English Translation

8 2 As to the nature of this edition of the most important Jewish sources intended as a selection and compilation, as well as the work technique of the author, it should be noted that the author is not an expert in the field he deals with, neither from a historical nor from a philosophical point of view. His own comments are almost exclusively limited to the reproduction of shorter and longer citations of relevant literature, or journalistic intensifications of the respective textual contents. He knows at best from second or third-hand literature the historical prerequisites underlying the drafting of the two Talmude, the Midraschim, the Schulchan Aruch and other Torah and Mishna-konmentars mentioned in his edition. He does not seem to master the Hebrew language at all; the Aramaic language, which is indispensable in this type of study, as well as the linguistic peculiarities of the Rashi commentary on the original Talmud texts, which was decisive for the dubious places and readings, are completely unknown to him. Although Hans Richter mentions in the first place the smaller Hebrew Wilnaer Talmud edition (6 vol.), it is very doubtful whether he himself had actually used it in his work on the Talmoud paragraphs. Rather, it is likely that his Czech translation and adaptation served as the almost only template for the German Talnud edition of Lazarus Goldschmidt (II edition, 1930/35, 12 vol.). Individual passages of his translations were used to refer to other older, incomplete Talmud or Schulchan Aruch versions (H.L. Strack, introduction in Tal-mud and Midrash, quotations from the Dispute Papers of Th. Fritsch, A. Rohling and others) - It is only to be seen that the author refers to and quotes the more detailed Jewish works, e.g. the Gaonic, or the tanaitic period, and the guiding works of late Jewish mysticism,