correct.This article discusses two examples of the latter type of textual clarification, but which have become completely corrupted. One discussion addresses the clarification of the text of a complicated passage from the Palestinian Talmud about a very sensitive topic: under what conditions may a husband divorce his wife if she has gone insane. The second discussion is about the text of a Mekhilta passage about the prohibition of instructing a non-Jew to perform labor for a Jew on the Sabbath. Determining the correct text of this passage has significant halakhic ramifications.Both of the texts discussed in this article contain recurring phrases, causing early scribes to err in their copying. The medieval sages sought to correct these corruptions and wrote extensive explanations of what the correct text should be. However, later scribes who copied these complex textual discussions were sloppy in their work and re-corrupted what the sages sought to correct, making the text nearly incomprehensible.In the appendix to the article is a brief discussion of the use of consistent philological rules by medieval sages, especially the well-known principle of ‘omission due to similar ending’, or homeoteleuton.