* On all these points see N. Briill’s essay, ‘Die Entstehungs- geschichte des bab. T. als Schriftwerkes’ ; and Weiss, as above, vol. iii. p. 208ff., and vol. iv. p. 1ff. 2
+ The question whether the Jerus. Talmud ever had Gémdra to the fifth order is best discussed in the Hehalutz... by Osias H. Schorr, who on excellent grounds maintains that such a Gémdara must have existed. Butit must be stated that hitherto, not even in the Cairo collections, which have restored to us so many lost works, has a single line turned up to confirm Schorr’s hypothesis, About the peculiarities of the fourth order, see I. Lewy, Interpretation des 1. Abschnittes des paldst. Talmud-Traktats Nesikin (Breslau, 1895), p. 20; but compare also the references to the other authorities there given. This essay is the best piece of work yet done on the redaction of the Jerus. Talmud.
66 TALMUD
SIBYLLINE ORACLES
a eee cme
and had no time to spare for the niceties of the Hédlakha, ‘and did not listen to the words of Talmud (in the narrower sense of discussing the legal portions of it) and the Mishna.’ The deeper was their devotion to the Haggada, which gave them ‘words of blessing and consolation.’ This will account for the copiousness of the Haggadie literature, which reached its highest development during the period of the *Amoraim. This literature is embodied in the Midrashim to various books of the OT as well as in certain inde- pendent Haggadic treatises, the contents of which, though possibly compiled at a later age, are made up of the homilies and moralizing exhortations given in the names of the same Palestinian Rabbis who figure as authorities in the two Talmuds. They, however, form a literature by themselves, never having served as sources or factors of the Talmud, though they are sometimes useful as parallel passages to the Haggadic portions of the latter. They thus do not fall within the scope of this article. It is, however, only fair to warn the theologian that though he may dispense, ¢.g., with the Pésikta (collection of homilies mainly based on the Haphtdréth) or the Midrash Shir Hashshirim (allegoric interpretations of the Song of Songs) in his study of the Talmud, he cannot do so safely in his study of the Rabbi, whose performance of his prophetic office is seen to best advantage in such moralizing works as those of which the Haggadic pieces just mentioned are a fair specimen.
LITERATURE (omitting mostly such books as have already been referred to in the notes).—Epitions: There are very few critical editions of the ancient Rabbinical literature, though new reprints are constantly appearing. The following, however, deserve special notice:—Mishna, Naples, 1492, ed. pr.; Mishna... Latinitate donavit . . . J. Surenhusius, Amstelod., 1698; The Mishna, edited from a unique MS, by W. H. Lowe, Cambridge, 1883 ; Mishnayoth : Hebrdischer Text mit Punktation, Deutscher Ubersetzung, von A. Samter, Berlin, 1887 (not yet finished). Most editions have, as a rule, the commentaries of ’Obadya di Bertinoro and of Yom Tob Lipman Heller (31% O01" ni5D1n), or the commentary of Maimonides (not as frequently as the two former). As useful editions for students, the tractates edited by Strack may be recommended. Tosephta, edited by Zucker- mandel (after MSS), Pasewalk, 1880. Jerus. Talmud, Venice, 1528, ed. pr., Krotoschin, 1866, and Zitomir, 1860-67. This last edition has several commentaries. Of single tractates there have appeared, among others, Bérakhoth, Pé’a, and Déma’, with thecommentary Ahabath Zion, by Z. Frankel, and a part of Baba Kammaé with a commentary by I. Lewy. Bab. Talmud, Venice, 1520, with the commentaries of R. Solomon b. Isaac, and the Glosses of the Franco-German Rabbiscalled Tosaphoth (Additions), The last and best edition of the Talmud is that which appeared in Wilna, 1880-86, 25 vols. The Varic lectiones in Mischnam et in Talmud Babylonicum, by Raph. Rabbinowicz, consisting of
16 vols., and extending over a large part of the Bab. Talmud, is a_
most important work for the critical study of the Talmud. Also to be consulted is the work owm msinon mxdnd onwnp, Konigs- berg, 1860, restoring the words and passages omitted or corrupted by the censors. Of single tractates we have only to notice here the Tract. Makkoth, ed. Friedmann, Wien, 1888.*
INTRODUCTORY AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL : N. Krochmal °3)23 77D join, Lemberg, 1851 (Heb.); L. Zunz, Die Gottesdienstlichen Vortrige der Juden”, Frankfurt-a.-M. 1892; M. Steinschneider, Jewish Literature, §§ 1-7, London, 1857; Z. Frankel, °2377 mvinn, Hodegetica in Mischnam .. . Lipsie, 1859 (Heb.); by the same, buyin wp, Introductio in Talmud Hierosolo- mitanum, Breslau, 1870 (Heb.); Graetz, Geschichte der Juden, vols, 3 and 4 (Germ.); Dérenbourg, Essai sur Vhistoire et la géographie de la Palestine Vapres les Thalnvud et les wutres sources rabbiniques (Paris, 1867); I. H. Weiss, rw) NI 4 Zur Geschichte der Jiidischen Tradition, vols. 1-8; Strack,
*A good bibliographical account of the various reprints of the Bab. Talmud is to be found in Rabbinowicz’s by “ION syobna_ nppnn, Munchen, 1877, whilst a short list of the various MSS in the different libraries is given by Strack in his Hinlet- tung, p. 70ff. It should, however, be noted that the last 20 years have brought to light many Talmudical pieces, not known to any bibliographer. They are stil awaiting description. Mr. Elkan N. Adler's library (London) is especially rich in early prints not known to Rabbinowicz ; whilst the Cambridge collections, both in the possession of the University Library and in that of Mrs. Lewis and Mrs. Gibson (now in Westminster College), contain many MSS fragments of the Bab. and Pal. Talmuds of the highest critical value.