Jacob Neusner

Jacob Neusner describes, analyzes, and interprets the transformation of one system of the Israelite social order by a connected but autonomous successor-system. He characterizes the successive systems classifying the one as philosophical and the other as religious. He explains the categorical account of each and sets forth the outcome of a number of topical studies on the category-formations of Rabbinic Judaism with special attention to the social order: politics, philosophy, and economics. These systems emerged as [1] autonomous when viewed synchronically, [2] connected when seen diachronically, and [3] as a continuous construction when seen at the end of their formative age. In their successive stages of categorical autonomy, connection, and finally continuity, the three distinct systems may be classified, respectively, as philosophical, religious, and theological, each one taking over and revising the definitive categories of the former and framing its own fresh, generative categories as well. The formative history of Judaism is the story of the presentations and re-presentations of categorical structures. In method, it is the exegesis of taxonomy and taxic systems. Now, after more than two decades, Neusner has decided to review the initial statement. Since the book summarizes ten years of work, from 1980 to 1990, on the Rabbinic category formations of social science politics, philosophy, and economics in the setting of the law and theology of Rabbinic Judaism from the Mishnah through the Bavli, 200-600 C.E., it seemed well worth the effort to recapitulate the original work. The revised introduction explains the omission of theology in his category-formation philosophy-religion-theology; Neusner's account of the Bavli produced the decade after this title was completed did not make possible the continuous description of the unfolding of the Rabbinic system. The pattern that appealed to Neusner from philosophy to religion to theology has not yet come to a satisfactory account. In the twenty years

The Prophets of Scripture are subverted by the Rabbis of the Talmud and Midrash. In the Rabbinic canon, the Prophets are represented as a miscellaneous mass of proof-texts, made up of one clause or sentence at a time. The Scripture's prophetic writings cited in clauses and phrases in the Rabbinic canon lose their integrity and cease to speak in fully coherent paragraphs and chapters. The same prophets, however, came to whole and coherent expression in other venues established by those same Rabbis. So the Rabbis of late antiquity took over writings from what they recognized as ancient times and of divine origin and they re-presented selections of those writings in accord with their own project's requirements, glossing clauses of the prophetic Scriptures but not whole, propositional discourses. This monograph shows how they did so. It portrays the formal patterns of the Rabbis' subversive glosses. Why impose the chaos of glosses on the orderly declaration of Scripture? It was to take possession of Scriptural prophecy that the Rabbinic authors imposed their characteristic forms and distinctive topics—-the characteristic categories and tasks and propositions. The Rabbinic canonical writings took over, imparting upon the received heritage of Scripture and tradition whatever they chose to treat as authoritative. They did with these selected compositions whatever they wanted. They Rabbinized Scripture in full awareness of how in the process they recast Scripture's own forms and purposes. The Rabbis were perfectly capable of recapitulating prophetic writings as coherent statements. This they did in providing for lections for Sabbaths and festivals.

The Talmud is a confusing piece of writing. It begins no where and ends no where but it does not move in a circle. It is written in several languages and follows rules that in certain circumstances trigger the use of one language over others. Its components are diverse. To translating it requires elaborate complementary language. It cannot be translated verbatim into any language. So a translation is a commentary in the most decisive way. The Talmud, accordingly, cannot be merely read but only studied. It contains diverse programs of writing, some descriptive and some analytical. A large segment of the writing follows a clear pattern, but the document encompasses vast components of miscellaneous collections of bits and pieces, odds and ends. It is a mishmash and a mess. Yet it defines the program of study of the community of Judaism and governs the articulation of the norms and laws of Judaism, its theology and its hermeneutics, Above all else, the Talmud of Babylonia is comprised of contention and produces conflict and disagreement, with little effort at a resolution No wonder the Talmud confuses its audience. But that does not explain the power of the Talmud to define Judaism and shape its intellect. This book guides those puzzled by the Talmud and shows the system and order that animate the text.

In separate multi-volume works, the project has presented form-analytical English translations of the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, outlined the Yerushalmi and the Bavli and compared these outlines. In this volume, the main points of the Halakhah of the topological expositions or tractates of the Mishnah-Tosefta-Bavli Hullin are set forth and the theological message of the tractate is laid out. The project yields a systematic account of the Halakhah in its documentary unfolding.

In separate multi-volume works, the project has presented form-analytical English translations of the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, outlined the Yerushalmi and the Bavli and compared these outlines. In this volume, the main points of the Halakhah of the topological expositions or tractates of the Mishnah-Tosefta-Bavli Hullin are set forth and the theological message of the tractate is laid out. The project yields a systematic account of the Halakhah in its documentary unfolding.

The author states in his preface: For a thousand years, from its earliest documents of the second century to the High Middle Ages, Rabbinic Judaism preferred to compose and collect anecdotes, not to construct of them sustained and connected biographies. This is a study of the inclusion of biographical narratives about sages in some of the components of the unfolding canon of Rabbinic Judaism in the formative age, the documents of the first six centuries C.E., exclusive of the two Talmuds. A sage here is defined as a man who embodies the Rabbinic system. A sage-story, then, is an anecdote about the life and deeds of a Rabbinic sage. A biographical narrative in general is the record of things done on a concrete and specific past-tense occasion by named individuals. The stories are not told as part of a sustained biographical account of those individuals' lives, birth to death. I am able in this way to correlate the unfolding of the authorized biography in the counterpart-Christian one. The documentary hypothesis yields the correlation between the advent of the Christian authorized biography and the advent of the sage-story in the later documents of the Rabbinic canon.

This collection of eight essays draws on a half-year of work, the second six months of 2009. Neusner takes up three problems in the history of Religions, four essays on fundamental issues in form-history and the documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon, and one theological essay. The reason Neusner periodically collects and publishes essays and reviews is to give them a second life, after they have served as lectures or as summaries of monographs or as free-standing articles or as expositions of Judaism in collections of comparative religions. This re-presentation serves a readership to whom the initial presentation in lectures or specialized journals or short-run monographs is inaccessible. Some of the essays furthermore provide a précis, for colleagues in kindred fields, of fully worked out monographs, the comparative Midrash exercise, for example.

The canonical documents of Rabbinic Judaism impose upon most of their components fixed patterns of rhetoric, recurrent logic of coherent discourse, and a well-defined topic or program, for example, a commentary on a biblical book or on a legal topic. But some few compositions and composites of the Rabbinic canon of late antiquity diverge from the formal norms of the compilations in which they occur. In these pages, Neusner assembles anomalous compositions that occur in the Mishnah, Tosefta, four Tannaite Midrashim, and Genesis Rabbah, and he further tests the uniformity of the forms that govern in a familiar chapter of the Bavli. Neusner's surveys show for the documents probed here that some small segment of the composites and compositions of the surveyed documents does not conform to the indicative rules of rhetoric, topic, and logic. Consequently, we face the challenge of constructing models of lost documents of the Rabbinic canon, conforming to the models governing anomalous compositions. These follow other topical and rhetorical norms and therefore belong in other, different types of documents from those in which they now are located. These anomalous writings in topic, logic, or rhetoric (or all three) in theory reveal indicative characteristics other than the ones defining the compositions and composites of the documents in which they are now located.

The collection Chapters in the Formative History of Judaism: Fourth Series commences with two historical theological essays, one on the apologetics of Judaism, the other on its soteriology. Both were written in response to invitations to contribute to collections of historical theology. Dr. Arvind Sharma of McGill University asked for the first chapter, posing a set of penetrating questions. It was to frame an essay of criticism of Judaism. The essay then responds to his program and problem with an apologetic composed out of the history of Judaism. The second is written for a forthcoming volume on soteriology in ancient Judaism and Christianity. It deals with the resurrection of the dead and the Messiah in Rabbinic documents. The second set of two essays deals with the canon of Rabbinic Judaism. Chapter Three responds to the request of Professor Bruce D. Chilton for a brief introduction to the Rabbinic canon. The fourth systematically compares two Midrash-compilations devoted to the same book of Scripture. It applies the documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon to a particular problem. Chapter Five is an effort at constructive theology. It is the Jack Chester Memorial Lecture for the Tenth Anniversary Celebration of the Sue and Leonard Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic Studies at the University of Miami. Two brief reviews complete the collection of six months of work.

Narrative and Document in the Rabbinic Canon, Volume I is a study of the inclusion of biographical narratives about sages in components of the unfolding canon of Rabbinic Judaism in the formative age. These documents are of the first six centuries C.E. and are exclusive of the two Talmuds. A sage is defined here as a man who embodies the Rabbinic system. A sage-story, then, is an anecdote about the life and deeds of a Rabbinic sage. In general, a biographical narrative is the record of things done on a concrete and specific past-tense occasion by named individuals. The stories are not told as part of a sustained biographical account of those individuals' lives, birth to death. In this way, one is able to correlate the unfolding of the sage-story in the Rabbinic canonical sequence with the unfolding of the authorized biography in the counterpart-Christian one. The documentary hypothesis yields the correlation between the advent of the Christian authorized biography and the advent of the sage-story in the later documents of the Rabbinic canon. The sage-stories of the Mishnah, Tosefta, Tannaite Halakhic Midrash-compilations, and Rabbah-Midrash collections are subject to examination. The Yerushalmi and the Bavli come next, in volume II. Here, we ask what is to be learned from a documentary reading of the sage-stories as they unfolded in the canonical setting.

This volume treats the interrelationship between Judaism and Christianity from the first centuries and into modern times, paying particular attention to these faiths' social, cultural, and theological interactions. The issues covered range from the formation of Jewish and Christian ideology in the context of Roman paganism to the ways in which Christian culture and theology of the medieval and modern periods form a backdrop to the creation of Jewish identity. While the historical periods and issues discussed are diverse, the result is to suggest the importance of our recognizing the close development of Judaism and Christianity. Written by top scholars in Judaic and Christian studies, these essays reflect on how the two faiths related to and were shaped by each other as they evolved in shared historical and cultural contexts, even as each maintained its own distinctive ideologies and beliefs.

Of the score of documents in the Rabbinic canon that reached closure in late antiquity, the first six centuries of the Common Era, the Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan Text A (Abot de Rabbi Natan, henceforward: ARNA) proves the most difficult to classify in the canonical context. It presents a challenge because it is different in its indicative traits from any other in the Rabbinic documents of its period. In the conclusion, (Chapter Forty-Five), Neusner explains what is at stake for the documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon in that observation. Jacob Neusner follows the procedures that have guided his prior work in situating Rabbinic documents within their formal context and in ordinal sequence in their larger canonical setting. After introducing the two documents compared here, Abot and ARNA, Neusner sets out a prologue explaining the analytical procedure. Then, he takes up a detailed probe of all the evidence and produces a hypothetical category-system of forms. This is exposed through a system of visual indicators, which Neusner defines and explains in the prologue to Part One. Part Two in two chapters follows. The results of Chapter Forty-Four, where Neusner tests the givens of the documentary hypothesis against the facts of ARNA and Abot, yield the concluding chapter, Chapter Forty-Five, where Neusner surveys the results for the entire document to see what rules govern in the context of the documentary hypothesis. These call into question the universal applicability of that hypothesis. There is no documentary program that derives uniquely from ARNA in canonical context.

In this Neusner book, he seeks to discern the Talmud's forests from its trees. By "trees" is meant episodic and free-standing statements, facts out of any larger context. By "forests" is meant whole paragraphs and still larger constructions of thought made out of sentences that in context and in sequence cohere. Accordingly, the issue here is how the Talmud transforms isolated facts into cogent and coherent constructions: the forests formed by the Talmud's trees. What is at stake is simply stated: What ignores the program of the Bavli in its composition and in the formation of its composites belongs in other, different documents from the Bavli and we can reconstruct through an act of imagination in response to the characteristics of the secondary composites of the Bavli the traits of those other, different documents.

This collection of five essays and two book reviews draws on a half-year of work, from mid-2008 to early 2009. The collection begins with historical theological essays: one on the apologetics of Judaism, the other on its soteriology. Both were written in response to invitations to contribute to collections of historical theology. The second set of two essays deals with the canon of Rabbinic Judaism. This is The Jack Chester Memorial Lecture to the Tenth Anniversary Celebration of the Sue and Leonard Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic Studies at the University of Miami. Two brief reviews complete the collection of six months of work.

In separate multi-volumed works, the author has presented form-analytical English translations of the Mishnah, Tosefta, Yerushalmi, and Bavli, outlined the Yerushalmi and the Bavli, and compared those outlines. In addition, he has set forth the main points of the Halakhah of the topical expositions or tractates of the Mishnah-Tosefta-Yerushalmi-Bavli and stated what he conceives to be the theological message of the respective tractates. Here he follows a single tractate through the principal documents of formative Judaism as he has presented them. He shows how his academic commentaries, outlines and comparisons and theological summaries yield a systematic account of the Halakhah in its documentary unfolding.

The documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon of late antiquity maintains that complete documents form the smallest whole building blocks of the Rabbinic system. These two volumes undertake a concrete exercise in the realization of the documentary hypothesis. It compares the rhetorical/formal and exegetical traits of two entire, kindred documents. Then, through a side by side chart, it compares each component of the two documents' treatment of the same extended segment of Scripture, Numbers 19. Whole documents are to be described and analyzed through a process of systematic description, comparison, and contrast. What makes the study fresh is that the author compares the two documents of the rabbinic canon that are most alike—the two Sifrés on Numbers. What makes it surprising is the result: they have nothing in common. Each is autonomous, and except for the scriptural foundation systematically shared by both, neither intersects in an appreciable measure with the other. Volume One (Chapters One and Two) deals with forms. In Chapter One, the author surveys the forms of Sifré to Numbers and identifies and classifies the formal patterns that govern throughout. Then, with the formal and propositional program of Sifré to Numbers as a base, in Chapter Two he does the same with Sifré Zutta to Numbers. Volume Two (Chapters Three through Five) deals with exegesis and systematic comparison of whole segments of documents. Chapters Three and Four describe and compare the exegetical patterns of the base-documents, with special reference to the utilization of the verses of Scripture as foci of coherent discourse. In Chapter Five, the author compares the treatment of Huqqat, that is, a single passage of Scripture read by the two commentaries respectively.

The documentary hypothesis of the Rabbinic canon of late antiquity maintains that complete documents form the smallest whole building blocks of the Rabbinic system. These two volumes undertake a concrete exercise in the realization of the documentary hypothesis. It compares the rhetorical/formal and exegetical traits of two entire, kindred documents. Then, through a side by side chart, it compares each component of the two documents' treatment of the same extended segment of Scripture, Numbers 19. Whole documents are to be described and analyzed through a process of systematic description, comparison, and contrast. What makes the study fresh is that the author compares the two documents of the rabbinic canon that are most alike—the two Sifrés on Numbers. What makes it surprising is the result: they have nothing in common. Each is autonomous, and except for the scriptural foundation systematically shared by both, neither intersects in an appreciable measure with the other. Volume One (Chapters One and Two) deals with forms. In Chapter One, the author surveys the forms of Sifré to Numbers and identifies and classifies the formal patterns that govern throughout. Then, with the formal and propositional program of Sifré to Numbers as a base, in Chapter Two he does the same with Sifré Zutta to Numbers. Volume Two (Chapters Three through Five) deals with exegesis and systematic comparison of whole segments of documents. Chapters Three and Four describe and compare the exegetical patterns of the base-documents, with special reference to the utilization of the verses of Scripture as foci of coherent discourse. In Chapter Five, the author compares the treatment of Huqqat, that is, a single passage of Scripture read by the two commentaries respectively.

Why the emergence of the Common Era in the history of Judaism resonates today

Jacob Neusner is Research Professor of Religion and Theology at Bard College and Senior Fellow of the Institute of Advanced Theology at Bard. He has published more than 900 books and unnumbered articles, both scholarly and academic and popular and journalistic, and is the most published humanities scholar in the world. He has been awarded nine honorary degrees, including seven US and European honorary doctorates. He received his AB from Harvard College in 1953, his PhD from Columbia University and Union Theological Seminary in 1961, and rabbinical ordination and the degree of Master of Hebrew Letters from the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in 1960. Neusner is editor of the 'Encyclopedia of Judaism' (Brill, 1999. I-III) and its Supplements; Chair of the Editorial Board of 'The Review of Rabbinic Judaism, ' and Editor in Chief of 'The Brill Reference Library of Judaism', both published by E. J. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands. He is editor of 'Studies in Judaism', University Press of America. Neusner resides with his wife in Rhinebeck, New York. They have a daughter, three sons and three daughters-in-law, six granddaughters and two grandsons.

The authors seek to identify the recurrent tensions, the blatant points of emphasis, the recurring indications of conflict and polemic. Framing the issue of the disposition of the Scriptural heritage in broad terms, they describe what characterizes the Gospels and the Mishnah, the letters of Paul and the Tosefta. In other words, if they take whole and complete the writings of first and second century people claiming to form the contemporary embodiment of Scripture's Israel and ask what they all stress as a single point of insistence, the answer is self-evident. Nearly every Christianity and nearly all known Judaisms appeal for validation to the Scriptures of ancient Israel, their laws and narratives, their prophecies and visions. To Scripture all parties appeal - but not to the same verses of Scripture. In Scripture, all participants to the common Israelite culture propose to find validation - but not to a common theological program subject to diverse interpretation. From Scripture, every community of Judaism and Christianity takes away what it will, but not with the assent of all the others.