Parables of Judgment in Tannaitic Literature

Abstract

Abstract Tannaitic texts promote legal logic as the only acceptable form of dispute resolution, in keeping with the requirement to scrupulously uphold God’s Torah. However, rabbinic homiletics often include observations about the broader aims of social justice in which detached, legal decision-making falls short. This chapter argues that the many hypotheticals or paths raised but not taken in tannaitic texts suggest other modes of contextual and relational reasoning; many of these paths would better promote the values of equality and social good will. The chapter also closely analyses an explicit exegetical and moral debate staged in the Tosefta between two distinct modes of judicial decision-making. The authoritative and legally precise judge who segregates himself from the litigants and enforces God’s law is set in opposition to the mediator who guides litigants through negotiation and compromise to arrive at a peaceful and just resolution. The Tosefta does not decide between them.