| |||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
definitely over my head . . .,
By
This review is from: Midrash, Mishnah, and Gemara: The Jewish Predilection for Justified Law (Hardcover)
because I had difficulty following his examples, but still somewhat interesting. Halivni argues that Jews' means of describing Jewish law have swung back and forth over the centuries from "apodictic" (i.e. law as final conclusion with little explanation) to "discursive" (law as constant argument, sometimes with no ultimate conclusion at all). Halivni explains that the first swing of the pendulum came from Second Temple Midrash (some explanation) to the Mishnah (almost no explanation) after the destruction of the Second Temple. Then came another swing from the Mishnah to the Talmud (which is almost entirely discursive). And after the Talmud came the medieval codifiers such as Maimonides, who moved back to the apodictic code - though in turn they were followed by commentators on the codes. Halivni also asserts that the discursive strain in Jewish thought was exemplified by medieval Torah commentators which exercised considerable freedom in interpreting the Torah, sometimes in contradiction to settled Jewish law. Halivni's sympathy is clearly with those commentators and with the Talmud; he seems to believe that regardless of whatever practical law governs Jews, Torah should be studied for its own sake.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
See all 16 books citing this book
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
|
|
