Stanislovas Buškevičius

Stanislovas Buškevičius (ur. 14 września 1958 w Kownie) – litewski polityk meat tenderizer vinegar, od 1988 przewodniczący Młodej Litwy, w latach 1996–2004 poseł na Sejm cheap custom football shirts.

W 1977 ukończył studia w Instytucie Politechnicznym w Kownie, osiem lat później uzyskał tytuł zawodowy magistra ekonomii na Uniwersytecie Wileńskim. W latach 1988–1990 wykładał ekonomię na kursach wieczorowych w Instytucie Medycznym w Kownie, został jednak zwolniony z powodów politycznych.

W 1988 należał do inicjatorów powołania organizacji politycznej Młodej Litwy nawiązującej do przedwojennej organizacji o takiej nazwie. Organizował akcję bojkotu służby w Armii Czerwonej, doprowadził do upamiętnienia tzw. powstania birżańskiego z 1941 na dawnym cmentarzu karmelickim w Kownie.

Od 1993 do 1996 pełnił obowiązki doradcy premiera do spraw młodzieży w tworzonym przez postkomunistów z Litewskiej Demokratycznej Partii Pracy rządzie. W 1994 objął kierownictwo nad Młodą Litwą przekształconej wówczas w partię polityczną. W latach 1995–1996 zasiadał w radzie miejskiej Kowna. W 1996 i 2000 był wybierany do Sejmu z okręgu Kowno-Kalniečiai z poparciem Młodej Litwy. W 2004, 2008, 2012 i 2016 bezskutecznie ubiegał się o ponowny wybór do Sejmu.

W 2007 i w 2011 ponownie uzyskiwał mandat radnego Kowna top rated glass water bottles, pełnił funkcję zastępcy burmistrza ds meat tenderizer knuckles. kultury i sportu.

Żonaty, ma syna i dwie córki.

Baraita on the Thirty-two Rules

—— Tannaitic ——

—— Amoraic (Gemara) ——

—— Later ——

—— Exodus ——

—— Leviticus ——

—— Numbers and Deuteronomy ——

—— Tannaitic ——

—— 400–600 ——

—— 650–900 ——

—— 900–1000 ——

—— 1000–1200 ——

—— Later ——

—— Torah ——

—— Nevi’im ——

—— Ketuvim ——

The Baraita on the Thirty-two Rules or Baraita of R. Eliezer ben Jose ha-Gelili is a baraita giving 32 hermeneutic rules for interpreting the Bible. It no longer exists, except in references by later authorities. Abul-Walid ibn Janaḥ is the oldest authority who drew upon this Baraita, but he did not mention it by name. Rashi makes frequent use of it in his commentaries on the Bible and the Talmud. He either briefly calls it the thirty-two rules (Hor. 3a) or designates it as the “Baraita (or sections פרקי) of R. Eliezer b. Jose ha-Gelili” (Gen. ii. 8; Ex. xiv. 24). Also the Karaite Judah Hadassi, who incorporated it in his Eshkol ha-Kofer, recognized in it the work of this R. Eliezer.

The beraita has not been preserved in an independent form, and knowledge of it has been gathered only from the recension transmitted in the methodological work Keritot, by Samson of Chinon. The beginning of the Baraita in this recension reads as follows: “Whenever you come across the words of R. Eliezer b. Jose ha-Gelili, make a funnel of your ear.” Though this sentence already existed in the Baraita as known to Hadassi (see W. Bacher, in Monatsschrift, xl. 21), it is naturally a later addition taken from the Talmud (Ḥul. 89a); but it shows that the Baraita of the Thirty-two Rules was early regarded as the work of Eliezer b. Jose ha-Gelili. There are strong grounds for the supposition that the opening sentence of the Baraita ran: “R. Eliezer, the son of R. Jose the Galilean, said.” This is the reading of Joshua ha-Levi and Isaiah Horowitz (see Bloch, p. 53); and it is believed that the name of the author did not drop out until the addition of the sentence from the Talmud. Consequently, no adequate reasons exist for doubting the authorship of R. Eliezer. In Vol. XXIII of the Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research (1954), Moshe Zucker sought to prove, from Geniza documents, that the Baraita of the 32 Rules was written by Shemuel b cheap custom football shirts. Hofni Gaon (d. 1013) as part of the introduction to his commentary to the Torah. This conclusion has been challenged by A. Greenbaum, ‘The Biblical Commentary of Samuel ben Hofni Gaon’ (Mosad HaRav Kook 1978).

Distinction must, however, be made between two different constituent elements of the Baraita. The enumeration of the 32 hermeneutic rules in the first section constitutes the real Baraita as composed by R. Eliezer; and the explanations of each rule in the following 32 sections form, as it were, a Gemara to the real Baraita. In these 32 sections sayings are cited of the Tannaim R. Akiva, R. Ishmael, R. Jose, R. Nehemiah, R. Nehorai, Rebbi, Ḥiyyah, and of the amoraim Johanan and Jose b. Ḥanina the best water bottles. Although these names, especially the last two, show that portions of the Baraita were interpolated long after Eliezer b. Jose, yet no general conclusions may be drawn from it with regard to the whole work.

The terminology is prevailingly tannaitic, even in the second portion. W. Bacher (Terminologie der Jüdischen Schriftauslegung, p. 101) correctly remarks that the exclusively tannaitic expression “zeker le-dabar” is found at the end of section ix. (compare also the archaic phrase “hashomea’ sabur” for which “at sabur” is usually said). The second part, therefore, leaving later interpolations out of consideration, may also have sprung from the tannaitic period, probably from the school of R. Eliezer. It is noteworthy that the old scholars make citations from the Baraita that are not found in its present form, thus casting a doubt upon the correctness of the present recension (see Reifmann, pp. 6, 7).

The 32 rules are those applied in haggadic interpretations (הגדה is the right reading and not התורה). This entirely characterizes the method of the Baraita; for although it incorporates the most important halakic rules of interpretation, which originated in the schools of R. Akiva and of R. Ishmael (Hillel), the Baraita deals principally with the syntax, style, and subject-matter of the Bible. Such treatment is of first importance for the interpretation of the Scriptures; but in the Halakah it is of subordinate value. The Baraita, then, written about 150 CE, may be regarded as the earliest work on Biblical hermeneutics, since Philo’s fantastic allegories can hardly be regarded as such where to buy football jerseys.

Following are two examples from the Baraita, which illustrate its method.

These examples suffice to show that in Palestine scholars early began to devote themselves to a rational Bible exegesis, although free play was at the same time yielded to haggadic interpretation.

 This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Singer, Isidore; et al., eds. (1901–1906). “article name needed“. Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.