Sources of the Talmuds

Origin of the Mishna and Tosefta

After the destruction of the Second Temple, the sages devoted their efforts to a systematic clarification of the Torah and to in-depth study in its laws. Rabbi Judah the Prince took it upon himself to organize the laws that had been studied and decided upon in the various yeshivas, and to compile the central rulings that had been accepted up to that time. The result of this enormous effort was the creation of the Mishna — a systematically organized collection of laws and insights.

The sages of the Land of Israel who lived after Rabbi Judah the Prince added relatively little directly to the Mishna itself. Most of their work focused on other Torah compositions. The most prominent among them was Rabbi Hiyya, a disciple of Rabbi Judah the Prince, who collected material he believed was missing from the Mishna. This material sometimes included alternative opinions that had not been recorded in the Mishna, or detailed lists of views that the Mishna had summarized briefly. He also gathered explanations and background for various details mentioned in the Mishna without elaboration, and in some cases included segments of discussions concerning specific laws. This collection became known as the Tosefta.

Two Talmuds

After the publication of the Tosefta, the study halls in the Land of Israel treated the Mishna and Tosefta as one unit. Over time, various questions arose regarding the meaning of certain Mishnas or Toseftas, as well as apparent contradictions between rulings in these collections. The sages of the period began holding discussions among themselves, eventually compiling some of their thinking into a work that later became known as the Talmud.

As sages traveled between the Land of Israel and Babylonia, the study method that had developed in the Land of Israel reached Babylonia as well. Discussions and study continued there for several centuries, until the Babylonian sages eventually compiled their own Talmud. These two Talmuds then became known as The Jerusalem (Land of Israel) Talmud and The Babylonian Talmud.

A common misconception is that each Talmud is simply a commentary on the Mishna, but this is a mistake that has hindered proper understanding of their contents.

In general, each Talmud is a commentary structured around the framework of the Mishna, drawing on existing materials. Its central approach is to analyze problematic laws in each tractate by comparing details from the Mishna with the Tosefta, one Mishna with another, or one Tosefta with another. Sometimes the laws are compared to sections from the Mechiltas (The pre-Mishna Torah commentaries) or to verses from the Tanach. In certain cases, entire existing discussions were copied verbatim from the Mechiltas or the Tosefta into one of the Talmuds.

Stylistic differences

One of the most distinctive stylistic features of the Jerusalem Talmud is its presentation of chains of quotations and discussions without explicit connections between them, leaving the reader to figure out the intended meaning for the juxtapositions. This style also appears in the Babylonian Talmud, but much more rarely. The Babylonian Talmud generally provides additional explanations and technical terminology to guide the reader toward a specific line of thought.

Difficulty in studying

Over time, studying either Talmud became difficult. The brief style used by the Jerusalem Talmud makes it hard to understand. Because the Babylonian Talmud is generally considered easier to read than the Jerusalem Talmud, when it relies on the style of presenting quotations and discussions without explicit connections, those sections are often misunderstood by people who have not studied the Jerusalem Talmud. Even though the Babylonian Talmud includes more linking material, it sometimes lacks an introductory clarification of the discussion’s purpose at the beginning. When the goal is not clearly defined, the entire discussion can be completely misinterpreted.

This phenomenon is especially common when a discussion relates directly to a Mechilta or Tosefta. Many readers mistakenly assume that each Talmud’s sole purpose was to interpret the Mishna, and were unfamiliar with the Mechiltas and Tosefta. As a result, they struggle to understand what those discussions are trying to achieve.

Printing of the Talmuds

The printing of the Talmuds created additional problems. Printers frequently added Mishna passages in places where they assumed a Talmud passage was discussing them, reinforcing the mistaken perception that the Talmuds are nothing more than a commentary on the Mishna.

When we examine early manuscripts of each Talmud, we see that some do not include the Mishna at all. Those that do include it place it by chapter and generally do not attempt to integrate it into the Talmud text itself. Logic alone suggests that the Mishna was incorrectly inserted in the printed editions, because when the Talmud contrasts a Mishna against another that appears later in the same chapter, it dissects it immediately, and the discussion of the later Mishna is almost nonexistent once it is reached.