685 BOEKBESPREKINGEN — JUDAICA 686

JUDAICA

FOX, Harry & Tirzah MEACHAM (ed.) — Introducing . KTAV Publishing House, Hoboken, 1999. (23 cm, XIX, 340). ISBN 0-88125-637-4. $ 79.50.

The first known explicit inquiry into the origin and pur- pose of the Tosefta is to be found in the answer of Sherira Gaon to one of the questions formulated by Jacob ben Nis- sim on behalf of the congregation of Kairouan at the end of the tenth century CE. The question read: “And the Tosefta, of which we heard that R. Hiyya wrote it: Was it written after the or at the same time as it? And what concerned R. Hiyya to write it? If it was to add certain matters which explicate the concerns of Mishnah, why did Rabbi not write them as they are stated in the name of the same sages as the Mishnah?” The book under review makes clear that this question still occupies the minds of many students of rabbinic literature. The different methodological approaches and the subsequent models that are put forward show that the problem is very much alive, but still far from being solved. Harry Fox opens the floor with a review article on the sub- ject. The article contains much that is worth noting, but unfor- tunately it is hard to read because of the abundance of topics he broaches and the somewhat tangled style of his writing. The article of Jacob Neusner is a repetition of much of his earlier work. But if this volume is going to serve as an intro- ductory volume to the study of the Tosefta — which would not surprise me — then it is of course useful to have a reca- pitulation of his view. Reena Zeidman starts with a summary of previous schol- arship on Tosefta. She concludes that most of the research so far concentrated on Tosefta's relationship to the Talmudium. 687 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVII N° 5/6, September-December 2000 688

She proposes to focus instead on its relationship to the Mish- eral profound and thought provoking. As for the ultimate nah. Her theory posits an interactive relationship between objective, I sincerely doubt whether this ever can be Mishnah and Tosefta prior to their final redaction, for which achieved. she borrowed the musical term contrapuntal composition. The editors explain that the present book began as a Jubilee Shamma Friedman adds another piece of evidence to his Volume in honour of Menachem Rothman. However, while earlier position, that where Mishnah and Tosefta have paral- the book was underway, Rothman became ill and departed. lel teachings, the wording of the Tosefta is probably the more What was meant as a celebratory volume became a memor- original. On basis of his method of minute textual compari- ial volume. May his memory be blessed. son he concludes that more than Tosefta commenting on Mishnah, Mishnah is commenting on Tosefta, by abridging Arnhem, May 2000 Alberdina HOUTMAN and rephrasing the older material. This original view deserves particular notice. After his impressive study Authority and Tradition, in which Yaakov Elman explored the relationship between the Tosefta and the Babylonian , he now examines the relationship between the Tosefta and the Palestinian Talmud. On the basis of a comparison of tractate PisÌa in the Tosefta and the Palestinian Talmud, he concludes that the redactors of the Palestinian Talmud probably did not consult a text of the Tosefta as we know it now. Tirzah Meacham investigates the same relationship for tractate . Meacham tries to unravel the logic of the argument in PT Niddah. Her observations are largely in agreement with Elman, namely that there are baraitot in the Tosefta that would contribute to the discussion in the PT but were not used, and that the majority of the parallels are not exact. Nevertheless, she states that the discussion in PT Nid- dah was directed by the ideas of Tosefta Niddah. This last reasoning is not quite convincing. Judith Hauptman does not so much concentrate on the question of the Tosefta, but rather on the feminist reading of tannaitic halakhic literature in general. She introduces a new way of interpreting this literature, namely by examining the roads not taken, i.e. by looking at the other options available to the redactor, but which were apparently rejected. This is in itself an interesting and useful exercise. However, for the problem of the purpose and origin of the Tosefta it is hardly relevant. The essay of Herbert Basser consists of two parts, which are in fact two different papers. The first part discusses the antiquity of tannaitic decrees by comparing them with stories in the Gospels. In the second part he examines the question whether the tannaitic halakhic compilations in fact represent parts of a larger tradition. He concludes that indeed the edi- tors of the various works drew on the same source. So far the argument is convincing. However, his answer to the question why the various parts of oral traditions were taught in sepa- rate compilations puzzles me. He writes (p. 276): “We might speculate that the composer of the Mishnah deliberately wrote out his material in such a subtle way so as to make the mate- rial very obscure, since oral tradition was not to be written down.” Paul Heger, finally, analyses an obscure anecdote in the Mishnah about a popular rebellion at the performance of the water libation. He demonstrates how close parallel reading of all the available sources can help to understand a frag- mented account. Tirzah Meacham concludes the volume with an afterword. She expresses the hope that the variety of approaches and the range of topics will encourage further research and ultimately enable the clarification of Tosefta's place in rabbinic litera- ture. In my opinion the present volume will certainly reach the first goal, seeing that the various contributions are in gen-