INTRODUCTION
21
upon eastern and western Aramaic respectively) is
far more difficult than that of the Mishnah, being,
as it is, concise to a degree that Thucydides might
have envied, and Tacitus striven in vain to imitate.
It is full of technical terms and foreign words, which
are the despair of the reader who knows only his
Hebrew Bible. Yet there is order and method even
in the Talmud, and it is a great mistake to suppose
that its contents may be treated as a series of un-
connected sentences, whose meaning is clear apart
from their context, and without reference to the
deep underlying principles which give vitality to
the whole. The passages which will presently be
cited from the Talmud may serve as illustrations of
what has been said, so far as mere translations, how-
ever literal, can represent an original text so peculiar
and so bizarre ; and, in presenting them apart from
their context, I trust I have not been unmindful of
the caution just given.
The twofold Talmud is by far the most important
work of the early Rabbinical literature. Yet there
are others, dating from the same centuries, which
can by no means be passed by unnoticed. It was
stated above that the Mishnah was not the only
collection of Halachoth, though it was adopted as
the standard. To say nothing of the fact that the
Gemaras contain many Halachoth not included in
the Mishnah (hence called ' Baraitha,'
i.e.
external),
there exists at least one independent collection of
Halachoth, as a sort of rival to the Mishnah. This
is known as Tosephta, a name which means' addition'
or
'
supplement,' as if it had been intended merely to
supply what was wanting in the standard work. Yet
 |  |  |