Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

How does Jacob Neusner's translations of the talmud bavli and yerushalmi compare to artscroll's, koren's, and soncino's?

I have never seen Neusner's in a shul or bais midrash unlike the other three mentioned; is there a reason for that? Is it an accurate translation?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

Wikipedia. As described there, Neusner has been criticized by the following scholars in his field of study:

[Shaye J. D. Cohen, "Jacob Neusner, Mishnah and Counter-Rabbinics," Conservative Judaism, Vol.37(1) Fall 1983 p. 48-63]

[Craig A. Evans, "Mishna and Messiah 'In Context'," Journal of Biblical Literature, (JBL), 112/2 1993, p. 267-289]

[Saul Lieberman, "A Tragedy or a Comedy" Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol.104(2) April/June 1984 p. 315-319]

[Hyam Maccoby, "Jacob Neusner's Mishnah," Midstream, 30/5 May 1984 p. 24-32]

[Hyam Maccoby, "Neusner and the Red Cow," Journal for the Study of Judaism (JSJ), 21 1990, p. 60-75]

[John C. Poirier, "Jacob Neusner, the Mishnah and Ventriloquism," The Jewish Quarterly Review, LXXXVII Nos.1-2, July–October 1996, p. 61-78]

[E.P.Sanders, Jewish Law from Jesus to the Mishnah. Philadelphia, 1990.]

[Solomon Zeitlin, "A Life of Yohanan ben Zakkai. A Specimen of Modern Jewish Scholarship," Jewish Quarterly Review, 62, 1972, p. 145-155.]

[Solomon Zeitlin, "Spurious Interpretations of Rabbinic Sources in the Studies of the Pharisees and Pharisaim," Jewish Quarterly Review, 62, 1974, p. 122-135.]

[ Evan M. Zuesse, "The Rabbinic Treatment of 'Others' (Criminals, Gentiles) according to Jacob Neusner," Review of Rabbinic Judaism, Vol. VII, 2004, p. 191-229]

[Evan M. Zuesse, "Phenomenology of Judaism," in: Encyclopaedia of Judaism, ed. J. Neusner, A. Avery-Peck, and W.S. Green, 2nd Edition Leiden: Brill, 2005 Vol.III, p. 1968-1986. (Offers an alternative to Neusner's theory of "Judaisms.")]

Some scholars are critical of Neusner's methodology, and assert that many of his arguments are circular or attempt to prove "negative assumptions" from a lack of evidence. Others are critical of Neusner's reading and interpretations of Rabbinic texts, finding that his account is forced and inaccurate.

Some scholars have questioned Neusner's grasp of Rabbinic Hebrew and Aramaic. Probably the most famous and biting criticism came from Saul Lieberman: about Neusner's translation of the Jerusalem Talmud, Lieberman wrote:"...one begins to doubt the credibility of the translator [Neusner]. And indeed after a superficial perusal of the translation, the reader is stunned by [Neusner's] ignorance of Rabbinic Hebrew, of Aramaic grammar, and above all of the subject matter with which he deals." He ended his review: "I conclude with a clear conscience: The right place for [Neusner's] English translation is the waste basket. "[Saul Lieberman, "A Tragedy or a Comedy" Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol.104(2) April/June 1984 p. 315-319]

share|improve this answer
    
Partial answer more questions unanswered. –  sam Jul 31 '13 at 18:54
    
Indeed Lieberman's piece is notoriously quite sharp. –  Double AA Jul 31 '13 at 18:56
    
@DoubleAA "I conclude with a clear conscience: The right place for [Neusner's] English translation is the waste basket." –  Shmuel Brin Aug 25 '13 at 5:23

Neusner only translates the historical document as it was codified ca. 500 CE. He does not include any later commentaries such as Rashi, nor any halakhic literature.

share|improve this answer
    
Neither did Soncino... –  Double AA Aug 25 '13 at 1:10

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.