[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Moshe Shulman wrote concerning my post on MMT:

    "He is only saying that he thinks the authors
    of MMT could have been in charge of the temple,
    and that they did not separate themselves.  (I
    have answered him that I think the wording used 
    there could not have that meaning . . .)"
Moshe, you misstate me.  I do think the authors
of MMT separated themselves from the multitude of
the people.  That is what MMT says, and that is what
I said in my post at all times.  Since this has
been repeated in posts of yours perhaps five times
now, I would like to get this detail straight and not
be misrepresented.

The expression PRSNW of MMT is equivalent, as the 
editors of MMT noted, to SWR MDRK H'M of CD 8.16, 19.29.
Ian has framed the issue admirably: these phrases can well be
understood as the rhetoric of priestly separation from 
non-observant people.  What happens when such a disciplined 
observant party is in power?  At this point the terminology of
"sectarian" begins fracturing.  The insight I hoped to
introduce was that the issue and rhetoric of group discipline 
and cohesion needs to be distinguished from the 
separate issue of political and social marginalization.  
There is no necessary linkage.  The terminology of 
"sectarian", unless more carefully defined, may be 

Greg Doudna