ענפי הנוסח של תוספתא יבמות לאור קטעי הגניזה הקהירית

שירה שמידמן

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Scholars have long debated the relative reliability of the two main manuscripts of the Tosefta. Should one prefer MS Vienna which was chosen by Leiberman to serve as the basis for his critical edition of the Tosefta? Or perhaps one should rely on the earlier MS Erfurt? This article sheds new light on this question by comparing these two manuscripts to the two extant Cairo Genizah fragments for Tosefta Yevamot. The findings from this research point to the originality of the readings in MS Erfurt, from two angles. Firstly, I demonstrate the presence of conjunctive errors common to MS Erfurt and the two Genizah fragments; these errors indicate that MS Erfurt and Genizah fragments share a common textual ancestor. These Genizah fragments show no signs of emendation from parallel sources, which further supports the authenticity of the textual witnesses in this branch. Secondly, my examination of the scribal emendations to Tosefta Yevamot reveals that the scribe of MS Erfurt rarely emends the text, and the few emendations are all derived from parallel sources in Rabbinic literature. In contrast, the scribe of MS Vienna emends the text with much higher frequency. Moreover, the emendations in MS Vienna are not limited to corrections based on parallel sources, but rather also include additions and interpolations that do not originate in Rabbinic sources. These findings all point to the superiority of MS Erfurt for Tosefta Yevamot.
Original languageHebrew
Pages (from-to)5-38
Number of pages34
Journalתרביץ
Volumeפט
Issue numberא
StatePublished - 2023

RAMBI Publications

  • RAMBI Publications
  • Tosefta -- Criticism, Textual
  • Tosefta -- Yevamot -- Criticism, interpretation, etc
  • Cairo Genizah

Cite this