Difference between revisions of "Talmud"

<p> <strong> TALMUD </strong> (‘learning’) </p> <p> <strong> 1. Origin and character </strong> . The [[Jews]] have always drawn a distinction between the ‘Oral Law,’ which was handed down for centuries by word of mouth, and the ‘Written Law,’ <em> i.e. </em> the [[Pentateuch]] or Five Books of Moses. Both, according to Rabbinical teaching, trace their origin to Moses himself. It has been a fundamental principle of all times that by the side of the ‘Written Law,’ regarded as a <em> summary </em> of the principles and general laws of the [[Hebrew]] people, there was this ‘Oral Law’ to complete and explain the ‘Written Law.’ It was an article of faith that in the Pentateuch there was no precept and no regulation, ceremonial, doctrinal, or legal, of which God had not given to Moses all explanations necessary for their application, together with the order to transmit them by word of mouth. The classical passage on this subject runs: ‘Moses received the (oral) law from Sinai, and delivered it to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the Great Synagogue’ ( <em> Pirqe Aboth </em> , l. 1). This has long been known to be nothing more than a myth; the ‘Oral Law,’ although it no doubt contains elements which are of great antiquity <em> e.g. </em> details of folklore really dates from the time that the ‘Written Law’ was read and expounded in the synagogues. Thus we are told that Ezra introduced the custom of having the <em> [[Torah]] </em> (‘Law’) read in the synagogues at the morning service on Mondays and Thursdays ( <em> i.e. </em> the days corresponding to these); for on these days the country people flocked to the towns from the neighbouring districts, as they were the market days. The people had thus an opportunity, which would otherwise have been lacking to them, of hearing the Law read and explained. These explanations of the Law, together with the results of the discussions of them on the part of the <em> sôpherîm </em> (‘scribes’), formed the actual ‘Oral Law.’ The first explanatory term applied by the Jews to the ‘Oral Law’ was <strong> midrash </strong> (‘investigation’), and the Bible itself witnesses to the way in which such investigations were made and expounded to the people: ‘Also [[Jeshua]] and [[Bani]] … and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law; and the people stood in their place. And they read in the book, in the law of God, with an interpretation; and they gave the sense, so that they understood the reading’ (&nbsp; Nehemiah 8:7-8 ). But it is clear that the ‘investigations’ must have led to different explanations; so that in order to fix authoritatively what in later days were considered the correct explanations, and thus to ensure continuity of teaching, it became necessary to reduce these to writing; there arose thus (soon after the time of [[Shammai]] and Hillel) the ‘Former Mishna’ ( <em> [[Mishna]] Rishonah </em> ), <strong> Mishna </strong> meaning ‘Second’ Law. This earliest Mishna, which, it is probable, owed its origin to pupils of Shammai and Hillel, was therefore compiled for the purpose of affording teachers both a norm for their decisions and a kind of book of reference for the explanation of difficult passages. But the immense amount of floating material could not be incorporated into one work, and when great teachers arose they sometimes found it necessary to compile their own Mishna; they excluded much which the official Mishna contained, and added other matter which they considered important. This was done by Rabbi Aqiba, Rabbi Meir, and others. But it was not long before the confusion created by this state of affairs again necessitated some authoritative, officially recognized action. It was then that Jehudah ha-Nasi undertook his great redaction of the Mishna, which has survived substantially to the present day. Jehudah ha-Nasi was born about a.d. 135 and died about a.d. 220; he was the first of Hillel’s successors to whose name was added the title <em> ha-Nasi </em> (‘the Prince’); this is the way in which he is usually referred to in Rabbinical writings; he is also spoken of as ‘Rabbi,’ <em> i.e. </em> master <em> par excellence </em> , and occasionally as <em> ha-Qadosh </em> , ‘the Holy,’ on account of his singularly pure and moral life. Owing to his authority and dignity, the Mishna of Jehudah ha-Nasi soon superseded all other collections, and became the only one used in the schools; the object that Jehudah had had in view, that, namely, of restoring uniform teaching, was thus achieved. The Mishna as we now have it is not, however, quite as it was when it left Jehudah’s hands; it has undergone modifications of various kinds: additions, emendations, and the like having been made even in Jehudah’s life-time, with his acquiescence, by some of his pupils. The language of the Mishna approximates to that of some of the latest books of the OT, and is known by the name of ‘Neo-Hebraic’; this was the language spoken in [[Palestine]] during the second century a.d.; It has a considerable intermixture of foreign elements, especially Greek words Hebraized. </p> <p> The Mishna is divided into six <em> Sedarim </em> (Aram. [Note: Aramaic.] for ‘Orders’), and each <em> Seder </em> contains a number of treatises; each treatise is divided into chapters, and these again into paragraphs. The names of the six ‘Orders,’ which to some extent indicate their contents, are: <em> Zera‘im </em> (‘Seeds’), containing eleven treatises; <em> Mo‘ed </em> (‘Festival’), containing twelve treatises; <em> Nashim </em> (‘Women’), containing seven treatises; <em> Nezikin </em> (‘Injuries’), containing ten treatises [this ‘Order’ is called also <em> Yeshu’oth </em> (‘Deeds of help’)]; <em> Qodashim </em> (‘Holy things’), containing eleven treatises; and <em> Tohâroth </em> (‘Purifications’), containing twelve treatises. </p> <p> Now the Mishna forms the basis of the Talmud; for just as the Mishna is a compilation of expositions, comments, etc., of the [[Written]] Law, and embodies in itself the [[Oral]] Law, so the [[Talmud]] is an expansion, by means of comment and explanation, of the Mishna; as the Mishna contains the Pentateuch, with all the additional explanatory matter, so the Talmud contains the Mishna with a great deal more additional matter. ‘The Talmud is practically a mere amplification of the Mishna by manifold comments and additions; so that even those portions of the Mishna which have no Talmud are regarded as component parts of it.… The history of the origin of the Talmud is the same as that of the Mishna a tradition, transmitted orally for centuries, was finally cast into definite literary form, although from the moment in which the Talmud became the chief subject of study in the academies it had a double existence (see below), and was accordingly, in its final stage, redacted in two different forms’ (Bacher in <em> JE </em> <em> [Note: [[Jewish]] Encyclopedia.] </em> xii. 3 b ). Before coming to speak of the actual Talmud itself, it may be well to explain some terms without an understanding of which our whole subject would be very inadequately understood: </p> <p> <strong> [[Halakhah]] </strong> . Under this term the entire <em> legal </em> body of Jewish oral tradition is included; it comes from a verb meaning ‘to go,’ and expresses the way ‘of going’ or ‘acting,’ <em> i.e. </em> custom, usage, which ultimately issues in <em> law </em> . Originally it was used in the plural form <em> Halakhoth </em> , which had reference to the multifarious civil and ritual laws, customs, decrees etc., as handed down by tradition, which were not, however, of Scriptural authority. It was these Halakboth which were codified by Jehudah ha-Nasi, and to which the term <em> Mishna </em> became applied. Sometimes the word <em> Halakhah </em> is used for ‘tradition,’ which is binding, in contradistinction to <em> Dîn </em> , ‘argument’ (lit. ‘judgment’), which is not necessarily binding. </p> <p> <strong> [[Haggadah]] </strong> (from the root meaning ‘to narrate’). This includes the whole of the non-legal matter of Rabbinical literature, such as homilies, stories about Biblical saints and heroes; besides this it touches upon such subjects as astronomy, astrology, medicine, magic, philosophy, and all that would come under the term ‘folklore.’ This word, too, was originally used in the plural <em> Haggadoth </em> . <em> Haggadah </em> is also used in a special sense of the ritual for [[Passover]] Eve. </p> <p> <strong> [[Gemara]] </strong> . This is an [[Aramaic]] word from the root meaning ‘to learn,’ and has the signification of ‘that which has been learned,’ <em> i.e. </em> learning that has been handed down by tradition (Bacher in <em> JE </em> <em> [Note: Jewish Encyclopedia.] </em> , art. ‘Talmud’); it has also the meaning ‘completion’; in this sense it came to be used as a synonym of <em> Talmud </em> . </p> <p> <strong> Baraitha </strong> . This is an apocryphal <em> Halakhah </em> . When Jehudah ha-Nasi compiled his Mishna, there was a great deal of the Oral Tradition which he excluded from it (see above); other teachers, however, the most important of whom was Rabbi Chijja, gathered these excluded portions into a special collection; these <em> Halakhoth </em> , which are known as <em> Baraithoth </em> , were incorporated into the Talmud; the discussions on them in the Talmud occupy many folios. </p> <p> <strong> Tannaim </strong> (‘Teachers’). This was the technical name applied to the teachers of the Mishna; after the close of the Mishna period those who explained it were no more called ‘Teachers,’ but only ‘Commentators’ ( <em> Amoraïm </em> ); the <em> dicta </em> of the <em> Tannaim </em> could not be questioned excepting by a Tannaite, but an exception was made in the case of Jehudah ha-Nasi, who was permitted to question the truth of Tannaite pronouncements. </p> <p> There are two Talmuds, the ‘Jerusalem’ or ‘Talmud of Palestine’ and the ‘Babylonian,’ known respectively by their abbreviated forms ‘ <strong> Yerushalmi </strong> ’ and ‘ <strong> Babli </strong> .’ The material which went to make up the <em> Yerushalmi </em> had been preparing in the academies, the centres of Jewish learning, of Palestine, chief among which was Tiberias; it was from here that Rabbi Jochanan issued the <em> Yerushalmi </em> , in its earliest form, during the middle of the 3rd cent. a.d. The first editor, or at all events the first compiler, of the <em> Babli </em> was Rabbi Ashi ( <em> d </em> . a.d. 430), who presided over the academy of Sura. Both these Talmuds were constantly being added to, and the <em> Yerushalmi </em> was not finally closed until the end of the 4th cent., the <em> Babli </em> not until the beginning of the 6th. The characteristics which differentiated the academies of Palestine from those of [[Babylonia]] have left their marks upon the two Talmuds: in Palestine the tendency was to preserve and stereotype tradition, without permitting it to develop itself along natural channels; the result was that the <em> Yerushalmi </em> became choked with traditionalism, circumscribed in its horizon, and in consequence was regarded with less veneration than the <em> Babli </em> , and has always occupied a position of subordinate importance in comparison with this latter. In the [[Babylonian]] academies, on the other band, there was a wider outlook, a freer mental atmosphere, and, while tradition was venerated, it was not permitted to impede development in all directions; the <em> Babli </em> therefore absorbed the thought and learning of all Israel’s teachers, and is richer in material, and of more importance generally, than the <em> Yerushalmi </em> . In order to give some idea of what the Talmud is, and of the enormous masses of material gathered together there, the following example may be cited, abbreviated from Bacher ( <em> op. cit. </em> xii. 5). It will be remembered that the Talmud is a commentary on the Mishna. In the beginning of the latter occurs this paragraph: ‘During what time in the evening is the reading of the <em> Shema‘ </em> begun? From the time when the priests go in to eat their leaven (&nbsp; Leviticus 22:7 ) until the end of the first watch of the night, such being the words of R. Eliezer. The sages, however, say until midnight, though R. [[Gamaliel]] says until the coming of the dawn.’ This is the text upon which the <em> Yerushalmi </em> then comments in three sections; the first section contains the following: a citation from a <em> bariatha </em> with two sayings from R. [[Jose]] to elucidate it; remarks on the position of one who is in doubt whether he has read the <em> Shema‘ </em> ; another passage from a <em> baraitha </em> , designating the appearance of the stars as an indication of the time in question; further explanations and passages on the appearance of the stars as bearing on the ritual; other Rabbinical sayings; a <em> baraitha </em> on the division between day and night, and other passages bearing on the same subject; discussion of other <em> baraithas </em> , and further quotations from important Rabbis; a sentence of Tannaitic origin in no way related to the preceding matters, namely, ‘One who prays standing must bold his feet straight,’ and the controversy on this subject between Rabbis [[Levi]] and Simon, the one adding, ‘like the angels,’ the other, ‘like the priests’; comments on these two comparisons; further discussion concerning the beginning of the day; Haggadic statements concerning the dawn; a conversation between two Rabbis; cosmological comments; dimensions of the firmament, and more Haggadic comments in abundance; a discussion on the night-watches; Haggadic material concerning David and his harp. Then comes the second section, namely, a Rabbinical quotation; a <em> baraitha </em> on the reading of the <em> Shema‘ </em> in the synagogue; other Rabbinical and Haggadic matter; further Haggadic sayings; lastly, section 3 gives R. Gamaliel’s view compared with that of another Rabbi, together with a question which remains unanswered. </p> <p> This is, of course, the merest skeleton of an example of the mass of commentary which is devoted to the Mishna, section by section. Although the Haggadic element plays a much less Important <em> rôle </em> than the Halakhic, still the former is well represented, and is often employed for purposes of edification and rebuke, as well as for instruction. The following outline of a Haggadic passage from the <em> Yerushalmi </em> will serve as an example; It is intended as a rebuke to ‘Scandal-mongers,’ and a text (&nbsp; Deuteronomy 1:12 ) is taken as a starting-point, namely, ‘ <em> How can I myself alone bear your cumbrance and your burden and your strife? </em> ’ It then continues: ‘How did our forefathers worry Moses with their cumbrances? In that they were constantly slandering him, and imputing evil intentions to him in everything that he did. If he happened to come out of his house rather earlier than usual, it was said: “Why has he gone out so early to-day? There has no doubt been some quarrelling at home!” If, on the other hand, he went out a little later than usual, it was said: “What has been occupying him so long indoors? [[Assuredly]] he has been concocting plans to oppress the people yet morel” ’ (Bernfeld, <em> Der Talmud </em> , p. 46). Or, to give one other example: in pointing out the evils which come from a father’s favouring one son above the others, it is said: ‘This should not be done, for because of the coat of many colours which the patriarch Jacob gave his favourite son [[Joseph]] (&nbsp; [[Genesis]] 37:1 ff.), all [[Israel]] went down into Egypt’ ( <em> ib. </em> p. 47). </p> <p> <em> Haggadoth </em> flourish, as regards quality, more in the <em> Yerushalmi </em> than in the <em> Babli </em> ; for in the Babylonian schools intellectual acumen reigned supreme: there was but little room for the play of the emotions or for the development of poetical imagination: these were rather the property of Palestinian soil. Therefore, although the Haggadic element is, so far as quantity is concerned, much fuller in the <em> Babli </em> than in the <em> Yerushalmi </em> , it is, generally speaking, of a far less attractive character in the former than in the latter. ‘The fact that the <em> Haggadah </em> is much more prominent in <em> Babli </em> , of which it forms, according to Weiss, more than one-third, while it constitutes only one-sixth of <em> Yerushalmi </em> , was due, in a sense, to the course of the development of Hebrew literature. No independent mass of <em> Haggadoth </em> developed in Babylon, as was the case in Palestine; and the Haggadic writings were accordingly collected in the Talmud’ ( <em> JE </em> <em> [Note: Jewish Encyclopedia.] </em> xii. 12). But the <em> Haggadah </em> , whether in the <em> Yerushalmi </em> or in the <em> Babli </em> , occupies in reality a subordinate place, for in its origin, as we have seen, the Talmud was a commentary on the Mishna, which was a collection of <em> Halakhoth </em> ; and although the Haggadic portions are of much greater human interest, it is the Halakhic portions that form the bulk of the Talmud, and that constitute its importance as the fountain-head of Jewish belief and theology. </p> <p> <strong> 2. [[Authority]] of the Talmud </strong> . Inasmuch as the Oral Law, which with its comments and explanations is what constitutes the Talmud, is regarded as of equal authority with the Written Law, it will be clear that the Talmud is regarded, at all events by orthodox Jews, as the highest and final authority on all matters of faith. It is true that in the Talmud itself the letter of [[Scripture]] is always clearly differentiated from the rest; but, in the first place, the comments and explanations declare what Scripture means, and without this official explanation the Scriptural passage would lose much of its practical value for the Jew; and, in the second place, it is firmly believed that the oral laws preserved in the Talmud were delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai. It is therefore no exaggeration to say that the Talmud is of equal authority with Scripture. The eighth principle of the Jewish creed runs: ‘I firmly believe that the Law which we possess now is the same which has been given to Moses on Mount Sinai.’ In commenting on this in what may not unjustly be described as the official handbook for the orthodox Jewish Religion, the writer says: ‘Many explanations and details of the laws were supplemented by oral teaching; they were handed down by word of mouth from generation to generation, and only after the destruction of the second temple were they committed to writing. The latter are, nevertheless, called Oral Law, as distinguished from the Torah or Written Law, which from the first was committed to writing. Those oral laws which were revealed to Moses on Mount [[Sinai]] are called “Laws given to Moses on Mount Sinai” ’ (M. Friedländer, <em> The Jewish [[Religion]] </em> [revised and enlarged ed., 1900], p. 136). It is clear from this that the Written Law of the Bible, and the Oral Law as contained in the Talmud, are of equal authority. The Talmud is again referred to as ‘the final authority in Judaism’ by the writer of a later exposition of the Jewish faith (M. Joseph, <em> [[Judaism]] as [[Creed]] and Life </em> , 1903, p. vii.). One other authoritative teacher may be quoted: ‘As a document of religion the Talmud acquired that authority which was due to it as the written embodiment of the ancient tradition, and it fulfilled the task which the men of the Great [[Assembly]] set for the representatives of the tradition when they said, “Make a hedge for the Torah” ( <em> Aboth </em> , i. 2). Those who professed Judaism felt no doubt that the Talmud was equal to the Bible as a source of instruction and decision in problems of religion, and every effort to set forth religious teachings and duties was based on it.’ And speaking of the present day, the same writer says: ‘For the majority of Jews it is still the supreme authority in religion’ (Bacher in <em> JE </em> <em> [Note: Jewish Encyclopedia.] </em> xii. 26). </p> <p> <strong> 3. The Talmud and [[Christianity]] </strong> . Much that is written in the Talmud was originally spoken by men who were contemporaries of Christ; men who must have seen and heard Him. It is, moreover, well known what a conflict was waged in the infant Church regarding that question of the admittance of Gentiles, the result of which was an irreconcilable breach between Jew and Gentile, and an ever-increasing antagonism between Judaism and Christianity. These facts lead to the supposition that references to Christ and Christianity should be found in the Talmud. The question as to whether such references are to be found or not is one which cannot yet be said to have been decided one way or the other. The frequent mention of the <em> Minim </em> is held by many to refer to Christians; others maintain that by these are meant philosophizing Jews, who were regarded as heretics. This is not the place to discuss the question; we can only refer to two works, which approach it from different points of view, and which deal very adequately with it: <em> Christianity in Talmud and [[Midrash]] </em> , by R. T. [[Herford]] (London, 1903), and <em> Die religiösen Bewegungen innerhalb des Judenthums im Zeitatter [[Jesu]] </em> , by M. Friedländer (Berlin, 1905). </p> <p> W. O. E. Oesterley. </p>

<i> halakah </i> <i> Talmud </i> <i> Mishnah </i> <p> Those scholars represented in the Mishnah are referred to as the <i> Tannaim </i> . Generally, they lived from the first through the second centuries A.D. The Talmud gives the opinions of a new generation of scholars referred to as the <i> Amoraim </i> (A.D. 200-500). Various teachers became famous and attracted students from a variety of locales in the ancient world. By this means, the decisions of rabbis resident in [[Babylon]] became normative for a broad cross section of ancient Jewish life. How strongly rabbinic decisions influenced the average Jew we cannot know. Passages from the Talmud reflect the great concern of some rabbis that their advice was not being followed by the people. </p> <p> The Talmud represents a continuation of the application of the oral law ( <i> halakah </i> ) to every sphere of Jewish life. This process probably began with the early Jewish sect known as the <i> [[Pharisees]] </i> . Many of the discussions in the Talmud, however, seem to have no direct practical application, but are theoretical in nature. </p> <p> The passing on of the tradition and the remembering of the specific decisions and reasoning of the teachers by their disciples was apparently emphasized in the rabbinic schools. There is some evidence that both Mishnah and Talmud were remembered according to chants or musical melodies. </p> <p> The Babylonian Talmud became the most authoritative of the two written Talmuds due both to the political fortunes of the Jewish communities in Palestine and Babylon in the first four centuries A.D. and also to its more sophisticated style. Later generations of Jewish scholars also recognized that the Babylonian Talmud was completed later and so supposed that it absorbed or superseded the [[Jerusalem]] one. </p> <p> Apart from haggadic passages that are mostly Hebrew, it was written in Eastern Aramaic, the language of Babylon at the time. The Babylonian Talmud reflects a highly developed system for settling disputed questions of <i> halakah </i> (oral law). It includes commentary on all six major divisions of the Mishnah, but deletes certain subsections. For example, discussion of the segments of Mishnah that deal with the [[Temple]] service are omitted, presumably because the Jewish community in Babylon did not anticipate the rebuilding of the Temple in the near future (interestingly, the Jerusalem Talmud does discuss these sections). </p> <p> The Babylonian Talmud also contains theoretical legal discussion as well as information on the daily life of Jewish people in the first six centuries, history, medicine, astronomy, commerce, agriculture, demonology, magic, botany, zoology, and other sciences. It also incorporates a large measure of <i> Haggadah </i> (illustrative stories and poetry) in addition to legal discussion. </p> <p> The Jerusalem Talmud was not compiled in Jerusalem but in the centers of Tiberias, Caesarea, and [[Sepphoris]] in Palestine, since Jerusalem ceased to be a major center of Jewish learning after the destruction of the second Temple in A.D. 70. It uses Western Aramaic, the dialect of Palestine. It is succinct and concise in its presentation of legal arguments, and does not contain the considerable body of Haggadah included in the Babylonian Talmud. The Jerusalem Talmud was completed about 400 A.D. approximately a century before the Babylonian Talmud. </p> <p> The importance of the Talmud to Jewish life until the modern period can hardly be overestimated. Talmud and commentary upon it become a major focus of religious action in the medieval period. The Talmud became the central document for Jewish education during the medieval period. </p> <p> New [[Testament]] scholars are especially interested in the Talmud. Some of the <i> halakah </i> embodied in the Talmud is attributed to early rabbis and may reflect Jewish practice in the time of the writers of the New Testament or of Jesus. This material must be used judiciously in historical reconstruction, however, since it was compiled five centuries after the fact. See Haggadah and Halakah; [[Mishnah]] . </p> <p> Stephenson Humphries-Brooks </p>

<p> A collection of Jewish writings. There are two works which bear this name </p> <p> the Talmud of Jerusalem, and the Talmud of Babylon. Each of these are composed of two parts </p> <p> the Mishna, which is the text, and is common to both; and the Gemara, or commentary. The Mishna, which comprehends all the laws, institutions, and rules of life (which, besides the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, the Jews thought themselves bound to observe, ) was composed, according to the unanimous testimony of the Jews, about the close of the second century. It was the work of rabbi Jehuda (or Juda) Hakkadosh, who was the ornament of the school of Tiberias, and is said to have occupied him forty years. The commentaries and additions which succeeding rabbies made, were collected by rabbi Jochanan Ben Eliezer, some say in the fifth, others in the sixth, and others in the seventh century, under the name of Gemara, that is, completion, because it completed the Talmud. A similar addition was made to the Mishna by the [[Babylonish]] doctors in the beginning of the sixth century, according to Enfield; and in the seventh, according to others. The Mishna is divided into six parts, of which every one which is entitled order, is formed of treatises: every treatise is divided into chapters; and every chapter into mishnas or aphorisms. </p> <p> In the first part is discussed whatever relates to seeds, fruits, and trees: in the second, feasts: in the third, women, their duties, their disorders, marriages, divorces, contracts, and nuptials; in the fourth, are treated the damages or losses sustained by beasts or men, of things found, deposits, usuries, rents, farms, partnership in commerce, inheritance, sales and purchases, oaths, witnesses, arrests, idolatry; and here are named those by whom in oral law was received and preserved: in the fifth part are noticed what regards sacrifices and holy things: and the sixth treats on purifications, vessels, furniture, clothes, houses, leprosy, baths, and numerous other articles:-all this forms the Mishna. As the learned reader may wish to obtain some notion of rabbinical composition and judgment, we shall gratify his curiosity sufficiently by the following specimen: "Adam's body was made of the earth of Babylon, his head of the land of Israel, his other members of other parts of the world. R. [[Meir]] thought he was compact of the earth gathered out of the whole earth: as it is written, thine eyes did see my substance. </p> <p> Now it is elsewhere written, the eyes of the Lord are over all the earth. R. [[Aha]] expressly marks the twelve hours in which his various parts were formed. His stature was from one end of the world to the other; and it was for his transgression that the Creator, laying his hand in anger on him, lessened him; 'for before, ' says R. Eleazer, 'with his hand he reached the firmament.' R. Jehuda thinks his sin was heresy; but R. Isaac thinks that it was nourishing his foreskin." The Talmud of Babylon is most valued by the Jews; and this is the book which they mean to express when they talk of the Talmud in general. An abridgment of it was made by [[Maimonides]] in the 12th century, in which he rejected some of its greatest absurdities. The Gemara is stuffed with dreams and chimeras, with many ignorant and impertinent questions, and the style very coarse. The Mishna is written in a style comparatively pure, and may be very useful in explaining passages of the New Testament, where the phraseology is similar. This is, indeed, the only use to which [[Christians]] can apply it: but this renders it valuable. </p> <p> Lightfoot has judiciously availed himself of such information as he could derive from it. Some of the popes, with a barbarous zeal, and a timidity of spirit, for the success of the [[Christian]] religion, which the belief of its divinity can never excuse, ordered great numbers of the Talmud to be burned. [[Gregory]] IX. burned about twenty cart-loads; and Paul IV. ordered 12, 000 copies of the Talmud to be destroyed. </p> <p> See [[Mischna]] the last edition of the Talmud of Babylon, printed at Amsterdam, in 12 vols. folio: the Talmud of Jerusalem is in one large volume folio. </p>

<p> Although we do not meet with this word in the Bible, yet as the Jews are very tenacious of what they called their Talmud, I thought it might not be amiss just to notice it in a short way. The word Talmud or Thalmud, means to teach. And the Talmud contains the substance of the Jews' doctrine and traditions in religion and morality. They have the Talmud of Jerusalem, and the Talmud of Babylon, according to the different periods in which they were compiled. As may be supposed, it consists in a multitude of unfounded histories: in many it is to be feared act unlike the Apocrypha. Since the invention of printing, there have been copies of them from the press. </p>

<p> A huge limbo, in chaotic arrangement, consisting of the Mishna, or text, and Gemara, or commentary, of Rabbinical speculations, subtleties, fancies, and traditions connected with the Hebrew Bible, and claiming to possess co-ordinate rank with it as expository of its meaning and application, the whole collection dating from a period subsequent to the [[Captivity]] and the close of the canon of Scripture. There are two Talmuds, one named the Talmud of Jerusalem, and the other the Talmud of Babylon, the former, the earlier of the two, belonging in its present form to the close of the 4th century, and the latter to at least a century later. See Haggadah and [[Halacha]] . </p>