traNSLatioN aND coNqueSt • 213an account of the transmission of the Oral Law from Moses, but also
with his own extensive introduction to the chain of oral tradition in
Judaism, might be understood as an attempt at answering Muslims’
taḥrīf claim. on a more basic level, the project of tracing the Jewish
shalshelet ha- kabbalah, the chain of tradition^100 would have particular
resonance, and perhaps attraction, to Muslims familiar with their own
isnād tradition for ḥadīth literature.^101 Moyal’s choice of the subject for
the first volume of his projected translation series may well have been
informed, at least in part, by his recognition of this commonality with
Islam.
In fact, Moyal’s account of the composition of the mishnah employs
another term with Islamic associations— a term we considered in detail
in chapter 2. to explain how the Oral torah, which Jews had been
forbidden from writing, could suddenly, in the days of rabbi Judah
ha- Nasi, be composed in a book, Moyal appeals to the notion of ijmāʿ,
or consensus, found prominently in Sunni Islam.^102 he writes that “the
scholars [al- ʿulamāʾ] of his [Judah ha- Nasi’s] age consented [ajmaʿ]
upon them [the books of the mishnah] without exception or oppo-
sition.”^103 Moyal repeats this claim several times in the course of his
work. In a subsequent rendition of this account, he explains that, fear-
ing that the Oral torah be forgotten, “the scholars [al- ʿulamāʾ] deliber-
ated on lifting the ban on writing it down and, by a consensus of opin-
ions [bi- ijmāʿ al- ārāʾ], allowed the writing of the mishnah.”^104 In other
words, the prohibition against writing the Oral torah was overturned
by the ijmāʿ of the scholars of rabbi Judah ha- Nasi’s generation. Given
(^100) the genre of Jewish succession lists was apparently initially adapted from the
Greco- roman literary genre of scholarly successions. See amram tropper, “avot,” eJ^2.
(^101) an isnād is the chain of transmission supporting a ḥadīth, a traditional report con-
cerning the life and teachings of the prophet Muhammad. as Cyril Glass explains, “the
authority, and character, including moral probity, of every member of a chain in the
transmission of a given Ḥadīth, and the existence of alternative chains of transmission for
a saying, were fundamental criteria for accepting Ḥadīth as authentic.” See cyril Glassé,
“isnād,” Nei. See also J. robson, “isnād,” ei^2. Moyal uses the term isnād in reference to
the transmission of a particular mishnah in at- Talmūd, 108.
(^102) See “idjmāʿ” in ei (^2).
(^103) Mūyāl, at- Talmūd, 7. Moyal also employs this concept in his exposition on the San-
hedrin: “all these great men in israel gathered and consented (ajmaʿū) to enact the ap-
propriate laws for the life of the nation and they determined the daily prayers.” See ibid.,
26, 28, 48. Cf. Maimonides’s introduction to Mishneh Torah. Maimonides does not appear
to use the term ijmāʿ here, though he does claim that rabbi Judah ha- Nasi taught the
mishnah “to the scholars in public and it was revealed to all of Israel and they all wrote
it down.” on the notion of ijmāʿ or parallels to it in Judaism, especially in Middle eastern
Judaism, see chapter 2 above, as well as Goitein, A Mediterranean Society, 2:65– 66; Levy,
The Sephardim in the Ottoman Empire, 51; Fishman, “Guarding oral transmission.”
(^104) Mūyāl, at- Talmūd, 37.