of
comment
and
explanation,
of
the
Mlshna;
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
JE
xii.
S"").
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:
—
Halakhah.
—
Under
this
term
the
entire
legal
body
of
Jewish
oral
tradition
is
included;
it
comes
from
a
verb
meaning
'to
go,'
and
expresses
the
way
'of
going'
or
'acting,'
i.e.
custom,
usage,
which
ultimately
issues
in
law.
Originally
it
was
used
in
the
plural
form
Halakhoth,
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
Halakhoth
which
were
codified
by
Jehudah
ha-Nasi,
and
to
which
the-
term
Mishna
became
applied.
Sometimes
the
word
Halakhah
is
used
for
'tradition,'
which
is
binding,
in
contradistinction
to
Dire,
'argument'
(lit.
'judgment'),
which
is
not
necessarily
binding.
Haggadah
(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
Haggadoth.
Haggadah
is
also
used
in
a
special
sense
of
the
ritual
for
Passover
Eve.
Gemara.
—
This
is
an
Aramaic
word
from
the
root
meaning
'to
learn,'
and
has
the
signification
of
'that
which
has
been
learned,'
i.e.
learning
that
has
been
handed
down
by
tradition
(Bacher
in
JE,
art.
'
Talmud
')
;
it
has
also
the
meaning
'completion';
in
this
sense
it
came
to
be
used
as
a
synonym
of
Talmud.
Baraitha.
—
This
is
an
apocryphal
Halakhah.
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
Halakhoth,
which
are
known
as
Baraithoih,
were
incor-porated
into
the
Talmud;
the
discussions
on
them
in
the
Talmud
occupy
many
folios.
Tannaim
('
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'
{Amoraim);
the
dicta
of
the
Tannaim
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
pronounce-ments.
There
are
two
Talmuds,
the
'Jerusalem'
or
'Talmud
of
Palestine'
and
the
'Baliiylonian,'
known
respectively
by
their
abbreviated
forms
'
Yerushalmi
'
and
'Babli.'
The
material
which
went
to
make
up
the
Yerushalmi
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
Yerushalmi,
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
Babli
was
Rabbi
Ashi
(d.
a.d.
430),
who
presided
over
the
academy
of
Sura.
Both
these
Talmuds
were
constantly
being
added
to,
and
the
Yerushalmi
was
not
finally
closed
until
the
end
of
the
4th
cent.,
the
Babli
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
per-mitting
it
to
develop
itself
along
natural
channels;
the
result
was
that
the
Yerushalmi
became
choked
with
traditionalism,
circumscribed
in
its
horizon,
and
in
con-sequence
was
regarded
with
less
veneration
than
the
Babli,
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
Babli
therefore
ab-sorbed
the
thought
and
learning
of
all
Israel's
teachers,
and
is
richer
in
material,
and
of
more
importance
gener-ally,
than
the
Yerushalmi.
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
(op.
cit.
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
Shema'
begun?
From
the
time
when
the
priests
go
in
to
eat
their
leaven
(Lv
22')
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
Yerushalmi
then
com-ments
in
three
sections;
the
first
section
contains
the
following:
a
citation
from
a
bariatha
with
two
sayings
from
R.
Jose
to
elucidate
it;
remarks
on
the
position
of
one
who
is
in
doubt
whether
he
has
read
the
Shema';
another
passage
from
a
baraitha,
designating
the
ap-pearance
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
baraitha
on
the
division
between
day
and
night,
and
other
passages
bearing
on
the
same
subject;
discussion
of
other
baraithas,
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
hold
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
con-cerning
the
davro;
a
conversation
between
two
Rabbis;
cosmological
comments;
dimensions
of
the
firmament,
and
more
Haggadic
comments
in
abimdance;
a
dis-cussion
on
the
night-watches;
Haggadic
material
con-cerning
David
and
his
harp.
Then
comes
the
second
section,
namely,
a
Rabbinical
quotation;
a
baraitha
on
the
reading
of
the
Shema'
in
the
synagogue;
other
Rabbinical
and
Haggadic
matter;
further
Haggadic
sayings;
lastly,
section
3
gives
R.
Gamaliel's
view
com-pared
with
that
of
another
Rabbi,
together
with
a
question
which
remains
unanswered.
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
rOle
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
Yerushalmi
will
serve
as
an
example;
it
is
intended
as
a
rebuke
to
'
Scandal-mongers,'
and
a
text
(Dt
1'*)
is
taken
as
a
starting-point,
namely,
'
How
can
I
myself
alone
bear
your
cumbrance
and
your
burden
and
your
strife
f
'
It
then
continues:
'
How
did
our
forefathers
worry
Moses
with
their
cumbrances?
