Lynn Kaye. Time in the Babylonian Talmud: Natural and Imagined Times in Jewish Law and Narrative. Cambridge Press, 2018.
Lynn Kaye in her thorough examination of time in rabbinic literature argues that the rabbis of the Babylonian Talmud (BT) imagined time as flexible, with temporal concepts like simultaneity, fixity, and retroactivity informing their laws and narratives. Time in the Babylonian Talmud is one of the more recent contributions to what Kaye and Sarit Kattan Gribetz have recently called the “temporal turn” in the study of ancient Judaism.[1] As part of this “turn” Kaye provides an in-depth study of temporality in the BT through a phenomenological approach. Kaye engages with the work of other scholars of ancient Jewish time, specifically Sacha Stern, who has previously argued that ancient Jews (with the exception of Hellenistic Jews like Philo of Alexandria) had no abstract concept of time.[2] Instead, Kaye argues that a close reading of the BT reveals what the rabbis imagined as temporally possible.
Kaye suggests that time as imagined in the BT is best represented by Wassily Kandinsky’s painting, Several Circles (1926). According to Kaye, the painting’s circles of various sizes and colors represent various moments; these moments, as circles, interact both temporally and spatially and are spread across the canvas non-linearly. Kaye proposes that time in the BT is represented not by the circles of the painting, but by the empty space that surrounds the circles, allowing the circles or moments to be reorganized into any arrangement (p. 5). Kaye finds an innovative view of the spatiality of temporality in the BT that “is not limited to visible and irreversible physical and social processes of change or ‘natural time’…[Rather,] Temporality allows events that are not adjacent in natural time to make contact” (p. 31). Through a close reading of legal and narrative material, Kaye is able to push back against the linear understanding of “natural time” to show that time acts as a flexible, even malleable, concept in the BT and that these “manifestations of temporality become most intricate” in the anonymous editorial layers of the BT (p. 20).
Kaye opens her work with an expansive introduction to her methodology and a brief review of the study of time in antiquity, before progressing to the midrashim and Second Temple literature. Kaye’s engagement with time in the midrashim is well-argued and shows that the notion of flexible time is not unique to the BT. However, Kaye suggests a significant difference between Second Temple and rabbinic views of their place in time: while Second Temple literature assumes a continuity with “biblical times,” the rabbis assume their world was discontinuous. According to Kaye, this feature of rabbinic literature as well as the flexibility of time in the midrashim suggests that rabbinic literature differs from earlier Jewish sources in that “permeable temporal boundaries” exist (p. 20). Overall, I find Kaye’s claim that the BT and rabbinic literature have a distinct notion of permeable temporal boundaries convincing but a more thorough engagement with Second Temple sources would have added to her argument. For example, one wonders whether the manipulation of temporal measurement, say in the Apocalypse of Weeks, Jubilees, and Daniel 9, would indicate temporal flexibility and how this would affect Kaye’s distinction between Second Temple and rabbinic sources.
In her study of temporality in the BT, Kaye concentrates on four topics: simultaneity, temporal precision, fixity, and retroactivity. In Chapter One, Kaye tackles the first topic, simultaneity in rabbinic literature, specifically whether simultaneity exists, whether humans possess the ability to observe simultaneity, and the extent to which rabbinic law allows for the indeterminacy of simultaneity. Kaye finds through analysis of passages on the human ability to decipher simultaneity and the use of the legal principle, “it is im/possible to reduce,” that the use of gates or other liminal spaces in legal discussions of simultaneity indicates the intimate connection between space and time in the BT.
In Chapter Two, Kaye concentrates on divine and human temporal precision. Kaye begins with an overview of ancient time-telling tools, both material tools, such as sun-dials, and non-material tools, such as the placement of the sun in the sky. Kaye argues that because temporal imprecision was relatively common in antiquity, the rabbis provide varying margins of error for some legal requirements. The BT offers a specific response to temporal imprecision and, according to Kaye, uses the term mašehu, which functions both spatially and temporally, in order to provide a legal buffer. Humans may lack temporal precision; however, as Kaye shows, God in the BT is precise in their timeliness. Indeed, at Mekhilta de-Rabbi Shimon Bar Yokhai 12:29, God sits on, presumably in control over, a sundial. In one of her more persuasive analyses, Kaye argues that the “Oven of Akhnai” narrative shows that God brings retribution at the exact right time (the moment Rabbi Eliezer prays is the exact moment that Rabban Gamaliel’s death is announced). From this and other passages in the BT, Kaye finds, “Punishment simultaneous with transgressions signal the divine ability to close any temporal gap between events, something that human beings cannot do” (p. 77). In the BT, God is essentially always right on time. Kaye ends the chapter with a thought-provoking contrast of the theological significance of God as “timely” in rabbinic literature with other ancient and modern texts, like Augustine’s presentation of God as “timeless.”
In Chapter Three, Kaye moves to the temporal notion of fixity, a quality that allows more abstract concepts like law to remain the same regardless of temporal change. Kaye analyzes the rabbinic use of the metaphor of “fixing” (qbʿ) and shows that metaphors on qbʿ once again reinforce the connection between space and time, and because of the emphasis on permanence, movement. Kaye argues that fixity is applied to specific traditions in rabbinic literature in order to affirm that the tradition “can endure despite the processes of change that characterize natural time” (p. 30). Therefore, some traditions can effectively transcend—or be fixed in—(natural) time.
In Chapter Four, Kaye turns to the legal principle of retroactivity (bĕrêra), which presumes that a later action or intention can affect an earlier one. Through an extended discussion of the application of bĕrêrā to an eruv tehumin Kaye argues that bĕrêrā assumes two modes of time: natural time and a time where moments can be reconfigured in a different order. As Kaye pointedly argues, “with the Bavli’s multiple temporal orderings, natural time can process successively, while legal timings have different configurations of events” (p. 130). Kaye thus shows the potential of retroactivity to allow the BT to manipulate time. To close the chapter, Kaye discusses the potential issues with the concept of bĕrêrā—both theologically (i.e., Is there free-will?) and logically (i.e., do time-machines exist?).
Kaye then turns to her most successful and persuasive analysis, Chapter Five, in which she discusses the temporality of Passover practices that link past and present. Kaye, influenced by Marcel Proust’s In Search of Lost Time, focuses on how moments of past and present become linked and finds three methods in the BT: matching the exact time, action, and speech. For example, in regard to the Passover, the three methods are found respectively as the remembrance of the Exodus at the correct time of night (b. Pesahim 120b), the eating of matzah, and verbal expressions of the Exodus (115a-b). In performing these acts, the remembrance of the Exodus and the original Passover are “actualized” (p. 146), and the time that separates the rabbinic Jew observing Passover from the Israelite fleeing Egypt is erased. Though Kaye notes that observance of other holidays, particularly Sukkot, functions similarly, the BT exhibits the most concern for and spends the most time on, Passover. Here the time-bending quality of Passover raises intriguing questions: What is it about this holiday, compared to say, Sukkot, that makes it so keen for the blurring of past and present? And, why is the BT, in particular, so concerned with Passover and its connection to the Exodus?
In Time in the Babylonian Talmud, Kaye challenges our temporal assumptions and contributes to our understanding of the complexity and utility of time in ancient Judaism. One of the many strengths of the monograph is Kaye’s accessible explanations (and helpful figures) of the intricate aspects of temporality. For example, her use of Several Circles as a visualization effectively demonstrates time’s flexibility and spatial features in the BT. Kaye’s use of comparative data for temporality in ancient literature, such as Greek, Syriac, Middle Persian, and Roman sources, was a welcome addition and highlights the need for more in-depth studies of time in Late Antiquity. Discussing the context and scope of these points of comparison might help us not only illustrate the temporality of the BT but also theorize why the BT exhibits this temporality. What differences emerge for the BT’s anonymous redactors? How does temporality help contextualize the rabbinic community in Babylonia?
Overall, despite the seemingly technical claims of this study, Kaye uncovers a significant feature of the BT and clears the way for a more nuanced understanding of ancient Jewish time. Instead of privileging Greek conceptions of an abstract time, Kaye shows “The kinds of time that arise from Talmudic storytelling and legal reasoning are products of legal and narrative thought and are not limited to the paths of temporal thinking in Greek thought” (p. 120). Through expert reading of rabbinic literature, Kaye provides key insights into ancient temporality and rightly shows that it is best to see what the BT tells us about its concept of time rather than imposing our own. Kaye’s book is timely indeed.
Catherine E. Bonesho, University of California, Los Angeles, bonesho@ucla.edu
[1] Sarit Kattan Gribetz and Lynn Kaye, “The Temporal Turn in Ancient Judaism and Jewish Studies,” Currents in Biblical Research 17.3 (2019): 332-95.
[2] Sacha Stern, Time and Process in Ancient Judaism (Oxford Press, 2003).