Description

Aus der Bibliothek von Prof. Wolfgang Haase, langj�igem Herausgeber der ANRW und des International Journal of the Classical Tradition (IJCT) / From the library of Prof. Wolfgang Haase, long-time editor of ANRW and the International Journal of the Classical Tradition (IJCT). - beide Buchdeckel leicht konvex, ansonsten tadelloser Zustand / both covers slightly convex, otherwise perfect condition - Table of Contents -- MISHNAH -- The Modern Study of the Mishnah -- Jacob Neusner -- The Traditional Study of the Mishnah -- Joel H. Zaiman -- Bibliography on the Mishnah -- Baruch M. Bokser, Joel Gereboff, William Scott Green, Jacob Neusner, Gary G. Porton, and Charles Primus -- MIDRASH -- Defining Midrash Gary G. Porton -- Bibliography on Midrash Lee Haas -- SIDDUR -- The Modern Study of Jewish Liturgy -- Richard S. Sarason -- Recent Developments in the Study of Jewish Liturgy -- Richard S. Sarason -- Biblical and Talmudic References -- An Annotated Bibliographical Guide to the Study of the Palestinian Talmud -- Baruch M. Bokser -- The Babylonian Talmud -- David Goodblatt -- Introduction -- These introductions to the literary evidence of earlier Rabbinic udaism deal with the five most important types of documents: the Mishnah, the Midrashic compilations, the liturgy, and (in volume II) the two great Talmuds. The purpose is to explain the state of scholarship, with special interest in methods used for framing and answering the principal questions of systematic, critical learning in our own day: What do we know? How do we know it? Why is it important? The reader should be able to gain a fair insight into the way in which paramount masters of Jewish learning of the present generation formulate and work through their scholarly programs. For some documents the principal questions are historical; for others, exegetical; for still others, philological. All documents under discussion in these two books have been subjected to careful and reverent study for a very long time, a matter of nearly twenty centuries. Consequently, we cannot assume that the way questions now are asked must set the norm for how they will be asked in yet another generation, let alone conform to the norm for how they were asked in times past. The contrary is the case. The sole abiding fact is the document itself. What people make of it, why they want to deal with it at all, and the intellectual or religious purpose for which they do the work to begin with - these formative factors in the on-going traditions of learning require attentive specification. The purpose is to gain perspective both upon the documents under study and upon ourselves as contemporary students of them. The reward is to attain a clearer and more self-conscious understanding of what we do when we engage in what we deem to be critical and systematic learning.