אֶת־יְהוָ֧ה אֱלֹהֶ֛יךָ תִּירָ֖א אֹת֣וֹ תַעֲבֹ֑ד וּב֣וֹ תִדְבָּ֔ק וּבִשְׁמ֖וֹ תִּשָּׁבֵֽעַ׃
Matakot ka sa Walang-Hanggan na iyong Diyos; Siya ang iyong paglingkuran, at sa Kanya ka kumapit, at sa Kanyang pangalan ka manumpa.
Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot
Neḥemiah from Emmaus253In Babylonian sources, Naḥum from Gimzo (Shevuöt 26a) or Neḥemiah from Emmaus (Pesaḥim 22b) was the teacher of Rebbi Aqiva; Naḥum is also quoted as teacher in Yerushalmi sources (Bereshit rabba 22, 53) but in a very critical sense. Hence, it seems that Naḥum was the developer of a rudimentary method of explaining the Torah by looking at expressions that mean inclusions or exclusions, that the method was made satisfactory only by R. Aqiba, and that Neḥemia was R. Aqiba’s student. (The tradition of the name in Pesaḥim 22b is doubtful.)
The method of inclusions and exclusions is much more general than the limited use made here in identifying particles which have extending or limiting character; its use is always called “the method of R. Aqiba”, in contrast to the “method of R. Ismael”, which is based on generalities and specifications. served Rebbi Aqiba for 20 years and he taught him “את and גם mean additions, אך and רק mean exclusions254The particles denoting exclusion are רַק “only”, אַךְ “but only”. Those denoting inclusion are גַּם “also”, and אֶת, which either is the particle of the accusative or means “and”. In R. Aqiba’s theory, all accusative particles also have the meaning of “and.” This is not original with him; in the Greek translation of Aquila, a student of Rebbis Eliezer and Joshua, every את is translated as καί “and”, whether it makes sense or not. In the verse in question, it is the accusative participle used as “and” that seems to result in a meaning unacceptable to pure monotheism..” He asked him: What means that which is written (Deut. 6:13) “את the Eternal, your God, you must fear.” He said to him, Him and His Torah225A geothermal bath, as in Tiberias..
The method of inclusions and exclusions is much more general than the limited use made here in identifying particles which have extending or limiting character; its use is always called “the method of R. Aqiba”, in contrast to the “method of R. Ismael”, which is based on generalities and specifications. served Rebbi Aqiba for 20 years and he taught him “את and גם mean additions, אך and רק mean exclusions254The particles denoting exclusion are רַק “only”, אַךְ “but only”. Those denoting inclusion are גַּם “also”, and אֶת, which either is the particle of the accusative or means “and”. In R. Aqiba’s theory, all accusative particles also have the meaning of “and.” This is not original with him; in the Greek translation of Aquila, a student of Rebbis Eliezer and Joshua, every את is translated as καί “and”, whether it makes sense or not. In the verse in question, it is the accusative participle used as “and” that seems to result in a meaning unacceptable to pure monotheism..” He asked him: What means that which is written (Deut. 6:13) “את the Eternal, your God, you must fear.” He said to him, Him and His Torah225A geothermal bath, as in Tiberias..