4

On a previous question that I asked, one correspondent pointed out the existence of a Mishnaic index, which lists every page of the early rabbinic literature on which there is a reference (or allusion) to each individual mishna. I would like to know if in the course of discussing individual mishnayot, the Bavli ends up referencing every single mishna altogether, or if some go totally unmentioned. Would a person who learns Mishna only through Shas Bavli still end up encountering the entire text?

Improve this question

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
8

Not every Mishna is mentioned in the Bavli. As a counterexample (selected at random) the opening phrase of Keilim 14:3 does not appear in the Bavli.

Improve this answer
1
  • Thanks, DoubleAA. Direct and to-the-point! (I checked, and have since found other mishnayot around that one that also go unmentioned).
    – Shimon bM
    Jan 31, 2013 at 22:48
0

I misread the question and I wish to amend my answer. I did Shas with Daf Yomi during the 11th Cycle, and I did half of it again during the 12th. But I would never claim to have learned Shas Mishna based on that amount of study.

First, it is clear that there are no Bavli Tractates following many tractates of the Mishna. Only one tractate in the Seder of Zeraim, Brachos, has a Babylonian Gemara associated with it. That leaves Pe'ah, Demai, Kil'ayim, Shevi'is, Terumos, Ma'asros, Ma'aser Sheni, Challah, Orlah and Bikurim just from that seder! Mo'ed and Nashim are fully represented, I think in the Bavli. There are no Bavli gemaras for Avos and Eduyos in Seder Nezikin. From Seder Taharos, the Bavli is missing Keilim, Oholos, Negaim, Taharos, Mikvaos, Machshirin, Zavim, Yedayim, Tvul Yom and Uktzin.

Second, it may be true that many mishnayot are covered in discussions by reference, and one commentator has already pointed out that there is a major work that tries to track down all of the mishnayot cited therein. I have not reviewed that. But I have learned several of the mishnas listed above and there are some that come to mind, some in Challah for example, which I can't recall ever seeing in the Bavli.

Third, even if every mishna is somehow mentioned in the Bavli, I do not think that it is an appropriate way to learn the Mishnayos. They should be learned in the order that Rebbe placed them -- within context to each other.

Improve this answer
7
  • the point is that mishnayos from all over get brought into conversations elsewhere. E.g. Pesachim quotes mishnayos from Kodshim as well as Taharos. The Ridziner Rebbe did a massive work collecting all the places that the Bavli discusses a Mishnah in Taharos, and printed them alongside the mishnayos of Taharos. Unfortunately this happened just as the fraudulent Yerushalmi on Kodshim emerged; legend has it that one edition of the Ridziner work was marked at the top of each page: "This is a synthetic work and not a real Talmud."
    – Shalom
    Jan 31, 2013 at 16:03
  • hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20463 Sidrei Taharos by the Radziner -- though he also includes other midrashei halacha.
    – Shalom
    Jan 31, 2013 at 16:08
  • @Shalom: Please see my revised answer.
    – Bruce James
    Jan 31, 2013 at 16:26
  • Moed is missing Bavli on Shekalim.
    – Double AA ♦
    Jan 31, 2013 at 17:31
  • There is a long list of small tractates, typically printed along with Avos at the end of Eduyos, which are missing Gemara as well -- Kallah and Derech Eretz are some examples.
    – gt6989b
    Jan 31, 2013 at 17:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .