Talk:Gemara

Compilation?
Who was bavli compiled by?--108.21.81.129 (talk) 00:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Ravina I and Rav Ashi. --תנא קמא (talk) 17:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Question and answer
Has Gemara ever been pronounced 'gimnerah' with an 'n' after the 'm' ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.177.27.29 (talk • contribs) 13 Oct 2006


 * Uh, although I can't say for sure I am very familiar with the Gemara and it's other names (Talmud, "Torah Sh'Baal Peh" Etc.) and I have never heard of it being prounounced with an "n" after the "m". Let us know if you find a source for this it would be very interesting!141.153.150.184 03:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No! It has never been.--תנא קמא (talk) 17:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Idea for Talmud articles
I am reposting the following request from User on my user talk page for wider notification:


 * I was thinking of trying to stimulate development of a series of articles on Gemara concepts and doctrines, maybe to help children or newcomers to Gemara with explanations of some fundamental concepts that recur throughout the Gemara. Some examples might be articles on Yiush, Chazakah, Ta'aninun (as in "Ta'aninun L'Yoresh"), Eidim Zomemin (forgive my awful transliterations), Migu, etc., etc. Maybe we could even create a category or subcategory for it. I created Breira in this vein. As I don't have the experience or expertise in Wikipedia to know what to do to best develop this idea, I figured I'd come to you for your opinions on: (1) whether it's a good idea; and (2) How to best go about implementing it. Thanks Sh76us (talk) 15:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized discussion at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. Thank you. IZAK (talk) 03:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Use of term Gemara in Avot
The article claims that Pirkei Avot uses the term 'Gemara' in chapter 5. I have never seen a text that does not use the term 'Talmud'. If no-one can adduce a variant text, I would maintain that the article is incorrect. Wimtimbimtim (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gemara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927190001/http://www.shechem.org/torah/avot.html to http://www.shechem.org/torah/avot.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:12, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gemara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060826034101/http://books.chabadlibrary.org/sifrey_yesod/bavli/index.php to http://books.chabadlibrary.org/sifrey_yesod/bavli/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Civil War of the avengers
Team IRON MAN!!! 213.57.195.5 (talk) 14:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Etymology
I'm not going to edit war and you refuse to read or respond to my edit summaries, so here goes @Debresser. There is no mention of the word "gemara" in Avot. It does not exist and you have not provided any source in any attempt to demonstrate otherwise. The section "origins of the word" (emphasis added) therefore should not contain any necessarily irrelevant reference to Avot. Please self-revert.

Additionally, as I said in my last edit summary, that particular line should never be cited as a Mishnaic anything, because it does not belong to the mishna. It does not appear in any of the standard Mishnaic manuscripts, all of which are freely available online. As early as Isaac Abravanel, traditional scholars were complaining about its anachronistic intrusion into the text, and both Charles Taylor's 1897 edition and Shimon Sharvit's 2004 edition affirm that it is not original. The earliest source of which I am aware to recommend the age of 15 for Talmudic study is the Sefer Hasidim, roughly 1,000 years later than Avot. GordonGlottal (talk) 00:25, 23 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I already explained, in the article itself, that Talmud is used in Avot. Now the Talmud is comprised of Mishnah and Gemora, so what is the problem?
 * Even if some scholars hold that that specific Mishnah was added to Avot later, but it still is a part of Avot now, so what is the problem?
 * At the same time, I do understand what you say, so let's see if we can reach a compromise: what if we remove only the second sentence in the present text?
 * Regarding the sentence you propose. I have a few problems with it. 1. The source does not say what you claim it does. 2. the root "g-m-r" in Aramaic means "to derive" / "to learn", not "to conclude" / "to complete" as in Hebrew. 3. The word is not "borrowed", but this is its root meaning. Debresser (talk) 13:20, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The WORD "gemara" is the subject of this section. Not the "gemara" in any other sense. A mention of "talmud" has no relevance whatsoever. Thus your claim that "The TERM gemara for the activity of study is far older than its use as a description of any text" is absolutely not evidenced by Avot. The relevance of the date is to falsify that statement even assuming there was such a version, which however you have not provided any source to evidence. I am glad that you agree to its removal, which I will effect shortly.
 * As to the second point, completely false. The root גמר has a base meaning of "to complete" in both languages. The secondary meaning of "to learn" is obtained through the intermediate sense of "to complete understanding". Check your Jastrow to confirm. (The English verb "to conclude" has taken a similar path.)
 * As to the third point, it is clearly borrowed as an English/Hebrew word, because it is originally an Aramaic word. This is obvious not only from analysis of its history but from its very morphology: no indigenous Hebrew word includes a definite aleph-suffix (גמר-א). As you would imagine from this, indigenous use of גמרא in other senses is much older than use of גמרא in the sense of "talmud" (as it was previously called) which occurs only in Hebrew-language literature. GordonGlottal (talk) 02:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The Jastrow dictionary lists "to conclude, to derive" as a meaning of the root "g-m-r", precisely as I said. I do not contest that the base meaning is "to finish", which Jastrow has as first meaning, but in the context of this article that base meaning is not really relevant. By the way, if you check Jastrow for the word Gemara, you will see that he also stresses the aspect of reasoning as opposed to tradition, precisely as in the text that you proposed to remove...!
 * If you meant with "borrowed" that it is not an original English or Hebrew word, then I agree with you. However, this was not how I understood the sentence, so apparently that needs some clarification.
 * I am happy that we are working something out, slowly but surely. Debresser (talk) 21:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)