Notes on Nathan ben Yeḥiel’s ‘Arukh

Avas [or akhas]

Aryokh¹ analyzed and discovered that this term refers to documents of authorization.

The first source is from R. Natronay, who sent a letter to Mar Nathan ben Mar Ḥanina, to Qayrawān and other places where Jews lived: “When Mar Eleazar, head of the assembly, came here, he brought part of our repayment as a written instruction [avas] to the head of the academy.” The second source is from R. Tsemaḥ ben R. Paltoy, of the geonim of Pumbedita, who wrote regarding a question of Mar Sherira, concerning a difficulty with the first question: “A firstborn who sold his firstborn portion to his brother in his father’s lifetime, etc., and he despaired of recovering the avas”—i.e., the loan. The third source is from R. Ḥushiel, who wrote, in his halakhic discussion, of the following case: “A firstborn takes a double portion, whether in the appreciation of the property after the death of the father, or a loan, or a deposit, or an akhas, or a proof he has against others in any type of document.” [ . . . ]

Isurayta

Aryokh says that we have seen in several volumes of the Gemara this expression: “by the tenths [isurayta] of the school of Rabbi” [in the passage in b. Nedarim 39b, where it says: Rav Aha bar Ḥanina said: Anyone who visits a sick person removes one-sixtieth of his suffering. They said to him: If so, let sixty people come, and he will thereby recover. Rav Aha bar Ḥanina said to them: It is like the tenths of (the school of) Rabbi.] Now, the wording here is certainly imprecise, and it is a textual error, as it should say “by the tenths of Rabbi.” It is referring to Rabbi Judah the Prince’s statement that an [orphan] daughter who is maintained by her brothers takes one-tenth [isur] of the estate [for her dowry] [b. Ketubbot 68b]. They raised a difficulty against him: According to your opinion, one who has ten daughters and one son, the son will get nothing. He replied: The first takes a tenth of the property that remains, and the same applies to all of them. So, too, here, the first visitor removes one-sixtieth of the illness, and the second removes one-sixtieth of that which was left by the first, and the same applies to all of them. Thus, it should state “the tenths of Rabbi,” not “of the school of Rabbi.”