Two versions of the Talmud Original Text
Good morning. I am on the rabbit trail of the Talmud. I am doing some research into the topic. Does anyone know what the difference is between The Babylonian Talmud: Original Text, Edited, Corrected, Formulated and Translated into English (19 vols.) edited by Michael L. Rodkinson and Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmud Collection (50 vols.) by Jacob Neusner? It seems as though Neusner has more materials. I do not understand how that can be possible though. What is a good version for a person just dabbling in the topic?
Comments
-
Rodkinson was printed by the Talmud Society in 1918 (originally 1896). It is only the Babylonian Talmud. Neusner contains both the Jerusalem (2008) and Babylonian Talmud (2011). Those are two slightly different things, although there are considerable overlaps. The Babylonian Talmud is considered the more authoritative. Neusner is more contemporary English and has divided the text into sections a little differently than Rodkinson, making it easier to find an exact saying.
I prefer Neusner. It is a more contemporary translation and has some introduction.
0 -
Depends (as usual). The Neusner is more complete and more recent (translation). The Rodkinson picks up the more important, and combines sections for the Mishnah and Gemara (the word 'Talmud' includes both, though in Logos, more often just the Gemara). If I remember right, Faithlife prepub'd the Neusner and then shipped it, while the Rodkinson came through the old Community Pricing, and later shipped.
If you're 'dabbling', the Rodkinson is fine. If you're later going to do more academic quoting, etc, Neusner and both the Babylonian and Palestine are more useful (along with the Mishnah). In the screen copy below, Neusner is on the left (Babylonian top; Palestine or Jerusalem on the bottom). Rodkinson is on the top-right, which Neusner's Mishnah bottom right.
You'll notice in the TOCs that Rodkinson starts off with the Shabbat; Neusner's the Berakhot which Rodkinson doesn't cover.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I've got the Rodkinson translation. It appears not to have the original text included in the volume. Does Neusner include the original text? If not, is the original text of the Talmud even available in Logos? That would seem like a glaring absence, but I don't seem to be able to find it anywhere. I can buy a "dictionary of the Talmud" to help with the original language, but the original language I am really having trouble locating...
0 -
Both translations. Logos doesn't have the OL.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I think Logos reference links to the Talmud in other works won’t work with Rodkinson. It’s set up differently than the modern references. Neusner does work.
WIN 11 i7 9750H, RTX 2060, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD | iPad Air 3
Verbum Max0
