File talk:Mishna corrected Kaufman 00 WHOLE.pdf
License[edit]
This file was provided by its creator as a continuation of the work found in Category:Talmud (digital text vowelized and formatted). Its OTRS permission letter was for Talmudic tractates in general edited by the author (not for any particular file). It should have the same OTRS sticker as the rest of the material in that category, namely:
I would be grateful if an OTRS member could add the sticker to the File page. Dovi (talk) 08:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
This is called "Kaufman" but doesn't match the Kaufman manuscript, what is its source?[edit]
The Kaufman manuscript is available via the National Library of Israel at https://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLI/English/digitallibrary/pages/viewer.aspx?presentorid=MANUSCRIPTS&docid=PNX_MANUSCRIPTS990001910470205171-1
Some differences I can see from the Kaufman manuscript:
1) Missing text: The Kaufman manuscript is missing a page and has no text from the middle of mishnah 8:1 (after שהוא) to the middle of 9:5. This "transcription" has filled in the missing text which does not exist in the manuscript.
2) Chapter/Mishnah numbering: The Kaufman manuscript has a distinctive heading at the top of each chapter listing the chapter number and total number of mishnaiot within that chapter. Each mishnah is written in single flow of text, and not laid out to illustrate the structure of the mishnah. The individual mishnahs are identified only by a number, not by a heading that says "Chapter X, mishnah Y".
Also in the Kaufman manuscript the numbering is sometimes confusing and two chapters will appear to have the same number. This happens often enough that it deserves explanation beyond "scribal error" - and should be preserved in anything calling itself a "transcription".
If this were in fact a transcription, even scribal errors that have been corrected should be annotated so that the reader knows that the manuscript and the transliteration differs. Note: This isn't just a practice of critical scholarship. We have this practice as long standing tradition: in Torah tikkunim we have a written and "kriah" text. One does not just overwrite with one's own corrections even when it is obvious that something is wrong in a manuscript.
3) Explanation of corrections: Calling something a "corrected" Kaufman is confusing - when manuscripts of the mishnah differ, Kaufman is often considered the "correct" version unless there are compelling reasons to chose another reading. There is a lot of debate around which reading is best, so it is wise to explain any correction and why one thinks Kaufman is wrong. (See Richard Brody - Mishnah and Tosephta Studies, 2014).
This "transcription" separates out and formats each mishnah according to structure. It substitutes its own numbering scheme for the distinctive numbering scheme of the Kaufman manuscript and corrects numbering errors.
While a nice layout is clearly useful when teaching or learning the content of each individual mishnah, it is confusing to anyone actually trying to understand the textual history of the Mishnah. It would be helpful if the editor of this edition would avoid calling it a transcription and instead call it an edition based on Kaufman and explain any changes they've made to the actual Kaufman manuscript. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A02:ED0:5317:EF00:2D90:A9C3:6639:29C3 (talk) 04:52, 8 July 2021 (UTC)