Methods in biblical scholarship

Lewis Reich lewreich at
Mon Dec 27 21:19:22 EST 1999

On 27 Dec 99, at 11:34, Moshe Shulman wrote:

> At 10:13 AM 12/27/1999 -0500, Lewis Reich wrote:
> >----- Original Message -----
> >> > (BTW certainly
> >> > in later Jewish tradition it is clear that non-canon works are
> >considered in
> >> > a special status. I would consider the mishnah as an example.)

> >I would suggest that this is comparing apples and oranges.
> Then I have to disagree. The mishnah and talmud are as important to
> Judaism as the Bible is. There is just a recognition of a status that is
> lower. (This is even codified in Jewish law.)

I'm surprised you would disagree, Moshe.  I would certainly agree 
with you that they are as important, but I don't think that the 
tannaim and amoraim of the mishnah and talmud would have 
considered their work "canon" in the same sense as Tanakh, do 
you?  Are the Shulchan Arukh or the Arba Turim "canonical" in the 
same sense as Tanakh?

Lewis Reich

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list