Another collection of Oral Tradition from the days of the Tannaim is the “Tosefta,” which in Aramaic means “the addition.” According to tradition, the two great student colleagues of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi – Rabbi Chiyyah and Rabbi Hoshayah – compiled an additional group of oral traditions as a commentary and complimentary code to Mishnah. They adopted the organizational system of Mishnah into six orders and sixty-three tractates, and collected additional traditions around Mishnah. Their Tosefta was so dependent on Mishnah, that it was said that every law brought in Tosefta was obviously based on a passage in Mishnah. According to one famous story reported in tractate Ta’anit (page 21a), a scholar by the name of Ilfa even suspended himself from the mast of a ship and threatened to fall to his death if anyone could bring a quotation from Tosefta which he could not demonstrate to be Mishnah-based!

In our day, there is a book called “Tosefta,” but it does not entirely meet the above description. There certainly are many passages that are based on Mishnah, and expand and extend laws brought in Mishnah. Comparison of these passages to Mishnah expands our understanding of Mishnah considerably. These comparisons are called “father-son” comparisons, that is, it is clear that the Tosefta (the “son”)is derived from or added onto Mishnah (the “father”). However, in many other passages of Tosefta, the opposite seems to be true – the Mishnah seems to be summarizing or commenting on traditions presented originally in Tosefta! These comparisons are called “son-father.” Lastly, there are passages in which Mishnah and Tosefta both seem to be derived from a third, earlier source not extant today. These passages are called “siblings,” since neither source is based on the other. This great variety of relationships between Mishnah and Tosefta leads some scholars to claim that the Tosefta in our possession today is not the original Tosefta of Rabbis Chiyyah and Hoshayah, but another collection altogether, or a combination of the original Tosefta with signicant additions of other collections.

Whatever the actual historical relationship between the two sources, comparison of Mishnah and Tosefta yields valuable information. Firstly, Tosefta often brings opinions not represented in Mishnah, or even later layers of opinions of Tannaim not brought in Mishnah. For instance, Mishnah may bring the opinions of the Tannaim of Yavneh, and Tosefta may report the opinions of the Tannaim of the two later generations in the Galil. Study of the two texts together gives us a fuller, broader account of what the Tannaim said on the topic. Secondly, Tosefta may bring the rationale of opinions presented in Mishnah, or the historical or legal circumstances of a given piece of legislation in Mishnah. Tosefta may also provide opinions of Tannaim on topics or issues not at all discussed in Mishnah, or may present the opinions of Tannaim very differently than their presentation in Mishnah. All in all, study of Tosefta in comparison to Mishnah is a step toward fuller appreciation for the Torah of the Tannaim. For the student of the Babylonian Talmud, study of Tosefta opposite Mishnah before study of the sugyot in the Talmud is especially beneficial, since Amoraim in the Talmud may base their discussions on Tosefta.

Back to the reading section