Menachem Mendel has an informative post on modern academic Talmud study at: 
http://menachemmendel.blogspot.com/2007/06/modern-talmud-study-i.html
This is my comment:
There has been an unfortunate shift recently in that the academic Talmud scholars are no longer products of the yeshivos, at least not to the extent that they used to be. There is a difference in someone who gets most of his schooling in academia and one who spends a few years or a few decades learning a broad variety of Jewish subjects, not only Talmud. In the university one absorbs tools of analysis, an ability to write and reason and the prevailing societal norms of nihilism and self-distancing from all moral and spiritual commitments. In the yeshiva, on the other hand, one learns how to think and live and worship like a Jew. Even as recently as 40 years ago, many professors of Jewish studies were products of the yeshiva world. Now academic scholars can boast of no more than "exposure" to the traditional setting of Talmud study. Most of their learning takes place in the academia. As a consequence, they often lack the broad view that characterized previous generations. How many appreciate psak halacha in how it inter-relates with Talmudic sources? How many understand Jewish philosophy and Jewish intellectual history? How many are theologians and understand aggadah, devotional life, and inner perspective of Tannaim and Amoraim.? How many look to them with respect as someone who has something to teach them personally? These scholars, as a rule, do not! Current, recent generation of scholars are more likely to follow a scholarly consensus or deviate in important ways from the "feel and touch" of Judaic culture in as much as it relates to Talmud study. Two wrongs does my nations commit! They transgress traditional boundaries in pursuit of flashy revisionism ( and that without appreciating that they are doing so). In addition, without broad bekius, they overlook well-known passages and indications to the contrary. Without solid grounding in the texts themselves, they sometimes write things that not only grate on my sensibilities but against which I can, off hand, bring various proofs.
I realize that this applies to specific individuals to varying degrees. I speak of the trend.
How many academic scholars can participate in "talking in learning" - meeting objections, sharing positions, bringing proofs etc on a real live basis? There is a difference between looking up sources and having them refracted into one's memory, essence and being.
Chaval al d'ovdin v'lo mishtakchin.
Here is a comment with which I strongly support:
I think avakesh's point is well taken in North America (and Europe). But in Israel, Talmud departments are still very much populated by people who spent significant time in yeshivot - at least hesder yeshivot. On a related point, it seems to me that --methodologically-- this generation of Talmudists is far and beyond most of the academic scholars who grew out of European yeshivot. But as far as yedios and certainly living the culture - well there's no question.
Comments