 | This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
| Rabbinic literature | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Talmud Readers byAdolf Behrman | ||||||||||||
| Talmudic literature | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Halakhic Midrash | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Aggadic Midrash | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Targum | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
TheJerusalem Talmud (Hebrew:תַּלְמוּד יְרוּשַׁלְמִי,romanized: Talmud Yerushalmi, oftenYerushalmi for short), also known as theTalmud of the Land of Israel[1][2] orPalestinian Talmud[3][4], is a collection ofrabbinic notes on the second-century Jewishoral tradition known as theMishnah. Naming this version of the Talmud afterPalestine or theLand of Israel—rather thanJerusalem—is considered more accurate, as the text originated mainly fromGalilee in ByzantinePalaestina Secunda rather than from Jerusalem, where no Jews were allowed to live at the time.[5][6]
The Jerusalem Talmud predates its counterpart, theBabylonian Talmud (known in Hebrew as theTalmud Bavli), by about a century. It was written primarily inGalilean Aramaic.[7] It was compiled between the late fourth century to the first half of the fifth century.[8] Both versions of the Talmud have two parts, the Mishnah (of which there is only one version), which was finalized byJudah ha-Nasi around the year 200 CE, and either the Babylonian or the JerusalemGemara. The Gemara is what differentiates the Jerusalem Talmud from its Babylonian counterpart. The Jerusalem Gemara contains the written discussions of generations of rabbis of theTalmudic academies in Syria Palaestina atTiberias andCaesarea.
This version of the Talmud is frequently named the Jerusalem Talmud or the Palestinian Talmud. The latter name, after theregion of Palestine – or theLand of Israel – is considered more accurate, as the text originated mainly fromGalilee in ByzantinePalaestina Secunda rather than from Jerusalem, where no Jews were allowed to live at the time.[5][6] The use of the parallel terms dates to the period of thegeonim (6th–11th century CE), alongside other terms such as "Talmud of the Land of Israel", "Talmud of the West", and "Talmud of the Western Lands".[9]
The Jerusalem Talmud probably originated in Tiberias in the School ofJohanan bar Nappaha[10] as a compilation of teachings of the schools of Tiberias, Caesarea,[10] andSepphoris.[citation needed] It is written largely inGalilean Aramaic,[7] aWestern Aramaic dialect that differs fromits Babylonian counterpart.[11]
This Talmud is a synopsis of the analysis of theMishnah that was developed for nearly 200 years by theTalmudic academies in Syria Palaestina (principally those ofTiberias andCaesarea). Because of their location, the sages of these Academies devoted considerable attention to the analysis of the agricultural laws of theLand of Israel.
TheLeiden Jerusalem Talmud (Or. 4720) is today the only extant complete manuscript of the Jerusalem Talmud and available atLeiden University Libraries. It was copied in 1289 byJehiel ben Jekuthiel Anav and shows elements of a later recension.[12] The additions which are added in thebiblical glosses of the Leiden manuscript do not appear in extant fragments of the same Talmudictractates found in Yemen,[13] additions which are now incorporated in every printed edition of the Jerusalem Talmud. These Yemenite fragments, a consequence of isolation the Yemenite community, are important as source material (as evidenced below).
The Leiden manuscript is important in that it preserves some earlier variants to textual readings, such as in TractatePesachim 10:3 (70a), which brings down the old Hebrew word forcharoset (the sweet relish eaten at Passover), viz.dūkeh (Hebrew:דוכה), instead ofrūbeh/rabah (Hebrew:רובה), saying with a play on words: "The members of Isse's household would say in the name of Isse: Why is it calleddūkeh? It is because she pounds [the spiced ingredients] with him." The Hebrew word for "pound" isdakh (דך), which rules out the spelling ofrabah (רבה), as found in the printed editions.Yemenite Jews still call itdūkeh. [14]
Leiden University Libraries has digitised both volumes of the manuscript and made it available in its Digital Collections.[15]
Among the Hebrew manuscripts held in theVatican Library is a late 13th-century – early 14th-century copy of TractateSotah and the completeZeraim for the Jerusalem Talmud (Vat. ebr. 133):Berakhot,Peah,Demai,Kilayim,Sheviit,Terumot,Maaserot,Maaser Sheni,Ḥallah andOrlah (without the Mishnah for the Tractates, excepting only the Mishnah to the 2nd chapter of Berakhot).[16]L. Ginzberg printed variant readings from this manuscript on pp. 347–372 at the end of hisFragments of the Yerushalmi (New York 1909).Saul Lieberman printed variants at the end of his essay,ʿAl ha-Yerushalmi (Hebrew), Jerusalem 1929. Both editors noted that this manuscript is full of gross errors but also retains some valuable readings.
Traditionally, the redaction of this Talmud was thought to have been brought to an abrupt end around 425, whenTheodosius II suppressed theNasi of theSanhedrin and put an end to the practice ofsemikhah (formal scholarly ordination). The redaction of the Jerusalem Talmud was done to codify the laws of the Sanhedrin as the redaction of the Mishnah had similarly done during the time ofJudah ha-Nasi. It was thought that the compilers of the Jerusalem Talmud worked to collect the rulings of the Sanhedrin and lacked the time to produce a work of the quality they had intended and that this is the reason why theGemara do not comment upon the whole Mishnah, or that certain sections were lost.[17]
Current perspectives on the dating of the closure of the text of the Palestinian Talmud rely on an understanding of activity of rabbinic scholarship and literary production, identifying datable historical datapoints mentioned by the text, and its reliance on and citation by other datable (or roughly datable) texts. Broadly, the Palestinian Talmud is dated at some time from the second half of the fourth century to the first half of the fifth century.[18]
Christine Hayes has argued that a lack of evidence forAmoraim activity in Syria Palaestina after the 370s implies that the text was closed by around 370.[8] However, reference to historical events from around or even slightly after 370 may push the earliest possible date to the late 4th century. For example, the Roman generalUrsicinus, who had a public role between 351 and 359, is mentioned several times in a legendary context, suggesting that these references are somewhat later than his public career.[19] Furthermore, there is also a reference to the Persian campaign of the Roman emperorJulian from 363.[18] While less clear, there is also confidence that the Roman official "Proclus" named by the Palestinian Talmud corresponds to a Roman official also namedProclus, who became the governor of Palestine around 380 and eventually climbed to the position ofpraefectus urbi Constantinopolis (Prefect of Constantinople) which he held between 388 and 392.[18] The final generation of rabbis whose opinions are found in the text belong to the second half of the fourth century. The time of the editing and compilation of these opinions would likely have occurred in the generation of their disciples, again leading to a date of the text during the late fourth or the early fifth century.[20]
The dating of the Palestinian Talmud is definitively prior to that of the Babylonian Talmud, which relies heavily on it.[21][22] The Babylonian Talmud was composed at some time between the mid-sixth century to the early-seventh century, but prior to the onset of the Arab conquests.[23] This provides an upper absolute boundary as to when the Palestinian Talmud could have been compiled. To further push down the upper boundary, some lines (Demai 2:1;Shevi'it 6:1) of the Palestinian Talmud are also extant in theTel Rehov inscription which dates to the 6th or 7th century.[24][25]: 182
In the initial Venice edition, the Jerusalem Talmud was published in four volumes, corresponding to separatesedarim of the Mishnah. Page numbers are by volume as follows:
Each page was printed as afolio, thus it contains four sub-pages (i.e., 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d), in contrast to the Babylonian Talmud which only has two sub-pages (7a, 7b).
In addition, each chapter of the Jerusalem Talmud (paralleling a chapter of Mishnah) is divided into "halachot"; each "halacha" is the commentary on a single short passage of Mishnah. Passages in the Jerusalem Talmud are generally references by a combination of chapter and halacha (i.e., Yerushalmi Sotah 1:1), by a page in the Venice edition (i.e., Yerushalmi Sotah 15a), or both (Yerushalmi Sotah 1:1 15a).
In addition to thesedarim ofTohorot (except part ofNiddah) andKodashim, several tractates and parts of tractates are missing from the Jerusalem Talmud. The last four chapters ofShabbat, and the last chapter ofMakkot, are missing. Niddah ends abruptly after the first lines of chapter 4.[26] TractatesAvot andEduyot are missing from both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds.Tractate Shekalim from the Jerusalem Talmud is printed in printings of both the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud.
According to theJewish Encyclopedia,[27]
Yerushalmi has not been preserved in its entirety; large portions of it were entirely lost at an early date, while other parts exist only in fragments. Theeditio princeps (ed. Bomberg, Venice, 1523 et seq.), based on the Leiden manuscript and on which all later editions are based, terminates with the following remark: "Thus far we have found what is contained in this Talmud; and we have endeavored in vain to obtain the missing portions." Of the four manuscripts used for this first edition (comp. the note at the conclusion of Shab. xx. 17d and the passage just cited), only one is now in existence; it is preserved in the library of the University of Leyden (seebelow). Of the six orders of the Mishnah, the fifth, Ḳodashim, is missing entirely from the Palestinian Talmud, while the sixth, Ṭohorot, contains only the first three chapters of the treatise Niddah (iv. 48d–51b).
Occasionally, therishonim quote passages from the "Yerushalmi" which are not found in extant versions of the Jerusalem Talmud.Proposed explanations for this include the following:
There are significant differences between the two Talmud compilations. The language of the Jerusalem Talmud isGalilean Aramaic,[7] aWestern Aramaic dialect which differs fromthat of the Babylonian.
The Jerusalem Talmud is often fragmentary[5] and difficult to read, even for experienced Talmudists. The redaction of the Babylonian Talmud, on the other hand, is more careful and precise. The traditional explanation for this difference was the idea that the redactors of the Jerusalem Talmud had to finish their work abruptly. A more probable explanation is the fact that the Babylonian Talmud was not redacted for at least another 200 years, in which a broad discursive framework was created. In a novel view,David Weiss Halivni describes the longer discursive passages in the Babylonian Talmud as the "Stammaitic" layer of redaction, and believe that it was added later than the rest: if one were to remove the "Stammaitic" passages, the remaining text would be quite similar in character to the Jerusalem Talmud.
The two compilations are similar in examining the Mishnah according to rabbinic tradition, but numerous differences exist in the details in their interpretations. Such differences are listed and examined in depth in the modern worksAmrei Bemaarava andDarkhei Hatalmudim.[30]
Neither the Jerusalem nor the Babylonian Talmud covers the entire Mishnah: for example, a Babylonian Gemara exists only for 37 out of the 63 tractates of the Mishnah. In particular:
The Babylonian Talmud records the opinions of the rabbis of Israel as well as of those of Babylonia, while the Jerusalem Talmud seldom cites the Babylonian rabbis. The Babylonian version contains the opinions of more generations because of its later date of completion. For both these reasons, it is regarded as a more comprehensive collection of the opinions available. On the other hand, because of the centuries of redaction between the composition of the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud, the opinions of earlyamoraim might be closer to their original form in the Jerusalem Talmud.
The Jerusalem Talmud, and other classical rabbinic sources from the Land of Israel, strongly influenced Jewish practice there and in lands further west for many centuries, even forming the basis of many customs of earlyAshkenaz.[32] This influence is attested to in the works ofPirqoi ben Baboi (8th–9th century) andSherira Gaon (10th century). Some traditions associated with the Jerusalem Talmud have been retained to this day, for example in the liturgy of theItalian Jews andRomaniotes.
In time, though, theBabylonian Talmud came to be seen as the canonical work of rabbinic tradition across the entire Jewish world. As such, the Babylonian Talmud has traditionally been studied more widely and has had a greater influence on the halakhic tradition than the Jerusalem Talmud. Already in the 11th century, the great works ofRashi andIsaac Alfasi were based on the Babylonian Talmud, not the Jerusalem Talmud. The shift to Babylonian authority occurred mainly because the influence and prestige of the Jewish community of Israel steadily declined in contrast with the Babylonian community in the years after the redaction of the Talmud and continuing until theGaonic era. Furthermore, the editing of the Babylonian Talmud was superior to that of the Jerusalem version, making it more accessible and readily usable.Hai ben Sherira, on the preeminence of the Babylonian Talmud, wrote:
Anything that has been decided halachically in our Talmud (i.e. the Babylonian Talmud), we do not rely on [any contradictory view found in] the Jerusalem Talmud, seeing that many years have passed since instruction coming from there (i.e. the Land of Israel) had ceased on account of persecution, whereas here (i.e. inBabylonia) is where the final decisions were clarified.[33]
Nevertheless, the Jerusalem Talmud was still accorded a certain status as a secondary work useful for the clarification ofhalakha. Regarding the Jerusalem Talmud's continued importance for the understanding of arcane matters, Hai ben Sherira wrote:
Whatever we find in the Jerusalem Talmud and there is nothing that contradicts it in our own Talmud (i.e. the Babylonian Talmud), or which gives a nice explanation for its matters of discourse, we can hold-on to it and rely upon it, for it is not to be viewed as inferior to the commentaries of therishonim (i.e. the early exponents of the Torah).[34]
A similar judgment was made byRitva: "We always rely on their Talmud (i.e. the Jerusalem Talmud) and interpret and codify our Talmud (the Babylonian) based on their (the scholars of Yerushalmi) words."[35]
It was also an important resource in the study of the Babylonian Talmud by theKairouan school ofChananel ben Chushiel andNissim ben Jacob, with the result that opinions ultimately based on the Jerusalem Talmud found their way into both theTosafot and theMishneh Torah ofMaimonides.
Following the formation of the modern state ofIsrael, there was some interest in restoring Jerusalem Talmud's traditions. For example,David Bar-Hayim of the Machon Shilo institute has issued asiddur reflecting the practices found in the Jerusalem Talmud and other sources. In addition, from a historical perspective, the Jerusalem Talmud remains an indispensable source of knowledge of the development of the Jewish Law in the Holy Land.
There is no comprehensive commentary to the Jerusalem Talmud by any of theRishonim, but explanations of many individual passages can be found in the literature of the Rishonim. Most significantly, RabbiSamson ben Abraham of Sens (c. 1150 – c. 1230), known as theRash, excerpts and explains many sections of the Jerusalem Talmud in his commentary to the Mishnah of Seder Zeraim. His work, however, is focused on the Mishnah and is not a comprehensive commentary on the entire Jerusalem Talmud.
Judah ben Yakar (died c. 1210) wrote a commentary to much of the Jerusalem Talmud, which was quoted by other rishonim but has now been lost.[36]
Kaftor VaFerach, by RabbiIshtori Haparchi (1280–1355), a disciple of RabbiAsher ben Jehiel, theRosh, is one of the few surviving compositions of the Rishonim about all of SederZeraim. However it is aHalachic work and not per se a commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud.
The only surviving commentaries of Rishonim on the Jerusalem Talmud are the commentaries toTractate Shekalim ofMenachem Meiri,[37]Meshulam ben David andShemuel ben Shniur.[38] All three of these commentaries are reprinted in the Mutzal Mi'Eish edition of the Jerusalem Talmud Tractate Shekalim.[39]
ManyAcharonim, however, wrote commentaries on all or major portions of the Jerusalem Talmud, and as with the Babylonian Talmud, many also wrote on individual tractates of the Jerusalem Talmud.
One of the first of the Acharonim to write a commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud wasSolomon Sirilio (1485–1554), also known asRash Sirilio, whose commentaries cover only the Seder Zeraim and thetractate Shekalim of SederMoed. Sirilio's commentary remained in manuscript form until it was first printed in 1875.[40] In theVilna edition of the Jerusalem Talmud,Rash Sirilio appears only for tractatesBerakhot andPe'ah, but the commentary for the entire Seder Zeraim appears in the Mutzal Mi'Eish andOz Vehadar editions. In addition to his commentary, Sirilio worked to remove mistakes made by manuscript copyists that over time had slipped into the text of the Jerusalem Talmud, and his amended text of the Gemara is reproduced alongside his commentary in the Vilna and Mutzal Mi'Eish editions.
Another 16th century commentary on the Yerushalmi is RabbiElazar ben Moshe Azikri's commentary to Tractates Berakhot[41] and Betzah.[42]
Today's modern printed editions almost all carry the commentaries,Korban ha-Eida, byDavid ben Naphtali Fränkel (c. 1704–1762) ofBerlin on the orders of Moed, Nashim and parts of Nezikin, andPnei Moshe, byMoses Margolies (c.1710?–1781) ofAmsterdam on the entire Talmud. The Vilna edition also includes theRidvaz by RabbiYaakov Dovid Wilovsky on most of the Talmud. The goal of all three of these commentaries is to explain the simple meaning of the Talmud similar toRashi's commentary on the Bavli, and the authors each wrote an additional commentary—Sheyarei ha-Korban,Marei ha-Panim andTosefot Rid respectively—that is meant to be a similar style toTosafot.
RabbiChaim Kanievsky published a commentary on tractates Berakhot through Nedarim (roughly 70% of the Jerusalem Talmud), considered by many to be the clearest commentary. Most of it is reprinted in the Oz Vehadar edition of the Yerushalmi. RabbiYitzchok Isaac Krasilschikov wrote the Toledot Yitzchak and Tevuna commentaries on tractates Berakhot through Rosh Hashanah (roughly 50% of the Jerusalem Talmud), which was published from his manuscript by the Mutzal Me-esh Institute.
A modern edition and commentary, known asOr Simchah, is currently being prepared inArad; another edition in preparation, including paraphrases and explanatory notes in modern Hebrew, isYedid Nefesh. The Jerusalem Talmud has also received some attention fromAdin Steinsaltz, who planned a translation into modern Hebrew and accompanying explanation similar to his work on the Babylonian Talmud before his death.[43] So far only TractatesPe'ah and Shekalim have appeared.[44]
Although it ispopularly known as the Jerusalem Talmud (Talmud Yerushalmi), a more accurate name for this text is "Talmud of the Land of Israel." Indeed, for most of the amoraic age, under both Rome and Byzantium, Jews were prohibited from living in the holy city, and the centers of Jewish population had shifted northwards... The Palestinian Talmud emerged primarily from the activity of the sages of Tiberias and Sepphoris, with some input, perhaps entiretractates, from the sages of the "south" (Lydda, modern Lod) and the coastal plain, most notably Caesarea.
the Jerusalem Talmud contains a mix of Hebrew and Galilean Aramaic.
The general designation of the Palestinian Talmud as "Talmud Yerushalmi," or simply as "Yerushalmi," is precisely analogous to that of the Palestinian Targum. The term originated in the geonic period, when, however, the work received also the more precise designations of "Talmud of Palestine," "Talmud of the Land of Israel," "Talmud of the West," and "Talmud of the Western Lands."
{{cite encyclopedia}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Singer, Isidore; et al., eds. (1901–1906)."Talmud".The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
