Why is the Talmudic style so Confusing?

Question

why is the Talmud is written in such a confusing manner. Every other discipline in the world is taught in such a way as to make it as easy as possible to understand. If you learn mathematics for example, they first teach you addition then subtraction. Once you master that, you go on to multiplication, division, algebra, geometry, etc.

There is a clear order, building up from simple to complex and it's written in such a way as to be as easy as possible to understand. On the other hand, the talmud is written in a seemingly chaotic fashion. The very first mishna says:

"when do we read the shema?.. When the Kohanim enter to eat their teruma..."

Who? What? What Kohanim? What shema?! First tell me about the source of the mitzva of shema. Where does it come from. What is it? Instead the mishna jumps right in with a confusing mix of information. furthermore the talmud is constantly going off on tangents many of which are totally unrelated to the current tractate.

why is it written like this?

for example, If I want to teach physics in a clear way, I'd start with newton's laws of motion and then after a semester when this is fully clear I'd move up to waves and other more complicated stuff, then maybe optics or electromagnetism then thermodynamics,etc then quantum theory. (and even within newton's laws, I would start from basic and move up to complex). I would not start with newton's laws then throw in some electro-magnetism stuff and a little quantum mechanics all at once as this would totaly confuse every one. One must start with ONE most fundamental subject and explain it fully then move on to another subject which builds on that.

Answer 1

Keep in mind that the Oral Law had been left as oral teachings for quite some time, until the Mishnah began to put things down.

At the time the Mishnah was written, an average Jew would have been raised knowing that he recites Shema twice daily, and he would have seen Kohanim waiting till nightfall to consume terumah. So the Mishnah is filling us in on the nitty-gritty that we may not have known just from observing normal practice, assuming we have some background.

It's also been suggested that part of the goal was to keep a great deal of the Oral Law oral, hence the Mishnah is just some rough notes. It wasn't intended as a standalone text for a novice.

Answer 2

Pirkey Avos 5:22

Five years is the age for the study of Scripture. Ten, for the study of Mishnah. Thirteen, for the obligation to observe the mitzvot. Fifteen, for the study of Talmud.

Talmud seems difficult because it is expected that you will have spent five years studying the Scripture on which it is based and five years studying the Mishnah itself before diving into the Gemara in all its complexity. Besides this, you will have been actively engaged in learning about the practical aspects of the commandments from the age of three on. In other words, it's not a first year class.

Answer 3

I think that it's important to take into consideration the manner in which the Talmud was composed. It has never been a secret that the authors of the Talmud were many and various, ranging over a period of some three centuries and spanning an area that ranged from Palestine in the West to Babylonia in the East. It is, in essence, a commentary upon a similarly authored compilation (the Mishna having been composed by multiple individuals over a period of a century at a minimum), and one which incorporates other teachings - both those that are anonymously authored and those that were attributed, however correctly or incorrectly, to specific individuals.

The compilation of the Talmud involved stitching these different texts together on the basis of theme and content, sometimes coupling a section with another because they share a keyword or because they both refer to the same sage. The "stitching" comprises those anonymous portions that were written last of all, which link each sugya to its surrounding content and which provide a narratorial voice that questions and analyses the authenticity of traditions. As a piece of literature, this is already vastly different to other examples of human creativity, and cannot properly be compared to them.

When somebody wishes to learn mathematics, the teacher will begin with the most basic information and will increase in complexity as the student's skills develop. Likewise, if somebody wishes to learn halakha, (s)he will start with basic material and only approach the more difficult material once that has been mastered. Under no circumstances would somebody start with the Talmud if their intentions are to know the halakha. They start with the Talmud if their intentions are to know the Talmud, which is a field of study in and of itself.

Answer 4

Basically: they didn't have the time, resources, and manpower to make the Talmud a careful, precise, and highly organized text. So they didn't.

Try turning one page of Talmudic thought into careful, precise, ordered statements. It requires a MONUMENTAL amount of work. The Encyclopedia Talmudit has taken almost fifty years now to get to the letter Yud, and that is with fully-funded experts, in close contact, in a wealthy country, using computers and email. Imagine trying to make breakfast or write down a poem in the year 600!, and then consider how impossible it would have been to turn the Talmud into a tidy encyclopedia back then.

Fortunately: Time was on our side. Over many centuries, thousands of minds have poured over the Talmud and contributed to making it clearer and more consistent. Rashi was a breakthrough, as was Tosfot, and now is Schottenstein. Its a big task, but we've got a long time to work on it.