The seven rules of Hillel

Throughout this website, frequent mention is made of a particular figure: Hillel “the Elder”. Hillel is so prominent of a subject, it would be impossible to conduct a study of Judaism and fail to encounter some sort of reference to this man. This is partly due to the historical divide between Hillel and the infamous Shammai. Shammai stood as vice president of the Sanhedrin, second in Command relative to Hillel. Shammai would persistently vex Hillel throughout their tenures, even to the point of aggression (according to one famous account). The Jewish compilation of tradition, known as the Mishnah, documents the religious rulings of Hillel and every point of disagreement between Hillel and Shammai. Hillel was so great that upon his death, the tradition of “Zuggot” (an election of a president and vice-president) would end. Instead, headship over the Sanhedrin would fall to his kin. Hillel was also the first to distil Torah wisdom to the single principle of moral behaviour towards our neighbor:

The non-Jew came before Hillel and Hillel converted him saying, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour, that is the entire Torah, the rest is just commentary, now go and study.” – Talmud – Shabbat 31a

In time, Jesus would submit the the same sentiment, but in the opposite way:

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”- Matthew 7:12

With an informed eye, similarities between Hillel and Jesus can be identified in multiple accounts. In every dispute Jesus had with the Pharisee’s regarding the Sabbath, Jesus would make use of legal precedent likely originating with Hillel. It also explains why the Pharisees would bitterly disagree, yet allow Jesus to continue with impunity. One can even make the argument that the Pharisee’s to contend with Jesus were students of Shammai. If so, this means that Jesus was siding with Hillel in the historic divide between Hillel and Shammai that did remain even up to Jesus’ time. Jesus also frequently used the method of an argument known as “Kal Vahomer” (translated as: “light and heavy”). The argument followed this pattern: “If A is so, how much more so should B apply.” This argument is but one Hermeneutical method of seven, first presented in a formal system by Hillel. These seven “rules” are known as the “Seven Middos (rules) of Hillel”

The Seven rules of Hillel

1. Ḳal va-ḥomer: “If A is so, how much more so should B apply”
2. Gezerah shavah: Equivalence of expressions. Linking scripture with identical phrases.
3. Binyan av mi-katub eḥad: Building up a “father” with a single text
4. Binyan av mi-shene ketubim: Building up a “father” from two or more texts
5. Kelal u-Peraṭ and Peraṭ u-kelal: the general to the particular.
6. Ka-yoẓe bo mi-maḳom aḥer: A conflict resolved by another passage.
7. abar ha-lamed me-‘inyano: Explanation obtained from context.

The First Rule

 “Kal Vahomer” (Light and heavy)

This first rule is employed many times in the Old Testament scripture. It often begins with the sentiment: “How much more…”

“For I know how rebellious and stiff-necked you are. If you have been rebellious against the Lord while I am still alive and with you, how much more will you rebel after I die!” – Deuteronomy 31:21

“But David’s men said to him, “Here in Judah we are afraid. How much more, then, if we go to Keilah against the Philistine forces!” – 1 Samuel 23:3

Notice that these references follow the pattern: “If A, then how much more should B apply”

“If you have run with footmen and they have wearied you, then how can you contend with horses?” – Jeremiah 12:5

Our gospels document Jesus employing “Kal Vahomer”:

If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the Law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath? – John. 7:23

The argument made is IF the Sabbath can be broken to circumcise a male on the Sabbath (which was regarded as a type of Spiritual restoration), how much more should it be permitted to make a man well on the Sabbath? 

Another:

“What man is there among you who has one sheep, and IF it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” Matthew 12:11-12

The Second Rule

“Gezerah shavah” means equivalence of expressions.

This is the practice of linking disparate sections of scripture based on a common phrase or figure of speech. When a “Gezerah shavah” is identified, the rule would allow for the interpretation of a verse to be informed by the other sections of scripture where the identical phrase or figure of speech is used. For example, Samuel 1:11 states:

“Then I will dedicate him (Samuel) to the LORD all the days of his life, and no razor shall ever come over his head.”

The same phrase is used in Judges 13:5:

“You will become pregnant and have a son whose head is never to be touched by a razor because the boy is to be a Nazirite, dedicated to God from the womb. He will take the lead in delivering Israel from the hands of the Philistines.”

By comparing this phrase “no razor shall ever come over his head” with Judges 13:5, it can be concluded under the second rule of Hillel, that the phrase as it is applied to Samuel is indicating that Samuel was a Nazirite from birth.

Examples of Gezerah Shavah in the New Testament:

Capernaum, Comfort and the Regathering

“When Jesus heard that John had been put in prison, he withdrew to Galilee. Leaving Nazareth, he went and lived in Capernaum” – Matthew 4:12-13

Capernaum means – “Village of comfort”. Hidden in this seemingly insignificant detail, is a “Gezerah Shavah.” The sentiment of comfort is often linked in prophecy to the event of the regathering of Israel:

Comfort ye, comfort ye my people says your God. The voice of him that cries in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Behold the Lord God will come with strong hand and his arm shall rule for him: behold his reward is with him and his work before him. He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm and carry them in his bosom and shall gently lead those that are with you…Then shall the virgin rejoice in the dance both young men and old together: for I will turn their mourning into joy and will comfort them and make them rejoice from their sorrow. There is hope in your end says the Lord that your children shall come again to their own border.” – Jeremiah 31:10,16, 17

Notice, that after every inclusion of the word comfort, is a promise of the regathering of Israel to their land. According to the prophet Isaiah, God “comforts” Israel by ending their exile from the land. By sneaking the phrase “Capernaum” into the narrative, the author of Matthew was wanting to assign Messianic expectation to Jesus. Prophecy connects the miracle of a final regathering of Israel to the land, with the historic arrival of the Messiah. The gospel of Matthew was implying by way of Gezerah Shava, in short: “Jesus is the Messiah. He will regather Israel.”

According to Jewish tradition, Galilee was an important location regarding the appearance of the Messiah:

“The king Messiah will be revealed in the Galilee” – From Exile to redemption, volume 2, page 119. Zohar I, 119a

Why would tradition insist on Galilee? It was in Galilee that the 10 Northern tribes were conquered and carried away into Assyria:

In the days of Pekah king of Israel came Tiglathpileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abelbethmaachah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria.” – 2 King 15:29

Since the job description of the Messiah is to regather Israel, it is fitting that he would arrive in the very place where the exile happened first:

Said R. Simeon:’At the time when the dead will be awakened and be in readiness for the resurrection in the Holy Land, legions upon legions will rise on the soil of Galilee, as it is there that the Messiah is destined to reveal himself. For that is the portion of Joseph, and it was the first part part of the Holy Land to be destroyed, and it was there that the exile of Israel and their dispersion among the nations began, as Scripture says, “but they are not grieved for the hurt of Joseph”(Amos 6:6) – Socncino Zohar, Shemoth, Section 2, Page 220a.

Paul and the Hope of Israel

In Acts 26, Paul is granted an audience with Herod Aggripa, King of Judea. Paul is welcomed to speak in his own defense to prove the charges against him were without merit. In his speech, he mentions the “hope” of the twelve tribes:

“The Jewish people all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. 5 They have known me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that I conformed to the strictest sect of our religion, living as a Pharisee. And now it is because of my hope in what God has promised our ancestors that I am on trial today. 7 This is the promise our twelve tribes are hoping to see fulfilled as they earnestly serve God day and night. King Agrippa, it is because of this hope that these Jews are accusing me. Why should any of you consider it incredible that God raises the dead. – Acts 26:4-8

What is the “hope” of the tribes? What is the “hope” they wish to see fulfilled as they serve God day and night? This phrase has a specific meaning in scripture! Through the rule of “Gezerah Shavah” we are privileged to know exactly what Paul meant when he said it. 

In the book of Ezekiel, Ezekiel is granted a vision of a valley of dead bones. The Lord then speaks on their behalf. The sentiment is that of despair and shame:

Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ – Ezekiel 37:11

Ezekiel is commanded to direct a prophecy to them:

 ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. Then you, my people, will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, declares the Lord.’” – Ezekiel 37:11-14

The “hope” lost, was in reference to their inheritance. However, God issues a declaration: on the contrary, their hope is not lost! Instead, God announces his plans to regather them to their inheritance; to revive them spiritually, and “settle” them in their land.

According to Jeremiah, the Israelites truly have hope in their “end”. In Jeremiah chapter 31, Jeremiah reveals what this hope really means:

“…there is hope in your end says the Lord that your children shall come again to their own border.” – Jeremiah 31:17

According to Paul, the New Covenant will “fulfil” the “hope in what God has promised” – and by comparing his statement with the prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah, we know that Paul was referring to the children of Israel coming “again to their own border.”

The prophecy of Zacharias

In Luke chapter 19, Jesus announces the calamity that will soon befall the city and the Temple. This depiction of violence would visibly reveal the wrath of God against Jerusalem for “knowing not the time” of their “visitation”:

And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation. – luke 19:24

The word “visit” or “visitation” connotes an act of God; an appearance of his strength, for the purpose of deliverance:

Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt: – Exodus 3:16

The word first appears in Genesis chapter 50:

And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. – Genesis 50:24

Both appearances of the term connote God’s intention to usher Israel into the safety of the land promised to the Patriarchs.

In Luke chapter 1, Zacharias (John the Baptist’s father) out of inspiration from the Holy Spirit, delivered the following prophecy:

“Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David…” – Luke 1:68-69

The prophecy foretells God’s imminent visitation. As established, the word implies a powerful display of God’s power – specifically God’s power to rid his people of captivity, to redeem and regather them. The next statement mentions a “horn of salvation” – this is reminiscent of Isaiah 23:13. According to the prophecy, the regathering of the exiles is triggered after the blow of a horn/Shofar:

“And it will be on that day when a great shofar will be blown, the perishing in the land of Assyria and the exiles in the land of Egypt will come, and they will worship before the LORD on the Holy Mountain in Jerusalem.”- Isaiah 27:13

This connection was recited three times a day by ancient Israel, in tandem with the daily sacrifices. In a prayer instituted by Ezra and the great Assembly (known as the Amidah), the tenth blessing states:

“Sound the great shofar for our freedom, lift up a banner to gather us together from the four corners of the earth. Blessed are you, LORD, who gathers in the exiled of his people Israel.”

Yet, there is more to parse out in Zacharia’s prophecy:

“…To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; The oath which he sware to our father Abraham.” – Luke 1:72

This is another Gezerah shavah. According to Leviticus 26:41-45, the act of the Lord remembering the Covenant is an implication of his will to regather Israel, despite their undeservedness. God therefore mercifully regathers Israel, not for their sake, but on account of his promise to Abraham: 

“Then, if they humble their uncircumcised hearts and accept their guilt, I will remember my promise to Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham. I will also remember the land. The land, abandoned by them, will enjoy its time to honour the Lord while it lies deserted without them. They must accept their guilt because they rejected my rules and looked at my laws with disgust. Even when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or look at them with disgust. I will not reject or cancel my promise to them, because I am the Lord their God. But for their sake, I will remember the promise to their ancestors.” – Leviticus 26:41-45

Remarkably, three accounts of Gezerah shavah can be found in Zacharia’s prophecy:

• Luke 1:68 – “Visit”
• Luke 1:69 – “raised up a horn of salvation”
• Luke 1:72 – “remember”

The content revealed in the prophecy: the mercy of God,  the regathering, the redemption, etc. were all made available in potential, should Israel recognize the time of their visitation. Unfortunately, the condition was not met. Jesus would lament their loss in two accounts:

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! – Matthew 23:37, luke 13:34

The depiction of a hen gathering chickens is an illustration of the regathering of Israel. It was Jesus’ desire to gather the children of Israel, and to remove from Israel their yoke of bondage to Rome. This would have triggered the beginning of the Messianic age.

Apostle John and the “Sons of God”

The Apostle John and in his first epistle writes:

“But as many as received him to them gave he power to become the sons of God even to them that believe on his name.” – John 1:12

The last sentiment: “even to them that believe on his name” sounds redundant. However, John is stressing a point. That point is easily investigated through his use of the phrase “sons of God.” This was a promise of restoration, coming from prophet Hosea:

“There it shall be said unto them, You are the sons of the living God.” – Hosea 1:10

The context is that it should be said to “them” – the 10 tribes that were divorced and sent into exile in the Old Testament. Hosea announces a turn of fortune for the Northern tribes. In Jesus, John envisioned the fulfilment of this prophecy of restoration. In the Old Testament they were rejected and turned away. However it is through Jesus that God welcomes them back with open arms. They return as “Sons of God.”

The Third rule

“Binyan av mi-katub eḥad” – Building up a “father” with a single text:

A Binyan “Av” (In English: Father) is the generation of a rule or principle derived from one text, that can shed light on other similar texts. For example, Deuteronomy 19:15 states that the testimony of one witness is not enough to confirm a matter in a judicial setting. From this “Av” (a father principle, or authoritative rule) we can determine that anytime the Torah mentions a “witness” (without specification in number) it is referring to the testimony of at least two witnesses.

The Fourth Rule

“Binyan av mi-shene ketubim” –  Building up a “father” from two or more texts:

The same concept applies, however the “Av” – the authoritative rule, is built from a number of scriptural passages, rather than one. An example would be the concept of the trinity. The trinity, although not explicitly confirmed in scripture, is a conclusion logically derived from many passages, after considering the implications and nuances of each reference. 

This “Av” regarding many persons in the Godhead can be found in the Aramaic Targums. In every case where the text mentions an encounter with YHVH, the Aramaic describes an encounter with the “Memra” (In English: the “Word.” In Greek, it is “logos”) One can easily conclude the translators held the “Av” principle of at least two persons in the Godhead: YHVH in heaven, and YHVH the “Memra” (YHVH the Word) who deals with man on behalf of YHVH in heaven.

The Fifth Rule

“Kelal u-Peraṭ and Peraṭ u-kelal” – The general to the particular. Or the particular to the general. 

A “Kelal” is a reference to a general class of something. A “Perat” is a specification within that class.  A “Kelal u-Perat” is the act of clarifying a generality with a specification. The Torah often mentions a generality, and follows it with a specification:

“When anyone among you brings an offering to the Lord, bring as your offering an animal from either the herd (cattle) or the flock (sheep).” – Leviticus 1:2

The reference to the “animal” is the “Kelal”. The cattle and sheep represent the “Perat” specifications. Using this rule, the Israelites knew that although the command seems to allow for an “animal” in general, the act of including the “Perat” narrowed the amount of eligible animals down to the two specific kinds mentioned: cattle and sheep. 

A “Perat u-Kelal” works the opposite. The mention of specifics, followed by a generality, indicates a rule that is all-inclusive and not confined to the specifics mentioned.

The Sixth Rule

The Sixth rule: “Ka-yoẓe bo mi-maḳom aḥer” – A conflict resolved by another passage. 

When two passages seem to conflict, a resolution can be found in a third passage. For example: “Then the LORD called to Moses and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying…” – Leviticus 1:1, appears to contradict Exodus 25:22 – “And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.”

Numbers 7:89 resolves the apparent inconsistency. The Lord would call from the Tent of Meeting, as a voice from between the two cherubim:

“When Moses entered the tent of meeting to speak with the Lord, he heard the voice speaking to him from between the two cherubim above the atonement cover on the ark of the covenant law. In this way the Lord spoke to him.

Paul uses this method in the book of Romans. Paul compares two principles that at first, seem to contradict:

• The righteous shall live by faith (Romans 1:17 = Habakkuk 2:4) 
• There is none righteous, no, not one … (Romans 3:10 = Psalms 14:1-3= Psalms 53:1-3; Ecclesiastes 7:20)

A second conflict is presented:

• God will render to each one according to his deeds. (Romans 2:6 = Psalms 62:12; Proverbs 24:12) 
• Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man whom YHWH shall not impute sin. (Romans 4:7-8 = Psalms 32:1-2

Paul’s solution to both : He cites Genesis 15:6 – “Abraham believed G-d, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 

It is by faith that we are spared of the consequences of our sin. Through faith we receive unmerited grace, our sins are forgiven, and the righteousness of the Messiah is imputed to us.

The Seventh Rule

The Seventh Rule: “abar ha-lamed me-‘inyano” – Explanation obtained from context. This rule is simple, don’t isolate a passage from its context.