In quest of babylonian tannaitic traditions: the case of Tanna D'Bei Shmuel
The question of the existence of Babylonian rabbinic traditions dating from the mishnaic period (pre-220 CE) has not been thoroughly and methodically addressed in the scholarly literature. Historians have pointed out that several rabbis were active in Babylonia during the mishnaic period; some resea...
| Published in: | AJS review |
|---|---|
| Subtitles: | Research Article |
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
University of Pennsylvania Press
[2009]
|
| In: |
AJS review
|
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Babylon
/ Rabbinic Judaism
/ Tradition
/ Tannaim
/ Talmud
/ Halacha
|
| RelBib Classification: | BH Judaism |
| Further subjects: | B
Festivals
B Rosh Hashanah B Seders B Blasts B Lamps B Judaism B Tefillin B Rabbis B Talmud |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The question of the existence of Babylonian rabbinic traditions dating from the mishnaic period (pre-220 CE) has not been thoroughly and methodically addressed in the scholarly literature. Historians have pointed out that several rabbis were active in Babylonia during the mishnaic period; some researchers have even suggested that in this early period, organized rabbinic intellectual activity already existed in cities such as Nisibis, Nehardea, and Husal. However, a systematic examination of halakhot whose provenance was Babylonia in the mishnaic period has yet to be undertaken. Most prior attempts to uncover Babylonian rabbinic activity from this period have focused on a few traditions ascribed to Tannaim who had a known connection to Babylonia, such as R. Judah b. Bathyra, R. Nathan, and R. Hiyya (the “Babylonians,” as they are sometimes called in rabbinic literature). In light of the absence of a systematic study of Babylonian pre-talmudic rabbinic traditions, Gafni came to the following conclusion, one that this paper will support with solid evidence: Even if there was a composed Babylonian halakhic tradition that originated before the end of the mishnaic period, it seems that the Palestinian tradition was accepted as the main tradition of the Babylonian sages already at the beginning of the amoraic period. Moreover, when this tradition penetrated into the Babylonian centers of learning, it seems to have completely pushed aside other traditions, causing them to become almost untraceable…. This subject still awaits thorough treatment by talmudic researchers, and at this stage we can discuss only the amount of rabbinic intellectual activity that existed in Babylonia before the talmudic period began…. Reason dictates that after the destruction of the Temple and the Bar-Kochba revolt, as sages began to arrive in Babylonia, the basic foundations of the rabbinic activity were established. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1475-4541 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Association for Jewish Studies, AJS review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S036400940999002X |