Studies in the Talmudic emendation of Tannaitic sources: An analysis of five terms of emendation in the Babylonian Talmud. [Hebrew and English text]

Abstract

The phenomenon of text emendation of Tannaitic sources by Amoraim and the anonymous sugyah is attested to by the Babylonian Talmud in a wide number of cases. Various technical terms (hagahot) are used by the Talmud to indicate these emendations. In this study, we limited ourselves to an exhaustive detailed analysis of five representative terms: "krokh uteni" (chap. 3), " thinspace'einah mishnah" (chap. 4), "samei mikan" (chap. 5), " thinspace'apeik dots ve'ayeil" (chap. 6), and "lizdadin katani" (chap. 7). These terms were chosen because they are representative of the different approaches found in the Talmud to correct and emend Tannaitic sources. In addition, these terms differ significantly from each other both in regard to the actual authors of the emendations and in regard to the type of difficulty which led them propose emendation. These five terms may therefore be viewed as archetypical of other hagahot; and the conclusions drawn from this study, while based on these specific terms, contribute to a better understanding of the phenomenon of Talmudic emendation of Tannaitic sources.;The methodological approaches used in our critical study included the following: clearly defining each term, discerning the ease with which Amoraim suggest text emendation, noting which Amoraim have more of a tendency to suggest actual textual change (hagahah) and which to explain and interpret the text (peirush), categorizing the types of texts subjected to emendation and identifying the origin of the emended text, noting the type of problem raised by each sugyah, uncovering any underlying reasons that may have influenced the Talmudic emendation, detailing the different component parts of each sugyah, differentiating between the anonymous and Amoraic material in the sugyah, comparing all the Tannaitic material to its parallels in the Halakhic Medrashim, Tosefta, Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds etc., and to extant manuscripts and Rabbinic sources. Wherever possible a comprehensive sugyah analysis is offered touching on the development of each facet of the Babylonian Talmudic sugyah.;Our research supported the contention that many emendations of Tannaitic sources did not originate simply as conjectures offered by an Amora to change the text in order to obviate the textual difficulty in the source; rather the emendations were predicted on a knowledge and tradition that the very source in questions existed as well in such a variant reading (nusah).