How the Mishnah was published TB Sukkah 54

Starting on daf TB Sukkah 53b and continuing on today’s daf TB Sukkah 54 is an extended discussion on what was the minimum number of shofar blasts, twenty-one according to the rabbis and seven according to Rabbi Yehuda, and what was the maximum number of shofar blasts, forty-eight according to the rabbis and sixteen according to Rabbi Yehuda, that were blown in the Temple. There’s really not a significant difference between the rabbis counting and Rabbi Yehuda’s counting. The rabbis counted each triplet, a teki’a, a tru’ah, a teki’a, as three blasts and Rabbi Yehuda counted each triplet as only one blast. Rabbi Yehuda insisted though that the three blasts need to be blown wiith only one breath.

The Gemara then brings the story which will illuminate how the Mishnah was published. “When Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina came from the south of Eretz Yisrael, from Judea, he brought a baraita with him that he received from the Sages there…The Gemara notes: Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina teaches the baraita, and he said its explanation: The verse comes to say that one sounds trumpet blasts for each and every additional offering in and of itself.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Dr. Saul Lieberman, the greatest Talmudic scholar of the 20^th century, who taught at the Jewish Theological Seminary, writes in his book Hellenism in Jewish Palestine:

“Since in the entire Talmudic literature we do not find that a book of the Mishnah was ever consulted in case of controversies or doubt concerning a particular reading we may safely conclude that the compilation was not published in writing, that a written edition of the Mishnah did not exist….

“A regular oral edition of the Mishnah was in existence, a fixed text recited by the Tannaim[1] of the college. The Tanna (‘repeater’, reciter) committed to memory the text of certain portions of the Mishnah which he subsequently recited in the college in the presence of the great masters of the Law. Those Tannaim were pupils chosen for their extraordinary memory, although they were not always endowed with due intelligence. The rabbis characterize these reciters as follows: ‘the magian mumbles and understands not what he says. [Similarly] the Tanna recites and he understands not what he says.” Indeed the stupider the Tanna, the more reliable his text; who is not suspected of ‘doctoring’ it.” (A more knowledgeable Tanna reciting a difficult text might be inclined to emend it so that the text would be clearer to him. But his understanding would be faulty and his correction would be wrong.-gg)

“When the Mishna was committed to memory and the Tannaim recited it in the college it was thereby published and processed all the traits and features of a written edition.” (Pages 87-88)

In note 39 Dr. Lieberman writes “There were, of course, notable exceptions of great scholars who fulfilled the function of college-Tanna.” Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina must have been one of the scholars who could fulfill both roles.

---

[1] I want to make a clear distinction between these Tannaim who were essentially human tape recorders memorizing mishnayot and the rabbis in the Mishnah who are also called Tannaim and lived between 10-220.