Footnote 4 – Queries & Comments

Other critics, doubtless aware of Neusner’s aggressive pugnacity, have been more gentle. For example, Jacob Milgrom in his magisterial commentary on Leviticus 1–16 (Anchor Bible) (New York: Doubleday, 1991) concludes, “We can all be grateful to Neusner for initiating the long-needed project of explaining the Biblical roots of the rabbinic ideas on impurity. The task, however, must begin anew.” According to Milgrom, “Neusner’s comprehension of Scripture is wanting.” He is “unaware … that much of what he attributes to the rabbis as their innovation has its roots in Scripture.” Milgrom characterizes this as an “axiomatic mistake.” Neusner also makes other “axiomatic mistakes.” Elsewhere, Milgrom characterizes Neusner as being “patently wrong” and “dead wrong.” As to Neusner’s understanding of the Mishnah, which is the core of the Talmud and the most basic text of Rabbinic Judaism, Milgrom says: “Neusner’s discussion of Mishna[h]’s biblical foundations is … replete with errors, which, unfortunately, grate on the reader because he is wont to repeat himself, often verbatim.”