THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
" to repeat," " to learn and teach [the content
of doctrine]) " means oral teaching and its study.
It comes to mean the total content
3. The of the material of oral tradition which
Mishna ; had gathered by the end of the second Origin and century of our era, or the total content
Growth, of the teaching of individuals active in this work (the " Tannaim "), or their single deliverances (in this sense Halakah is also used), then any collection of such deliverances. It means, par excellence, the collection made by Judah ha-Xasi. In opposition to the sixty (sixtythree) tracts of this collection the term Baraitha was applied to other collections, as also to single pronouncements not contained in it. Among these collections were those called Tosephta, of which one is extant (ed. U.S. Zucker, Tosefta, Pasewalk, 1880, supplement volume, Treves, 1882). An Aramaic equivalent of " Mishna " is Mathnitha (from teni or tena', " to teach "), while tanna, pi. tannaim, is the designation of the Mishnaic doctors, and also of the later " wandering librarians " who had memorized Mishnaic deliverances and in the discussions of the Amoraim or lecturers on the Mishna served in place of texts. In the Talmud the Mishna is cited with the formula " we learned." The attempt has been made to prove that before the destruction of the Temple a Mishna collection was made by the schools of Shammai and Hillel (D. Hoffman, Die erste Mischna, Berlin, 1S82); but if Josephus (ut sup.) is to be relied upon, this could have been only oral. But before Judah ha-Xasi there were halachic collections. It is probable that many revered tannaim made halachic collections and books of Haggada both to aid the memory and in the preparation of their lectures, though these might not be used during the actual course of instruction. Such collections, relating to special departments of traditional material, may have been used by the redactors of the Mishna, and to this may have been due the attribution of certain tracts to this or that noted teacher of early times. There is good testimony to work of this kind by Rabbi Akiba (first third of the second century), as in Zabim 678, and upon this the work of Rabbi Mcir rested. These collections laid the foundations for the more comprehensive labors of Judah ha-Xasi. That a collection was really made at this time seems certain, though that the Mishna in its present form could have originated so early is not to be doubted. It has in the course of time received numerous additions, such as those in which the first assumed author's name is mentioned with his views, and differing views by his contemporaries, and the like. Later authorities than he are seldom named. The text of the Mishna exists in three recensions: that in the manuscripts or editions of the Mishna; that in the Babylonian Talmud, in which the work of the Amoraim follows short excerpts or single pronouncements of the Mishna; that in the Palestinian Talmud, in which the Gemara follows each whole chapter of the Mishna and so that the initial word of the explanatory Mishna sentence is repeated in the corresponding place. Of this third recension for a number of centuries there were known only the first four series and of the sixth scries only Xidda 1—1 (cf. W H. Lowe,
The Mishnah on which the Palestinian Talmud Rests, London, 1883; based on the Cambridge Ms. Add. 470, 1). The relation of these recensions to each other needs investigation.
The development of the Halacha in the earlier
period was altogether independent of the written
(Pentateuchal) laws; only later were the citations
added. Yet, in relation to the present Mishna the
form of the midrash (or exegesis) is in
4. The many passages more or less signifi-
Material cantly to be recognized as the older Described, (for examples cf. Hauck-Herzog, RE, xix. 320). The extant Tosephta in many cases is the Mishna in midrash form. Here should receive mention, at least, the fact which is of interest to the Christian reader, that the Pentateuchal passages to which the traditional material brings explanation, extension, and the like are not directly cited but are set forth as thoroughly known. Variations from the arrangement which the name of the tract would lead one to expect are due to the fact that for the sake of relieving the memory deliverances which are alike on one point only are cited, even though they differ on other things. The links of association are of many kinds. Dissimilarities in the handling of the material are sometimes due to the reception into the collection of not a few tracts, apart from additions, essentially in the shape in which their collectors left them. There is also great lack of systematic arrangement. Originally a controlling factor in the arrangement was the length of the tracts, partly due to the teacher's desire to utilize the zeal of the student in mastering the longer treatises while he was fresh to the subject. The Mishna rabbis soon deserted all other Mishna collections for the one which had the approval of the Amoraim. In elucidating the Mishna, the same rules were employed as on the written law of Moses. The relation of the Amoraim to the Mishna was very like that of the Tannaim to the Torah.
Manuscripts are: (1) at Parma, MS. 138, according to De Rossi of the thirteenth century, half of it pointed; (2) at Berlin, Orient. Fol. 567, orders II.-IV., with the commentary of Maimonides in Hebrew translation; Orient. Qu. 566-574, with the Arabic commentary of Maimonides (no. 568 was written in 1222, eighteen years after the death of Maimonides); (3) at Hamburg, no. 18, orders I. -III. with the Hebrew commentary of Maimonides, dated 1416; (4) at Oxford, nos. 393-407, with the Arabic commentary of Maimonides; nos. 408-409, 2662, with Hebrew translation; nos. 2661, 2662-2669 contain fragments of a somewhat higher antiquity; (5) at London, in the British Museum, the Mishna with Arabic commentary of Maimonides — Cod. Orient. 2217-26, 2391-94, Add. 27588; (6) at Cambridge the MS. Add. 470 published by Lowe ut sup.; (7) at Budapest there is a valuable old codex.
II. Divisions: The extant Mishna and the Babylonian Talmud consist of six parts called sedharim, " orders," and from the initials of tho Hebrew for this expression (shisshah sedharim, " six orders ") arose the Hebrew mnemonic for Talmud, " shas." Of the Palestinian Talmud only the first four orders and a part of the sixth are extant. Each order has a number of tracts (from seven to twenty-two) called massekhtoth (sing. massekheth, " web "), and the tracts fall into chapters (perakim) which are divided into paragraphs or sentences (each of which is called a mishnah, or, in the Palestinian Talmud, halakah). The names of