[Image]  [Hi-Res Image]

Page 256

" 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-Nasi. In opposition to the sixty (sixty

three) 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. M. S. Zucker, Tosefta, Pasewalk, 1880,

supplement volume, Treves, 1882). An Aramaic

equivalent of " Mishna " is Mathnitha (from teni

or tena', " to teach "), while tanna, pl. tannaim, is

the designation of the Mishnaic doctors, and also of

the later " wandering librarians " who had memor

ized 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, 1882); but if Josephus (ut sup.)

is to be relied upon, this could have been only oral.

But before Judah ha-Nasi there were halachic col

lections. 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 collec

tions, 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 at

tribution 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 Meir rested. These collections

laid the foundations for the more comprehensive

labors of Judah ha-Nasi. 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 men

tioned 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 cen

turies there were known only the first four series and

of the sixth series only Nidda 1-4 (cf. W. H. Lowe,

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 signifiMaterial 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 the 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