Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Gemara
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Argumentation and debate== [[File:Frankfort, Theologisch debat.jpg|thumb|"Theologisch debat" ([[Eduard Frankfort]], c. 1900), depicting a {{Transliteration|he|[[chavrusa]]}} debating a {{Transliteration|he|sugya}}]] The distinctive character of the {{Transliteration|he|gemara}} derives largely from the intricate use of argumentation and debate, described above; these "back and forth" analytics are characterized by the Talmudic phrase ''shakla v'tarya'' (שקלא וטריא; lit. "taking and throwing"). In each {{Transliteration|he|sugya}}, either participant may cite scriptural, {{Transliteration|he|Mishnaic}} and {{Transliteration|he|Amoraic}} proof to build a [[Logical argument|logical support]] for their respective opinions. The process of deduction required to derive a conclusion from a prooftext is often logically complex and indirect. "Confronted with a statement on any subject, the Talmudic student will proceed to raise a series of questions before he satisfies himself of having understood its full meaning."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ohr.edu/judaism/articles/talmud.htm|title=Talmudic Method}}</ref> This analysis has been described as "mathematical" in approach; [[Adin Steinsaltz]] makes the analogy of the ''Amoraim'' as [[scientist]]s investigating the [[Halakha]], where the [[Tanakh]], [[Mishnah]], [[Tosefta]] and [[Halakhic Midrash|midrash]] are the [[phenomena]] studied. ===Prooftexts=== Prooftexts quoted to corroborate or disprove the respective opinions and [[theory|theories]] will include: * verses from the Tanakh: the exact language employed is regarded as significant; * other {{Transliteration|he|mishnayot}}: cross-references to analogous cases, or to parallel reasoning by the {{Transliteration|he|Tanna}} in question; * ''[[Beraita|Beraitot]]'' (ברייתות) – uncodified {{Transliteration|he|mishnayot}} which are also sources of halakha (lit. outside material; sing. {{Transliteration|he|beraita}} ברייתא); ** references to opinions and cases in the {{Transliteration|he|[[Tosefta]]}} (תוספתא); ** references to the {{Transliteration|he|[[Halakhic Midrash]]}} ({{Transliteration|he|[[Midrash#Tannaitic|Mekhilta, Sifra and Sifre]]}}); * cross-references to other {{Transliteration|he|sugyot}}: again to analogous cases or logic. ===Questions addressed=== The actual debate will usually centre on the following categories: ====Language==== Why does the {{Transliteration|he|Mishna}} use one word rather than another? If a statement is not clear enough, the {{Transliteration|he|Gemara}} seeks to clarify the {{Transliteration|he|Mishna's}} intention. ====Logic==== Exploring the logical principles underlying the {{Transliteration|he|Mishnah's}} statements, and showing how different understandings of the {{Transliteration|he|Mishnah's}} reasons could lead to differences in their practical application. What underlying principle is entailed in a statement of fact or in a specific instance brought as an illustration? If a statement appears obvious, the {{Transliteration|he|Gemara}} seeks the logical reason for its necessity. It seeks to answer under which circumstances a statement is true, and what qualifications are permissible. All statements are examined for internal consistency. See: [[List of Talmudic principles]] and [[:Category:Talmud concepts and terminology]] ====Legal==== Resolving contradictions, perceived or actual, between different statements in the {{Transliteration|he|Mishnah}}, or between the {{Transliteration|he|Mishnah}} and other traditions; e.g., by stating that: two conflicting sources are dealing with differing circumstances; or that they represent the views of different rabbis. Do certain authorities differ or not? If they do, why do they differ? If a principle is presented as a generalization, the {{Transliteration|he|Gemara}} clarifies how much is included; if an exception, how much is excluded. ====Biblical exposition==== Demonstrating how the {{Transliteration|he|Mishnah's}} rulings or disputes derive from interpretations of Biblical texts, the {{Transliteration|he|Gemara}} will often ask where in the [[Torah]] the {{Transliteration|he|Mishnah}} derives a particular law. See [[Talmudic hermeneutics]] and {{slink|Oral Torah #The interplay of the Oral and Written Law}}.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Gemara
(section)
Add topic