English
Etymology
tractatus, past participle of tractare
Noun
- a treatise
Related terms
The Mishnah or Mishna (, "repetition", from the
verb shanah , or "to study and review") is a major work of
Rabbinic
Judaism, and the first major redaction into written form of
Jewish oral traditions, called the
Oral Torah. It
was debated between 70-200
CE by the
group of rabbinic sages known as the
Tannaim and
redacted about
200 CE by
Judah haNasi
when, according to the
Talmud, the
persecution of the Jews and the passage of time raised the
possibility that the details of the oral traditions would be
forgotten. The oral traditions that are the subject of the Mishnah
go back to earlier, Pharisaic times. The Mishnah does not claim to
be the development of new laws, but merely the collection of
existing traditions.
The Mishnah is considered to be the first
important work of
Rabbinic
Judaism and is a major source of later
rabbinic
religious thought. Rabbinic commentaries on the Mishnah over the
next three centuries were redacted as the
Gemara.
Structure
The Mishnah consists of six
orders (, singular
), each containing 7-12
tractates (, singular ; lit.
"web"), 63 in total. Each is divided into chapters (, singular )
and then paragraphs or verses (, singular ). The Mishnah is also
called Shas (an
acronym
for Shisha Sedarim - the "six orders").
The Mishnah orders its content by subject matter,
instead of by biblical context, and discusses individual subjects
more thoroughly than the
Midrash. It
includes a much broader selection of halakhic subjects than the
Midrash.
The six orders are:
- Zeraim
("Seeds"), dealing with prayer and blessings, tithes and
agricultural laws (11 tractates)
- Moed
("Festival"), pertaining to the laws of the Sabbath and the
Festivals (12 tractates)
- Nashim
("Women"), concerning marriage and divorce, some forms of oaths and
the laws of the nazirite (7 tractates)
- Nezikin
("Damages"), dealing with civil and criminal law, the functioning
of the courts and oaths (10 tractates)
- Kodashim ("Holy
things"), regarding sacrificial rites, the Temple,
and the dietary
laws (11 tractates) and
- Tohorot
("Purities"), pertaining to the laws of purity and impurity,
including the impurity of the dead, the laws of ritual purity for
the priests (Kohanim), the laws of "family purity" (the menstrual laws) and others
(12 tractates).
In each order (with the exception of Zeraim),
tractates are arranged from biggest (in number of chapters) to
smallest.
The word Mishnah can also indicate a single
paragraph or verse of the work itself, ie. the smallest unit of
structure in the Mishnah.
The
Babylonian Talmud
(Hagiga 14a) states that there were either six-hundred or
seven-hundred orders of the Mishnah.
Hillel the
Elder organized them into six orders to make it easier to
remember. The historical accuracy of this tradition is disputed.
There is also a tradition that
Ezra the scribe
dictated from memory not only the 24 books of the
Tanakh but 60
esoteric books. It is not known whether this is a reference to the
Mishnah, but there is a case for saying that the Mishnah does
consist of 60 tractates. (The current total is 63, but Makkot was
originally part of Sanhedrin, and Bava Kamma, Bava Metzia and Bava
Batra may be regarded as subdivisions of a single tractate
Nezikin.)
Interestingly,
Reuvein
Margolies posits that there were originally seven orders of
Mishnah. He cites a
Gaonic tradition on
the existence of a seventh order. The missing order contained the
laws of Sta"m (scribal practice) and Berachot (blessings).
Authorship
The Mishnah does not claim to be the development
of new laws, but merely the collection of existing oral laws,
traditions and folk wisdom. The rabbis who contributed to the
Mishnah are known as the Tannaim, of whom approximately 120 are
known. The period during which the Mishnah was assembled spanned
about 170 years, and five generations.
Most of the Mishnah is related without
attribution
(). This usually indicates that many sages taught so, and the
halakhic ruling usually follows that view. Sometimes, however, it
appears to be the opinion of a single sage, and the view of the
sages collectively () is given separately. In such cases the
halakha usually follows
the "sages", but may follow a third view expressed by a named
rabbi.
The Talmud records a tradition that unattributed
statements of the law represent the views of
Rabbi Meir,
which supports the theory that he was the author of an earlier
collection. For this reason, the few passages that actually say
"this is the view of Rabbi Meir" represent cases where his view was
later rejected.
Rabbi
Judah haNasi
(popularly called "Rabbi") is credited with publishing the Mishnah,
though there may have been a few edits since his time (for example,
those passages that cite him by name). According to
Maimonides
(Introduction to
Mishneh
Torah), after the tremendous upheaval caused by the destruction
of the Temple and the
Bar
Kochba revolt, the
Oral Torah was
in danger of being forgotten. It was for this reason that Rabbi
chose to redact the Mishnah.
One must also note that in addition to redacting
the Mishnah, Rabbi and his court also ruled on which opinions
should be followed, though the rulings do not always appear in the
text.
As he went through the tractates, the Mishnah was
set forth, but throughout his life some parts were updated as new
information came to light. Because of the proliferation of earlier
versions, it was deemed too hard to retract anything already
released, as such, a second version of certain laws were released.
The
Talmud
refers to these differing versions as Mishnah Rishonah ("First
Mishnah") and Mishnah Acharonah ("Last Mishnah").
David Zvi
Hoffman suggests that Mishnah Rishonah actually refers to texts
from earlier Sages upon which
Rabbi based
his Mishnah.
One theory is that the present Mishnah was based
on an earlier collection by Rabbi Meir. There are also references
to the "Mishnah of Rabbi Akiva", though this may simply mean his
teachings in general. It is possible that Rabbis Akiva and Meir
established the divisions and order of subjects in the Mishnah, but
this would make them the authors of a school curriculum rather than
of a book.
Authorities are divided on whether Rabbi Judah
haNasi recorded the Mishnah in writing or established it as an oral
text for memorisation. The most important early account of its
composition, the Epistle of
Sherira
Gaon, is ambiguous on the point, though the "Spanish" recension
leans to the theory that the Mishnah was written. However, the
Talmud records that, in every study session, there was a person
called the tanna appointed to recite the Mishnah passage under
discussion. This may indicate that, even if the Mishnah was reduced
to writing, it was not available on general distribution.
Context
Oral law
Before the publication of the Mishnah, Jewish
scholarship was predominantly oral. Rabbis expounded on and debated
the
Tanakh,
the
Hebrew
Bible, without the benefit of written works (other than the
Biblical books themselves), though some may have made private notes
(), for example of court decisions. The oral traditions were far
from monolithic, and varied among various schools, the most famous
of which were the
House of
Shammai and the
House of
Hillel.
The end of the Jewish commonwealth in the year 70
CE resulted in an upheaval of Jewish social and legal norms. The
Rabbis were faced with the new reality of Judaism without a Temple
(to serve as the center of teaching and study) and Judea without
autonomy. It is during this period that Rabbinic discourse began to
be recorded in writing.
The earliest recorded oral law may have been of
the
midrashic form, in
which
halakhic
discussion is structured as
exegetical commentary on the
Torah. But an
alternative form, organized by subject matter instead of by
biblical verse, became dominant by about the year 200 CE, when
Rabbi
Judah haNasi
redacted the Mishnah. In general, all opinions, even the
non-normative ones, were recorded in the Mishnah and subsequently
the Talmud.
In modern times, "the law" takes on a different
meaning than discussed in the Mishnah and Talmud. "The law" in
Judaism refers primarily to
biblical law,
given to the Israelites by God through Moses, as well as
interpretations of the meaning and application of those rules.
Thus, "
the
Law" is understood to be the religious teachings and rules
given by God. Yet, since religion was infused in every area of
life, rules for governing society, resolution of disputes, and
enforcing safety and public order were also governed by the
religious law, leading to an overlap of religion and modern
conceptions of law.
Relationship with the Hebrew Bible
Rabbinic
Judaism holds that the
oral tradition
was received by
Moses at
Mount Sinai
in parallel with the
Five
Books of Moses, the (written)
Torah (Torah
she-bi-khtav), and that these together have always been the basis
of
Jewish
law (halakha). The "Written Law" consists of the "Five Books of
Moses," the first five books of the
Hebrew
Bible, and not the Bible as a whole.
According to the Rabbinic view, the Oral Law
(Torah she-be'al-peh) was also given to Moses at Sinai, and is the
exposition of the Written Law as relayed by the scholarly and other
religious leaders of each generation. This Oral Law is
authoritative in practical terms, as the traditions of the Oral Law
are considered as the necessary basis for the interpretation, and
often for the reading, of the
Written
Law.
Thus,
Jewish law and
custom is based not only on a literal reading of the
Torah, or the rest of
the
Tanakh,
but on the combined oral and written traditions. Notably, the
Mishnah does not cite a written scriptural basis for its laws:
since it is said that the Oral Law was given simultaneously with
the Written Law, the Oral Law codified in the Mishnah does not
derive directly from the Written Law of the Torah. This is in
contrast with the
Midrash
halakha, works in which the sources of the traditionally
received laws are identified in the
Tanakh, often by
linking a verse to a halakha. These Midrashim often predate the
Mishnah.
By 200 CE, much of the Oral Law was edited
together into the Mishnah, and published by Rabbi Judah haNasi.
Over the next four centuries this material underwent analysis and
debate, known as
Gemara
("completion"), in what were at that time the world's two major
Jewish communities, in the
land of
Israel and in the
Babylonian
Empire. These debates eventually came to be edited together
into compilations known as the
Talmud: the
Talmud
Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Talmud) for the compilation in Israel,
and
Talmud Bavli
(Babylonian Talmud) for the compilation undertaken in
Babylon.
Competing oral laws and acceptance
It is unclear, according
to J. Sussman (Mehqerei Talmud III), whether there was any writing
connected to the Oral Law, or whether it was entirely oral. Over
time, different traditions of the Oral Law came into being, raising
debates about what the laws or their rulings were. According to the
Mevo Hatalmud many rulings were given about specific things that
could have been taken out of context or where a ruling was
revisited but the second ruling was not as popularly known. To
correct this, Rabbi Yehuda haNasi took up the redaction of the
Mishnah. If something was already there with no conflict, he used
it without changes in language, he reordered and ruled on where
there was conflict, and clarified where context was not given. The
idea was not do this at his own discretion, but rather to examine
the tradition as far back as he could, and only supplement as
required.
Some Jews did not accept the written codification
of the oral law at all; known as
Karaites, they
comprised a significant portion of the world Jewish population in
the 10th and 11th Centuries CE, and remain extant, though they
currently number in the thousands.
Mishnah Study
Omissions
A number of important laws are not elaborated
upon in the Mishnah. These include the laws of
tzitzit,
tefillin (phylacteries),
mezuzah (Sta"m), the
holiday of
Hanukkah, and the
laws of
gerim (converts).
These were later discussed in the minor tractates.
Rabbi
Nissim Gaon
in his Hakdamah Le'mafteach Hatalmud writes that many of these laws
were so well known that it was unnecessary for Rabbi to discuss
them. Reuvain Margolies suggests that as the Mishnah was redacted
after the
Bar Kochba
revolt, Rabbi could not have included discussion of
Hanukkah which
commemorates the Jewish revolt against the
Syrian-Greeks
(the Romans would not have tolerated this overt nationalism).
Similarly, there were then several decrees in place aimed at
suppressing outward signs of national identity, including decrees
against wearing tefillin and tzitzit; as
Conversion
to Judaism was against Roman law,
Rabbi would
not have discussed this.
David Zvi
Hoffman suggests that there existed ancient texts in the form
of the present day
Shulchan
Aruch that discussed the basic laws of day to day living and it
was therefore not necessary to focus on these laws in the
Mishnah.
Textual variants
The earliest printed edition of the Mishnah was
published in Naples ("the Napoli edition"). There have been many
subsequent editions, including the late nineteenth century Vilna
edition, which is the basis of the editions now used by the
religious public.
As well as being printed on its own, the Mishnah
is included in all editions of the Babylonian and Jerusalem
Talmuds. Each paragraph is printed on its own, and followed by the
relevant Gemara discussion. However, that discussion itself often
cites the Mishnah line by line. While the text printed in paragraph
form has generally been standardized to follow the Vilna edition,
the text cited line by line often preserves important variants,
which sometimes reflect the readings of older manuscripts.
The nearest approach to a critical edition is
that of Hanoch Albeck. There is also an edition by
Yosef Qafih
of the Mishnah together with the commentary of
Maimonides,
which compares the base text used by Maimonides with the Napoli and
Vilna
editions and other sources.
Oral traditions and pronunciation
The Mishnah was and still
is traditionally studied through recitation (out loud). Many
medieval manuscripts of the Mishnah are vowelized, and some of
these contain partial Tiberian
cantillation. Jewish
communities around the world preserved local melodies for chanting
the Mishnah, and distinctive ways of pronouncing its words.
Most vowelized editions of the Mishnah today
reflect standard
Ashkenazic
vowelization, and often contain mistakes. The Albeck edition of the
Mishnah was vowelized by Hanokh Yellin, who made careful eclectic
use of both medieval manuscripts and current oral traditions of
pronunciation from Jewish communities all over the world. The
Albeck edition includes an introduction by Yellin detailing his
eclectic method.
Two institutes at the
Hebrew
University in Jerusalem have collected major oral archives
which hold (among other things) extensive recordings of Jews
chanting the Mishnah using a variety of melodies and many different
kinds of pronunciation. These institutes are the Jewish Oral
Traditions Research Center and the National Voice Archives (the
Phonoteca at the Jewish National and University Library). See below
for external links.
Commentaries
- Rabbi Samson of
Sens (France) was, apart
from Maimonides, one of the few rabbis of the early medieval era to
compose a Mishnah commentary. It is printed in many editions of the
Mishnah.
- Rabbi Obadiah
ben Abraham of Bertinoro
(15th
century) wrote one of the most popular Mishnah commentaries. He
draws on Maimonides' work but also offers Talmudical material (in
effect a summary of the Talmudic discussion) largely
following the commentary of Rashi. In addition to
its role as a commentary on the Mishnah, this work is often
referenced by students of Talmud as a review-text, and is often
referred to as "the Bartanura" or "the Ra'V".
- After the Maharal
of Prague had initiated organised Mishnah study (Chevrath
ha-Mishnayoth), Yomtov
Lipman Heller (who is often believed to be his pupil but came
to Prague already as a mature scholar) wrote a commentary called
Tosafoth Yom Tov. In the introduction Heller says that his aim is
to make additions (tosafoth) to Bertinoro’s
commentary. The glosses are sometimes quite detailed and analytic.
That is why it is sometimes compared to the Tosafoth -
discussions of Babylonian gemara by French and German scholars of
12-13th C. In many compact Mishnah printings, a condensed version
of his commentary, titled Ikar Tosafoth Yom Tov, is
featured.
- Other Acharonim who
have written Mishna commentaries:
- A prominent commentary from the 19th century
is Tifereth Yisrael by Rabbi Yisrael Lipschutz. It is subdivided
into two parts, one more general and the other more analytical,
titled Yachin and Boaz respectively (after two large pillars in the
Temple
in Jerusalem). Lipschutz has not been completely without
controversy, in some hasidic cricles.
- The commentary by Rabbi Pinhas
Kehati, which is written in
Modern Israeli Hebrew and based on classical and contemporary
works, has become popular in the late Twentieth Century. The
commentary is designed to make the Mishnah widely accessible to a
wide spectrum of learners of all ages and all levels of experience
in Torah study. It is popularly referred to as "The Kehati". Each
tractate is introduced with an overview of its contents, including
historical and legal background material, and each Mishnah is
prefaced by a thematic introduction. The current version of this
edition is printed with the Bartenura commentary as well as
Kehati's.
- The above-mentioned edition edited by Hanokh Albeck and
vocalized by Hanokh Yellin (1952-59) includes the former's
extensive commentary on each Mishnah, as well as introductions to
each tractate (Masekhet) and order (Seder.) This commentary tends
to focus on the meaning of the mishnayot themselves, without as
much reliance on the Gemara's interpretation and is, therefore,
considered valuable as a tool for the study of Mishnah as an
independent work.
As a historical source
Both the Mishnah and Talmud contain
little serious biographical studies of the people discussed
therein, and the same tractate will conflate the points of view of
many different people. Yet, sketchy biographies of the Mishnaic
sages can often be constructed with historical detail from Talmudic
and
Midrashic
sources.
Many modern historical scholars have focused on
the timing and the formation of the Mishnah. A vital question is
whether it is composed of sources which date from its editor's
lifetime, and to what extent is it composed of earlier, or later
sources. Are Mishnaic disputes distinguishable along theological or
communal lines, and in what ways do different sections derive from
different schools of thought within early Judaism? Can these early
sources be identified, and if so, how? In response to these
questions, modern scholars have adopted a number of different
approaches.
- Some scholars hold that there has been extensive editorial
reshaping of the stories and statements within the Mishnah (and
later, in the Talmud.) Lacking outside confirming texts, they hold
that we cannot confirm the origin or date of most statements and
laws, and that we can say little for certain about their
authorship. In this view, the questions above are impossible to
answer. See, for example, the works of Louis
Jacobs, Baruch M. Bokser, Shaye
J. D. Cohen, Steven D. Fraade.
- Some scholars hold that the Mishnah and Talmud have been
extensively shaped by later editorial redaction, but that it
contains sources which we can identify and describe with some level
of reliability. In this view, sources can be identified to some
extent because each era of history and each distinct geographical
region has its own unique feature, which one can trace and analyze.
Thus, the questions above may be analyzed. See, for example, the
works of Goodblatt, Lee Levine, David C. Kraemer and Robert
Goldenberg.
- Some scholars hold that many or most of the statements and
events described in the Mishnah and Talmud usually occurred more or
less as described, and that they can be used as serious sources of
historical study. In this view, historians do their best to tease
out later editorial additions (itself a very difficult task) and
skeptically view accounts of miracles, leaving behind a reliable
historical text. See, for example, the works of Saul
Lieberman, David
Weiss Halivni, Avraham Goldberg and Dov Zlotnick.
- Professor Lawrence Shiffman proves that many of the specific,
detailed arguments of the Pharisees already existed in 150 BCE (or
earlier) - as documented in the Dead Sea Scroll MMT.
Notes
See also
References
Translations
- Philip
Blackman. Mishnayoth. The Judaica Press, Ltd., 2000 (ISBN
0-910818-00-X)
- Herbert
Danby. The Mishnah. Oxford, 1933 (ISBN 0-19-815402-X).
- Jacob
Neusner. The Mishnah: A New Translation. New Haven, reprint
1991 (ISBN 0-300-05022-4).
- Various editors. The Mishnah, a new translation with commentary
Yad Avraham. New York: Mesorah publishers, since 1980s.
Historical study
- Shalom Carmy (Ed.) Modern Scholarship in the Study of Torah:
Contributions and Limitations Jason Aronson, Inc.
- Shaye J.D. Cohen, "Patriarchs and Scholarchs", Proceedings of
the American Academy for Jewish Research 48 (1981), pp. 57-87
- Steven D. Fraade, "The Early Rabbinic Sage," in The Sage in
Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. John G. Gammie and Leo G.
Perdue (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1990), pp. 417-23
- Robert Goldenberg The Sabbath-Law of Rabbi Meir (Missoula,
Montana: Scholars Press, 1978)
- John W McGinley 'The Written' as the Vocation of Conceiving
Jewishly ISBN 0-595-40488-X
- Jacob Neusner Making the Classics in Judaism (Atlanta: Scholars
Press, 1989), pp. 1-13 and 19-44
- Jacob Neusner Judaism: The Evidence of the Mishnah (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1981), pp. 14-22.
- Gary Porton, The Traditions of Rabbi Ishmael (Leiden: E.J.
Brill, 1982), vol. 4, pp. 212-25
- Dov Zlotnick, The Iron Pillar Mishnah (Jerusalem: Bialik
Institute, 1988), pp. 8-9
- Reuvain Margolies, Yesod Ha-Mishnah V'Arichatah (Heb.)
- David Tzvi Hoffman, Mishnah Rishonah U'flugta D'tanna'e
(Heb)
Recitation
- Frank Alvarez-Pereyre, La Transmission Orale de la Mishna. Une
methode d'analyse appliquee a la tradition d'Alep: Jerusalem
1990
External links
Wikimedia projects
Wikisource's Open Mishna Project is
developing Mishnah texts, commentaries, and translations. The
project is currently available in four languages:
Hebrew
(the largest collection),
English,
French
and
Portuguese.
Mishnah study & the Daily Mishnah
- Aaron Ahrend, "Mishna Study and Study Groups in Modern Times"
in JSIJ 3: 2004 (Hebrew). Available online here
(Word & PDF).
- The
Daily Mishna - uses the Kehati commentary (in English
translation).
- Mishna Yomis
- Daily Mishna audio (English).
- Mishna
Yomit - One Mishna per day. (Note: this study-cycle follows a
different schedule than the regular one; contains extensive
archives in English).
- Mishna of
the Daf - a new Mishna study cycle that parallels the progress
of the Daf
Yomi.
- Kehati
Mishna a program of two Mishnayos per day, and the complete
text of Kehati in English
- Dafyomireview
- custom learning and review programs for mishnayos
Oral Traditions (chanting and pronunciation of the
Mishnah)
tractate in Arabic: الميشناه
tractate in Bulgarian: Мишна
tractate in Czech: Mišna
tractate in Welsh: Mishnah
tractate in Danish: Mishna
tractate in German: Mischna
tractate in Spanish: Mishná
tractate in Persian: میشنا
tractate in French: Mishna
tractate in Korean: 미슈나
tractate in Indonesian: Mishnah
tractate in Interlingua (International Auxiliary
Language Association): Mishnah
tractate in Italian: Mishnah
tractate in Hebrew: משנה
tractate in Hungarian: Misna
tractate in Dutch: Misjna
tractate in Japanese: ミシュナー
tractate in Norwegian: Misjná
tractate in Norwegian Nynorsk: Misjná
tractate in Polish: Miszna
tractate in Portuguese: Mishná
tractate in Romanian: Mişna
tractate in Russian: Мишна
tractate in Slovak: Mišna
tractate in Finnish: Mišna
tractate in Swedish: Mishna
tractate in Turkish: Mişna
tractate in Yiddish: משניות