Talmud andMidrash, commentative and interpretative writings that hold a place in the Jewish religious tradition second only to the Bible (Old Testament).

Definition of terms

The Hebrew term Talmud (“study” or “learning”) commonly refers to acompilation of ancient teachings regarded as sacred and normative by Jews from the time it was compiled until modern times and still so regarded by traditional religious Jews. In its broadest sense, the Talmud is a set of books consisting of theMishna (“repeated study”), theGemara (“completion”), and certainauxiliary materials. The Mishna is a collection of originally oral laws supplementing scriptural laws. The Gemara is a collection of commentaries on and elaborations of the Mishna, which in “the Talmud” is reproduced injuxtaposition to the Gemara. For present-day scholarship, however, Talmud in the precise sense refers only to the materials customarily called Gemara—an Aramaic term prevalent inmedieval rabbinic literature that was used by the church censor to replace the term Talmud within the Talmudic discourse in theBasel edition of the Talmud, published 1578–81. This practice continued in all later editions.

The term Midrash (“exposition” or “investigation”; plural, Midrashim) is also used in two senses. On the one hand, it refers to a mode of biblical interpretation prominent in the Talmudic literature; on the other, it refers to a separate body of commentaries on Scripture using this interpretative mode.

Opposition to the Talmud

Despite the central place of the Talmud in traditional Jewish life and thought, significant Jewish groups and individuals have opposed it vigorously. TheKaraite sect inBabylonia, beginning in the 8th century, refuted theoral tradition and denounced the Talmud as a rabbinic fabrication. Medieval Jewish mystics declared the Talmud a mere shell covering the concealed meaning of the written Torah, and heretical messianic sects in the 17th and 18th centuries totally rejected it. The decisive blow to Talmudic authority came in the 18th and 19th centuries when theHaskala (the Jewish Enlightenment movement) and its aftermath,Reform Judaism, secularized Jewish life and, in doing so, shattered the Talmudic wall that had surrounded the Jews. Thereafter, modernized Jews usually rejected the Talmud as a medievalanachronism, denouncing it as legalistic, casuistic, devitalized, and unspiritual.

There is also a long-standing anti-Talmudic tradition among Christians. The Talmud was frequently attacked by the church, particularly during the Middle Ages, and accused of falsifying biblical meaning, thus preventing Jews from becoming Christians. The church held that the Talmud contained blasphemous remarks againstJesus andChristianity and that it preachedmoral and social bias toward non-Jews. On numerous occasions the Talmud was publicly burned, and permanent Talmudic censorship was established.

On the other hand, since theRenaissance there has been a positive response and great interest in rabbinic literature by eminent non-Jewish scholars, writers, and thinkers in the West. As a result, rabbinic ideas, images, and lore, embodied in the Talmud, have permeated Western thought andculture.

Content, style, and form

The Talmud is first and foremost a legal compilation. At the same time it contains materials thatencompass virtually the entire scope of subject matter explored in antiquity. Included are topics asdiverse as agriculture, architecture, astrology, astronomy, dream interpretation,ethics, fables, folklore, geography, history,legend, magic, mathematics, medicine,metaphysics, natural sciences, proverbs, theology, and theosophy.

Access for the whole family!

Bundle Britannica Premium and Kids for the ultimate resource destination.

Subscribe

This encyclopaedic array is presented in a unique dialectic style that faithfully reflects the spirit of free give-and-take prevalent in the Talmudic academies, where study was focussed upon a Talmudic text. All present participated in an effort to exhaust the meaning and ramifications of the text, debating and arguing together. The mention of a name, situation, or idea often led to the introduction of a story or legend that lightened the mood of a complex argument and carried discussion further.

This text-centred approach profoundly affected the thinking and literary style of the rabbis. Study becamesynonymous with active interpretation rather than with passive absorption. Thinking was stimulated by textual examination. Even original ideas were expressed in the form of textual interpretations.

The subject matter of the oralTorah is classified according to its content intoHalakha andHaggada and according to its literary form into Midrash and Mishna. Halakha (“law”) deals with the legal, ritual, and doctrinal parts of Scripture, showing how the laws of the written Torah should be applied in life. Haggada (“narrative”) expounds on the nonlegal parts of Scripture, illustrating biblical narrative, supplementing its stories, and exploring its ideas. The term Midrash denotes the exegetical method by which the oral tradition interprets and elaborates scriptural text. It refers also to the large collections of Halakhic and Haggadic materials that take the form of a running commentary on the Bible and that were deduced from Scripture by this exegetical method. In short, it also refers to a body of writings. Mishna is thecomprehensive compendium that presents the legal content of the oral tradition independently of scriptural text.

Modes of interpretation and thought

Midrash was initially a philological method of interpreting the literal meaning of biblical texts. In time it developed into a sophisticated interpretive system thatreconciled apparent biblical contradictions, established the scriptural basis of new laws, and enriched biblical content with new meaning. Midrashic creativity reached its peak in the schools ofRabbi Ishmael andAkiba, where two differenthermeneutic methods were applied. The first was primarily logically oriented, makinginferences based upon similarity of content andanalogy. The second rested largely upon textual scrutiny, assuming that words and letters that seem superfluous teach something not openly stated in the text.

The Talmud (i.e., the Gemara) quotes abundantly from all Midrashic collections and concurrently uses all rules employed by both the logical and textual schools; moreover, the Talmud’s interpretation of Mishna is itself anadaptation of the Midrashic method. The Talmud treats the Mishna in the same way that Midrash treats Scripture. Contradictions are explained through reinterpretation. New problems are solved logically by analogy or textually by careful scrutiny of verbal superfluity.

The strong involvement with hermeneuticexegesis—interpretation according to systematic rules or principles—helped develop theanalytic skill andinductive reasoning of the rabbis butinhibited the growth of independent abstract thinking. Bound to a text, they never attempted to formulate their ideas into the type of unified system characteristic ofGreek philosophy. Unlike the philosophers, they approached the abstract only by way of the concrete. Events or texts stimulated them to form concepts. These concepts were not defined but, once brought to life, continued to grow and change meaning with usage and in differentcontexts. This process ofconceptual development has been described by some as “organic thinking.” Others use this term in a wider sense, pointing out that, although rabbinic concepts are not hierarchically ordered, they have a pattern-like organiccoherence. The meaning of each concept is dependent upon the total pattern of concepts, for the idea content of each grows richer as it interweaves with the others.