Pilpul

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pilpul (Hebrew: פילפול, loosely meaning "sharp analysis") refers to a method of studying the Talmud through intense textual analysis in attempts to either explain conceptual differences between various halakhic rulings or to reconcile any apparent contradictions presented from various readings of different texts. This method, based on Avot (6:6), the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 31a), Rashi (commentary on Tractate Kiddushin of the Babylonian Talmud, 30a, s.v. "Talmud") and Maimonides (Yad HaChazakah, Sefer Madda, Laws of Torah Study, 1:11), requires derivation of the conceptual structures underlying various Jewish laws. Before World War II, variations of this method were popular among Lithuanian and Polish Jews. Since then, pilpul has become prominent in most Ashkenazi and many Chassidic yeshivas.

Beginning around the seventeenth century, the colloquial usage of pilpul came to refer to a popularized method of tenuous conceptual extrapolation from texts in efforts to reconcile various texts or to explain fundamental differences of approach between various earlier authorities. Many leading rabbinic authorities harshly criticized this method as being unreliable and a waste of time. In fact, some students of the Talmud around this time began employing this pseudo-pilpul, apparently often motivated by the prospect of impressing others with the sophistication of their analysis. These students typically did not apply appropriate standards of proof in obtaining their conclusions (if any), and frequently presupposed conclusions that necessitated unlikely readings of "proof-texts". As such, pilpul has sometimes been derogatorily called bilbul, Hebrew for "confusion". Many authorities spoke out in support of similar methods of actual pilpul as being reliable and even central to Talmud study whenever traditional standards of proof were applied rigorously.

Pilpul has escaped into English as a colloquialism used by some to indicate extreme disputation or casuistic hairsplitting. This usage has especially fallen into use among critics of Haredi Jews, impugning their Talmud study as non-productive.