Hillel was the first who laid down definite her meneutical rules for the interpretation of the Bible. Just as at the commencement of the Reformation England was distracted by the vacillation of Henry VIII., who one day became a defender of the Roman Catholic faith and another day espoused the cause of Protestantism ; by the alternate powers of More, Fisher, and Gardiner, and Cromwell, and Cranmer ; by Mary, who succeeded to the throne and then again the good Protestant Edward VI. who followed her ; so Judma was perplexed by tbe Sadducean and Pharisean princes who alternately followed each other ; Alexander Janai, a Sadducee, vvas succeeded Ity Queen Salome, whose sympa thies were with the Pharisees, she again was suc ceeded by Aristobulus II., a Sadducee ; and lie again was followed by his brother Hyrkanus II., who favoured the Pharisees. Now Hillel tried to , reconcile these opposite parties. He endeavoured , to shew the Sadducees, who rejected every law which was not expressly laid down in the word of God, that the traditional law naturally flows from the written.law, through the medium of the follow ing seven rules of interpretation (nrm t).
Inferencefram minor to the major (-Inn) e.g., Exod. xxii. 13, does not say whether the bor rower of a thing is responsible for theft. In ver. 9- r r, however, it is declared that the depositary who can free himself from making restitution in cases of death or accident, must make restitution when the animal is stolen ; whilst in ver. 13, the borrower is even obliged to make restitution in cases of death or accident. Hence the inference made from the minor (i .e., the depositary) to the major (i.e., the borrower) that he (in xxii. 13) is all the more responsible for theft (Baba Mezia, 95, a). This exegetical law is employed by Christ and the apostles (comp. Matt. vii. ; x. 29-31 ; Rom. v. 8 ; viii. 32-34 ; Heb. iii. 3).
2. The analogy of ideas (711C1 r1111), 01-analogous injerences. This rule was employed by Hillel him self on a very extraordinary occasion. In his days the evening of the Passover (tinn z-v) happened to fall on a Sabbath, which is of very rare occur rence, and the question was hotly contested, whe ther or not the Paschal lamb might he slain on the Sabbath. Hillel said that it may be slain, and argued it thus :—It is said respecting the daily sacrifice, to offer it (rwitn) time' (Num. xxviii. 2) ; and it also said, respecting the Paschal lamb, let the children of Israel keep it (11.1717:2) in its time' (ibid. ix. 2). Now, with regard to the daily sacrifice, it is distinctly ordered that it should be offered on the Sabbath (ibid. xxviii. 9) ; the ex pression in its time does not, therefore, denote the day, but that the offering is to be observed at the appointed time ; and as the expression is also used of the Passover lamb, hence it must be offered irrespective of the day, and, therefore, also irre spective of the Sabbath (comp. Jerusalem Pesa chim, 66, a ; Pesachim, vi. ; Tosifta Pesachim. cap. iv.) 3. Analogy of tzoo objects in one verse (1N r)1 ' 11T1271). Thus Lev. xv. 4 mentions two objects, viz., the bed and the chair (=ICI 1:n1), which, though belonging to two different classes, have the common quality of serving for repose. And as these are declared to be unclean when touched by him who has an issue, and to have the power of defiling both men and garments through contact, it is in ferred that all things which serve for resting may be rendered unclean by him who has an issue and then defile both men and garments.
4. Analogy of two objects in two verses (3N. 1'M 0'11117 ')V?:), e.g., though the command to light the lamps in the sanctuary (nrii, Lev, xxiv. 4) is different from the command 'to put out of the camp every leper' (t..VD trbm, :Kum. v. 2), inasmuch as in the former case the injunction is described as binding for ever or for all times (Levit. xxiv. 3), whilst in the latter the speedy carrying out of it is especially spoken of (Num. v. 4) ; yet because they have that in common that they are both alike commands, and that the word 1V, command, is used with regard to both of them, hence it is concluded that every law with regard to which the expression IV, command, is used, must at once and for ever be obeyed, 5. General and special (D1D17). Thus, where ever a special statement follows a general one, the definition of the special is to be applied to the general one, because it is always the only valid meaning, e.g., it is said in Lev. i. 2, if any man of you bring an offering to the Lord, from cattle, from oxen, and from sheep.' Here cattle is a general expression, and may denote different kinds of anitnals. Oxen and sheep is the special whereby the general is defined, and therewith it is rendered co-extensive. Hence it is inferred that only oxen and small cattle may be brought as sacrifices but not beasts.
6. Analogy of another passaf,e ppm 11 nrz irm). This is an extension of rules 3 and 4.
7. The connection (IMO 111). Thus the prohibition, ye shall not steal,' in Lev. xix. 1, is explained to refer to stealing money and not human beings (comp. Exod. xxii. 16), because the whole connection treats upon money matters (comp. Sanhedr. S6).
These herrneneutical rules which are most impor tant to the understanding of the ancient versions [MIDRAsx] were afterwards extended by R. Ishmael and others [IsHmAEL]. Hillel also simplified the accumulated mass of the tmditional explanations of the Pentateuch which had been divided into six or seven hundred sections (Chagiga 24 ; Succa xi.), by classifying its materials under six Sea'arim (0.11D) or Orders—the basis of the present arrangement of the Mishna. Hinds liberality of mind did not suit his colleague, the rigid Shammai : the latter there fore founded a sepamte school, of which he became the head. The one is well known as the school of Hillel, and the other as the school of Shanzmai. After occupying the presidential throne for about forty years, the learned, godly, humane, meek, self-denying Hillel died when Jesus of Nazareth, the Redeemer of the world, was about ten years old. The presidency became hereditary in family for fifteen generations [EDucivrtoN).
Literalure--Bartolocci, B ibliotheca Magna Rabbi nica,ii.784-796 ; Biesenthal, Thcolog. histor. Stu dien, Berlin 1847, p. 68, ff. ; Frankel, Program zur El-lip:Kg des jidisch-theologischen Seminars zu Breslau, 1854, p. ff. ; and Monatschrill, p.
201, ff. ; Graetz, in Frankel's Monatschrift, p. 156, ff. ; and Geschichte a'er Yuden, vol. iii., Leipzig 1856, p. 2o7, ff.; Jost, Geschichte des yudenthums, Leipzig 1857, vol. i., p. 254, ff.—C. D. G.