Why was the Babylonian Talmud chosen as the authoritative Oral

>>2174501
Probably something with Babylonian supremacy in clerical rulings.
The Babylonian targum was also made the official targum instead of the Palestinian targum but Babylonian and Palestinian pointing were both superseded by the Tiberian pointing.

After the Jews were repatriated to their homeland Babylon still remained the center of scholarship since there was more stability and wealth where as Judaea was probably in need of reconstruction and development. The wars with the Romans didn't help either so the development of religious studies had consistent reason to be centered in the Babylonia region until the Muslim conquests.

>>2174738
A little off topic but I dont understand the whole repatriated thing. Didn't the Babylonians only take the Jewish elite? How did their descendants just step into an already occupied area and take back control without a war?

Weren't the Samaritans Jews who did not get taken and did not accept the changes that took place during that period?

>>2174761
They found other people inhabiting the area when they returned and had to live alongside them. Samaritans were probably not as numerous.

>>2174501
>Why was the Babylonian Talmud chosen as the authoritative Oral Torah text over the Jerusalem/Palestinian Talmud


Because at the time of composition, the center of Rabbinic thought and most of the big name Rabbis lived there.

>How do Jews reconcile the two Talmuds if they are both considered to be the Oral Torah in written form?

Anon, the "Oral Torah in written form" is more than just a compilation of things that Moses heard from God and didn't write down; that wouldn't fill a document longer than the encyclopedia britannica. It's a line of authority, a methodology, and a rule of common law, that splits apart as the Jewish community splits apart. BOTH are Oral Torah, as are the difference in opinions in modern Sephardi, Ashkenazi, and Yeminite practice are Oral Torah

>>2174761
>How did their descendants just step into an already occupied area and take back control without a war?
Even if we consider just the Ezra/Nehemiah accounts, these do show there was opposition to the return of the exiles and the reconstruction of Jerusalem - enough for both sides to petition Persian authorities for intervention.

The delivery is fairly anodyne and it's not clear how extensive the opposition was and whether or not blood may have been shed.