Pt3 Revealing the Order: Literary Structure and Rhetoric in the Mishnah
This is the third and final part of a three-part series, based on my research on literary structure in the Mishnah. Part 1 is here, Part 2 is here; the outline of the series can be found at Part 1.
Part 3: Architectural, Procedural, and Thematic Lists – The Mishnah’s World in Order
Introduction to Part 3: Thematic Cohesion and Grand Narratives through Lists
In the previous two parts of this series, we've journeyed through the landscape of Mishnaic literary structure, focusing on how my visualization techniques—using formatted lists and tables—can illuminate the Mishnah's internal logic.
We began with fundamental hierarchical lists in Part 1 and progressed to more diverse forms, such as numerical, comparative, and conditional lists in Part 2.
Now, in this concluding part, we turn our attention to lists that serve an even broader purpose: constructing thematic cohesion and, in a sense, grand narratives.
These are lists that meticulously detail sacred spaces, outline complex Temple rituals, and define extensive legal categories.
As I’ve noted, some Mishnaic tractates contain "chapter-long lists that, when formatted intuitively, reveal a logical progression that is easier to follow" (Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 1).
It is these grander structures, often spanning significant portions of text, that we will now explore.
My aim, as always, is to show how a clear visual presentation of these extensive lists not only aids comprehension but also allows us to appreciate the Mishnah’s systematic approach to ordering its world and teachings.
This exploration will underscore the Mishnah's role not just as a legal code, but as a document that maps out physical and conceptual realities with remarkable precision.
Structuring Sacred Space and Ritual: The Temple Lists
The late Second Temple in Jerusalem, its architecture, and its intricate rituals are central to much of the Mishnah.1
The Mishnaic editor employed detailed lists to preserve the memory and understanding of these sacred realities.
My work in formatting these lists helps to create a clearer mental map of these spaces and procedures.
Case Study: Shekalim 6:3 – "The 13 Gates of the Temple Courtyard: Locations, Names, and Functions"
This Mishnah in tractate Shekalim provides a tour of the Temple Courtyard gates.2
Original Hebrew text, formatted:
My table (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 37-39) organizes this information by location, name, and any additional details:
This structured overview makes it much easier to visualize the layout of the Temple gates than a continuous prose description.
Case Study: Middot (Selections) – Mapping the Temple's Dimensions
Tractate Middot (literally: “Measurements”) details the layout of the historical late Second Temple.3
For example:
Middot 1:1 – "The 24 Temple Watch Locations" (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 70-71): This list identifies 3 priestly and 21 Levitical guard posts, specifying their locations (e.g., "5 at the five gates of the Temple Mount," "4 at the four internal corners").
Middot 4:7a – "East-West and North-South Dimensions of the Second Temple Sanctuary" (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 82-84): This provides a layer-by-layer breakdown of the Sanctuary's dimensions, totaling 100 cubits east-to-west and 70 cubits north-to-south. My tables for this list (one for E-W, one for N-S) meticulously present each component (e.g., "Porch wall - 5 cubits," "Porch - 11 cubits," etc.).
These detailed dimensional lists allow us to reconstruct, at least conceptually, the grandeur and specific proportions of the Temple.
My tabular formatting helps in collating these measurements into a coherent whole.
Case Study: Tamid (Selections) – Outlining Temple Procedures
Tractate Tamid describes the daily service in the late Second Temple.
Its lists are often procedural, outlining sequences of actions.
Tamid 3:1 – "The 13 Lotteries for Assigning Duties" (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 89-90): This lists the 13 tasks assigned by lottery for the daily tamid animal sacrifice, from "Who will slaughter" to the priest responsible for "The wine."
Tamid 4:2-3a – "The 11 Steps in Processing the Daily Temple Sacrifice Carcass and Allocating Parts" (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 91-93): This provides a step-by-step guide, from piercing the animal's knee to taking the left hind leg, and specifies which part was distributed at each stage.4 My table clearly links each "Step" and "Action" to the "Part Distributed."
These procedural lists are vital for understanding the complex choreography of Temple ritual.
Visual formatting clarifies the sequence and the distribution of responsibilities.
Categorical Lists: Defining Legal Boundaries and Consequences
The Mishnah frequently uses extensive lists to categorize transgressions and their corresponding legal ramifications, or to define other legal classifications.
These lists demonstrate the Sages' drive for comprehensive legal articulation.
As I noted in the introduction to my "Part 3 - Mishnah Structure: With a Focus on Lists" (PDF 3, p.1), my focus here is particularly on "lists of 5 items or more," which often form substantial legal categories.
Case Study: Sanhedrin 7:4a – "List of 17 Transgressors Subject to Death By Stoning"
This stark list from Tractate Sanhedrin (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 52-54) enumerates capital offenses punishable by stoning.
Original Hebrew text, formatted:
My formatting categorizes them for clarity:
Sexual Transgressions (6 items; list items #2-3): e.g., "One who has sex with his mother," "A woman who brings an animal upon herself (bestiality)."
Religious and Ritual Offenses (5 items; list items #4-8): e.g., "One who blasphemes," "One who desecrates the Sabbath."
Family and Social Offenses (3 items; list items #9-12): e.g., "One who curses his father or mother," "One who leads a community astray to idolatry."
Witchcraft and Magic (1 item; list item #13): "One who practices sorcery."
Other (1 item; list item #14): "A rebellious and wayward son."
Case Study: Keritot 1:1 – "List of 34/36 Transgressors Subject to Spiritual Excision (Karet)"
Similarly, Tractate Keritot begins with an extensive list of offenses that incur the penalty of karet (spiritual excision) (from Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 62-65).5
Original Hebrew text, formatted:
My presentation of this list also uses subcategories:
Sexual Transgressions (15 items; list items #1-5): e.g., "One who has sex with his father’s wife (stepmother)," "One who has sex with a menstruant (niddah)."
Religious and Ritual Offenses (7 items; list items #6-12): e.g., "One who worships idols," "A ritually impure person who eats sacred offerings."
Food-Related Transgressions (7 items; list items #13-16): e.g., "One who eats forbidden fats (חלב)," "One who eats chametz on Passover."
Temple and Ritual Prohibitions (3 items; list items #17-19): e.g., "One who prepares the [‘anointing] oil’ inappropriately."
Failure to Perform Positive Commandments (2 items; list items #20): "Failure to offer the Passover sacrifice," "Failure to circumcise."
Such comprehensive enumerations serve to define the boundaries of communal and individual responsibility with great precision.
Case Study: Nedarim 6:1-7:2 – "Restricted and Permissible Foods in Vows: A Guide to 46 Cases"
One of the longest and most intricate lists I've formatted is from tractate Nedarim, dealing with foods affected by vows (from Mishnah Structure - Part 2,6 p. 15-20).
This list, detailing 46 scenarios, specifies which foods are permitted or prohibited based on the wording of a vow.
Original Hebrew text, formatted (first 12 items):
Table visualizing (beginning of table, corresponding to previous):
For example:
One who vows (neder) [to abstain] from cooked foods is permitted roasted and boiled foods.
If he said 'Konam (קונם), cooked food that I taste', he is forbidden loose cooked food but permitted thick [cooked food].
Given its length, I presented this in a detailed table with columns for "Vow re:", "neder, or konam?", "Permitted Foods," and "Prohibited Foods."
This structure is essential for navigating the distinctions the Mishnah makes based on the precise formulation of the vow and the nature of the food item.
It demonstrates an extreme case of Mishnaic exhaustive legal categorization.
Conclusion: The Mishnaic Mind – Ordered, Rhetorical, and Accessible
Across these three parts, we have seen how the Mishnah, far from being an undifferentiated mass of text, is a work that contains clear literary structure.
The Mishnaic editor employed lists as a fundamental organizing principle,7 creating hierarchies, drawing comparisons, outlining procedures, mapping spaces, and defining comprehensive legal categories.
My work in reformatting these Mishnaic passages into visually clear lists and tables is driven by the conviction that such an approach significantly aids not only comprehension but also a deeper appreciation of the Mishnah's literary construction.
When the "scaffolding" of the text is made visible, the editor’s logical processes and rhetorical strategies become more evident.
The observation that the Mishnah, a text with (purported) "oral work" origins (Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 1), contains such stable and complex literary patterns raises fundamental questions about its composition, memorization, and transmission.
The very structures we've examined likely served as powerful mnemonic and pedagogical tools for generations of scholars.
Ultimately, by visually presenting these lists, my "goal is to help readers understand the Mishnah's often complex literary structure more effectively" (Mishnah: Visualizing Literary Structure, p. 1).
This understanding moves us beyond merely decoding words to appreciating the Mishnaic mind itself—a mind committed to order, precision, and the clear articulation of a sacred worldview.
I encourage readers to explore these visualization techniques in their own learning of Talmudic literature. By actively looking for and highlighting structure, we can unlock new layers of meaning and engage more profoundly with classical Hebrew literature. The blueprint is there; sometimes, all it takes is a new way of seeing to bring it into focus.
References
Even though the Second Temple had been destroyed around 150 years before the time the Mishnah was redacted. (The Second Temple was destroyed in 70 CE, the Mishnah was redated in early- to mid-3rd century CE.)
For my formatting, summaries, and tables for the entire tractate, see my “Mishnah Tractate Shekalim: Featuring Reader-Friendly Formatting, Summaries, and Tables“.
For my formatting, summaries, and tables for the entire tractate, see my “Mishnah Tractate Middot: Featuring Reader-Friendly Formatting, Summaries, Tables, Hyperlinks, and Loanword Etymologies“.
This Mishnah section (specifically, Tamid 4:3) is one of the longest in the entire Mishnah corpus. See my count in my previous piece.
Notably, the number of items to listed is explicitly stated (36), at the beginning. This explicit number for items in a list is the second-largest in the Mishnah, after the 39 melachot of Shabbat.
I format that latter Mishnah in Mishnah Structure - Part 3 (“Part 3 - Mishnah Structure: With a Focus on Lists“), p. 8-9:
An even more basic structural unit in the Mishnah is the casuistic formulation (case followed by ruling).
I plan to discuss this in a future piece.
For now, see this example showing casuistic style - Case; Law; Reason - organizing the original Hebrew text of the first chapter of tractate Arakhin (Mishnah_Arakhin.1.1-4):
Compare the discussion of this format in the Bible, in this piece by Martha Himmelfarb, “Scribal Features That Helped the Priestly Text Survive“, at TheTorah.com, section “Casuistic Laws“:
A third scribal feature employed by the priestly source, as Guy Darshan has shown [in “The Casuistic Priestly Law in Ancient Mediterranean Context: The History of the Genre and its Sitz im Leben”, in Harvard Theological Review 111:1 (2018)] , pp. 24-40] is the casuistic formulation of some of its laws, i.e., “if/when…. then…”
Laws formulated in casuistic terms are widespread in ancient Near Eastern civil law; they play a prominent part in the Laws of Hammurabi and the Covenant Collection of Exodus 21-23, for example […]
Apart from the biblical priestly source, casuistic laws do not appear in ancient Near Eastern ritual texts.
Nevertheless, they are attested in Greek laws concerning purity and cult from the middle of the first millennium B.C.E., that is, roughly contemporary with the priestly source.
One important implication of the casuistic formulation is that it addresses laws to “the public at large,” in contrast to ancient Near Eastern ritual texts that are intended for priests alone.
For our purposes, it is noteworthy that authors of the priestly source took the practices of the scribes of the non-priestly legal corpus as a model for their own composition.
To contrast with the casuistic format described by Himmelfarb ('if/in the case of… then…', i.e. a conditional structure) — we can outline several alternative formats used in both biblical and ancient legal-religious texts:
Apodictic Format
Structure: Direct command or prohibition, with no hypothetical case.
Example: 'You shall not murder' (Exodus 20:13).
Function: More absolute in tone, often associated with divine speech or moral absolutes (e.g., the Ten Commandments).
Contrast: Unlike casuistic laws, apodictic laws lack a conditional structure (‘if….then’) and do not imply situational application. They're often aimed at communal identity rather than adjudication.
Priestly Prescriptive Formulae
Structure: Ritual instructions stated as prescriptive sequences, often in the second or third person imperative or jussive.
Example: Leviticus 1:3–9 (instructions for burnt offerings).
Function: Technical, directed at priests; emphasizes correct cultic procedure rather than hypothetical violations.
Contrast: Unlike casuistic law, these are neither hypothetical nor public-facing; they're procedural and prescriptive, not juridical.
Narrative-Embedded Law
Structure: Law delivered through story or embedded within a historical episode.
Example: Numbers 15:32–36 (the Sabbath wood-gatherer).
Function: Illustrative, conveying legal norms through concrete narrative.
Contrast: Less abstract than casuistic law; focuses on precedent and dramatization rather than codification.
Wisdom-Instruction Format
Structure: Moral or behavioral guidelines framed as general truths.
Example: Proverbs 22:6 ('Train up a child…').
Function: Didactic, often familial or societal, rather than legal per se.
Contrast: Not legalistic or enforceable; lacks conditional framing or judicial applicability.
Divine Speech Formula
Structure: 'Thus says YHWH…', followed by commands or consequences.
Example: Amos 5 or Leviticus 26.
Function: Prophetic or covenantal; often blends law with exhortation or judgment.
Contrast: Less procedural or hypothetical than casuistic law; more performative and authoritative.
Each format encodes different assumptions about audience, purpose, and enforcement.
The priestly adoption of casuistic structure, as Himmelfarb notes, is notable because it borrows a genre typically associated with civil law and adapts it to cultic contexts.
See also David P. Wright, Inventing God's Law: How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi (2009), especially chapter 2 - “The Casuistic Laws” and chapter 3 “The Apodictic Laws”.
Wright ibid. defines as follows:
Casuistic: "if . . . then . . ."
Apodictic: "do this/don't do that"
It’s worth pointing out here that (as has been pointed out by scholars) a number of Mishnah tractates dealing with the late Second Temple period are descriptive in their literary formulation (i.e. narrative accounts), rather than prescriptive (i.e. they don’t follow the casuistic or apodictic legal literary formats that’s standard in the rest of the Mishnaic corpus).