 |
Volume 76 › Table of Contents › Article Abstract
| › |
Barak S. Cohen, Bar-Ilan University |
Rav Nahman and Rav Sheshet, who lived in the early fourth century C.E., are two
of the most prominent Babylonian amoraim. They are known for their numerous
disagreements, having conflicting opinions on halakhic issues in over thirty five
instances in both Talmuds. The present study presents a systematic analysis of the
entire corpus of their disagreements revealing significant differences in their system
of study and exegesis, primarily with regard to the use and interpretation of tannaitic
sources. Their diverse approaches originate from differing methods of study : Rav
Sheshet had a conservative approach, employing formalistic exegesis of tannaitic
sources, while Rav Nahman employed an innovative technique, tending to expand
tannaitic sources through creative interpretation. Moreover, there is a clear relationship
between the data derived from an analysis of their respective methodologies
and the rest of their literary legacy in talmudic literature. Indeed, the examination
of the methodologies of Rav Nahman and Rav Sheshet demonstrates the importance
of the careful examination of the collective corpus of amoraic literature. Ultimately
this is the key to building a coherent intellectual history of the amoraim.
|
