Concepts of periodization and causality in Talmudic literature

The modernization of European Jewry was a gradual process that spread from individuals to communities and from one social class to another. It travelled from city to small town and from central and western Europe eastward. Among its component elements were economic redistribution, acculturation, secular edu cation, and religious reform. Scholars have examined each of these elements and their interrelation. They have also recognized the appearance of a new historical consciousness that began to play a crucial role in the formation of modern Jewish identity. Recently, the shifting relation of Jews to their history has received much attention, both in general surveys and in specific studies.' Yet the emergence of a fresh historical awareness, after centuries in which historical interest was at best limited, deserves further consideration, for the process was by no means simple and straightforward. As Jews began to attribute major significance to his tory in general and to Jewish history in particular, they faced issues that were not speedily or uniformly resolved: What was the purpose of historical study? What history should be learned? How was the study of history related to Jewish religion and its possible reform? And perhaps most important, should the study of Jewish history principally serve to liberate the Jew from tradition by historicizing it or create a new attachment to the past by reconceiving it as a model or anchorage for the present? These questions emerge especially among German Jews during the periods of the Enlightenment and Romanticism. The answers given reflect both the intellectual milieu and the specific historical situation of the Jews. I. THE VALUE OF HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE Although Moses Mendelssohn, the first prominent and articulate modern Jew, on one occasion complained of his boredom with history, his first biographer, Isaac Euchel, felt constrained to point out, in 1788, that his subject's secular edu cation had begun with historical studies. That remark, in turn, served as a good l. The general works include

2011

The Jewish Quarterly Review, 2013

2011

Journal of Philological Pedagogy, 2023

This programmatic study explores the challenges Jewish educators face when reconciling historical claims in rabbinic literature, particularly the Talmud, with conventional historical sources. The central issue arises when students encounter contradictions between rabbinic narratives and non-rabbinic historical accounts, potentially leading to crises of faith. The article outlines five critical tools for resolving these contradictions: exclusion, allegorization, synthesis, accommodation, and rejection. Each method offers a different approach to harmonizing or addressing discrepancies between rabbinic and external sources. The article provides detailed examples of how these tools have been applied to resolve specific historical controversies, such as the destruction of the Alexandrian Jewish community, the death of Honi the Circledrawer, Nero's alleged conversion to Judaism, and the story of Titus and the yetosh. Each case study demonstrates how different rabbinic authorities and scholars have employed these tools to address contradictions between rabbinic and non-rabbinic sources. The article emphasizes that the choice of method depends on the educational context and the audience. In strictly Orthodox settings, exclusion or allegorization may be preferred to preserve the Talmud's authority, while in Modern Orthodox or academic contexts, synthesis, accommodation, or even rejection might be more acceptable. The Jewish educator's role is to balance the pursuit of truth with the need to respect communal and institutional norms, ensuring that students can navigate these complexities without losing faith in the tradition. In conclusion, the article underscores the importance of equipping Jewish educators with these critical tools to address historical contradictions in rabbinic literature. By doing so, educators can help students reconcile their faith with historical inquiry, fostering a deeper understanding of Jewish tradition while maintaining intellectual integrity.

The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 2022

For lack of a better criterion, we can identify a rabbinic 'group' by about 200 CE, the traditional date for the publication of the Mishna in Palestine.1 At that point, there was a coherent literary work using specialized language, legal terminology, and modes of argument, all applied to a set of topics. The Mishna thus presupposed an audience, however small, that could make sense of it. The Mishna also states traditions in the names of persons. These men appear to go back as far as two hundred or so years (only occasionally earlier).2 However, the bulk of statements are attributed to sages who flourished later, after the revolts of 66-70 and 132-136 CE that resulted in the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the re-annexation of Judaea as a separate Roman province. The Mishna also provides the title rabbi ('my master') for nearly all of the figures from 70-200 CE. Although this usage may not be exclusively rabbinic, it does not appear to antedate the first century CE.3 In practice, then, the Mishna claims a legacy of inherited tradition drawing on the remembered statements and opinions of recognized (often named and titled) antecedents of considerable but usually not primordial antiquity. This criterion has the merit of identifying a fixed historical point by which to date 'the rabbis' , although the underlying social and intellectual developments were undoubtedly lengthier and more complex. Like every reconstruction that hopes to talk about actual rabbinic people, places, and times, the following discussion makes assumptions about the rough reliability of the division of rabbis into 'generations' and the significance of large political and military events for shaping the group. Part 1 of this chapter looks backwards, examining the connections between what we know of rabbis near the turn of the third century CE and the social,

In his influential Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory, Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi analyzed brilliantly the transition in Jewish conceptions of Jewish history from premodern to modern times. The present paper discusses a number of alternative perspectives on this transition. Yerushalmi argued convincingly the importance of the traditional conception of Jewish history, which he labeled "Jewish memory," for Jewish survival. This paper challenges the terminology, agrees with the role played by the traditional Jewish thinking in Jewish survival, and emphasizes the premodern circumstances that made the traditional thinking so vital and effective. With respect to modern conceptions of Jewish history, which Yerushalmi associates with Jewish history writing, this paper argues that an examination of the circumstances of modernity reveals the creativity of this altered view of the Jewish past and the ways in which it in turn has fostered Jewish survival in the face of radically new challenges.