Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

TALMUD

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V26, Page 386 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

TALMUD , the See also:

great Rabbinical See also:thesaurus which See also:grew up during the first four or six centuries of the See also:Christian Era, and, with the Old Testament, became the " See also:Bible " of the See also:Jews, and the See also:chief subject of their subsequent See also:literary activity. 1. Contents.—The Talmud (See also:Hebrew " teaching, learning ") consists of the Mishnah (Heb. " [oral] repetition, teaching "), a systematic collection of religious-legal decisions developing the See also:laws of the Old Testament, and the Gemara (Aramaic " completion, decision," or perhaps also " teaching "), supplementary material, legal and otherwise.' The whole was in two great recensions, Palestinian and Babylonian. Other material related to the Mishnah is preserved in the Tosephta (See also:Aram. " addition ") and the Midrashim, and since all these, together with the Targziinim, represent the orthodox Rabbinical literature connecting the Old Testament with See also:medieval and See also:modern Judaism, the reader should also consult the articles JEWS (parts ii. and iii.), See also:MIDRASH, See also:TARGUM, and for more detailed and See also:critical treatment the references given to the Jewish Encyclopedia. ' Mishnah stands in contrast to Miqra (" See also:reading, scripture "); its Aram. See also:equivalent is Mallznitha, from tend, " to repeat,' whence the appellation Tannd, " teacher " (§ 3 below). These and the terms Gemara, Talmud, &c., are more fully explained in H. L. Strack's invaluable Einleilung in den Talmud (See also:Leipzig, '1908), pp. 2 sqq. The Mishnah is a more or less careful arrangement of the extant Oral See also:Law (see § 2).

It forms the See also:

foundation of the Gemara, and is divided into six Seddrim or Orders, each containing a number of MassektOth (" weavings," cf. the See also:etymology of " See also:text ") or Tractates. These are subdivided into Peragim (" sections ") or chapters, and these again into paragraphs or sentences. I. Zera`See also:im (" seeds "), the first See also:Order, on See also:agriculture, is introduced by (I) Berakoth (" blessings "), on daily and other prayers and blessings. (2) Pe'ah (" corner "), deals with Lev. xix. 9 seq., See also:xxiii. 22; Deut. See also:xxiv. 19-22, and the rights of the poor. (3) Demai, or rather Dammai (" doubtful "), on doubtful cases See also:relating to the See also:tithing of See also:fruit offerings. (4) Kil'ayim (" of two sorts "), on for-bidden mixtures (Lev. xix. 19; Deut. xxii. 9-II).

(5) Shebi`ith (" seventh "), on the sabbatical See also:

year (Ex. xxiii. I I ; Lev. See also:xxv. 1-8; Deut. xv. i sqq.). (6) Terume-th (" heave offerings "), on the laws in Num. xviii. 8 sqq., 25 seq. ; Deut. xviii. 4. (7) Ma`asroth (" See also:tithes ") or Ma`aser Ri'shon (" first tithe "), with reference to the See also:Levites, Num. xviii. 21-24. (8) Ma'aser Sheni (" second tithe "), with reference to the tithe eaten at See also:Jerusalem, Deut. xiv. 22-26. (9) Hallah (" cake "), on Num. xv.

18-21. (to) 'Orlah (" foreskin " [of trees]), on Lev. xix. 23-25. (II) Bikkiitrim (" first-fruits "), on Ex. xxiii. 19; Deut. See also:

xxvi. i sqq. The See also:fourth See also:chapter of this See also:treatise, printed in most See also:editions, is properly a Baraitha. II. Mo ed (" festival "). (I) Shabbath, on the See also:Sabbath as a See also:day of See also:rest, Ex. xx. to, xxiii. 12; Deut. v. 14, &c. (useful edition by Strack, 1890).

(2) `Erubin (" mixtures " or amalgamations), on legitimate methods of avoiding inconvenient restrictions on the Sabbath. (3) Pesahim (" passovers "—sacrifices and meals), on Ex. xii, xiii. 6-8, xxiii. 15; Lev. xxiii. 5 sqq. ; Num. See also:

xxviii. i6 sqq. ; Deut. xvi. t sqq., &c. (4) Shegalim (" shekels "), on the See also:poll tax (Ex. See also:xxx. 12 sqq. ; Neb. x. 33). (5) Yonia (Aram.

" the day "), or Kippurim (" See also:

atonement "), or Y. ha-k. (" the day of atonement "), on Lev. xvi., xxiii. 26-32 (useful edition by H. L. Strack, Leipzig, 1904). (6) Sukkah or Sukkoth (" See also:booth[s] "), on Lev. xxiii. 34 sqq. ; Num. See also:xxix. 12 sqq.; Deut. xvi. 13-16. (7) Besah (" See also:egg," the opening word) or Yom tob (" See also:good [i.e. feast] day "), See also:general rules for feast-days.

(8) Rosh ha-Shanah (" New Year festival "), on the services, the See also:

calendar, and more particularly on the first of the Seventh See also:Month (cf. Num. x. to, xxviii. i t sqq., &c.). (9) Ta'anith or Ta'aniyyolh, i.e. " fast[s]," See also:special observances relating thereunto; in particular to public fasts appointed in See also:time of drought. (to) Megillah, " See also:roll " (of See also:Esther), the reading of it at See also:Purim, &c. (II) Mc'ed Titan (" the small M," to distinguish it from the name of this order), or Mashkin (the first word), regulations for the intermediate festivals at See also:Passover and See also:Tabernacles. (12) Hagigah (" festival "), on the three See also:principal festivals, Deut. xvi. 16, the See also:duty of pilgrims and the defilements to be avoided (transl. from Bab. Talm. by A. W. Streane, Camb., 1891). xxx.

(4) Nazir (" Nazirite "), on Num. vi. (5) Giftin (" documents "), on See also:

divorce and separation. (6) SOtah (" the faithless woman "), on Num. v. 11-31. (7) Qiddushin (" sanctifications " of See also:marriage), on the contraction of legal marriage. IV. Nezigin (" See also:damages "), also known as Yeshu`oth (" deeds of help "). (I) Baba See also:gamma (Aram. " the first See also:gate "), on injuries and See also:compensation; See also:civil law. (2) B. Mesi a (Aram. " the See also:middle gate "), on sales, leases, lost See also:property.

(3) B. See also:

Baths (Aram. " the last gate "), on real See also:estate, See also:succession, &c. (4) Sanhedrin (avvESpwv), on See also:procedure and criminal law. (5) Makkoth, "blows," on the number to be inflicted (Deut. xxv. 1-3) and for what offence, &c. (6) Shebis`oth (" oaths "), on Lev. v. 4 sqq. (7) 'Eduyyolh, " testimonies," viz. of later teachers regarding their predecessors, on the See also:schools of See also:Hillel and See also:Shammai, 'Aqiba, &c., important for the problem of the literary growth of the Mishnah. (8) ',Ibodah 'See also:Zara (" idolatrous See also:worship "), regulations in reference to See also:heathen See also:idolatry (useful edition with Germ. transl. by Strack, 1909; and including that of the Gemara by F. C. See also:Ewald, See also:Nuremberg, 1856).

(9) 'AbOth or Pirqe A. (" sayings of the fathers "), a famous collection of See also:

maxims; the See also:sixth chapter on " the See also:possession of the law " does not properly,belong to the Mishnah (ed. with transl. by C. See also:Taylor, Camb. 1897, and in See also:German by H. L. Strack, 1901). (lo) Horayolh (" decisions "), on judicial and other errors (Lev. iv. i sqq.). V. Q6dd-shim (" See also:holy things "). (I) Zebahim (" sacrifices "), or shehi(See also:ath gbdashim (" the slaughter of holy things "), on the sacrificial laws, &c. (2) Menahoth (" See also:meat-offerings "), on Lev. ii. 5, II-13, vi.

7-16, xiv. 10-20, &c. (3) Hullin or Shehilath H. (" [the slaughter of] See also:

common things "), on non-sacrificial meat: (a) Bekoroth (" first-See also:born "), on firstlings (Ex. xiii. Iz seq.; Lev. See also:xxvii. 26 seq. ; Num. viii. 16-18, xviii. I5-17;' Deut. xv. 19 sqq.). (5) 'Arakin (" valuations " for See also:ransom, &c.), on Lev. xxv. 15-28, 29 sqq., xxvii.

2 sqq., 28 seq. (6) Temurah (" See also:

exchange of dedicated animals), cf. Lev. xxvii. to, 33. (7) See also:Ker-ithoth (" cutting off "), on See also:excommunication, &c. (8) Me`ilah (" trespass "), on Lev. v. 15 sqq.; Num. v. 6-8. (9) Tamid, on the " continual or perpetual (daily' burnt offering)," Ex. xxix. 38—42; Num. xxviii. 2–8. (1o) Middoth (" See also:measures "), an important tractate on the See also:temple (measurements, See also:gates, halls, &c.). (II) Qinnim (" nests "), on sacrifices of doves by the poor (cf.

Lev. i. 14–17, v. I sqq., xii. 8). VI. Tohoroth or Teh., " purifications," a See also:

euphemism for things which are ritually or ceremonially " unclean." (1) Kelim (" vessels "), their uncleanness (cf. Lev. xi. 32 sqq. ; Num. xix. 14 sqq., xxxi. 20 sqq.). (2) Ohaloth (" tents "), on defilement through a See also:corpse (Num. xix.

14–20), &c. (3) Nega'im (" plagues," i.e. leprosy), on Lev. seq. (4) See also:

Farah (the [red] " See also:heifer "), on Num. xix. (5) Teharoth (euphemism for impurities), on See also:minor defilements. (6) Migwa-'oth (See also:ritual baths), bathing for the defiled (cf. Lev. xiv. 8, xv. 5 sqq.; Num. xxxi. 23; also See also:Mark vii. 4). (7) Niddah (See also:female " impurity "), on Lev. xv. 19–33.

(8) Makshirin (" predisposing "), or Mashgin (" liquids "), on defilement caused by wet unclean things (cf. Lev. xi. 34, 37 seq.). (9) Zabim (" those with a See also:

discharge "), on Lev. xv. (to) Tebul Yom (" immersed for [or on] the day "), on those who have taken a ritual See also:bath and must wait until sunset before becoming ritually pure (see Lev. xv. 5, xxii. 6 seq ; Num. xix. 19). (II) Yaddyim, " hands, ' their See also:purification (cf. Matt. xv. 2, 20; Mark vii. 2–4, &c.).

(12) Ugrin (' stems "), on the relation between fruit and the stems and stalks as regards defilement, &c. To Order IV. the Babylonian recension of the Talmud adds seven See also:

treatises, which are of later origin and are regarded as more or less extra-canonical. (I) Aboth de See also:Rabbi Nathan, an expansion of IV. 9, attributed to a second-See also:century Rabbi, but See also:post-Talmudic (ed. S. Schechter, 1887). (2) Sopherim (" See also:scribes "), on the See also:writing of the scrolls of the See also:Pentateuch, grammatical (Massoretic) rules, and (a later addition) on the See also:liturgy (ed. J. See also:Muller, Leipzig, 1878). (3) See also:Ebel Rabbathi (" great weeping "), or, euphemistically, Semahoth C' joys "), on See also:mourning customsand rules. (4) Kallah (" betrothed, See also:bride "), on chastity in marriage, &c. Derek Ere.

(5) Rabbah, and (6) See also:

Zula, a " large " and a " small " treatise on various rules of " conduct " and social See also:life. (7) Pereq ha-Shalom, a " chapter on See also:peace " (peacefulness). In addition to these seven, other small Talmudic treatises are also reckoned (edited by R. Kirchheim, See also:Frankfort-on-See also:Main, 185o). These See also:deal with (I) the writing of the rolls of the Law; (2) Mezuzah (Dent. vi. 9, xi. 20); (3) Tephillin (prayers, phylacteries) ; (4) the fringes (Num. xv. 38) ; (5) slaves; (6) the See also:Samaritans (see J. A. See also:Montgomery, The Samaritans, pp. 196 sqq.); and (7) proselytes. The Mishnah itself contains 63 tractates, or, since IV.

1–3 originally formed one (called Nezigin) and IV. 4, 5 were See also:

united, 6o. The number is also given as 70 (cf. 2 Esd. xiv. 44–46), perhaps by including the seven smaller treatises appended to IV. There are 523 chapters (or 525, see I. If, IV. 9). 2. The Origin of the Mishnah.—A careful distinction was See also:drawn between the Written Law, the See also:Mosaic Torah, and the rest of the Scriptures (z?+?;m mia), and the Oral Law, or Torah by Mouth (n;'n ntra). The origin of the latter, which has become codified in the Mishnah, has often been discussed. It was supposed that it had been handed down by See also:Ezra; that it was indebted to See also:Joshua, See also:David or See also:Solomon; that it was as old as See also:Moses, to whom it had been communicated orally or in writing, See also:complete or in its essence.

The traditional view is well illustrated in the words ascribed to R. See also:

Simeon Lakish, 3rd century A.D.:1 " What is that which is written, ' I will give thee the tables of See also:stone, and the Law and the Commandment, which I have written, that See also:thou mayest See also:teach them (Ex. xxiv. 12) '? ` Tables,' these are the Ten Words (the See also:Decalogue) ; the ` Law ' is the Scripture; ` and the commandment,' that is the Mishnah: ' which I have written,' these are the Prophets and Writings (i.e. The Hagiographa), ` to teach them,' that is the Gemara—thus instructing us that all these were given to Moses from See also:Sinai." Literary and See also:historical See also:criticism places the discussion on another basis when it treats the Mosaic Torah in its See also:present See also:form as a post-exilic compilation (about 5th century a.c.) from See also:sources differing in date, origin and See also:history. There is no a priori See also:reason why other legal enactments should not have been current when the compilation was first made: the Pentateuchal legislation is incomplete, and covers only a small See also:part of the affairs of life in which legal decisions ' For the See also:sake of convenience See also:Ben (" son ") and Rabbi are, as usual, abbreviated to b. and R. For the See also:quotation which follows, see Oesterley and See also:Box, The See also:Religion and Worship of the See also:Synagogue (See also:London, 1907) p. 51; and, on the subject, S. Schechter, Studies in Judaism (London, 1896), ch. vii.—" the history of Jewish tradition "; E. See also:Weber, Judische Theologie (Leipzig, 1897), pp. 91 seq. and 130 sqq. ; Strack, op. cit., p.

8 seq.; W. Bousset, Relig. d. Judentums (See also:

Berlin, 1906), pp. 176 sqq., and See also:Jew. Ency., iv. 423 sqq. ; see also G. B. See also:Gray's See also:art. " Law Literature " in the Ency. Bib.might be needed. There must have been a large See also:body of usage to which Jewish society subscribed; customary usage is one of the most binding of laws even among modern See also:Oriental communities where laws in writing are unknown, and one of the most interesting features is the persistence in the See also:East of closely-related forms and principles of See also:custom from the See also:oldest times to the present day.

Laws must be adjusted from time to time to meet changing needs, and new necessities naturally arose in the See also:

Greek and See also:Roman See also:period for which the older codes and usages made no See also:provision. Much in the same way as Roman law was derived from the Twelve Tables, the Jewish written laws were used as the authority for subsequent modifications, and the continuity of the religious-legal See also:system was secured by a skilful treatment of old precedents? In the See also:article MIDRASH it will be seen that new teaching could justify itself by a re-See also:interpretation of the old writings, and that the traditions of former authoritative figures could become the framework of a teaching considerably later than their See also:age. It is probable that this See also:process was largely an unconscious one; and even if conscious, the See also:analogy of the conventional " legal fiction " and the usual anxiety to avoid the See also:appearance of novelty is enough to show that it is not to be condemned. By the help of a tradition —a " haggadic " or " halakic " Midrash (q.v. § 1)—contemporary custom or ideals could appear to have See also:ancient precedents, or by means of an exegetical process they could be directly connected with old See also:models. In the Old Testament many laws in the Mosaic legislation are certainly post-Mosaic and the value of not a few narratives lies, not in their historical or See also:biographical See also:information, but in their treatment of law, ritual, custom, belief, &c. Later developments are exemplified in the pseud-epigraphical literature, notably in the See also:Book of See also:Jubilees, and when we reach the Mishnah and Talmud, we have only the first of a new See also:series of stages which, it may be said, culminate in the 16th-century Shulhan `Aruk, the great compendium of the then existing written and oral law. Thus, the problem of the origin or antiquity of the unwritten Oral Law, a living and fluid thing, lies outside the See also:scope of criticism; of greater utility is the study of the particular forms the laws have taken in the written sources which from time to time embody the ever-changing See also:legacy of the past. The course of development between the recognition of the supremacy of the Pentateuch and the actual writing down of the Mishnah and Gemara can be traced only in broad lines. It is known that a great See also:mass of oral tradition was current, and there are a number of See also:early references to written collections, especially of haggadah. On the other See also:hand, certain references indicate that there was a strong opposition to writing down the Oral Law.

It is possible, therefore, that written See also:

works were in circulation among the learned, and that these contained varying interpretations which were likely to injure efforts to maintain a See also:uniform Judaism. See also:Philo speaks of ,uvpta o'eypa.ba WBi7 Kol voµcµa (ed. Mangey, ii. 629), and the oral See also:esoteric traditions of the See also:Pharisees are attested by See also:Josephus (xiii. It), 6, cf. 16, 2); cf. in the New Testament, Matt. xv. 1–9, Mark vii. 8, &c.; and the bevrepc ens " repetitions " (cf. the See also:term Mishnah) of the Christian Fathers. For the written collections, see Strack, op. cit., pp. io sqq.; J. Theodor, Jew. Ency., viii. 552; J.

Z. Lauterbach, ib., p. 614; W. Bacher, ib., xii. 19; S. Schechter, See also:

Hastings' See also:Diet. Bible, v. 62; and art. MIDRASH, § 5, in this See also:work. The theory of an esoteric tradition is distinctly represented in 2 Esdras xiv., where Moses receives words which were not to be published, and Ezra re-writes seventy books which were to be delivered to the See also:wise men of his See also:people. Also the Book of Jubilees knows of See also:secret written traditions containing regulations regarding sacrifices, &c., and See also:Jacob hands over " all his books and the books of his fathers to See also:Levi his son that he might preserve them and renew them for his See also:children (i.e. the priestly See also:caste) unto this day " (xlv. 16).

3. Growth of the Mishnah and Gemara.—According to the traditional view the See also:

canon of the Old Testament closed with the work of Ezra. He was followed by the Sopherim, " scribes " (or the Men of the great Synagogue), to the Maccabaean age, and these again by the " Pairs " (zugoth, Gr. 'uyov), the reputed heads of the Sanhedrin, down to the Herodian age (150–30 B.C.). The last culminate in Hillel (q.v.) and Shammai, the founders of two great See also:rival schools, and to this famous pair the work 2 See W. R. See also:Smith, Old Test, in the Jewish See also:Church, p. 51 seq., I6o. of See also:collecting hdldkoth (" legal decisions ") has been ascribed. The ensuing period of the Tannd'im, " teachers " (about A.D. 10-220), is that of the growth of the Mishnah.' Among the best known representatives of the schools are Rabban (a See also:title given to Hillel's descendants) See also:Gamaliel, the Phil-Hellene and teacher of the apostle See also:Paul (Acts xxii. 3) and his son Simeon (Josephus, Life, § 38 seq., See also:Wars, iv.

3, 9), and Rabban Jol}anan b. Zakkai, founder of the seat of learning at See also:

Jamnia (Jabneh). A little later (about 90-130 A.D.) are the famous Gamaliel II., Eliezer b. Hyrqanos (at Lydda), and See also:Ishmael b. See also:Elisha, the last of whom founded the school at Usha and is renowned for his development of the rules of exegesis framed by Hillel. With Rabbi Aqiba (q.v.) and the synods of Jamnia (about 90 and 118 A.D.) a definite See also:epoch in Judaism begins. At Jamnia, under the See also:presidency of Gamaliel II. and Eleazar b. See also:Azariah, a collection of traditional halakoth was formed in the tractate 'Eduyyoth (larger than and not to be identified with IV., 7 above). Here, too, was discussed the canonicity of the See also:Song of Songs and of See also:Ecclesiastes, and it is probable that here Aqiba and his colleagues fixed the See also:official text of the canonical books. Aqiba had an important See also:share in the early development of the Mishnah (Strack, pp. 19, 89); and, in the collecting of material, he was followed notably by the school of Ishmael (about 13o-16o A.D.), which has See also:left its mark upon the early halakic Midrashim (see MIoRASu, § 5, 1-3). The more interesting names include R.

See also:

Meir, a well-known haggadist, R. Simeon b. Yohai, R. Jose b. IJalaphta and R. Jehudah b. 'El'ai. But, as collections of decisions were made by prominent teachers from time to time, confusion was caused by their See also:differences as regards both contents and teaching (Sotah, 22a; Shabb. 138b). Consequently, towards the See also:close of the second century a thoroughly comprehensive effort was made to reduce the halakoth to order. See also:Judah, See also:grandson of Gamaliel II., known as the See also:Prince or See also:Patriarch (ndsi'), as Rabbenu (" our teacher "), or simply as " Rabbi " See also:par excellence, was the editor. He gathered together the material, using Meir's collection as a basis, and although he did not write the Mishnah as it now is, he brought it into essentially its present shape.

His methods were not See also:

free from arbitrariness; he would attribute to " the wise " the See also:opinion of a single authority which he regarded as correct; he would ignore conflicting opinions or those of scholars which they themselves had afterwards retracted, and he did not See also:scruple to cite his own decisions .2 The period of the 'AAmord'im, " speakers, interpreters," (about 220—500 A.D.), witnessed the growth of the Gemara, when the now " canonical " Mishnah formed the basis for further amplification and for the collecting of old and new material which See also:bore upon it. In See also:Palestine learning flourished at Caesarea, Sepphoris, See also:Tiberias and Usha; Babylonia had famous schools at Nehardea (from the 2nd century A.D.), Sura, Pumbeditha and elsewhere.' Of their teachers (who were called Rabbi and See also:Rab respectively) several hundreds are known. R. IJiyya was redactor of the Siphra on See also:Leviticus (MIDRASH, § 5, 2); to him and to R. Hoshaiah the compilation of the Tosephtd is also ascribed. Abba Arika or Rab, the See also:nephew of the first mentioned, founded the school of Sura (219 A.D.). Rab and Shemuel (See also:Samuel) " the astronomer " (died 254 A.D.) were pupils of " Rabbi " (i.e. Judah, above), and were famed for their know-ledge of law; so numerous were their points of difference that the Talmud will emphasize certain decisions by the statement that the two were agreed. The Gemara is much indebted to this pair and to Johanan b. Nappaha (199-279). The latter, founder of the great school of Tiberias, has indeed been On the various teachers, especially the Haggadists, see W. Bacher, Agada der See also:Babylon.

Amoraer (See also:

Strassburg, 1879), A. d. Tannaiten (1884, new edition begun in 1903), A. d. See also:Pal. Amorder (1892). 2 See the criticisms in Jew. Ency., viii. 612, and J. Bassfreund, Monatsschrift f. d. Gesch. u. Wissens. d. Judentums, 1907, pp. 427 sqq.

On the earlier stages, see Jew. Ency., viii. 6io, and Hastings' Diet. Bible, v. 61, See also:

col. 2, with the references. On these schools, see art. JEws, § 42 seq.; and Jew. Ency., i. 145-148.venerated, on the authority of See also:Maimonides, as the editor of the Palestinian Talmud; but the presence of later material and of later names, e.g. Mani b. Jona and Jose b.

Abin (Abun), refute this view. The Babylonian Rabbah b. Nahmani (d. c. 330) had a dialectical ability which won him the title " uprooter of moun tains." His controversies with R. See also:

Joseph b. IJiyya (known for his learning as " Sinai "), and those between their disciples See also:Aba.yi and Raba are responsible for many of the See also:minute discussions in the Babylonian Gemara. Meanwhile the persecutions of See also:Constantine and See also:Constantius brought about the decay of the Palestinian schools, and, probably in the 5th century, their recension of the Talmud was essentially complete. In Babylonia, however, learning still flourished, and with Rab Ashi (352-427) the arranging of the present framework of the Gemara may have been taken in hand. Under See also:Rabba Tosepha'a (died 470) and Rabina, i.e. Rab Abina (died 499), heads of the See also:academy of Sura, the Babylonian recension became practically complete. Finally, the Sabora'e, " explainers, opiners " (about 500-540), made some additions of their own in the way of explanations and new decisions. They may be looked upon as the last editors of the now unwieldy thesaurus; less probable is the view, often maintained since See also:Rashi (11th century), that it was first written down in their age.' 4.

The Two Talmuds.—The Palestinian recension of the Mishnah and Gemara is called " the Talmud of the See also:

Land of See also:Israel," or " T. of the See also:West "; a popular but misleading name is " the Jerusalem Talmud." It is an extremely uneven compilation. " What was reduced to writing does not give us a work carried out after a preconcerted See also:plan, but rather represents a series of jottings answering to the needs of the various individual writers, and largely intended to strengthen the memory " (Schechter). See also:Political troubles and the unhappy See also:condition of the Jews probably furnish the explanation; hence also the abundance of Palestinian haggadic literature in the Midrashim, whose " words of blessing and See also:consolation " appealed more to their feelings than did the legal writings. The Pal. Talmud did not attain the See also:eminence of the See also:sister recension, and survives in a very incomplete form, although it was perhaps once See also:fuller. It now extends only to Orders with the omission of IV. 7 and 9, and with the addition of part of VI. 7.5 The Babylonian Talmud (or Tal. Babli) contains the Gemara to 362 tractates) but the material is relatively very full, and it is about three times as large as the Pal., although the Gemara there extends to 39 tractates. In the latter the Gemara follows each See also:paragraph of the Mishnah; in the former, references are usually made to the leaves (the two pages of which are called a and b), the enumeration of the editio princeps being retained in subsequent editions. The Mishnah is written in a See also:late literary form of Hebrew; but the Gemara is in Aramaic (except the Baraithas), that of the Bab. T. being an Eastern Aram. See also:dialect (akin to Mandaitic), that of the Pal.

T. being Western Aram. (akin to Biblical Aram. and the Targums). Greek was well understood in cultured Palestine; hence the latter recension uses many Greek terms which it does not explain; whereas in the Bab. T. they are much less common, and are sometimes punningly interpreted.° The Pal. Tal. is the more concise, but it is remarkable for the numerous repetitions of the same passages; these are useful for the criticism of the text, and for the See also:

light they throw upon the incompleteness of the work of compilation. The Bab. Tal., on the other hand, is diffuse and freer in its See also:composition, and it is characterized by the exuberance of Halakah, which is usually rather subtle and far-fetched. Both Talmuds offer a good See also:field for See also:research (see below). Especially interesting are the Baraithas which are preserved in the Gemara in Hebrew; they are " See also:external " decisions not included in the more authoritative See Strack, p. 16 seq. The view has little in its favour, although memory played a more important part then than now. For early mnemonic See also:aids to the Mishnah, see Strack, p.

68, Jew. Ency.,xii. 19. ° The Mishnah was first critically edited by W. H. See also:

Lowe (See also:Cam-See also:bridge, 1883). ° The Greek words are treated by S. Krauss and I. See also:Low, Griech. u. See also:Lat. Lehnworter (Berlin, 1898-9). For the See also:Persian elements in the Bab.

T., see Jew. Ency., vii. 313. Mishnah, but they differ from and are sometimes older than the Mishnic material, with which they sometimes conflict (so in particular as regards the rejected decisions of the school of Shammai). They usually begin: " our Masters taught," " it is taught," or " he taught," the verb tend (cf. Tannd'im, " teachers ") being employed (see further Jew. Ency., ii. 513 seq.). Parallel to the Mishnah is the Tosephtd, an See also:

independent compilation associated with R. See also:Nehemiah (a contemporary of Meir and Simeon b. Yohai), Hiyya b. Abba and others; it is arranged according to the Mishnic orders and tractates, but lacks IV.

9 and V. 9–11. The halakoth are fuller and sometimes older than the corresponding decisions in the Mishnah, and the treatment is generally more haggadic.l The method of making the discussions part of an interpretation of the Old Testament (halakic Midrash), as exemplified in the Tosephtd, is apparently older than the abstract and independent decisions of the Mishnah—which presuppose an acquaintance with the Pentateuchal basis—and, like the employment of narrative or historical Midrash (e.g. in the Pentateuch, See also:

Chronicles and Jubilees), was more suitable for popular exposition than for the See also:academies. For other halakic literature which goes back to the period of the See also:Tanna'Im, see the Mekiltd, Siphrd and Siphre, art. MIDRASH, § 5, 1–3. The Palestinian Talmud, although used by the See also:Qaraites in their controversies, See also:fell into neglect, and the Babylonian recension became, what it has since been, the authoritative See also:guide. With the Geonim, the heads of Sura and Pumbeditha (about 589–Io38), we enter upon another See also:stage. The " canonical " Mishnah and Gemara were now the See also:objects of study, and the scattered Jews appealed to the central bodies of Judaism in Babylonia for information and guidance. The Geonim in their " Responses " or " Questions and Answers " supplied authoritative interpretations of the Old Testament or of the Talmud, and regulated the application of the teaching of the past to the changed conditions under which their brethren now lived. The legal, religious and other decisions formulated in the pontifical communications of one See also:generation usually became the venerated teaching of the next, and a new class of literature thus sprang into existence. (See See also:GAON.) Meanwhile, as the Babylonian schools decayed, Talmudic learning was assiduously pursued outside its oriental See also:home, and some Babylonian Talmudists apparently reached the West. However, the fortunes of the Talmud in a hostile See also:world now become part of the history of the Jews, and the many interesting vicissitudes cannot be recapitulated here.

(See JEWS, §§ 44 sqq.) To the use of the Pal. Talmud by the Qaraites in their controversies with the Rabbis we owe the preservation of this recension, incomplete though it is. To the intolerance of Christians are no doubt due the rarity of old See also:

MSS., and the impure See also:state of the text of both Talmuds. At the same time, the polemics had useful results since the literary controversy in the 16th century (when Johann See also:Reuchlin took the part of the Jews) led to the editio princeps of the Babylonian Talmud (See also:Vienna, 1520-23). A See also:change shows itself in the second edition (See also:Basel, 1578–81), when the `Abodah Zhrdh (above, § 1. IV. 8) was omitted, and passages which offended the Christians were cancelled or modified? Owing to the nature of its contents the Talmud stood sorely in need of aids and guides, and a vast amount of labour (of varying value) has been devoted to it by Jewish scholars. Of the many commentaries the first See also:place must be given to that of R. Solomon Izhaki of See also:Troyes (see RASHI); his knowledge of contemporary tradition and his valuable notes make it a new starting point in the interpretation of the Talmud. To Rashi's disciples are due the Tosaphoth " additions," which, with the commentary of " the Commentator," as he was styled, are often reproduced in printed editions of the Talmud. This school (See also:France and See also:Germany, 12th to 13th century) See also:developed a casuistical and over-ingenious interpretation—in contrast to the See also:Spanish Talmudists who aimed at simplification and codification—and it See also:drew upon it the saying of Nabmanides (13th cent.) : " They try to force an See also:elephant through 1 Lat. transl. of Orders I.–III., V., by Ugolinus, Thes., xvii.–xx., See also:recent ed. by M.

S. Zuckermandef (See also:

Pasewalk, 188o) ; see Jew. Ency., xii. 207 sqq. 2 On the censorship and burning of the Talmud, see Jew. Ency., iii. 642 sqq., xii. 22; Strack, 71 seq., 78 sqq.the See also:eye of a See also:needle." Important also are the introduction to and commentary upon the Mishnah by Maimonides (q.v.), and the commentary of Rabbenu See also:Obadiah di See also:Bertinoro (died 1510). Both have often been printed; they were translated by Surenhusius (See also:Amsterdam, 1698–1703). See Jew. Ency., xii. 27–30.

Systematic abstracts of the legal parts of the Talmud were made by See also:

Isaac Alfazi (or " Riph," 1013–1103), and by Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, otherwise called Sepher ha-Yad or Yad ha-Hbzakah). The latter prepared a great See also:summary of all Jewish religious and civil law, the See also:standard work upon which Christian theologians from the 16th century onwards based their studies—and also their criticisms—of early Rabbinism. Jacob b. See also:Asher b. Yebiel in his See also:Tarim (" rows ") presented a well-arranged collection of those laws which had not become obsolete together with the addition of new ones. Most important of all, however, is Joseph See also:Caro's Shulhan 'Aruk (" prepared table "), which came in the age of See also:printing (1565), leapt into popularity, and has been, in its turn, the subject of many commentaries and hand-books. This great work systematized Talmudic law in all its developments, ancient and modern, written and oral (I. Abrahams, Jew. Lit., London, 1906, p. 147 seq. ; see also Jew. Ency., iii., 584 sqq.).

The lengthy history of the written and oral law thus reached its last stage in a work which grew out of the Talmud but had its roots in a more distant past. It was at the See also:

dawn of a period when the ancient codes which had been continuously reinterpreted or readjusted were to be re-examined under the See also:influence of newer ideas and methods of study.3 The haggadic portions of the Talmud were collected: (a) from the Bab. recension, in the Haggadoth ha-Talmud (See also:Constantinople, 1511) and in Jacob See also:ibn Habib's 'En (eye, well of) Jacob (Salonika, 1516) ; and (b) from the Pal., by Samuel Yapheh (See also:Venice, 1589), and in the Yalkut Shimeoni (see MIDRASH, § 5, 9). These are superseded by the recent See also:translations made by A. Wunsche (Jer. T., See also:Zurich, 188o; Bab. T., Leipzig, 1886–9). The standard See also:lexicon was the 'Aruk(h) of Nathan b. Yebiel of See also:Rome (c. Iloo) which underlies all subsequent works, notably the great Aruch Completum of A. Kohut (Vienna, 1878–1892; supplement, New See also:York, 1892) ; see further Jew. Ency., iv. 58o seq.

Modern dictionaries of the older Rabbinical writings have been made by J. See also:

Levy (Leipzig, 1876), M. Jastrow (London and New York, 1886), G. Dalman (Frankfort-on-Main, 1901). More technical is W. Bacher's Exeget. Terminologie d. jiid. Traditions-lit. (Leipzig, 1905). The grammatical aids are modern. For Mishnic Hebrew, see A. Geiger (See also:Breslau, 1845), Strack and Siegfried (Leipzig, 1884), and M.

H. Segal's See also:

essay on the relation between Mishnic and Biblical Hebrew (Jew. Quart. Rev., xx. 647–737) ; for Western Aramaic, especially G. Dalman, Jiid. Pal. Aram. (Leipzig, 1905) ; for Eastern Aram., S. D. See also:Luzzatto (Eng. trans. by Goldammer, 1877), C. Levias (See also:Cincinnati, 1900), M.

L. Margolis (See also:

Munich, 1910), and also T. See also:Noldeke's Manddische Gramm. (See also:Halle, 1875). The text of the Talmud has been badly preserved; much useful critical work has been done by R. Rabbinovicz, Variae Lectiones (Munich, 1876–86) for the Bab. T., and by B. Ratner, Ahavath See also:Zion (in Heb., Wilna, 1901–2) for the Jer. T. As regards translations (a subject critically handled by E. Bischoff, Frankfort-on-Main, 1899) and texts, few are satisfactory; some have already been mentioned in § I ; for a full See also:list see Strack's Einleitung, pp. 144–155.

One may, however, mention the translations in See also:

English by D. A. de Sola and M. J. Raphall (18 Mishnic tractates; London 1843); J. See also:Barclay (also a selection of 18; London, 1878), and the (abbreviated) edition of the Bab. Talm. with text and See also:translation by M. L. Rodkinson (New York, 1869 sqq.). The Bab. text with a German translation has been edited by L. See also:Goldschmidt (Berlin, 1897 sqq.). The Palest. Talm. has been translated into See also:French by M.

Schwab (See also:

Paris, 1871 sqq.). 5. Features of See also:Interest and Value.—Although the Midrashim do not hold the authoritative position which the Talmud enjoys, the two See also:groups cannot be kept apart in any See also:consideration of the interesting or valuable features of the old Rabbinical writings. Viewed as a whole they have the characteristics of other Palestinian literature, the merits and defects of other oriental works. As regards the Talmud, neither the Mishnah nor the subsequent Gemara aimed at presenting a digested corpus of law. It is really a large collection of opinions and views, a remarkably heterogeneous mixture of contents, for which the history of its growth is no doubt largely responsible. It appals the reader with its irregularity of treatment, its See also:variations of See also:style, and its abrupt transitions from the spiritual to the crude and trivial, and from superstition to the purest insight. Like the See also:Koran it is often concise to obscurity and cannot be translated literally; 3 It is interesting to compare the development of Jewish law with that of the Mahomrnedan, Roman and English systems, the points of resemblance and difference being extremely suggestive for other studies. On the Jewish codifiers generally, see S. Daiches in L. See also:Simon's Aspects of Heb. See also:Genius (London, 1910), pp.

87 sqq. it presupposes a knowledge which made commentaries a See also:

necessity even, as we have seen, to the Jews themselves. The opening of Order II. 6, for example, would be unintelligible without a knowledge of the law in Levit. xxiii. 42: " A booth (the interior of which is) about 20 cubits high is disallowed. R. Judah allows it. One which is not ten hands high, one which has not three walls, or which has more See also:sun than shade is disallowed. ` An old booth?' (marks of quotation and interrogation must be supplied). The school of Shammai disallows it; but the school of Hillel allows it," &c. In the Gemara, the decisions of the Mishnah are not only discussed, explained or developed, but all kinds of additional See also:matter are suggested by them. Thus, in the Bab.

See also:

Gem. to III. 5, the reference in the Mishnah to the Zealots (TsKapeot) is the occasion for a See also:long romantic See also:account of the wars preceding the destruction of the Second Temple. In IV. 3 the incidental See also:prohibition of the cutting up of a roll of Scripture leads to a most valuable discussion of the arrangement of the Canon of the Old Testament, and other details including some account of the See also:character and date of See also:Job. There are numerous haggadic interpolations, some of consider-able interest. See also:Prose mingles with See also:poetry, wit with See also:wisdom, the good with the See also:bad, and as one thing goes on to suggest another, it makes the Talmud a somewhat rambling compilation. It is scarcely a law-book or a work of divinity; it is almost an See also:encyclopaedia in its scope, a See also:store-See also:house reproducing the know-ledge and the thought, both unconscious and speculative, of the first few centuries of the Christian era. A good See also:idea of its heterogeneity is afforded by the English translations of Talmudic and other commentaries by P. I. Hershon (London, 1880-5). For See also:miscellaneous collections of excerpts, see H. Polano (in the See also:Chandos See also:Classics) ; See also:Chenery, Legends from the Midrash; I.

See also:

Myers, Gems from the Talmud; S. See also:Rapoport, Tales and Maxims from the Midrash; E. R. Montague, Tales from the Talmud. A valuable general introduction to the Rabbinical literature (with numerous excerpts) is given by J. See also:Winter and A. Wunsche, Gesch. d. Jiid.-Hellen. u. Taint. Litteratur (See also:Trier, 1894). The literature has not been fully explored for its contribution to the various branches of antiquarian research. On the See also:animal fables, most of them found also in See also:Indian and in classical collections, see J.

See also:

Jacobs, Fables of See also:Aesop (London, 1889) ; for myth, superstition and folk-See also:lore, see D. See also:Joel, Aberglaube (Breslau, 1881), and M. Grunbaum, Semit. Sagenkunde (See also:Leiden, 1893), Ges. Aufsatze (Berlin, 1901); for See also:mathematics, see B. Zuckermann (Breslau, 1878) ; for See also:medicine, J. Bergel (Leipzig, 1885), &c. For these subjects, and for law, See also:zoology, See also:geography, &c. &c., see the full and classified See also:bibliographies in M. L. Rodkinson, Hist. of Talmud (New York, 1903), vol. ii. ch. viii., and Strack's Einleitung, pp. 164-175.

See also:

Ordinary estimates of the Talmud are often influenced by the attitude of See also:Christianity to Judaism and Jewish legalism, and by the preponderating interest which has been taken in the religious-legal See also:side of the Rabbinical writings. The See also:canonization of oral tradition in the Mishnah brought the advantages and the disadvantages of a legal religion, and controversialists have usually seen only one side. The excessive legalism which pervades the Talmud was the scholarship of the age, and the Talmud suffers to a certain extent because accepted opinions and isolated views are commingled. To those who have no See also:patience with the minutiae of legislation, the prolix discussions are as irksome as the arguments appear arbitrary). But the Talmudical discussions were often merely specialist and technical —they were academical and ecclesiastical debates which did not always See also:touch every-day life; sometimes they were for the purpose of reconciling earlier conflicting views, or they even seem to be See also:mere exhibitions of See also:dialectic skill (cf., perhaps, Mk. xii. 18-23). It may be supposed that this predilection for See also:casuistry stimulated that spirit which impelled Jewish scholars of the middle ages to study or translate the learning of the Greeks.2 Once again it was—from a modern point of view—old-fashioned 1 The whole subject of Jewish legalism should be compared with See also:Islam, where again law and religion are one; as regards the legal aspect, see the extremely suggestive and instructive study, " The Relations of Law and Religion, the See also:Mosque el-Azhar," by I. See also:Bryce, Studies in History and See also:Jurisprudence (1901), ii. No. xiii. 2 Some of the most influential of the Greek works in the middle ages had passed through See also:Syriac, Arabic and Hebrew translations before they appeared in their more See also:familiar Latin See also:dress !scholarship; yet one may now recognize that in the development of See also:European See also:science and See also:philosophy it played a necessary part, and one can now realize that again the benefit was for common humanity rather than for the Jews alone. It may strike one as characteristically Jewish that extravagant and truly oriental encomiums were passed upon such legalists and Talmudists as Isaac Alfazi, Rashi or Maimonides; none the less the medieval Jews were able to produce and appreciate excellent literature of the most varied description. In any See also:case, the Talmud must be judged, like other authoritative religious literature, by its place in history and by its survival.

From age to age groups of laws were codified and See also:

expanded—the Priestly law of the Old Testament, the Mishnah, the complete Talmud, the subsequent codifications of Alfazi, Maimonides, and finally Joseph Caro. Thus, the Talmud occupies an intermediate place between the older sources and its later developments. At each step disintegration was arrested, but not Jewish genius; and the domination of the Law in Judaism did not as a matter of fact have the petrifying results which might have been anticipated. The explanation may be found partly in the intense feeling of solidarity uniting the Deity with his worshippers and his worshippers among themselves. No distinction was drawn between See also:secular and religious duties, between ceremonial, ethical or spiritual requirements. Modern distinctions of moral and ceremonial being unknown, ancient systems must be judged in the light of those modes of thought which could not view religion apart from life. The Talmud discusses and formulates rules upon points which other religions leave to the individual; it inculcates both ceremonial and spiritual ideas, and often sets up most lofty ethical See also:standards. The bonds, rigorous and See also:strange as they often appear to others, were a See also:sacrament enshrined in the See also:imagination of the lowliest follower of the Talmud. Some of the keenest legalists (e.g. the Babylonian Rab) are famous for their ethical teaching, and for their share in popular exposition; one of the best ethical systems of medieval Judaism (by Bahya ibn Pekuda) is founded upon the Talmud; the last exponent of Rabbinical legalism, Joseph Caro, was at the same time a mystic and a pietist; and the See also:combination of the poetical with the legal temperament is frequent. The Talmud outlived the reactionary tendencies of the Qaraites (q.v.) and of the See also:Kabbalah (q.v.), and fortunately, since these movements, important though they undoubtedly were for the See also:evolution of thought, had not within them the See also:power to be of lasting benefit to the See also:rank and See also:file of the community. Finally, no religion has been without exhibitions of fanaticism and excess on the part of its followers, and if the Old Testament itself was the authority for See also:witch-burning among Christians, it is no longer profitable to ask whether the Talmud was responsible for offences committed by or alleged against those whose lives were regulated by it. On the other hand, Judaism has never been without its heroes, martyrs or See also:saints, and the fact that it still lives is sufficient to prove that the See also:mechanical legalism of the Talmud has not hindered the growth of Jewish religion.

Apart from the general interest of the literature for history and of its contents for various departments of research, the exegetical methods of the Talmud are especially instructive. There were rules of interpretation, and they give expression to one dominant idea: there is an See also:

infinite potentiality in the words of the Old Testament, none is fortuitous or meaningless or capable of only a single interpretation, they were said for all time, " for our sake also " and " for our learning " (cf. Paul, in See also:Romans iv. 24, xv. 4). This was not conducive to critical inquiry; questions of the historical background of the biblical passage or of the trustworthiness of the text scarcely found a place. The interpretation itself is markedly subjective; by the side of much that is legitimate exegesis, there is much that appears arbitrary in the extreme. The endeavour was made to interpret, not necessarily according to the See also:letter, but according to individual conceptions of the spirit and underlying See also:motive. Thus, the same See also:evidence could give rise to widely differing conflicting interpretations, which may not be directly deducible from or justified by the Scripture. Hence the value of the teaching, whether halakic or haggadic, rests upon its See also:intrinsic See also:worth, and not upon the exegetical principles which were the tools common to the age. Moreover, it was also considered necessary that teaching should be authenticated, as it were, by its association with older authority whose See also:standing guaranteed its genuineness. For this reason See also:anonymous writings were attributed to famous names, and traditions were judged (as in Islam), not so much upon their merits, as by the See also:chain of authorities which traced them back to their sources.

To supplement what has already been pointed out in the article MIDRASH, it may be noticed that the familiar See also:

penalty of the " See also:forty stripes See also:save one " (2 See also:Cor. Xi. 24; Josephus, See also:Ant., iv. 8, 23) is discussed in the Mishnah (Makkoth, iv. 5), and is subsequently explained by an extremely artificial interpretation of Deut. xxv. 2-3 (as though " to the number 40 "). But the penalty is obviously older than, and entirely independent of, the arbitrary explanation by which it is supported. Again, the rending of clothes on the occasion of a See also:charge of See also:blasphemy (Matt. xxvi. 65) is actually connected with Joseph b. Qorha of the 2nd century A.D. (Sanhed., vii. 5), although elsewhere this halakah is anonymous.

Here the effort was made to substantiate a practice, but the tradition was not unanimous; and it often happens that the Talmud preserves different traditions regarding the same teaching, different versions of it, or it is ascribed to different authorities (see Jew. Ency., xii. p. 15, col. 2). The fact that certain teaching is associated with a name may have no real significance for its antiquity, even as a law ascribed to the age of Moses—the recognized law-givermay prove to be of much earlier or of much later inception. This feature naturally complicates all questions affecting origin and originality, and cannot be ignored in any study of the Talmud in its bearing upon the New Testament.' Similar or related forms of interpretation and teaching are found in the Talmud, in Hellenistic Judaism, in the New Testament, in early Church Fathers and in Syriac writers. As regards the New Testament itself, the points of similarity are many and often important. It has been asserted that " the writings of recent Jewish critics have tended on the whole to confirm the See also:

Gospel picture of external Jewish life, and where there is discrepancy these critics tend to prove that the blame lies not with the New Testament originals, but with their interpreters." The Talmud also makes " credible details which many Christian expositors have been rather inclined to dispute. Most remark-able of all has been the cumulative strength of the arguments adduced by Jewish writers favourable to the authenticity of the discourses in the Fourth Gospel ..." 2 The points of contact between the phraseology in the Gospel of See also:John and the early Midrashim are especially interesting? The popularity of the See also:parable as a form of didactic teaching finds many examples in the Rabbinical writings, and some have noteworthy See also:parallels in the New testament.' It is known that there were theological controversies between Jews and Christians, and in the Midrash Bereshith Rabbah (MIDRASH, § 5, 5) is a passage (translated in Jew. Ency., viii. 558) directed against the Christian view which found support for the See also:doctrine of the Trinity in Gen. i.

26. But it is uncertain how far the doctrines of Judaism were influenced by Christianity, and it is even disputed whether the Talmud and Midrashim may be used to estimate Jewish thought ' There are many details in the Talmud which cannot be dated; if some are obviously contemporary, others find parallels in Ancient Babylonia, for example in the See also:

code of Hammurabi. See L. N. Dembitz, Jew. Quart. Rev., xix. 109–126, and the literature on the code (see BABYLONIAN LAW). Numerous miscellaneous examples of the intimate relationship between the Rabbinical and older oriental material will be found in H. Pick, Assyrisches u. Talmudisches (Berlin, 1903) ; A. Jeremias, Bab. im N.

Test. (Leipzig, 1905), Alte Test. im Lichte d. See also:

Allen Orients (ib., 1906) ; E. Bischoff, Bab. astrales im Welibilde d. Thalmud u. Midrasch (ib., 1907). 2 I. Abrahams, on " Rabbinic Aids to Exegesis," in Swete's Cunib. Bibl. Essays (1909), p. 181. See the essay of Schlatter, Sprache u.

See also:

Helmet d. vierten Evangalisten (1902). ' See P. Fiebig, Alt jild. Gleichnisse u. d. Gleichnisse Jesu (Leipzig, 1904) ; Lauterbach, Jew. Ency., ix. 512 sqq. ; Oesterley and Box, p. 96 seq. xXVI. 13of the 1st or 2nd century A.D. Much valuable work has been done by modern Jewish scholars on the " higher criticism " of these writings, which, it must be remembered, range over several centuries, but it still remains difficult to date their contents.

Moreover, in endeavouring to See also:

sketch the See also:theology of early Judaism it has been easy to find in the heterogeneous and conflicting ideas a system which agreed with preconceived views, and to reject as late or exceptional whatever told against them. In considering the evidence it is a delicate task to avoid See also:con-fusing its meaning for its age with that which has appeared the only natural or appropriate one to subsequent interpreters (whether Jewish or Christian) who have been necessarily influenced by their environment and by contemporary thought. At all events, if these writings have many old elements and may be used to illustrate the background of the New Testament, they illustrate not only the excessive legalism and ritualism against which early Christianity contended, but also the more spiritual and ethical side of Judaism. Upon this latter phase the pseudepigraphical and apocalyptical writings have See also:shed much unexpected light in linking the Old Testament with both Christian and Rabbinical theology. The various problems which arise are still under discussion, and are of great importance for the study of Palestinian thought at the age of the parting of the ways. They touch, on the one hand, the See also:absolute originality of Christianity and its attitude to Jewish legalism, and, on the other, the true place of the pseudepigrapha in Jewish thought and the antiquity of the Judaism which dominates the Talmud. They do not, however, exclude the possibility that by the side of the See also:scholasticism of the early Jewish academical circles was the more popular thought which, forming a See also:link between Jews and Christians, ultimately fell into neglect as Judaism and Christianity formulated their theologies. On the close relation between the thought of the age, see B. See also:Ritter, Philo u. d. Halacha (Leipzig, 1879) ; M. Grunwald in Konigsberger's Monaisbldtter (Berlin, 1890) ; N. I.

Weinstein, Zur See also:

Genesis d. Agada (Frankfort-on-Main, 1901); W. Bousset, Relig. d. Judentums, pp. 50 sqq. ; R. Graffin's ed. of See also:Aphraates (q.v.) (Paris, 1894), p. xlix. seq.; S. Funk on the haggadic elements in Aphraates (Vienna, 1891); and art. MIDRASR, § 4. In this respect the pseudepigraphic lit. is frequently of the greatest interest; thus Mark. iv. 24 finds a close parallel in " the Testament of See also:Zebulun," viii. 3 (R.

H. See also:

Charles, Test. of xii. Patriarchs, p. 117), and does not differ essentially from the saying ascribed to Gamaliel II. (Shabb. 51b) and others. A close parallel to Matt. vii. 3 is ascribed to R. Tarpon, latter See also:half of 1st century A.D. (Arak. 16b: " If one says, take the mote from thy eye, he answers, take the See also:beam from thy eye ") ; it seems to have been a popular saying (see Baba Bathra, 15b). See further, for the Talmud and Midrashim in relation to the New Testament generally, the literature in Strack, pp.

165 sqq. ; also A. Wiinsche, Neue Beitrage z. Erldut. d. Evangelien (See also:

Gottingen, 1878) ; C. H. See also:Toy, Judaism and Christianity (London, 1890; with Schechter's essay in his Studies [1896], pp. 283-305); H. Laible, Jesus Christus im Talmud (Berlin, 1891); R. T. See also:Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash (London, 1903; with W. Bather's See also:review in Jew.

Quart. Rev., xvii. 171–183) ; Bousset, op. cit. ; Oesterley and Box, op. cit. (with C. G. See also:

Montefiore's review in Jew. Quart. Rev., 1908, pp. 347–357) ; I. Abrahams in Swete's Camb. Bibl.

Essays (1909), pp. 163–192; C. G. Montefiore, Synoptic Gospels (1909) ; H. L.Strack; Jesus, See also:

die Hdretiker u. die Christen (1910). The Talmud itself is still the authoritative and See also:practical guide of the great mass of the Jews, and is too closely connected with contemporary and earlier Palestinian history to Results of be neglected by Christians. With the progress of criticism. modern research the value of this and of the other old Rabbinical writings is being re-estimated, and criticism has forced a modification of many old views.' Thus, an early reference to the title of a work does not prove that it is that which is now current; this applies, for example, to the tractate ` Eduyyoth (see Jew. Ency., viii. 611), and to the Midrash Siphre, which frequently differs from that as known to the Talmud (ib., xi. 331). It has been found that a tradition, however ' The " higher criticism " of these writings affords many useful hints and suggestions for that of other composite works, e.g. the Old Testament. It may be noticed also that the references to the Old Testament sometimes represent a slightly divergent text ; see V.

A. Aptowitzer, Schriftwort in d. Rabb. Lit. (1906) ; I. Abrahams, Camb. Bibl. Essays, pp. 172 sqq. II tenacious or circumstantial, is not necessarily genuine, and that too in spite of the chain of authorities by which its antiquity or genuineness appeared to be confirmed. Implicit reliance can no longer be necessarily placed upon the reputed authorship or editorship of a work; yet, although many of the views of medieval Jews in this respect prove to be erroneous (e.g. on the authorship of the Zohar; see KABBALAH), they may sometimes preserve the recollection of a fact which only needs restatement (e.g. R.

Johanan as the editor of the Pal. Talmud). Finally, the Talmud comes at the end of a very lengthy development of Palestinian thought (see PALESTINE: History). It is in the See also:

direct See also:line of descent from the Old Testament—intervening literature having been lost—the essence of which it makes its own. Forced by the events of history, this legacy of the past was subjected to successive processes and adapted to the needs of successive generations and of widely different historical and social conditions. Legal compendiums and systems of philosophy served their age and gave place to later developments; and the See also:elasticity of interpretation which characterizes it enabled it to outlive Karaites and Kabbalists. It also escaped the classicism of the See also:Renaissance with its insistence upon the test—either fact or fiction. As an oriental work among an oriental people the moral and spiritual influence of the Talmud has rested upon its connexion with a history which appealed to the imagination and the feelings, upon its heterogeneity of contents suitable for all moods and minds, and upon the unifying and regulative effects of its legalism. The relationship of Talmudism to the Old Testament has been likened to that of Christian theology to the Gospels; the comparison, whether fitting or not, may at least enable one to understand the varying attitudes of Jewish thinkers to their ancient sources. With closer contact to the un-oriental West and with the inevitable tendencies of modern western scholarship the Talmud has entered upon a new period, one which, though it may be said to date from the time of Moses Mendelssohn (see JEws, § 48), has reached a more distinctive stage at the present day. In the weakening of that authority which had been ascribed almost unanimously to the Talmud, and invariably to the Old Testament, a new and greater See also:strain has been laid upon Judaism to reinterpret its spirit once more to See also:answer the diverse wants of its adherents. This is part of that larger and pressing psychological problem of adjusting the " authority " ascribed to past writings to that of the collective human experience; it does not confront Judaism alone, and it must suffice to refer to the writings of " Reformed Judaism "; see, e.g.

C. G. Montefiore, Liberal Judaism (London, 1903); Truth in Religion. (1906); I. Abrahams, Judaism (1907), and the essays of S. Schechter. The writer desires to See also:

express his indebtedness to Mr Israel Abrahams for See also:bibliographical and other suggestions. (S. A.

End of Article: TALMUD

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.

Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.

[back]
TALMAGE, THOMAS DE WITT (1832-1902)
[next]
TALUKDAR (Hind. from taluk, district, and dar, hold...