Customer Reviews

Peshat and Derash: Plain and Applied Meaning in Rabbinic Exegesis

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The title derives from peshat - the plain meaning of the text - and derash - the interpreted or homiletical meaning of the text in Rabbinic Judaism. The book is divided into two halves. The first half chronicles the history of rabbinic exegesis from ancient to renaissance times. The issue dealt with is the development of methodologies. The ancient rabbis were dealing with their predilection for justified law - that is, interpreting the Bible to justify the traditions codified in the foundation document of Rabbinic Judaism, the Mishnah (and the later Talmud). The second half of the book develops a theology, compatible with orthodox tradition, that accounts for the tension between peshat and derash.

This book is definately densely written, a mere 173 pages including appendices. It assumes a knowledge of the primary texts of Rabbinic Judaism, the medieval commentators (Rashi, Rashbam, Rambam, Ramban, Ibn Ezra), and medieval law codes. Before attempting this book, I recommend first becoming familiar with these sources. Barry Holtz's Back to the Sources is a good book to gain familiarity with these sources.

Halivni is definately in same intellectual vein as the more famous Jacob Neusner. No writer has produced more works on Judaism since Rabbi Judah Hanasi than Neusner. Like Neusner, Halivni writes in a secular scholarly context, however, he exhibits extreme sensitivity toward traditional belief and orthodoxy.

Outstanding and difficult book. Accessible in large part to educated laypersons like myself. His argument really clarifies the stakes in holding the opposites of a deep belief in / experience of the reality of revelation mediated by Torah tradition, on the one hand, and a commitment to the "just the facts" perspective of contemporary secular science (hopefully not scientism), on the other hand.

I am awaiting delivery of Prof Halivni's work but having read the excerpt that Amazon has posted I can offer some preliminary thoughts. Prof Halivni lists 3 examples of how the rabbis "read into" the text a meaning which dispensed with the plain meaning of the text. While one might readily understand why the rabbis wished to dispense with the literal meaning of "an eye for an eye", the same can not be said for the other 2 examples which he lists ie the difference in the liability of the various types of bailees or the "establishing on behalf of the name of the deceased brother" as it pertains to levirate marriage. Why would the rabbis wish to supplant one meaning for the other rather than just create an additional layer of meaning? The traditional and I beleive more logical explanation is that the rabbis had a long standing tradition that these verses were meant to be interpretd in a manner which deviated from the plain meaning of the text. This in essence is the point of departure between Conservative and Orthodox approach to exegesis.
More to come once I read the whole work.

the book is great for someone who has a master's degree in bible study, it is written in a very highly sophisticated matter that needs to be brought down for the masses to understand. overall, i love it