University Microfilms International

IN FO R M A TIO N TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is .iOuvily dope, .cknt upon the quality of ;r»e igm-*;

submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1 .T h e sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

University M icrofilm s International 3 0 0 North Z e eb Road Ann Arbor, M ichigan 4 8 1 0 6 USA St. John's Road, Tyler's Green H igh W ycom be, Bucks. England H P 10 8HR

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

7 81 6179 KJ M E L H A N , R O N A L D R E U V E N RA3BI V C H A N A N OF T I B E R I A S I A S P E C T 8 OF THE 80 C IAL AND R E L I G I O U S H I S T O R Y OF THIRD C E N T U R Y PAL E S T I N E , YALE U N I V E R S I T Y , PH.D., 1977

University Microfilms International

300 n

ztse r o a d ,

a n n a r b o r , mi « 8 io 6

Copyright by Ronald Rauver. Ximelman

1978

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


RABBI YOHANAN OF TIBERIAS ASPECTS OF THE SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS HISTORY OF THIRD CENTURY PALESTINE

by

Ronald Reuven Kimelman

A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Yale University in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Decem&er

1977


ABSTRACT

RABBI YOHANAN OF TIBERIAS ASPECTS OF THE SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS HISTORY OF THIRD CENTURY PALESTINE

RONALD REUVEN KIMELMAN

This thesis is a study of some of the achievements of Rabbi Yohanan (bar Nappaha) in third century Palestine within the context of the Roman Empire.

After the initial survey of the biographical

data, part one discusses his economic, social, political and academic role, respectively, in Tiberias. Part two discusses Rabbi Yohanan's response to the theological challenges posed by the varieties of Christianity of his day.

These

include mainstream Christianity, primarily through the Church Father Origen, Jewish Christianity and Syrian Christianity.


Table of Contents

Acknowledgements

iv

Abbreviations

v

I.

1

II.

Biography of R.Yohanan A. Introduction B . Name C. Life-span 1. Birth 2. Death 3. Floruit a. R. Yohanan and R.ânina b. R. Yohanan and R.Hoshaya D. Youth E. Family 1. Son 2. Sister and Resh Laqish F. Economic Situation G . Beauty H. Epilogue Notes R. A. B. C. D. E.

Yohanan in Tiberias Introduction Tiberias R. Yohanan and the Nasi "R. Yohanan of the House of the Nasi" R. Yohanan and the Professionalization of the Rabbinate F. The Causes of the Alliance of R. Yohanan, the Nasi and the Ruling Classes Notes

1 1 3 3 6 10 11 14 16 17 17 20 23 29 30 32 48 48 48 55 59 69 76 80

III. R. Yohanan, Resh Laqish and theNasi A. Resh Laqish versus R. Yohanan on the Authority of tne Nasi B. R. Yohanan and Resh Laqish on the Nasi's Taxing of the Rabbis Notes

107

IV.

127 127 127 137 139 145 156 159

The Academy of R.Yohanan A. Introduction B. Colleagues C. Students D. R. Yohanan and the Babylonians E. The Transmission of theLogia of R. Yohanan F. R. Yohanan and Other Amoraim Notes

107 111 119

ii


Part Two - R. Yohanan as Apologist V. R. Yohanan and Jewish Christianity A. Introduction B. R. Yohanan and the Minim C. Other R. Yohanan Logia and Jewish Christians D. Conclusion Notes VI.

R. Yohanan and Origen on the Song of Songs A Third Century Jewish-ChristianDisputation A. Introduction B. The Disputation C. Conclusion Notes

VII. R. Yohanan and Christianity A. Christian Theology B. The Relationship Between Judaism and Christianity C. The Signs of Israel's Rejection D. Conclusion Notes VIII. Summary and Conclusions

175 175 175 175 188 202 204

221 221 225 238 239 254 254 262 266 272 274 283

Bibliography

294

Corrigenda

327

iii


Acknowledgements

I am indebted to the following whose comments on parts or all of an earlier draft enhanced appreciably the quality and the accuracy of the final draft:

Professors Rowan Greer, Ramsay MacMullen, Wayne Meeks

and Bernard Septimus of Yale University; Louis Feldman of Yeshiva University; Judah Goldin of the University of Pennsylvania; Robert Grant of the University of Chicago and Jochanan Winjhoven of Smith College.

Above all, I am grateful to Professor Sid Leiman of Yale

University whose critical comments on both substance and style are incorporated throughout the thesis. My deepest debt is toi"Ta

the late Abraham Joshua Heschel formerly

of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America who both inspired and encouraged me to dedicate myself to Torah scholarship and suggested the subject of this study. I also take pleasure in acknowledging the financial assistance, in the form of fellowships, from the following institutions:

the

Danforth Foundation; the Memorial Foundation for Jewish Culture; the National Foundation for Jewish Culture; and Yale University. addition, I am

In

ateful to Amherst College for their helpful reference

librarians and for research stipends which helped defray the cost of typing the dissertation and allowed for a field trip to Tiberias. Lastly, my apologies to my family for having followed Rab3a Ts suggestion (B Erubin 22a).


Transliteration

X a a T 77

= = = = =

:>

n = W,V T = z n = H o = t ■» = Y

B G D H

3 = K V = L = M 3 = N 0 = S

V =

c

s = P,F s = S

7Z7 =

W =

n =

? = Q *1 = R

Abbreviations and Short Titles

Biblical Books Gen Ex Lev Num Dt Jos Jud Sam Is Jer Ez

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Samuel Isaiah Jeremiah Ezekiel

Hos Ob Hab Zeph Zech Mai Qoh Ps Prov Song Lam Dan

Ho sea Obadaiah Habakkkuk Zephaniah Zechariah Malachi Qohelet Psalms Proverbs Song of Songs Lamentations Daniel

Men Mid Mia MQ* MS Naz Ned Nid Pes Qid RH San Shab Sheq Sot Suk Tan Ter Yeb Zeb

Menahot Middot Miqvaot Moed Qatan Ma-aser Sheni Nazir Nedarim Niddah Pesahim Qiddushin Rosh Hashanah Sanhedrin Shabbat Sheqalim Sotah Sukkah Ta-anit Terumot Yebamot Zebahim

Talmudic Tractates Arak AZ BB BM BQ Ber Bes Bik Ed Er Git Kag Hal Hor Hul Ker Kil Ma Meg

Arakin Aboda'n Zarah Baba Batra Baba Mesia Baba Qamma Berakot Besah Bikkurim Eduyot Erubin Gittin Hagigah Hallah Horayot Hullin Keritot Kilayim Ma-aserot Megillah

v


Albeck Mabo

H. Albeck, Mabo LaTalmudim.

Alon Mehqarim

G. Alon, Mehqarim BeToledot Yisrael.

Alon Toledot

C. Alon, Toledot HaYehudim Be-Eres Yisrael.

ARNA

Abot De Rabbi Natan, ed. S. Schechter.

ARNB

Version B of ARNA.

Aruk

Aruk HaShalem.

Avi-Yonah Bime

M. Avi-Yonah, Bime Roma UBizantion

Bacher AAEY

W. Bacher, Agadot Amore Eres Yisrael 1,2.

Beer AB

M. Beer, Amore Babel.

Braude

W. B. Braude, references to his translations of Midrash Psalms, PR, and PRK ad loc.

B

Babylonian Talmud.

Buchler Mehqarim

A. Buchler, Mehqarim BeTequfat HaMishnah VeHaTalmud.

CAH

The Cambridge Ancient History,

Carcopino Daily Life

J. Carcopino, Daily Life in Ancient Rome.

CC

Contra Celsum.

Dor Torat

Z.M. for .Torat Ereg-Yisrael BeBabel.

DR

Deut eronomy Rabba

DR (ed. Lieberman)

Deuteronomy Rabba (Oxford MS), ed. S. Lieberman.

DS

Digduge Soferim.

EH

Ecclesiastical History.

EJ

Encyclopaedia Judaica.

EJ (German)

Encyclopaedia Judaica.

Epstein Mabo

J. N. Epstein, Mabo LeNusab HaMishnah.

Epstein Mebo-ot

J. N. Epstein, Mebo-ot LeSifrut Ha-Amoraim.

ER

Exodus Rabba.

ET

Encyclopedia Talmudit.

vi


Frankel Mabo

Z. Frankel, Mabo HaYerushalmi.

GR

Genesis Rabba, ed. J. Theodor and 5. Albeck.

Ginzberg CPT

L. Ginzberg, Commentary on the Palestinian Talmud (Hb).

Ginzberg Ginze

L. Ginzberg, Ginze Schechter.

Ginzberg Legends

L. Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews.

Ginzberg Seride

L. Ginzberg, Seride HaYerushalmi.

Graetz Dibre

H. Graetz, Dibre Yeme Yisrael II.

Halevy Mid

A. A. Halevy, Midrash Rabba.

Halivni MM

D. Halivni, Meqorot UMesorot.

Hb

Hebrew.

Heineman Darke

I. Heineman, Darke Ha-Agadah.

Heschel Torah

A. J. Heschel, Torah Min HaShamayim BeAsplaqaria shel KaDorot.

Higger OSHB

M. Higger, Osar HaBaraitaot.

HTR

Harvard Theological Review.

HUCA

Hebrew Union College Annual.

Hyman Toledot

A. Hyman, Toledot Tannaim VeAmoraim.

IJS

Institute of Jewish Studies. (London)

J

Jerusalem Talmud = Palestinian Talmud = yerushalmi.

Jastrow

M. Jastrow, Dictionary of the Targumin the Talmud Babli and Yershalmi, and the Midrashic literature.

JE

Jewish Encyclopedia.

JESHO

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient.

IEJ

Israel Exploration Journal

vii


JRS

Journal of Roman Studies.

JJS

Journal of Jewish Studies.

JQR

Jewish Quarterly Review.

JSJ

Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Period.

Juster

Les Juifs dans 1'empire romaine.

Kasher TS_

M. M. Kasher, Torah Shelemah.

Klein Galilee

S. Klein, Ereg HaGalil.

Krauss LW

S. Krauss, Griechische und lateinische Lehitworter.

Krauss Qadmoniyot

S. Krauss, Qadmoniyot HaTalmud.

Krauss PR

S. Krauss, Paras VeRomi BeTalmud UBeMidrashim.

L MS

Leiden MS of J(erusalem Talmud).

Levine Caesarea

L. I. Levine, Caesarea Under Roman Rule.

LR

Leviticus Rabba, ed. M. Margcliot.

Lieberman "Afterlife"

S. Lieberman, "Some Aspects of After Life in Early Rabbinic Literature."

Lieberman GJP

S. Lieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine.

Lieberman HH

S. Lieberman, Hilkot HaYerushalmi.

Lieberman H.TP

S. Lieberman, Hellenism iu Jewish Palestine.

Lieberman "M of C"

S. Lieberman, "The Martyrs of Caesares."

Lieberman MT

S. Lieberman, Midreshe Teman.

Lieberman "Palestine"

S. Lieberman, "Palestine in the Third and Fourth Centuries."

Lieberman, RLI

S. Lieberman, "Roman Legal Institutions in Early Rabbinics and in the Acts Martyrun."

viii


Lieberman SZ

S. Lieberman, Sifre Zufca.

Lieberman TKF

S. Lieberman, Tosefta Kifshutah.

Lieberman TR

S. Lieberman, Tosefet Rishonim.

Lieberman TS

S. Lieberman, Texts and Studies.

Lieberman YKF

S. Lieberman, HaYerushalmi Kifshuto.

Liebeschuetz Antioch

J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz, Antioch: City and Imperial Administration in the Later Roman Empire.

M

Mishna.

M MS

Munich MS of B(abylonian Talmud).

Mann

J. Mann, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue.

Mantel Studies

H. Mantel, Studies in the History of the Sanhedrin.

Marmorstein Studies

A. Marmorstein, Studies in Jewish Theology.

Margoliot Encyclopedia

M. Margoliot, Encyclopedia LeHokme HaTalmud.

Mek

Meklita DeRabbi Ishmael, ed. H. S. Horowitz and I. A. Rabin.

Mek RS

Mekilta DeRabbi Simeon b. Yohai, ed. J. N. Epstein and E. Z. Melamed.

Melamed Mabo

E. Z. Melamed, Pirqe Mabo LeSifrut TT q lT q *T

A ^

MGWJ

Monatsc'tirift fiVr dir. Gp.-chi’rht? und Wissenschaft des Judenthums.

MHG

Midrash HaGadol.

MHG Dt

ed. Fish.

MHG Ex

ed. Margoliot.

MHG Gen

ed. Margoliot.

ix


MHG Lev

ed. Steinzalts.

MHG Num

ed. Rabinowitz.

Mid

Midrash.

Mid Prov

Midrash Proverbs, ed. S. Buber.

Mid Ps

Midrash Psalms, ed. S. Buber.

Mid Tan

Midrash Tannaim, ed. D. Hoffman.

Neusner History

J. Neusner, History of the Jews in Babylonia.

NR

Numbers Rabba.

OSK

Ogar HaGeonim, ed. B. Lewin.

PAAJR

Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research.

PG

Patrologia Graeca, ed. J. P. Migne.

PL

Patrologia Latina, ed. J. P. Migne.

PR

Pesiqta Rabati, ed. Ish-Shalom.

PRK

Pesiqta DeRabbi Kahana, ed. B. Mandelbaum.

R

Rabba.

R.

rabbi.

Rabbi

R. Judah HaNasi, the Patriarch.

Rabbi II

R. Judah Neseah.

Rabinowitz STB

Z. W. Rabinowitz, Sha-are Torat Babel.

Rabinowitz STEY

Z. W. Rabinowitz, Sha-are Torat Eres Yisrael.

Rostovtzeff SEHRE

M. Rostovtzeff, Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire.

Ratner ASY

B. Ratner, Ahabat gion VeYerushalayim I.

REJ

Revue etudes juives.

x


RY

R. Yohanan (bar Nappafca).

SER

Seder Eliyahu Rabba, ed. Ish-Shalom.

SH

Scripta Hierosolymitana (Magnes Press, Jerusalem).

Sifre Dt

ed. L. Finkelstein.

Sifre Num

ed. H. S. Horowitz.

Soncino

Publisher of English Translation on the Babylonian Talmud and Midrash Rabba, cited ad. loc.

Sperber Rom Pal

D. Sperber, Roman Palestine - 200-400 Money and Prices.

T

Tosefta.

Tanenblat Peraqim

M. A. Tanenblat, Peraqim gadasim LeToledot Eres Yisrael UBabel BeTequfat HaTalmud.

TC

Theodosian Code, trans C. Pharr.

T-A

J. Theodors and H. Albeck5s, edition of Genesis Rabba. j.anhuma Tanhuma, ed. S. Buber.

Tan Tan B Thesaurus

Eliezer ben Yehudah, Thesaurus toitus hebraitatis et recentioris.

trans.

translation.

Urbach "Class-Status"

E. E. Urbach, "Class-Status and Leadership in the World of Lhe Palestinian Sages."

Urbach "Halakah"

E. E. Urbach, "Halakah UNebuah."

Urbach flazal

E. E. Urbach, Hazal:

Urbach "Idolatry"

E. E. Urbach, "The Rabbinical Laws ofIdolatry in the Second and Third Centuries in the Light of Archaelogical and Historical Facts."

Urbach "Slavery"

E. E. Urbach, "The Laws Regarding Slavery as a Source for Social History of the Period of the Second Temple, the Mishnah and Talmud."

Urbach "Yerushalayim"

E. E. Urbach, "Yerusalayim shel Mapta VSYerushalayim shel Ma-ala."

Emunot VeDeot.

xi

& Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

VC

Vigiliae Christianae

Weiss Dor

I. Weiss, Dor Dor VeDorshav III.

Yad Eliyahu

E. Shulzinger, Yad Eliyahu.

YS

Yalqut Shimoni.

Zuri

J. S. Zuri, Rabbi Jochanan - der erste Amoraer Galiiaas.

xii


■ f f. I

Biography^- of RY A.

Introduction

A biographer of RY is faced with an embaracsment of riches.

There

is more biographical detail on RY than any other Palestinian amor a. Rabbinic literature provides details of RY's birth, parents, grandparent, sister, brother-in-law, children and death, as well as information about his teachers, colleagues, and students.

There is also mention of his

places of residence, hie economic and social status, his academic po sition, and scholarly contributions. Despite the richness of material, no definitive biography has been written.

2

This lacuna in rabbinic studies may be due to the lack of

scholarly consensus with regard to almost every aspect of RYTs life. These moot aspects include the meaning of his name, the time and place of birth, the date of death, his relationship to his teachers and colleagues, the family situation, the economic situation, his physical appearance, and finally even how he was eulogized.

B.

Name

The meaning of the name Yohanan bar Nappaha has stirred considerable debate.

RY understood his own given name to mean "grace of God."

3

The

key text for the understanding of the cognomen bar Nappaha is B San 96a when Resh Laqish stated concerning a controversy between RY and R. Isaac Nappaha ( = the smith):

snna

nmn

xn*m

xn®. According to Rashi's

first interpretation, this translates as, "the smith’s (R. Isaac) is better than the son of the smith's." a smith.

4

This assumes that RY's father was

The weakness in this assumption is that it receives no con-

1


2

firmation elsewhere.

Moreover, RY was born an orphan (B Qid 31b) which,

according to J. Zuri, makes it less likely that he was called after his father's profession.

Instead, Zuri has suggested that his grandfather,

who raised him, must have been a smith.^

A third suggestion is that the

in his name, denotes a member of a class or profession making

*12

RY a smith.^

All of these suggestions are based on Resh Laqish's am

phibolous comment and lack independent corroboration. In contrast, three suggestions have been proposed which do not assume that RY was, or was descended from, a smith.

Rashi's second

interpretation suggested that the name alludes to RY's proverbial beauty (see end of chapter) and refers to the activity of a smith. thus connotes inflaming or arousal.^

tens3

R. Margoliot proposed that

KTTS3

is a sobriquet which RY earned for solving a heretofore unsoluble problem, recorded in E (Ker 20a).

Until RY had explained that a certain law refers g

to a smith, the reason for the lav had not been understood.

Despite the

ingeniousness of this solution, it is unlikely that this is a nickname based on RY's acumen since J (RH 2,6 58b = San 1,2 18c) explicitly men tions that while still quite young, RY was called J. N. Epstein has suggested that origin.

snaa

“2

115371

72 .

Finally,

points to his village of

Ee substantiates such usage throughout the Talmud.

9

The

difficulty with this is that RY is always associated with Tiberias and Sepphoris. In sum:

his name remains enigmatic.^

Still, the assumption that

*12 in his name denotes son (or grandson) implying that his father

(or grandfather) was a smith is the most plausible suggestion.^


3

C. Life-span The data for RY’s life-span derive studied with Rabbi.

12

from three notices.

One, he

Two, the medieval Epistle of R. Sherira Gaon

(ca. 906-1006) dated his death to the Seleucid year 590 = 279 C E . ^ And three, also provided by R. Sherira there, he presided over the academy for eighty years. all three notices intact.

(iVo ?

No scholar has been able to maintain

Scholars have debated when Rabbi lived; the

correct text in the Epistle with regard to the date of RY’s death; and even the number eighty and how literally the term

q^ 2

should be

taken. The most

ambitious effort *"o date the life-span of RY has been

that of I. Halevy.

He proposed an emendation in the Epistle to read that

RY died in 289 and was born between 175-180.

14

There is, however, no

textual basis for this emendation,^ nor, as we shall see, any chrono logical necessity.

1. Birth The early date for RY's birth is based on the assumption that Rabbi died about 200 and that RY was one of his youngest students.^ The most recent research, however, places Rabbi's death about 220-22.

17

Halevy also assumes that RY was born in the last seventeen years of Rabbi's life.

18

His argument is based on two sources.

One is J Ket 12,3 ys\a

- Kil 9,4 32b, which states that Rabbi resided in Serphcris seventeen years.

The other is B Yoma 82b: There was a woman with child who had smelt (a dish). People came before Rabbi (questioning him what should be done). He said to them: Go and whisper to her and she accepted the whispered suggestion, whereupon he (Rabbi) cited about her the verse: Before I formed you


in the belly I knew you (Jer 1:5).

From her came forth RY.

(Again) there was a woman with a child who smelt (a dish). The people came to R. Hanina, who said to them: Whisper to her (that it is the Day of Atonement). She did not accept the whispered suggestion. He cited with regard to her: (83a) The wicked are estranged from the womb (Ps 58:4). From her came forth Shabatai, the hoarder of provisions (for speculation)— Soncino 405, see ibid., n. 4. Halevy cited only the first part of this source.

Upon seeing the

whole text, it is apparent that this is a didactic lesson to heed the suggestions of the rabbis, hardly a text upon which to base an historical dating.

19

Halevy also assumes that this transpired in Sopphoris

during the last seventeen years of Rabbi’s life.

Even if the text is

taken seriously for historical purposes, nothing compels us to place it in Sepphoris.

(Scholars have assumed that Rabbi was there then;

RY was born there.

20

)

thus

Actually, this may have transpired, if at all,

before Rabbi arrived in Sepphoris, or,if afterwards, during his peregrinations which included also a stay in Tiberias.

21

And, as noted

above, a scholar such as J. N. Epstein believes that RY hailed from the village

nsi

Still, the story may have been related in Sepphoris,

since the R. Hanina of the second part did reside most of his life there. Independent of these internal considerations, there is an addi tional consideration for the rejection of the historicity of the inci dent, or, at least, that it occurred in Sepphoris in the last seventeen years of Rabbi's life.

If we accept it at its face value, we must con

clude, with Halevy, that RY was, at most, about fifteen to sixteen at Rabbi's death.

This presents several difficulties.

bered Rab in Rabbi's academy:

RY remem

"I remember when I was sitting before

with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

5

Rabbi, seventeen rows behind Rab" (B Hul 137b).

And RY said to Resh

Laqish: Do you not remember that disciple (i.e., Rab) who attended (the lectures of) the Great Rabbi and of R. Hiyya, and by God! all the years during which that disciple sat before his teachers I remained standing! (ibid., 54a) According to these sources RY studied in Rabbi's academy several years while Rab was still there.

And according to the traditional

chronology, Rab left for Babylonia a couple of years (ca. 219) Rabbi's death.

22

before

If RY is sixteen/fifteen at Rabbi's death, then he

would be fourteen/thirteen at Rab's departure.

Furthermore, if all the

years implies three, at least, then RY would be, at the most, eleven while attending Rabbi's academy.

Add to this

Laqish also came into contact with Rabbi.

23

the fact that Resh The combined data leads

to the dubious conclusion that this junior colleague of RY

24

came

under Rabbi's tutelage before the age of ten. Accordingly, the provenance of the prenatal episode of RY should be sought rather in the hagiographical or even better aretalogical traditions of preternatural endowment. of Torah.

RY was destined for a life

As the greatest sage after Rabbi, RY was linked to him by

birth as Rabbi had been linked to his greatest predecessor, R. Akiba (GR 58, 2, p. 619 and parallels). Still, there is ample evidence for RY having been a student of Rabbi for a period sufficient for later Talmudic tradition to remember them as teacher and disciple.

25

Add to this period of about several

years both the factor of Resh Laqish also having been a student of Rabbi and the factor that entrance to the academy was at about fifteen


2(

6

and the result is that RY must have been about twenty at Rabbi’s death placing his birth about 2 0 0 .

2.

Death

The date of RY's death has provoked more controversy than the date of his birth.

Again the most comprehensive treatment of the subject

is I. Halevy’s.

Halevy's case revolves around four points:

an emenda

tion in the Epistle; the time of the arrival of R. Zera from Babylonia; the deaths of Resh Laqish and R. Eleazar; and a statement of R. Ammi. To start from the end: stated:

Once when a case came before S. Ammi, he

"Since RY has taught us a first and second time..."

(B BB 163b).

According to Halevy, this refers to the thirty-year cycles of Talmud study.

He says, "The meaning is clear that also the first time that

they studied before RY they received such (a teaching) and that after 27 thirty years RY decided so (again)." Despite Halevy, there is no reason to reject Rashbam’s comment that this simply denotes that RY taught this repeatedly, and not in thirtyyear cycles.

Zuri supports this by referring to B Yoma 53b where this

is a standard expression for repetition.

28

Halevy dates R. Zera’s arrival from Babylonia to study with RY about 280.

29

This dating is unacceptable because it is based on an

unnecessary emendation of the Epistle and the mistaken belief that only one R. Zera had come from Babylonia.

Conversely, many scholars have

noted that there were two R. Zeras (= Zeira in J) who came from 30 Babylonia:'

the first in RY’s time; the second in the middle of the

fourth century.

31


There are two factors to be considered when trying to afix dates for the period of the relationship between R. Zera and RY.

First,

R. Zera arrived sometime before RY's death; a deduction based on a reference to RY failing to arrange a marriage between R. Zera and his daughter (B Qid 71b).

Two sources indicate that RY had daughters:

the aforementioned reference to R. Zera; and the reference to RY addressing his unmarried daughters on his deathbed (J Git 7,6 49a). Yet when the Talmud records the loss of RY's tenth son it makes no mention of his daughters.

32

This indicates that they were born

later in his life, probably after the death of his tenth son.

This

may account for RY's exclamation that certain remedies sexually rejuvenatea him. knew

3A

33

This analysis supports the position that R. Zera

RY during RY's old age

and

serves to confirm D. Sperber*s

conclusion that R. Zera arrived in the 270s.

35

Second, between R. Zera's arrival and RY's death, P arrived from Babylonia and Resh laqish died.

Abba also

It is clear that Resh

Laqish was alive for some time after R. Zera's arrival(B Qid 44a). What is not as clear was whether Resh Laqish was alive when R. Abba arrived.

R. Abba did arrive after R. Zera (B Hul 57a).

But, by then,

he could not see RY directly having had to make contact through R. Eleazar (B Hul 19b), apparently due to RY's old and infirmed condition. Although R. Abba cites Resh Laqish (B Shab 63a), there is only or. case of a R. Abba and Resh Laqish together (J Ned 3,2 38a). according to E. Albeck, is a different R. Abba.

37

And this,

We hesitate, hence,

to accept D. Sperber's suggestion that R. Abba arrived sometime around 275,

38

since it is possible that R. Abba arrived after the death of


8

Resh Laqish in the last year of RY's life (ca. 279).

Moreover,

Sperber's chronology is based on the pervasive, albeit erroneous, assumption that Resh Laqish died about three years before RY. Ever since I. H. Weiss, it has been a scholarly commonplace to assume that Resh Laqish died three and a half years before RY.

I. H.

Weiss’ conclusion is based on the welding together of two sources.

In

the first (B BM 84a), RY and Resh Laqish disputed when certain metal intruments become susceptible to impurity.

The disagreement escalated

into an imbroglio provoking ad hominen innuendoes resulting in the death of Resh Laqish.

As a result, RY was plunged into deep grief and

rejected all attempts to console him: (RY) went on rending his garments and weeping: Where are you, 0 son of Laqisha? Where are you 0 son of Laqisha. And he cried until he lost his mind. Thereupon the rabbis prayed for him and he died. In the second (J Meg 1, 13 72b) it is reported that RY, out of grief, did not frequent the academy for three and a half years.

Weiss

combined these two sources and concluded thac RY's grief was due to the death of Resh Laqish, and consequently RY died three and a half years after Resh Laqish.

39

This analysis is assailable on three fronts. criminately combines material from B and J.

40

First, it indis-

Second, it assumes the

full historicity of the B source, an assumption which is questionable since this source contains a series of outlandish tidbits about RY. These include a discussion of the width of RY's "waist," and a tangent on his beauty and his peculiar use of it.

Next it recounts the first

encounter of RY and Resh Laqish resulting in the latter’s induction into

J

l


a life of Torah study for the hand of RY’s sister in marriage. series concludes with the account of their fatal dispute.

This

Much of

this is surely to be taken cum grano salis; some of it outrightly contradicts other data known about RY and Resh Laqish.

£1

Lastly, it is based on a misreading of the J source. reading

myx

or gallstones.

one should read 43

snns

42

Instead of

- some type of feverish chills

Indeed, the Midrash (Song R 2,6,2) states explicitly

that RY suffered from gallstones for three and a half years and that R. Hanina came to visit him.

Since "R. Hanina apparently died in the

fifties of the third century"^ death.

this source has nothing to do with his

Accordingly, only the B source remains and thus the traditional

interpretation that RY died within a year of Resh Laqish stands.

45

The other event which is calculated with regard to the death of RY is that of R. Eleazar.

Most scholars, following the Epistle of

R. Sherira.held that he died the same year as RY.

46

I. H. Weiss cited

this source, but pondered the possibility that he may have died sometime later.

47

Z. Frankel contended that there are several sources which

48 point to R. Eleazar having survived RY for some time.'

I. Halevy

castigated Frankel for not producing such sources and denied their existence.

49

Z. Rabinowitz claimed to have located such sources, but

conceded that they all could have occurred in that very year."^

In

addition, J. Zuri found some hints which seem to point to a later date."^ This list is expanded by H. Albeck. It seems unlikely that all the events contained in these sources took place within a year; thus, some additional years may be allotted to R. Eleazar.

The terminus ad quem would appear to be the arrival of


10

Diocletian in Palestine in 286. The mere fact that none of these three CO leading scholars of the 270’s"''’ are mentioned with regard to this emperor, although their disciples are so mentioned, already passed from the scene.

54

indicates that they had

In conclusion,

there is no evidence of

RY having lived past 279.

3. Floruit The third element in determining RY’s life-span is the statement in the same Epistle that RY

*â

been interpreted four ways.

(presided) eighty years.

This notice has

The first was to take it literally and argue

that RY lived more than a hundred years.^

The contemporary scholarly

consensus with regard to rabbinic chronology opposes such an interpretation. The second was to understand RY’s lifetime.^

as "lived," allowing eighty years for

Our analysis would support this contention, in that we

have shown that RY was born about 200 and died about 279. is that

does not mean "live."

been to emend the number eighty. rather than the word

The difficulty

The third and fourth options have

It is preferable to emend the number

*|â for, as S. Baron notes, "figures belong to

textual elements least well reproduced by ancient or medieval copyists, because any alteration in them has as a rule little bearing upon the general * «- »57 context. The first emendation was suggested by I. Halevy and is discussed above (p. 3 ). that

D. Sperber has proposed an alternative emendation, 7’3nn

( 80) was previously

of the original

a

s

58

which assumes

(=80) which itself is a corruption

(=40). According to this emended reading RY presided

for forty years having established himself at the age of forty about the year 240.

Independent of this emendation, there is much to say for this


11

division of RY's life into two forty year periods, and some objections. The major objection to dating RY’s prominence so early is the belief that he could not have achieved such significance during the lifetime of his mentors, R. Hanina and R. Hoshaya who both survived the 240's.

It

is in order, therefore, to clarify the relationship between R. Hanina and R. Hoshaya with regard to the chronology of RY's life.

a.

59

RY and R. Hanina

It is commonly held that RY left Sepphoris because of a falling out with R. Hanina,

60

and s u b s e q u e / rose to prominence in Tiberias.

Surprisingly, there is no solid evidence that his departure was due to R. Hanina and, moreover, there

is evidence that RY was prominent while

still in Sepphoris.

of the discussion is in J (Bes 1,1 60a):

The basis

R. Hanina instructed the Sepphorites...(on two matters)... according to R. Judah. RY went up and expounded (these two matters) according to the rabbis...because of these two things RY went from Sepphoris down to Tiberias. He said: Why did you bring me this old man? Whatever I permit he prohibits," whatever I prohibit he permits. I.Halevy, citing this to account for RY's departure from Sepphoris, commented on the last sentence: The commentators of J explained that RY said this with regard to R. Hanina. That is a mistake. It is clearly well-known that from the earliest days R. Hanina was a teacher and judge in Sepphoris even before RY grew up, in fact, before RY was born. How then is it possible at all that he could say such of R. Hanina? After all, we ourselves see from this itself that RY left there and not R. Hanina, and German scholars followed mistakenly the commentators of J. Accordingly, Halevy thought that R. Hanina uttered the last line.^

M. Wohlman controverted Halevy's analysis arguing for the

impossibility that R. Hanina would call his junior, indeed his student,


"old man."

Moreover, the phrase, "Why did you bring me?", indicates that

this rabbi was not a local resident.

On the other hand, added Wohlman,

it is equally improbable that RY would call his revered teacher (see B MQ 24a) about whom he spoke so gratefully (B Nid = MHG Lev 451) "old man."

62

If RY was not referring to his teacher, R. Hanina, then to whom was he referring?

The solution lies in the parallel (J Sheb 9,1 38c) which

reads, instead of R. Hanina, the above objections.

63

pun

pi

ic*3Tn

'n a reading which obviates

Apparently, offended that the Sepphoreans brought

in an elderly rabbi who often contradicted him, RY left.

The rift, hence,

was with the Sepphoreans not with R. Hanina. A factor which contributed to the friction between RY and the Sepphorean establishment was RY’s use of his popular pulpit (see below). From it, he opposed the entente between the Nasi and the Sepphorean ruling classes: Two familial groups were in Sepphoris: The decurions and the pagani who would perform salutatio daily to the Nasi. The decurions would enter first and leave first. The pagani went and achieved in Torah. They came and requested to gain entrance first. The issue was referred to Resh Laqish who asked RY. RY entered the academy of R. Benayah and preached: Even if it is a case of a bastard scholar and an ignoramus high priest, the bastard scholar takes precedence over the ignoramus high priest.^ What must have finally exasperated the Sepphoreans was RY's and Resh Laqish's exposure of the surreptitious denunciation of the Sepphoreans of their fellow guildsmen and municipal councilors to the Roman authorities.^ Prior to this rift with the Sepphoreans RY had already achieved some prominence as evidenced by the fact that his counsel was sought already by some of the Sepphorean community.

Presumably, this was after

- L


R. Hanina had asked RY and Resh Laqish to join with him in a judicial decision (J Nid 2,7 3b).

Apparently, they had long been qualified for

such a role, since the Talmud, ibid., is surprised that they had previ ously been excluded.

RY and Resh Laqish also had the responsibility to

deliver the peroration for R. Hanina's halakic discourses (J RH 2,6 58b San 1,2 18c).

One could also point to several instances where RY and

R. Hanina appear together in a rabbinic delegation as evidence of RY's early prominence.

In each of these cases, however, RY has apparently

been mistaken for R. Jonathan.^ In addition to his early judicial activities, RY was a popular preacher.

In the Great Synagogue of Sepphoris, he succeeded in attract

ing a certain seafaring heretic for two consecutive years . ^

Even his

homiletics mentor, R. Hanina, took pride in seeing the folk flock to hear RY preach in the academy of R. Benayah

near Sepphoris.

68

Moreover, RY was sufficiently prominent to be named already in a controversy with R. Efes (J Qid 3,5 64a) who was Rabbi's own amanuensis (GR 75,5) and likely R. Hanina's predecessor as head of the academy in Sepphoris (B Ket 103b). RY was also known to the Roman officials in Sepphoris RY was sitting reading before the Babylonian synagogue of Sepphoris. The proconsul passed by and (RY) did not rise from his place. (His retinue) were on the verge of striking him when he (the proconsul) said: Let him be, he is pre occupied with the laws of his Creator. Finally, there is explicit mention that RY was the leading authority in Tiberias in the lifetime of R. Hanina.

The Talmud reports

When R. Abbahu went to the South, he would do as R. Hanina (with regard to the order of blessings on a festival which occurred on a Saturday night). And when he went to Tiberias he would do as RY in order not to be at variance with a man in his own place.


b. RY and R. Hoshaya According to L. Levine’s comprehensive study, Caesarea, R. Hoshaya spent his last twenty years (ca. 230-250) in Caesarea.^ This calculation is based on statements which establish the relation ship between RY and R. Hoshaya, the chronology of which is uncertain. The chronological relationship derives from four sources: 1. RY said: Eighteen days I grew up at R. Hoshaya’s... and learnt only one word in our mishna...When we were studying Torah at R. Hoshaya's, eight of us used to sit in the space of one ell (B Er 53a). 2. For thirteen years (RY) made his entrance before his teacher (R. Hoshaya) although (RY) did not need him (J Er 5,1 22b = San 11,6 30b). 3. RY said: When we used to go to R. Hoshaya in Caesarea to study Torah...(J Ter 10,3 47a) 4. RY said: Because of this, I went to R. Hoshaya...in Caesarea, and he said to me: Two students taught it (i.e. the mishna - J Hal 1,7 58a). Ever since I. H. Weiss,

72

the "days" in source 1 have been taken to

mean years and the source has been taken as an alternative version of source 2 which reads thirteen for the eighteen of source 1.

It has

been assumed also that sources 1 and 2 relate to 3 and 4, and that all these events transpired in Caesarea, though 1 and 2 make no mention of Caesarea.

Thus L. Levine (ibid.,89) presents the scholarly consensus

in nuce: RY spent considerable time in Caesarea (citing source 3), some traditions mentioning thirteen years (citing source 2 ), others eighteen years (citing source 1). Even after he headed his own academy in Tiberias, and was recognized as a 'great man' K3T RY continued to consult with his teacher in Caesarea (citing source 4), though probably more out of respect than need (citing source 2 ). Given that these sources are to be cou&ined, it cannot be main tained that RY both spent thirteen (or eighteen) years in Caesarea and

L. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

that RY continued to consult R. Hoshaya in Caesarea, though RT now resided in Tiberias.

It is the same source (2) that mentions thirteen

years which states that he did not need R. Hoshaya.

Apparently then,

the period of thirteen years does not reflect his student residence in Caesarea.

To argue, on the one hand, that he resided thirteen years in

Caesarea and, on the other hand, that he came from Tiberias to consult R. Hoshaya

out of respect

is to impose two mutually exclusive inter

pretations on 2. In light of these difficulties, an alternative combination of the sources is warranted.

Source 1 took place in Sepphoris during RY's

youth, before R. Hoshaya left for Caesarea. expression "I grew up”

■»nVT*a

.

This accounts for RY's

The interpretation that

"days" denotes years is reasonable in order to account for the period of time assumed in the expression "I grew up."

This also fits RY's

exclamation that despite having studied with R. Hoshaya (the "father of the Mishna" - J BQ 4,6 4c) for eighteen years, RY learnt only one word with regard to the mishna under discussion!

73

Dating this source to

RY's youth accounts also for the incommodious learning conditions re corded in source 1. Sources 2, 3, and 4 relate to Caesarea.

RY had already achieved

prominence, but would, for some thirteen years, still visit R. Hoshaya in Caesarea to pay his respects and to ask an occasional question, especially with regard to resolving a problem in the Mishna, R. Hoshaya' speciality.

74

RY was also a recognized authority in Caesarea as evi

denced by the fact that he adjudicated a case in a Caesarean synagogue 74a

(B Yeb 65b).

Since there is no other mention of RY in Caesarea, this

most likely took place during R. Hoshaya's lifetime.


16

In light of this reconstruction, RY probably achieved prominence easily a decade before R. Hoshaya's death.

In fact, the Talmud (B Yeb

57a) records that after RY posed a question which R. Hoshaya could not answer, Rabbi II asked R. Hoshaya rhetorically, "Is not RY a prominent man" (see J Yeb 8,2 9b). The most telling evidence that RY was one of the prominent scholars of the 240’s emanates from his relationship with the Babylonians.

It is

specifically RY whom the Talmud (B Hul 95b) records as having carried on a correspondence with the greatest scholars of Babylonia, Rab (d. 247) and Samuel (d. 254/5).^

Even more significant is the fact that RY is

sufficiently well-known in the early 240's that Rab can give instruc tions to his student R. Kahana on how to behave in RY's academy.^ In conclusion, whether we emend the Epistle from eighty to forty or not, it is safe to conclude that RY was prominent in the 240's and could have presided over his academy in Tiberias from about 240.

X>.

Youth

RY's early prominence was anticipated by the precociousness of his youth.

77 Since RY was b o m an orphan ,7 his grandfather took responsi

bility for his education.

RY would later recall the teaching of R. Simeon

b. Eleazar that he had heard while riding on his grandfather's shoulders. He is even alleged to have recalled the mid-wives who delivered him (J Ket 5,6 30a)! The stories which connect Rabbi to RY also bespeak remarkable promise.

79

Moreover RY already adjuuicated a case in the presence of

R. Hiyya (J San 1,1 18a, end), who was of Rabbi's inner circle.

Most

revealing is an incident concerning the intercalation of the calendar.


78

17

In spite of the fact that RY was the youngest present, his ruling was accepted.

This ruling reflected both a sensitivity for language and a

penchant for astronomy.

80

And finally, he showed promise in geography,

a field which preoccupied him later in life.

81

RY said: When I was a boy, I made a statement about which I afterwards questioned the old men, and it was found that I was right. (I said:) Eamat is Tiberias. (B Meg 5b-6a)

E. Family Two aspects of his family which were previously mentioned, en passant, deserve further attention.

These are his tenth son and his

sister who allegedly married Resh Laqish.

J. Son Mention of RY’s tenth son appears only in B.

Once while paying a

sick-call to R. Eleazar, It occurred to RY that R. Eleazar was weeping over his own childlessness.

Supposedly to comfort him, RY said:

"This

is the bone of my tenth son" (Ber 5b). The other mention is in BB 116a where RY and R. Joshua b. Levi disputed the meaning of the verse:

Such

as have no replacements and fear not God (Ps 55:20). One says: Whosoever does not leave behind a son. And the other says: Whosoever does not leave a disciple. It may be proved (that it was) RY who said 'a disciple'; for RY said: This is the bone of my tenth son (having no son he would not have stigmatized himself as one who is not God fearing) . Regardless of the conclusion of this discussion, it is clear that this source is dependent on RY's statement in Ber (5b).

Hence, there is

only one independent mention of his sons and that in a highly stylized story.

82


Still, there are several statements of RY which sound appropriate for a bereaved or childless father.

RY said:

"It is grievous to the

Lord when the children of a righteous man have to die in their father's lifetime." teaching:

83

He was also anxious to find the Biblical basis for the

"Whosoever is occupied with Torah, acts of kindness, and

buries his children all his sins are forgiven him."

(B Ber 5a-b)

A later Midrash even has RY lamenting his childlessness:

84

His students said to him (RY): If you our teacher is crying what will be with us? He said to them: My sons, how can I not cry? They will stand me in judgement and show me my deeds and judge me for them. Moreover, they will say to me: Why did your sons die in your lifetime? since I had not succeeded, thusly, in con tributing to the betterment (or to the population)^ 5 ] of the world. As if it were not enough for a man that his sons should die in his lifetime, must he also be judged on account of them?! In the later Geonic literature, the fate of RY's last son received extensive treatment.

86

The upshot of the different Geonic traditions is

that after nine of his sons had died the tenth fell into a boiling cauldron.

His flesh rotted leaving RY to take up the bone of the small

finger which he would wrap in a cloth with which to comfort mourners. There is also the tradition that there remained one son,a R. Matnah, who was sent to Babylonia to study with Samuel.

87

Despite the variety of sources which record the above information, apparently they are all dependent upon the Talmud and not of independent historical worth.

The embellishments are added in order to resolve dif

ficulties which arise out of the original story.

The mention of the

cauldron was necessary in order to explain how a bone remained, since all parts of the body are to be interred.

The small finger was a re

sult of an attempt to find a bone which was sufficiently small that it


would not impart impurity.

With the same motive in mind, other medieval

sources claim that it was a tooth.

As the Aruk says:

"How could a holy

man such as RY carry the bone of a dead person which constantly imparts impurity, rather, that bone was a tooth of the dead person which does not impart impurity."

88

In fact, one source avoids the whole issue by

saying that it was a bone from the post-burial repast.

89

Whatever the explanation, RY, presumably, did have a bone of his son with him.

The commentators assume that he bore the bone for the

sake of consoling others.

90

Nonetheless, it is not clear from the lit

erary context why he showed the bone at all.

Let us cite the text in

context from where RY notices R. Eleazar weeping and addresses him: Why do you weep? Is it perhaps because you did not (study) much (Torah)? We have already learnt: It is the same whether one does much or little as long as he directs his heart to God. Is it perhaps because of (lack of) sustenance? Not everybody merits two tables. Is it perhaps because of (lack of) sons? This is the bone of my tenth son. What is the force of RY's last comment?

Tosafot said

91

that since

RY used to console others with it, it is obvious that these chastisements are ones of love.

92

This interpretation has two difficulties.

Above on the same page of the Talmud, RY says the lack of sons cannot be considered chastisements of love.

93

Furthermore, it does not fit

the literary structure which has each of RY's responses oriented towards consoling R. Eleazar with what he already has. to lament any deficiency.

This obviated any need

In the first case, he tries to dissuade him

from mourning over the lack of quantity by pointing out the quality of his learning.

In the second case, he tries to console him over the 9,

lack of one table by pointing out that he has achieved the other table.


What about the third case?

The structure demands something like

'do not mourn over the lack of sons, what you have suffices-1 he has not yet asked R. Eleazar

(Note

what he thinks of sufferings; only why

he is weeping, which, as seen from the conclusion, see below, p. 3 0 , has nothing to do with sufferings.) that suffice?

But he has no sons; so how can

Precisely, RY had ten sons and look what remains— a bone.

There is, therefore, no call for self-pity on R. Eleazar's part.

95

1. Sister and Resh Laqish

The alleged marriage of RY's sister to Resh uaqirh is most prob lematic.

This relationship is principally reported in that series of

strange agadic accounts about RY (B BM 84a): One day while RY was bathing in the Jordan, Resh Laqish saw him and leapt into the Jordan after him. Said (RY) to him: Your strength should be for Torah. He replied: Your beauty should be for women. (RY) said: If you will repent, I shall give you my sister in marriage, who is more beautiful than I. He resolved (to repent). Then he wished to collect his equipment, but could not. Subsequently, (RY) taught him Bible and Mishna, and made him into a great man. W. Bacher pointed out that this romanticized encounter appears only

in Babylonian sources.

Its purpose, he contends, is to highlight

the contrast between Resh Laqish's former and latter life.

Nonetheless,

Bacher considered the essential kernel to be historical, including the fact that RY influenced Resh Laqish's return to a life of Torah study, and that Resh Laqish married the sister of R Y . ^ I. Halevy, however, noted that these two conclusions are faced with chronological problems.

Unable to resolve these discrepancies, he

wrote, "It is impossible to know the order of events from agadic material alone...for the ancient rabbis were not exact in nonhalakic matters."


The difficulties arise from other sources from which it is clear that RY and Resh Laqish were student companions from their youth while here RY appears as Resh Laqish’s first teacher elementary school subject of Bible.

since he is teaching him the

Halevy is of the opinion that all

these events occurred in their youth when RY was about twenty-five and Resh Laqish about fifteen.

He then arrives at the dubious conclusion

that RY's sister, also about twenty-six, married the then fifteen-yearold Resh Laqish!

97

The crux of the issue is the conflict between two sources.

Accord

ing to one source, Resh Laqish studied in his youth with Rabbi; indeed the Talmud (B Snab 119b) ponders the possibility that Resh Laqish had even received traditions from his own forefathers.

According to the

other source, Resh Laqish appears as a Jewish illiteracy, innocent of even the Bible, when meeting RY.

Tosafot, trying to resolve the contra

diction, suggested that this reflects different stages In his life. Resh i.aqish had indeed studied in his youth, leaving It ard turning to crime, later returning.

98

Halevy rejected this solution, because it

assumes that it all transpired after RY had already succeeded to the head of the academy, and thus conflicts with those sources which speak of Resh Laqish and RY being companions from their youth.

99

The other objection to Bacher’s conclusion is with regard to the marriage of Resh Laqish and RY's sister. other notices of this relationship.

There are, supDcrredly, two

The first is in the came series of

stories where Resh Laqish fell ill after offending RY.^*^ the story continues, the sake of her son. sister" that is

n ’nrrK

Whereupon,

came to seek forgiveness from RY for

This word is generally understood *:o mean "his

RY's sister the wife of Resh Laqish.

Ib


addition

22

of a curlicue to the second letter n

and would read

n ’nns

n

, however, it becomes a (his wife).

This reading would

smooth out the sentence, since it is self-evident that the subject is the wife of Resh L a q i s h . I n contrast, by reading

n ’nns

"RY"

has to be supplied as the antecedent of "his" since "RY" is not the nearest antecedent. The second source is in B (Tan 9a).

RY meets the young child of

Resh Laqish and asks him to explain several Biblical verses.

The young

child gave several startling responses upon which— RY lifted his eyes and looked at the boy. The boy’s mother then came in and took him away saying: Get away from him, that he may not do to you as he did to your father. It is assumed by the commentators that this alludes to the story in which RY precipitated Resh Laqish’s premature death, and that the woman is RY’s sister. This interpretation faces several difficulties.

Since RY was born

an orphan, his sister must have been at least a year older (if not a twin).

(Unless we accept the gratuitous assumption that she is from a

second marriage.)

Resh Laqish died a year before RY

all accounts, was at least eighty years old. then in his late seventies.

who, according to

Resh Laqish was probably

Even if we accept Halevy’s position that

Resh Laqish was ten years RY's junior, he would be about ninety accord ing to Halevy's calculations, or about seventy according to more sober calculations.

At the very least, we have an octogenarian and a septu

agenarian— who according to Halevy have been married over three score

102

years— with a child of Bible school age (i.e., five-ten).

Talmud makes no mention of this Abraham-Sarah-like wonder!

Yet, the

Another


difficulty with this interpretation is the fact that in the meeting between RY and the son of Resh Laqish, the mother is not described as RY's sister. The inability to resolve these problems lends credence to I. E. Weiss' judgement:

"except for some startling agadot we have no sources

for the youth of Resh Laqish."

103

Consequently, it is likely that

these passages reflect, as S. Safrai notes, "the tendency, so common in the Babylonian Talmud, of connecting prominent, historical personalities by family ties."'*'^

F.

Economic Situation

Rabbinic literature discusses two other aspects of RY's early life: his economic situation, and his proverbial beauty. also problematic. economic situation.

These discussions are

Most problematic are the passages treating his early One picture is reflected in Palestinian rabbinic

sources; another in Babylonian rabbinic sources.

The Palestinian de-

. . r ,, 105 scnption is as follows: RY was taking a walk from Tiberias up to Sepphoris, leaning on the shoulder of R. Hiyya b. Abba. When they came to a certain farm, RY said: This farm was mine, and I sold it because I wanted to devote myself entirely to the study of Torah. When they came to a vineyard, RY said: This vine yard was mine, and I sold it because I wanted to devote myself entirely to the study of Torah. When they came to an olive orchard, RY said: This olive orchard was mine, and I sold it because I wanted to devote myself entirely to the study of Torah. Thereupon R. Hiyya b. Abba began to weep. When RY asked: Why are you weeping? his companion replied: I weep because my master did not put anything aside for his old age. RY said: Hiyya, my son, is what I did really as foolish as you seem to think? I gave up something which took no more than six days to provide and acquired something which took forty days and forty nights to provide. For God gave to the creation of the entire world no more than six days, as it is written, In six days


the Lord made heaven and earth (Ex 31:17); but to give the Torah He took forty days and forty nights, as it is written And (Moses) was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights (Ex 34:28). The Babylonian description of his economic situation is different: U f a and RY were greatly distressed by poverty and there fore said one to another, let us go into business and thus fulfill in our own lives the words: Howbeit there shall be no needy among you (Dt 15:4). They then went and sat down under a ruined wall. While eating, RY overheard one angel saying to another: Let us throw down the wall upon them and kill them, for they forsake eternal life and in volve themselves with temporal life. The other replied: Leave them alone, for one of them has an auspicious future. Whereupon RY said to Ufa: Sir, have you heard anything? He replied: No. Thereupon RY said to himself: This implies that I am the one with the auspicious future. I will therefore return (to my studies), that of me may be fulfilled, For the poor shall never cease out of the land (Dt 15:11)...By the time that U f a also returned, RY was already presiding (over the academy). It was said to him: Had you remained here and studied Torah you would have been presiding (B Tan 21a). The apparent wealth of the Palestinian

tradition does not correlate

with the poverty of the B a b y l o n i a n . E i t h e r they reflect two dif ferent periods or only one account, at most, can be given historical credence.

One way of saving both accounts would be to place the Baby

lonian one in RY's student period which it presumes to reflect. would likely precede the year 225.

This

Although the second account is told

when RY is older, it does not necessarily refer to his youth in the first quarter of the third century.

As D. Sperber notes, "As the cen

tury progressed this burden (of taxation) became ever more oppressive and crushing with the result that the small landowners were forced to sell their properties one by one (as indeedwas RY)." depression reached its nadir under Gallienus (253-68) distress gnawed at the country's vitals.

108

This

economic

when the economic

109


From this period emanate some of RY's other economic recollections. I recall when (wheat) was four se'ahs for a sela, yet in Tiberias many people were swollen with hunger for lack of an isar (to buy bread)... I recall when workmen were not hired on the east side of town lest they die from the odor of the bread. In

his youth, on theother hand, RY had experienced better times The late fruits (i.e. the worst of them) that we used to eat in our youth were better than the peach (or apricot) that we would eat in our old age.

On this the Talmud remarks: (i.e. for the worse).

"For in his day the world was changed"

As RY further stated:^Z

"I recall when a child

would break a carob pod and a line of honey would run down over both his arms." Apparently, in the latter part of RY's life there was a change for

the better, orat least

ishment better.

in light of the increased land impover

and exhaustion of the soil of the fourth century, it seemed 113

This is reflected in an explanation of an old man who

accounted for the differences in grain measurements in a statement of RY and that of the later R. Ammi.

114

"In the days of RY the land was

fat; in those of R. Ammi lean." If we date the Palestinian account to the middle of the third century, it may be possible to salvage an historical kernel from the Babylonian account.

M. Beer subjected this account to a historical

and textual analysis, and concluded that it is a tendentious literary construct.

Most of his arguments flow from the end of the account,

which follows: U f a then suspended himself from the mast of a ship and exclaimed: If there is anyone who will ask me a question from the baraitaot of R. Hiyya and R. Hoshaya and I fail to elucidate it from the Mishna, then I shall throw myself down and be drowned.


Ultimately, he did withstand the test. Beer contends that the whole account is artificially inserted in its context.

It appears to reflect a Babylonian reworking with two goals

in mind:

(1) even

a merchant can become an outstanding scholar and

teacher, which is a typical Babylonian phenomenon'

(2) the Mishna of

Rabbi is the foundation and the root of the halakah and that it contains everything even the mishna of R. Hiyya and R. Hoshaya. Acceptance of this analysis does not necessarily undermine the historicity of the account.

Beer's analysis only indicates that the

account does not belong in its present context and that the last part, which we cited separately, reflects a Babylonian reality.

It could also

be demonstrated that the account is suffused with typical Babylonian language and a s s u m p t i o n s S t i l l ,

the assumption that RY and U f a may

have, at one time, been forced to abandon Torah study temporarily due to economic exigercies cannot be gainsaid. Methodologically, the decisive issue is whether the account con tradicts other things known about RY.

As H. A. Wolfson is reported to

have taught, "There is no reason for rejecting a statement which is not inherently impossible nor contradicted by a aore reliable source. M. Beer himself points out one source ( B Er 55a) where RY says: "Torah can not be found among merchants and dealers."

118

RY also

defines "a scholar as one who neglects his business for his studies." This being the case, Beer's strictures apply only to Ufa's end

120

119

since

RY's return actually illustrates his neglect of business for study. There is one case where Beer, allegedly, finds a contradiction.

He

argues that one of the points of this "idealistic tendentious" story is


that if "one dedicates oneself to full-time Torah study, he will ultimately merit and acquire the position cf head of the academy and not need to fret about his livelihood."

He bases this on pseudo-Rashi's

comment there that the fringe benefits of such a position were prominence and wealth.

This idea, continues Beer, that RY was wealthy conflicts

with Palestinian tradition that RY sold his fields due to poverty and re mained penniless in his old age. There are two objections to this analysis of Beer.

First, despite

pseudo-Rashi, the text does not imply that study will lead to wealth. On the contrary, when RY dedicates himself to a life of study, he is awar e tha t he will be evidencing the verse: cease out of the land.

For the poor shall never

Furthermore, it is unclear, from the Palestinian

tradition, that RY was penniless in his old age; only that he had pre viously sold his fields, not fretting about his old age.

On the contrary,

there is evidence that his economic situation had improved, for he recalled when matters were much worse.

It is also generally accepted

that RY had an official rabbinic position and was supported by the Nasi.

12

Independent of these personal considerations, awareness of the convulsive economic fluctuations of the middle of the third century would militate against reading contradictions into contrasting economic descriptions. What is surprising is that Beer later argues that an appointment to a rabbinic office entailed a rise in financial status. this operated in Palestine as well as Babylonia.

123

He assumes that

For evidence, he

cites the case of R. Abbahu interceding on behalf of R. Abba of Acco (B Sot 40a).

There, however, as he himself notes, S. Lieberman has

explained, "that it is possible that R. Abbahu intended to save R. Abba


m 28 from the Treasury, i.e. from tax obligations."

124

A clergy exemption

is not yet a stipend. There is, withal, more solid evidence that RY's economic situation improved.

One source maintains that "when he ate meat

he gave (some) to his slave; when he drank wine he gave (some) to his slave" (B BB 145b). The ability to have a slave, to consume both meat j •

and wine, and then to give some to one's slave, in the middle of the third century, is a sign of some means. his meat (J Dem 1,2 21d).

125

In fact, RY even tithed

And Beer remarks, "those amoraim who had

meat on their table daily are to be classed among the well-to-do."

126

In addition, despite the fact that destitute students had only one suit of clothes (B Bes 32b), RY not only had a good set of Sabbath clothes (J BM 2, 13 8d), but according to B (MQ 24a) when his teacher R. Hanina died, RY rent no less than thirteen robes of Milesian wool!

127

And finally, RY was among those who let drop some coins so that the really penniless, R. Simeon b. Abba, would find them (Ruth R 5,7). Impecunious RY was not. In conclusion, RY's economic situation fluctuated as did the Empire's throughout the third century. his student days

128

He may have suffered penury in

only to have acquired subsequently some fields

which he sold in order to continue his studies.

This land may have been

an appanage received through the good offices of the Nasi.

129

Be that as

it may, his later improved economic condition was surely due to his academic position

130

and to his association with the Nasi.

It is the

nature of this association which is the subject of the next chapter. Beforehand, we shall clarify one last matter pertaining to RY - his proverbial beauty.


Q.

Beauty

The subject of RY's pulchritude is, as R. Graetz noted, a most unusual topic for the Talmud to expatiate upon.

131

The subject appears

in that same series of statements in which we have found so many other strange notices about RY:

132

RY said: I am the only one remaining of Jerusalem's men of outstanding beauty. He who desires to see RY's beauty let him take a silver goblet as it emerges from the crucible, fill it with the seeds of red pomegranate, encircle its brim with a chaplet of red roses, and set it between the sun and the shade: its lustrous glow is akin to RY's beauty. But that is not so; for did not a Master say: R. Kahana's beauty is a reflection of R. Abbahu's; R. Abbahu's is a reflection of our Father Jacob's; our Father Jacob's was a reflection of Adam's, whereas RY is omitted.' RY is different, because he lacked a beard.133 RY used to go and sit at the gates of the mikvah. 'When the daughters of Israel ascend from the bath', said he 'let them look upon me, that they may bear sons as beautiful and as learned as I.' Said the Rabbis to him: 'Do you not fear an evil eye?' — 'I am of the seed of Joseph' - he replied, 'against whom an evil eye is powerless.' For it is written, Joseph is a fruit ful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well: whereon R. Abbahu observed: Render not [by a well] but, 'above the power of the eye.' R. Josi b. R. Hanina deduced it from the following: and let them multiply abundantly like fish in the midst of the earth: just as fish in the seas are covered by water and the eye has no power over them, so also are the seed of Joseph— the eye has no power over t h e m . 134 Leaving aside the exoticness of the account, there are two aspects which require attention. literally translated, states: beauties."

First is the opening statement which

"I am the one remaining of Jerusalem's

This statement is open to three interpretations.

One,

RY's beauty is as that of Jerusalem which, the Talmud recounts, received nine of the ten portions of beauty in the world. implies that RY derived ultimately from Jerusalem.

135"

Two, it

And three, RY is


30

one of the last links with the "holy community of Jerusalem." l a s t suggestion is the most plausible.

What was so comely about RY?

1^ 6-

The account excludes the "facial

glory" which is associated with an imposing beard. axillary hair (B Naz 59a).

This

He also lacked

Elsewhere he is considered corpulent.

137

And he is depicted with such long eyelashes that he could not see without lifting them (B BQ 117a)•

The other possibility is the lustrous

complexion c 5 his skin since there is mention of some type of brachial lustre in that report of RY's sick-call on R. Eleazar which begins R. Eleazar fell ill and RY went in to visit him. Noticing that he was lying in a dark room, RY bared his arm and light radiated from it. And ends with R. Eleazar explaining to RY why he is weeping He replied to him: I am weeping on account of this beauty that is going to rot in the earth. He said to him: On that account you surely have a reason to weep; and they both wept. (B Ber 5b) Although all of the above statements about RY's physical appearance appear in Babylonian sources, there may be an oblique reference to it in one Palestinian source (J AZ 3,1 42c):

"when RY died the icons were turned

arnnnii,^Ît was said that there were no icons like him."

In light of

the Babylonian tradition, the last phrase has been taken to mean that there were no icons as fair as RY.

140

H- Epilogue Glimmerings of the reverence with which RY was held are refracted through his eulogies.

Characteristically, his unmitigated devotion to

Torah was lauded above all:

141


When RY died his generation praised him by applying to him the verse in Song 8:7 implying that if one were to offer all his worldly wealth in exchange for the love with which RY loved the Torah, his offer would be utterly rejected (for offering so little for so much). R. Isaac b. Eleazar may have also begun his eulogy thus:

142

This day is as hard for Israel as the day when the sun set at a noon-tide, as it is written: And it shall come to pass in that day...that I will cause the sun to go down at noon and I will darken the earth in the clear day. And I will turn your feasts into mourning and all your songs into lamentation...as the mourning of an only son (Amos 8:9-10). As RY had mourned R. Hanina as a relative, so did R. Ammi take it upon himself to mourn RY.

143

RY's impact was such that the Talmud even

imputes to him the posthumous salvation of that town heretic of Tiberias, Aher:

144

When RY died, the smoke ceased from Aher's grave. The public mourner began (his oration) concerning him (RY) thus: Even the guard (of Hell) could not stand up to you, 0 master! Even in death, RY was victorious!

145


Notes

1. The use of the term "biography'1 with regard to studies of Talmudic sages is most problematic and "threatened by pitfalls." (See J. Goldin, "Toward a Profile of the Tanna, Aqiba ben Joseph," JAOS 96 (1976) 38f.) The nature of the material does not allow for anything as ambitious as some of the recent attempts with regard to Augustine. Nonetheless, the quantity of the data which deals with the details of RY's life is suf ficiently exceptional, by standards of rabbinic literature, to deserve special treatment. 2. Nineteenth-century German scholarship on RY culminated in the fulllength study by Zuri, in 1918. For previous literature, see EJ (German) s.v., Jochanan, p. 208/and H. L. Strack, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash 319, n.2. In spite of subsequent research, the most sober account is that of Bacher AAEY. Bacher*s organization of passages is superior to the most recent effort of Y. Qonovis, RY. An anthology which I have never seen cited is that of H. Y. Brill, Toledot R Y .which tends to psychologize in its explanations. 3.

See Lieberman GTP 189, n. 25.

4. So Weiss Dor 62 and A. Kaminka, Mehqarim BaTalmud 203. See Rabinowitz STB 430 who notes J RH 2,6 58b which states clearly nssn 73 Elsewhere, B Ket 25b, BM 85b, Mak 5b, Hul 54b, RY is also referred to as simply RTT3 3 *13 He is never referred to totally as R. Yohanan b. Nappaha, hence the title of this work, R. Yohanan of Tiberias. 5.

Zuri 1.

In addition,

33

can denote "descendant."

6. S. Krauss in reviewing J. Klausner's Yeshu HaNosri, Tarbiz 2 (1931) 125, pointed o-’t that the contradiction between Mark 6:3 where Jesus is a carpenter and Matthew 13:54 where he is a son of a carpenter is due to a misunderstanding of the word m Also in rabbinic literature the ",a is frequently omitted in different versions, see Lieberman TKF Er 393. 19-29; T-A,p. 981, line 6 of variae lectiones. In fact, R. Isaac Rnss is called in B Hul 76a R. Isaac Rn3 3 T3. 7. Contra Osar Yisrael, ed. J. D. Eisensten, s.v., RY.who misunderstood that nns’io 7 ‘m'? (a euphemism) means transforming a negative feature into a positive one; not the converse. 8.

LeHeqer Shmot VeKinuim BaTalmud 14-

9.

Mabo 238; see similarly Weiss Dor 71 with regard to Resh Laqish.

10.

According to some readings of B Er 91a, RY is referred to as iwnb’a This reading is missing in Rashi, MSS (see PS) and Tosafot,


33

s.v. -jwnV ’2> . As indicated by Tosafot, the reading is probably based on the incident in B Yoma 82b that Rabbi whispered (wnb ) a verse to RY's mother before his birth. The correct version of this reading should form two words iwnb »a (who whispered to you), see, e.g., Sifre Dt 54, p. 122; and RY B Git 23b. Accordingly, this material is not pertinent to a discussion of RY's name. 11. See n. 4. Note that RY calls R. Eleazar b. Pedat "ben Padat" (B Yeb 72b) and Resh Laqish (=R. Simeon b. Laqish) "bar Laqisha" (B BM 84b). 12.

See following section.

13. Iggeret R. Sherira Gaon, ed. Hyman, p. 70 and n. 32; ed. B. M. Lewin, p. 84 and n. 3; p. 83 and n. 6. Meiri dated RY's death to 259/260 (Petihah LeMaseket Abot, ed. Waxman, 61). 14. Dorot 298-332, esp. 309; Rabinowitz STEY 539; see Zuri 1. The most extensive critique of Halevy, in this regard, is J. Zuri, Toledot HaMishpat Halbry 1,3, pp. 4-33. 15. See M. Beer, "Iyunim Belggeret R. Sherira Gaon," Bar-Ilan Annual IV-V 181-85. 16. See S. A. Jordan, Rabbi Jochanan bar Nappacha, who placed his birth in 175 and worked out an excessively precise chronology of RY's life almost decade by decade. Horowicz dated his birth to 178, Litteraturblatt der Jiid. Presse 1871, p. 48ff. 17. Sperber Rom Pal 222; S. Safrai, Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish StudiesUszThis calculation is supported by Geonic tradition, see Ginzberg Ginze II 397; and OSH. San (ed. Taubes) p- 499, n. 2. In general, see B. W. Helfgott, The Doctrine of Election in Tannaitic Literature 183f. 18.

Dorot 308

19. Zuri, op. cit., 31, already pointed out the folkloristic motif in this passage and cited a similar story in J Yoma 8,4 45a about R. Tarfon instead of Rabbi. Urbach, Hazal 216, argued that the story is told also to support a specific halakic position. 20. Strack, op. cit. (n. 2) 122; Hyman Toledot 654a; and Ginzberg CPT I 244, n. 13, believed that RY was born in Tiberias. 21. B Meg 5b and Rabinowitz STB 72. lines of Zuri, op. cit., 31. 22.

Our critique follows the main

Iggeret, ed. Lewin, p. 78; M. Beer, op.cit. (n. 15).

23. As reflected in the aforecited passage fromB Hul 549, and J Bes 5,2 63a where RY and Resh Laqish claim: "We haveachieved in Torah by virtue of having seen the fingers of Rabbi." Thehistoricity of the J source is not in doubt despite— as Frankel Mabo 96a; Bacher AAEY 2; and Epstein Mabo 239 noticed— its stereotypical formulation, see Rabbi's comment on R. Meir, J, ibid.


24. The evidence for Resh Laqish being RY's junior is based on the disciple-master relationship between them (see below, p. 127f. ); the story of their encounter (see above, p.20); and RY's calling Resh Laqish (B Meilah 7b) 25. B Pes 3b also suggests that RY was a student of Rabbi (others state that it is with reference to R. Yohanan b. Zakkai who sat before Hillel). The source speaks about the student's sensitivity to language, a charac teristic of RY from youth on, see J RH 2,6 58b and above, p.17;PR 57b; ER 42,2; B AZ 58b=Hul 137b. In MHG Gen 166,only RY is mentioned. The fact that RY cites Rabbi (e.g., B Men 88b) does not necessarily imply that he heard it from Rabbi. RY cites many tannaim who died long before his birth, see Albeck Mabo 68. When, however, he mentions an incident which occurred in the presence of Rabbi (e.g., J Qid 1,1 58c) he may have seen it. Here, however, the tradent is in doubt, see Rabinowitz STEY 449. Once, he does say: "Rabbi taught me well" (J AZ 4,1 43d), but there it is not clear that "Rabbi" is meant (see J AZ 2,7 41c). Finally, RY said that Rabbi had all seven qualities that the sages ascribed to the righteous (J San 11,4 30a). And once he asked his son R. Gamaliel a question (B Hul 106a). This material may have induced Rambam to associate RY with the court of Rabbi (Introduction, Mishneh Torah). See Qobes A1 Yad I If. 26.

See Abot 5:22

27.

Dorot 309 and Hyman Toledot 671b

28. 0£. cit. (n. 14) 14, 1,1,275. who follows Rashbam as does Halivni 29.

See B BB,ed. S. Abramson, ad MM Moed 96,n.8

loc.,

Dorot 302

30. For the literature, see D. Sperber "The Inflation in Fourth Century Palestine," Archiv Orientalni 34 (1966) 56, n.9; cf. also Albeck Mabo 619; Epstein Mabo 1297-1302; and Ginzberg CPT III 299. 31.

D. Sperber, ibid., 57-59

32.

See above, p. 17f.

33. B Shab 111a, Git 70a and Rashi, ad loc., following Hyman Toledot 670f. Hyman also suggested (670a) that the daughters were the fruit of a second marriage. The interpretation that RY regained sexual potency in his old age is supported by RY's own interpretation of Gen 18:11; and 24:1 where he described Abraham's revitalization in language which re calls his own: innyrt n" 3 pn n ’Tnrr (GR 48,16,p. 493). 34. It is unclear whether R. Zera was actually a student of RY, see Albeck Mabo 618, n.l 35.

0£. cit.


36.

Following Sperber Rom Pal 58.

37.

Mabo 178-79, n.78

38.

0£. cit., 58

39. Dor 81, followed by Halevy Dorot 307,330; Zuri 153; Hyman Toledot 671ay^t al. Previously, Frankel, Mabo 96b, suggested that the grief was due to the death of his sons. This would have more cogency if his sons had all died simultaneously. Although the number 3 1/2 appears to be precise, it may only be a round number, see Lieberman TKF Sot 689, n.23. 40. See Halivny n . 12 ?, end.

MM Moed 273, n. 26;^~idenuNayhim 497, n. 5; p.171,

41.

Each element will be taken up separately below.

42.

See Ratner ASY Shab 140;^Rabinowitz STB 356,431.

See MHG Gen 826f.

43. See Aruk, s.v. nax 26aJ and Rashi, B Git 69b. RY was fre quently sick. He was subject to ravenous attacks of bulimia (B Yoma 83b J Yoma 8,4 45b = Qoh R 7,12) and suffered from scurvy (B Yoma 84a). See J Shab 14,4 14d; B AZ 28a. 44.

Lieberman "Palestine" 36.

45. Mahzor Vitry, ed. Horowitz, 483, n. 7; Seder Tannaim VeAmoraim, ed. Kahan, 4; Rabinowitz STB 35546.

ed. Lewin 84•

47.

Dor 81-2.

48.

Mabo 113a.

49.

Dorot 330.

50.

STB 355

51.

Op. cit. (n. 14) 33.

52.

Mabo 227.

53.

RY and Resh Laqish together are called o? iv ’V n i c m*rn ’Vina (GR 3,5,p. 22 parallels and n.6) and icm»tK K n o i i o (Lam R 1,37). Separately, RY is called loiaVnn imicn (by R. Hananel somewhere); Resh Laqish, Vsim’T Kynio ’3 ’pn (B Meg 28b); and R. Eleazar is called Vk u p ' ’ s y n n ion (B Yom 9b; Nid 22b)


54. For the rabbinic sources on Diocletian, see Zuri, op. cit. (n. 14) 28 n. 23; andJE, s.v., Diocletian. S. Safrai's statement that RY "was still alive at the time of the accession of Diocletian" ("The Avoidance of Public Office in Papyrus Oxy 1477 and in Talmudic Sources," JJS 14 (1963) 6 8 ) appears to be erroneous. He notes J AZ 1,4 39d as if RY said it. That source, however, reads (see _L MS) R. Simeon b. Yohanan. The names there are problematic, see Rabinowitz STEY 558-59, but they are not our RY. In fact, when Diocletian did arrive, RY's disciples acted according to an earlier ruling cited in RY's name (J Ber 3,1 6 a= Naz 7,1 56a); he clearly was not present. 55. See S. Rappaport, Erek Milin I 285, who cited an old source: "They thought that RY who comes from the seed of Joseph presided eighty years as Joseph who lived eighty years in Egypt." Z. Yabes, Toledot Yisrael VII 60, n.5, allows RY one hundred and six years; and Hyman Toledot 671b allows RY one hundred and nine years. There is a medieval tradition that RY lived several hundred years, see Zunz-Albeck, HaDrashot BeYisrael 247, n.77. 56. So Frankel Mabo 97b; see Graetz Dibre 463, along with translator's note Cf. EJ (German) s.v., Jochanan 203,205. Lest one counter that eighty years is insufficient for RY's old-age reputation (see previous note) we cite Seneca: "Plato had the good fortune... to die...on his eighty-first year. For this reason wise men of the East...sacrificed to him after his death, believing that his length of days was too full for a mortal man..." (Ep. 58.31-Loeb 405-07). Moreover RY's teacher, R. Hanina, was considered so old at eighty that he was asked the secret of his longevity (B Hul 24b; J Tan 4,2 68 a). See W. F. Willcox, "Length of Life in the Early Roman Empire" International Congress for Studies in Population II 14-22; and B. E. Richardson, Old Age Among the Ancient Greeks 215-36. 57. SRH III 284, n. 48. On number corruptions, see D. Sperber, "Gilgule Misparim," Sinai 62 (1968) 278-80. 58. D. Sperber, "On Social and Economic Conditions in Third Century Palestine," Archiv Orientalni 38 (1370) 6 f. Zuri, op. cit. (n. 14) 18 proposed, emending 7 ’ 3an (80) to something which looks like it such as 7 ’man (50). 59. R. Yannai, RY's major teacher according to Weiss Dor 62 and Ealevy Dorot 273 (see J Ket 9,5 33b), seems to have died earlier, although he is mentioned with RY in Tiberias (Tan SFTYM 10 ) . Albeck, Mabo 184, says RY learned most from R. Hcshaya, but, as we shall see below, the evidence is tenuous. With regard to R. Hanina, see Enstein Mebo-ot 284f. 60. Bacher AAEY 16, n.4; Graetz Dibre 331; Weiss Dor 307, n. 26; and Zuri, og_. cit. (n. 14) 11. 61.

67; Halevy

Dorot, ibid.

i Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Dorot

I i

37

i

62. MeSitre Ha-Agada II 86. See Rabinowitz STB 432, n. 64. This last argument does not necessarily hold. The Aramaic for ’old man’ Rao is not necessarily derogatory. In fact, RY did call R. Hanina R20 once with respect (J Nid 2,6 50b) although the Sepphoreans may have dubbed him such in derision (J Tan 3,4 66c, see Ginzberg Ginze I 420). Also RY is called such in admiration (below, n. 67). R 20 is Aramaic for 7?* (RY San 13b ) which can be an acronym for naan n_3£ n* ergo 7? t = nan (see S0R,p. 140f., n. 48). Lieberman, GJP 22, even suggests that Kao can imply rabbinic ordination. For subsequent ambiguity, see Kasher TS_ IV 940, n. 4. 63. See J Nid 2,6 50b; Lieberman TR III 263f.; and J Yeb 1,2 2d= Git 1,2 43b-c (where the second RY should be R. Hanina who we take to be R. ] m n 7an . see Rabinowitz STEY 76# idem, STB 432,490;

cf., however, Hyman 7oJeJot 4 j4 a), 64. J Shab 12,3 13c = Hor 3,5 48c. See Lieberman YKF 175f., for a significant variant. The decurions (boiJeutai) were the municipal aristocracy.. The pagani are either the urban plebes (intramurani) or small landowners and tenants (see Rostovtzeff SEHRE 629, n. 18). Salutatio n»nVw 2 is the greeting of the client to his patron. The order of entrance (ordo salutationis) established status. For the learned pagani to displace the decurions was a rabbinic dream, but was not to become a political reality (see Ch. II). See Liebeschuetz Antioch 188;and Carcopino Daily Life 196f. Kraus s., Qadmoniyot II, 1, p. 11, noted that this was a scene before a patron. Alon, Toledot II 134; Mehqarim II 51f., discerned the social significance of the episode, but made no mention of the patron-client context. The legal sources also differen tiate decurions from plebians (Digest 43.19.9. 14-15; ibid 10.2; ibid. 50.2.2.2. Apparently, RY's code name for the ruling classes was "priests," which they probably were (see Klein Galilee 62ff.;and below, pp. 90-2. n. 94). This helps explain his caustic remarks on bungling priests (see continuation of J ,ibid; B Meg 28b; Ber 32b; Tan TRWMH 1; B San 90b). It seems that the Tiberian priestly estate was significant over a century later when they are reported to have welcomed Julian (see Sefer HaYishub 63 n. 141; 64 nn. 142,144, cf., however, Preface, 35). RY was also aware cf those priests who sneered: "these rabbis" (J San 10,1 27d near end). For an instructive parallel on the status and wealth of priestly families, see W. M. Ramsay, The Social Basis of Roman Power in Asia Minor 4, 243-60. 65. J Peah 1,1 16a, see Lieberman "Palestine" 347f. Denunciation (?”in 7lw?) to gentiles was such a heinous offense that it was ana thematized in an inscription found in an Ein Geddi synagogue (see B. Lifshitz, "The Ancient Synagogue of Hamat-Tiberias, its Floor and Inscription," (Hb) Mehqarim BeToledotAwhYisrael VeEres-Yisrael, eds. B. Oded, et al., Haifa 1974, 107-09. On the recalcitrant Sepphoreans, see Lieberman ^S 318, s.v., Sepphoreans; and idem, TKF Sot 745, n.31, who says they were 7573 ’’a’nn . Cf. also M. Beer, "Al Manhigim shel Yehude Sippori BeMeah HaShelishit," Sinai 74 (1974) 133-38.


66. J Nid 8,2 40d - Rabinowitz STEY 406; J Ber 9,1 12d (Vatican MS Ginzberg Seride 252b) and Mid Ps 19, p. 164, n.ll; cf. J Er 6,4 23c; B Ber 33b (see, however, YS^Dt 856). 67. PRK 18,5, p. 297f., parallels and notes. The fact that RY was heard twice by the same person reflects a regular position, an unlike lihood if he had already taken up residence in Tiberias. The story relates that RY literally petrified the heretic, a power which is attributed to the most prominent of rabbis. 68. J Hor 3,7 48b = BM 2,13 8d. according to the former one.

The latter source should be corrected

69. J Ber 5,1 9a. See Avi-Yonah Bime 54, who points out the re spectful relationship between the proconsul and other prominent rabbis. He, however, erred in the location of the citation and mis understood some of the details of the episode. 70. J Ber 8,1 12a. On going to the South (i.e., Lydda) on the part of R. Hanina, see Rabinowitz STEY 19;and Lieberman SZ_ 92, n.3. On R. Abbahu's practice, see B Shab 46a = Yeb 14a. We may conjecture that R. Hanina left for the South when R. Efes, who hailed from there, was appointed head of the Academy in Sepphoris, a position which rightfully belonged to R. Hanina. See B Ket 103b = Shab 59b whose memory of these events is already hazy. Cf. below, p. 85, nn. 55-7. 71. 88, I cite Levine because his calculations are based on the general chronology I have accepted. He, however, studiously avoids the chronological problems involved. See Zuri, op. cit. (n.14) 6-23, for the problems, and a critique of I. Halevy’sanalysis. 72.

Dor 63;

Halevy Dorot

?57f.

73. See the conclusion of the Gemara (B Er 53a); and Rabbi's comment B Yeb 84a with Yad Eliyahu II, adloc. I do not assume that R. Hoshaya was RY's exclusive teacher for eighteen years; only that there was an ongoing master-disciple relationship for this period. It is evident from theexpression of RY; "Many times I sat before R. Hoshaya" (J Yeb 4,8 5d) that this was intermittent. 74. See Epstein Mabo 241. 74a. See Lie2?erma.n J 2 1.33, n - 3 Z . 75. Even if Neusner (History II 48) is right that Samuel died in 263, this point holds for Rab. A difficulty not discussed by Neusner (ibid..43-44) is that Samuel'sdaughters, which according to him were taken captive in 263, approached R. Hanina in the academy. To assume that R. Hanina is still presiding in the academy as late as 263 when he was considered for the position at Rabbi's death (ca. 220) is dif ficult. See above, n.44. 76. B BQ 117a. Although the manner of the meeting of RY and R. Kahana reflect, as we shall discuss later (pp.142-45) the tension


39

between. Babylonia and Palestine, the fact that Rab's student, R Kahana. met RY should be considered historical. 77. B Qid 31b. RY's father died at his conception; his mother at his birth. In light of the impossible demands of filial piety, RY considered himself fortunate for not having laid eyes on his parents. Cf., however, Rabinowitz STB 430,and n.57. The statement attributed to RY about his mother in MHG Gen 813 should be corrected to R. Hanina as it is in the parallel, B Hul 24b. 78.

J Ma 1,2 48d.

79.

See above,p. S

See similarly GR 9,5, p. 70.

80. J RH 2,6 58a-b and parallels. See S. Gandz, "Studies in the Hebrew Calendar," Studies in Hebrew Astronomy and Mathematics 5; and Ginzberg Ginze I 391, 387. 81. See Zuri 87ff. RY also identified the exact place of 'ancient Tiberias' (B Meg 6a) and was the only amora to correctly identify Sepphoris with the Biblical Raqat (Jos 19:35), see Klein Galilee 85,95; 82. The parallel (MHG Gen 827^ reads "’T ’a instead of "I’a see ibid. n.16. For an appreciation of the concinnity of the story, see E. Bin-Gorion,Shbile Ha-Agada 180. 83.

LR 20,10 p. 467 and parallels and MHG Num 16.

84.

Seder Eliyahu Zuta 24 (ed. Friedman) 43.

85. I owe this translation ofobiy b r Leiman, s ee I s t y S - l S .

T 3 ip>*>n to Professor 5. Z.

86.

The literature is collated in OSH Ber HaPereshim, p. 6, #18.

87.

For a R. Matnah who studied with Samuel, see Albeck Mabo 204.

88.

Aruk, s.v.

#

See Rashbam.BB 116a.

89. This assumes that that meal consisted of meat! See R. Margoliot, Nisoge Or ad B Ber 5b;v-Y. Arieli, Einayim LeMishpap, Ber, ad loc. 90. Cf., however, Z. Chajes in the Levy Jubilee Volume: Tiferet Yisrael, Hebrew section, 174; and L. Finkelstein, Akiba 179, and 337, n.3. 91.

B Ber 5b, s.v.

92.

On such chastisements, see Urbach Hazal 392ff.


40

93. Tosafot follows the later Talmudic discussion there which itself is based on the assumption that RY's mention of the bone is to exemplify afflictions of love— petitio principii. The later Talmudic distinction between one who never had sons and one who had, but lost them, is an effort to resolve a contradiction which the Talmud sees between RY's dicta and a baraita. This is insufficient reason to argue that RY actually had in mind such a distinction when he originally said that the lack of sons cannot be considered as chastisements of love. 94. The two tables may be wealth and learning^ or, as MHG Gen 828 has, this world and the next world. 95. Seneca said it best: "No man goes into mourning for its own sake...There is an element of self-seeking even in our sorrow" (Ep. 63.2). cf. his advice to the sage on the bearing of grievous losses (Ep. 74). One may wonder at RY's equanimity atthe less cf his son and his utter vertigo at the loss of Resh Laqish(above p. 8). This also fits the Stoic pattern (Seneca Ep. 99.2-3). The difficulty with any interpretation is the fact that only six pages later the Talmud (B Ber lib) reports R. Eleazar instructing his son Peaat! (On him, see Albeck Mabo 347.) Tosefot HaRosh in Sefer Berakah Meshuleshet 5a, suggested that either Pedat had not yet been born or perhaps died in his father’s life time. The first suggestion is more likely since it is unlikely that he died in his father's lifetime in that he is cited as an authority who cited both his father and RY. Moreover, he was the amora of R. Assi (Yasa), RY's successor (J Meg 4,1075c). In addition, R. Eleazar married quite late, since the Talmudrecords that R. Ammi, R. Assi (Yasa), and R. Hiyya (b. Abba) helped him with the marriage preparations at a time when RY was expounding in the academy (B Ber 16a; J Ber 2,4 5a; see Ginzberg CPT I 344f.). 96.

Bacher AAEY 134.

97.

Dorot 317-20; so Hyman Toledot 660a.

98.

B BM 84a, s.v.

99.

Dorot 320, previously noticed by Weiss Dor 71f.

100.

’K .

B BM 84a, see above, p.8.

101. According to Hyman, Toledot 671a, who cites a reading irm’a-r = his wife (see PS). He gratuitously proposes that this is Resh Laqish's second wife. The emendation is accepted by N. Solomon, An Encyclopedia of Talmudic Lore (Hb), p. 472. If this is correct, then there is only one unambiguous mention of such a relationship— and that in the midst of that fantastic encounter between RY and Resh Laqish; the details of which do not square with all else known about the two.


’Knit

41

102.

See Abot 5:22; B BB 21a.

103. Dor 71. Kaminka, op. cit. (n. 4) 209 also rejected the historicity of the meeting of the two. He argued that the story of Resh Laqish's youth as a brigand is based on a folk-expression recorded in Qoh R. 7,26,1: o ’m b x b t »33 o »b o ^ B ’pV (the last of the brigands is the first of the hanged) Thus Resh Laqish's patronym or just cognomen was associated witho’oob and the Baby lonian agada viewed his youth as a sinner to sage conversion trans formation which was triggered by the impact of the great RY. On the other hand, the report (B Git 47a) that he sold himself as some type of circus performer or gladiator (ludarius) does reflect an economic reality of his time (Urbach "Slavery" 85). The raw material fo^ this creation may have been the Palestinian material which reports his readiness to fight off robbers, his guarding of orchards (J Ter 8,10 46b; MQ 3,1 81d; B MQ 17a), and his comment on selling oneself to ludarii (J Ter 8,5 45d = AZ 2,3 41b following Lieberman GJ? 148, n. 20). 104. "Tales of the Sages in the Palestinian Tradition and the Babylonian Talmud," SH XXII 229, see, ibid., 231. With regard to the story of RY and Resh Laqish's son, Yad Eliyahu to B Tan 9a suggests it was in retaliation for RY's putting down of Resh Laqish. For example, once Resh Laqish taught: "If one studies Torah, painful sufferings are kept away from him— RY said to him: This is known even to school children" and cited a Biblical verse (B Ber 5a = MHG Ex 565). See B Git 29a; Hul 81b. In cur case here, RY got his comeuppance by a school boy, no less than Resh Laqish's son! Cf. B Er 53b near end. 105. PRK 27,1 pp. 402f. and parallels, plus Tan B KY TSJ 19. In Derasha BeShebah HaTorah (ed. Aptowitzer) Sinai 7 (1944) 210, R. Hiyya b. Abba tells the incident about himself, while in Halakot Gedolot (ed. Hildesheimer) p. 6, it is told about him. 106. Kaminka, op. cit. (n. 4) 202, despaired of resolving the contradiction. 107. The fact that RY was leaning on the shoulder of a student does not necessarily imply that he was decrepit. This was a common prac tice (J Ber, 4b and parallels; Ket 9,2 33a; AZ 3,13 43b). RY practised this while still in his vigor (B Ket 62a) as did his students, R. Abbahu (J Bes 1,6 60c). RY held it wasan act of kindness to let a disciple attend upon his master (B Ket 96a; see, e.g., J Shab 6,2 8a). Indeed, this was superior than just learning from his master (B Ber 7b). In fact, RY's teacher, R. Hanina,leanedonthe shoulder of the same R. Hiyya b s Abba (see above, n. 68) as didR. Joshua b. Levi (J Shab 1,2 3a = Qid 1,7 61a). In general, see M. Aberbach, "The Relations between Master and Disciple in the Talmudic Age," Exploring the Talmud I, Education, ed. H. Z. Dimitrovsky, 207.


108. "Economic Conditions in Palestine during the Third Century CE," Abstract, Proceedings Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies II (Jerusalem 1972) 241. See Rostovtzeff SEHRE 344f. In Tan B KY TS* 19, RY's land is called an ousia about which, see Aruk, s.v. ir’OK 109. Zosimus 1.37, cited in Rostovtzeff SEHRE 737, n. 15. See D. Sperber, "Patronage in Amoraic Palestine (c. 220-400)"JESHO 14 (1971) 237, n. 2 110. B BB 91b = MHG Lev 715; B Tan 19b - only the first passage. See Avi-Yonah Bime 93; and Baron SHR 245. Note that wheat was comparatively cheap in Tiberias (Lieberman 102, n. 55). Sperber, Rom Pal 142, dates this source to RY's youth: "These memories of the post-twenties were still vivid in his mind when he reported them probably sometime during the 260's." His argument is that the absence of coin to buy bread was a consequence of the end of Tiberias' copper coinage during the reign of Elagabalus (218-222). A. Marmorstein’s dating to the 250's is to be preferred, "Dorojshel RY VeOtot HaMashiah," Tarbiz 3 (1936 ) 178y since, then, RY was surely in Tiberias (there is no other evidence that he was there in the 220s). The statement, moreover, sounds most like the de pressing economic reality of the 250s - documented extensively by Sperber (ibid., n. 109) himself - when occurred, as T. Frank notes, "the almost complete cessation of the local currencies” (An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome IV 897) and "under Gallienus a complete debacle of silver coinage" (ibid,V 93). H. Mattingly dates this full debacle of the complete coinage system to the end of 258 when "the full tide of disaster struck the Roman Empire and came near to submerging it" ("The Clash of the Coinages Circa 270-296" Studies in Roman Economic and Social History - in honor of A. C. Johnson, ed. P. R. Coleman-Norton, 275). Also Cyprian, in the early 250's, when cataloging present economic problems lists both shortages of food and increasing prices (Ad Demetrianum 3). Still, any dating of the recurrent famines under the Empire is hazardous. See the numerous references in D. Sperber, "Drought, Famine and Pestilence in Amoraic Palestine," JESHO 17 (1974) 212- 98, esp., p. 284. As R. MacMullen says, "No large percentage of the people in the Roman Empire can have lived their lives through without at least once wondering where the next meal was to come from" (Enemies of the Roman Order 249, see Appendix A: Famines, 249- 54). Still, the mention of distended bellies swollen from hunger may be a clue. This notice, in the Talmud, is made to highlight the severity of this famine which may pinpoint it to the one that is associated with "the great plague which affected large parts of the Eastern Empire during the reign of Valentian" (sic. - should be Valerian, 253-260) D. Sperber, op. cit. (n. 109) 238, who notes (2) "Eutrepius 4.5; Orosius 7.21.5; Aurelius Victor, de Caess 30; Vit. Gel. 5.5f; Zosimus 1.26.2; Zonaras 12.21; and Eusebius, HE 7.22." Indeed, Sperber dates another RY economic reflection to the 250's (JESHO, ibid., 290). As for dying from the odor of food, see Lam R (ed. Buber) p. 147, n.60. Note also RY's ravenous attacks of bulimia (J Yoma 8,4 45b= B Yorna 83b = Qoh R 7,12


43

111. J Peah 7,4 20a. The Vatican MS (Ginzberg Seride 356) reads 'R. Jonathan’ as does the parallel in J Sot 1,8 17b. The reading 'RY' is preferable in light of the period of his life and his dominating stature. If the middle of the third century is to be named after some one, only RY would qualify. See Alon Toledot II 253; and D. Sperber, "Trends in Third Century Palestine Agriculture,° JESHO 15 (1972) 231. 112. B BB 91b; Maseket Kallah 2,9 (ed. Higger) 204. Yet, RY and his colleagues could still have a fruit orgy in Genaseret (B Ber 44a = Er 30a = MKG Dt 711). 113.

Cf., however, Rostovtzeff SEHRE index, s.v.,land-exhaustion.

114. B BM 105b. See Sperber, o£. cit., 232f., 251- 54, for analysis of this comment in light of the prevailing agriculture conditions. 115.

Beer AB 181-83.

116.

Yad Eliyahu I

167a.See Bacher AAEY 5, n.

117. Mantel Studies 19, n.

112.

5.

See Goldin, oj>.cit.

(n. 1) 40a.

118. B Er 55a* On un see Lieberman TFK Ned 419, esp. n. 46. Beer, AB 183, n. 86, notes that this may (also) be a statement of Rab’a. Most likely R.ab*a was citing RY as he often did (see Dor Torat llff.) If the statement is originally Babylonian, then Beer's distinction between Babylonia and Palestine attitudes to Torah and business disappears. See Philostratus, Vita Appollonius 32, for a similar derogatory appraisal of merchants and skippers. Note that RY’s comment on Dt 30:13: not across the sea - refers to seafaring merchants. 119. J MQ 3,7 83b = Qoh R 7,7,1. I, Introduction.

See R. Margoliot, Margoliot HaYam

120. On U f a ’s material situation, see Beer AB 182, n. 84 ’ and, in general, Albeck Mabo 181. 121. B Sot 21a. See below, pp. 59, and 87, n.66. There is some evidence, moreover, that R Y ’s position as ab bet din entailed a sub stantial stipend, see YS_ Dt 915, p. 624a; and Urbach "Class Status" 70. Cf. R. Huna, J San 1,1 18b. 122. See, e.g., ER 31,14: tomorrow rich."

"This day rich, tomorrow poor; this day poor

123. AB 264f. 124.

Lieberman

145.

125. Although, RY was aware that the wine blessing in the havdalah ceremony had once been deleted due to the price of wine (B Ber 33a; Pes 103a) he persisted in exclaiming the rewards for having a full measure of ceremonial wine. See B Ber 51a; Shabuot 18b; Ber 42b. On wine prices, see Sperber Rom Pal 251.


! ■ [ ; i

| !

j

i

j '

126. AB 316. Yad Eliyahu,! 132a, argues, inconclusively, that RY ate meat daily. On the other hand, RY did know his choice meats (B BM 86b). On eating meat, see Krauss Qadmoniyot 11,1, pp. 206-15, esp. 212, for kopadion. Meat was especially expensive in Palestine, see Lieberman TKF Peah 186. ~

127. See Krauss, ibid., 11,2, who pointed out that clothes was the status differential between rich and poor (p. 15) both in quality (p. 18) and in quantity (p. 26). On p. 27, he discussed the meaning of 'Sabbath clothes'. If Soncino is correct in translating 'Milesian wool' then two comments of A. H. M. Jones, The Roman Economy: Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History, ed. P. A. Brunt, are pertinent: "The makes of garments named after particular towns are highly priced and presumably of special excellence" (p. 353). And "the famous weaving towns, then, which produced high class garments from high quality material catered only for the rich" (p. 355). This RY knew well, see GR 19,1, p. 170; and 20,12, p. 196 and itov See below, p. 82, n.20; and p.87,n.72.After reading this note Professor Ramsay MacMullen wrote: "Milesian wool was class. But Jones' broader statement is wrong, because some cheap weavers were also specified by source. See Diocle tian's Edict." 128. For the poverty which rabbis underwent especially in their student days, see Krauss, ibid., 27-33. Cf. B Hul 84a = MHG Dt 261, for RY's contrast of his and Rab's situation. 129. Many scholars assume gratuitously that he inherited these lands (see JE VII 211b; Hyman Toledot 655a; Margoliot Encyclopedia 481; EJ, s.v., 145). Weiss, Dor 62, argued against a smith being able to bequeath anything of substance. On the wealth of the Nasi, especially in land, see Alon Toledot II 132f. Although a gift of land sounds exorbitant, the Younger Pliny gave his nurse a farm (Ep. 6.3). 130. In fact, Beer, AB 270, says the general Middle-Eastern mentality would not tolerate leaving a head of the academy poor. The validity of this applies equally to RY who headed the academy for several decades. See, ibid., 265f., on R. Ammi. 131.

Dibre 330.

132. B BM 84a = MHG Gen 826f. = YS Gen #157, p. 830. The part about sitting near the mikvah is also in B Ber 20a = MHG Gen 545. 133. The Hebrew is o ’33 n*nn lit. 'facial glory'. MHG Gen 827 could not allow such a sage to be beardless and says: "facial form he lacked; facial glory he had." 134. For use of his homily, see B Sot 36b; BB 118a. see Kasher TS VII 1840, n.29f, 135. B Qid 49b, see ARNA 28; ER 36,1. see B Git 58a; and Targum ad Lam 4:2.

For its explanation,

For the pulchritude of Jerusalemites,


45

136. Tanenblat, Peragim 94, n.l,tock this to mean that RY "was descended from the distinguished (families) ofJerusalem." RY did cite "the men of Jerusalem" (B Pes 113a) and Alon,Toledot II 116f has gathered a number of sources which indicate the existence of such a community. Avi-Yonah,Bime 248, n.38, expressed doubt about its existence since it lacks extra-rabbinic confirmation, and because such a community would have been the focal point of the nation. These ob jections are inconclusive. The first is ex silentio and the second is understandable, since, as Alon (ibid., 117) points out, Hadrian’s decree may not have been officially rescinded. With regard to its centrality, note that in the sixteenth century, the Jerusalem community did not prevail over that of Safed. S. Safrai, "Qahala Qadisha DeBeYerushalm," Zion 22 (1957) 183-93, analyzed all the rabbinic material on the subject and concluded (p. 193) that they were a community of R. Meir's students. Urbach, "Yerushalayim," 167, saw it as part of "Rabbi’s restoration efforts," and "apparently linked with actual Messianic hopes" ("Class-Status" 70). Three of RY's senior colleagues, R. Hanina, R. Jonathan, and R. Joshua b. Levi all went up to Jerusalem (J MS 3,6 54b). Safrai (ibid., 188) noted that there were also non-sages there. In fact, it is RY who says (B BB 75b): "The present Jerusalem is unlike the future Jerusalem. (To) the present Jerusalem all who wish may go up, but to the future Jerusalem only the invited will go." (See S. Klein, Ere§ Yehudah 184, who also cites RY in this regard.) Safrai (184) discounted as exaggeration the Patristic testimony that the prohibition was still in effect, al though not the existence of the prohibition itself. I do not think that there is necessarily a conflict. It is likely that by Jerome's time (In Soph 1.15 et passim) under Christian instigation, the proscription was enforced. This dees not preclude a lapse from the time of R. Meir until RY, especially under the later Antonines and Severans whose religious policies towards the Jews were more liberal. Since the last rabbis mentioned in Jerusalem are RY's senior colleagues the terminating point may be the Decian persecutions (ca.250) which,while not explicitly anti-Jewisn, may have led to the enforce ment of those regulations already on the books. This may be alluded to in a comment of RY: God said: They have outstripped me. I decreed: Whoever does not go up (to Jerusalem) for the Festival violates a positive injunction. Whereas they decreed: Whoever does go up for the Festival will be stabbed with sword (B San 102a = MHG Dt 85) On the other hand, several scholars have doubted that Hadrian ever made such a decree. For an assessment of their arguments, see A. Lindar, "HaShilton HaRomi VeHaYehudim BeTequfat Constantinus," Tarbiz 44 (1975) 136f. 137. nax

Ber 13a = Nid 14a.

See B BM 84a (top) and Tosafot, ad loc., s.v.


138. For the same expression, see B AZ 20a. It is also told about the corpulent R. Eleazar b, R. Simeon (B BM 84a; J Ma 3,8 50d) that when dying his arm was exposed and he saw his wife weeping over his body which was "going to the worms" (PRK 11,22 p. 198; Qoh R 11,2). 139.

Following Ginzberg CPT II 45.

140.

See Bacher AAEY 19, n.3:

Frankel Mabo 96b.

141. PRK 27,1,p. 403 and parallels. Braude (412) mistranslated not realizing that the a of nansa is a a pretii denoting "in exchange." Professor S. Z. Leiman drew my attention "to Nehmad LeMareh ad LR 30,1 (ed. Vilna) 116k who explains the homily to mean that even if one gave up all one's wealth for the study of the Torah he would not be able to match that great love with which RY loved the Torah. RY also gave orders with regard to his burial clothes, see GR 100,2, p. 1285, parallels and notes. See also Maseket Semahot (ed. Higger) 179, n.92; M. Gaster, The Exempla of the Rabbis 15; and Krauss Qadmoniyot 11,2, p. 211. 142. B MQ 25b. "RY" does not appear in MSS (see Rabinowitz STB ^31, cf., however, Albeck Mabo 340). 143.

I b i d a n d n. 65, Cf. Epstein Mebo-ot 285.

144. B Hag 15b, following Rashi. On Aher (Elisha b. Abuya’ n) in Tiberias, see below, p. 5 3 . The irony of the situation, of course, is that Aher's Epicurean position: "there is no justice; there is no judge," was formulated precisely to vitiate any fear of the gods or of death. In Cicero's Tusculan Disputation, M tries to convince A of Epicurus' famous "death does not concern us." He demonstrates the irony of fearing in life non existent punishment after death thereby becoming wretched in this life (1. 5-8). Also according to Hippolytus, Epicurus taught that in death both body and soul dissolve and that consequently "there are no trials in Hades; no tribunals of justice" (Usener fragment 340). See H. A. Fischel, Rabbinic Literature and Greco-Roman Philosophy 43-49. And behold, wretched Aher is roasting in his gravel! With regard to Aher's status, note Lieberman ("Afterlife" 496): "a cardinal principle of ancient rabbinic Judaism: 'Fear God and keep his commandments,' 'God will bring thee into judgment.' If a man does not believe in posthumous divine retribution he is a heretic." 145. There is some evidence that the tomb in Tiberias popularly attributed to R. Yohanan b. Zakkai is RY's. According to Ishtore Haparhy, "You can still find today that cave in Tiberias ascribed to R. Kahana next to that of RY. Perhaps RY had his cave next tohim (R. Kahana) to propitiate him" (Kaftor UPerah 63)cf. B BQ 117b. Also in a piyut, R. Isaac (1660s) mentioned going to pay respects (to thegraves) of R. Kahana and RY in Tiberias, cited in Sefer Tiberiyah 209. It is also unlikely that a


47

i

rabbinic leader of the first century would be buried already there. This conclusion is confirmed by Z. Vilnay who adduced evidence for R. Yohanan b. Zakkai having been buried in Jerusalem (Magabot Qodesh 3 0 3 ) I am again indebted to the kindness of Professor S. Z. Leiman for this source.


48

II

RY in Tiberias

A.

Introduction

Two events of the second quarter of the third century affected the subsequent development of Palestinian Rabbinic Judaism. of both RY and the Nasi from Sepphoris to Tiberias.

They are the moving

A description of

Tiberias of the third century is necessary in order to understand their moving to Tiberias and their relationship there.

B.

Tiberias

The rise of Tiberias as the center of Palestinian Rabbinic Judaism is connected with the Severan family of Roman Emperors.

By virtue of three

imperial enactments, they altered significantly the role of the Jewish community in the socio-political structure of the city.

The first enactment

was by Septimius Severus (193-211) and his son Caracalla (198-217) which granted to the Jews the privilege (or imposed upon them the obligation) of being appointed to the municipal administration.^ The second enactment was the Constitutio Antoninianas of Caracalla (212) which granted the privilege, or rather imposed the duties of citizenship on all subjects of the Empire.

2

The third was the elevation of Tiberias to the

rank of a "colony" through which Tiberias gained certain tax exemptions.^ It is unclear which emperor granted colony status to Tiberias. critical Talmudic source in this discussion is B AZ 10a. Antoninus had two wishes most at heart:

The

There the emperor

one was the elevation of Tiberias

to the rank of a colony and the second was to assure the succession of his son to the throne.

He could obtain either but not both of these requests from


49

the Senate; and he applied to Rabbi for counsel.

Rabbi brought two men into

the presence of the messenger, put a dove in the hand of one of them and bade him mount the back of his fellow.

Then he said to him that supported the

other, "See that he whom you carry lets the dove go free!" understood the intimation:

Antoninus

his son, once emperor, would have it in his power

to raise Tiberias to the position of a colony.

4

For over a century historians have attempted to identify the emperor here referred to as Antoninus. candidates:

The following have been considered possible

Lucius Verus, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Caracalla,

and Elagabalus.^

Much of the speculation revolves around identifying which

Nasi is meant by "Rabbi."

That issue is in turn dependent upon the different

datings for the life of Rabbi.

The most recent studies of Rabbi's life-span

date his death to about 220 (see p. 3).

On the one hand, this relatively

late dating of Rabbi's death obviates any need to identify the "Rabbi" in the above source with Rabbi's grandson, Rabbi II.

On the other hand, it

likely excludes Marcus Aurelius (161-180) and Lucius Verus (161-169) from being identified with Antoninus.

The remaining three are excellent candidates

all belonging to those Severans who derive from Syria and allegedly had a record of positive relationships to the Jews and Judaism.0

Even Jerome

reported that Severus and Antoninus his son, had great affection for the Jews.^ The identification of the Severan who is believed to be the Antoninus of the Talmud is dependent on determining which of them could have met g

Rabbi.

The following is the recent analysis of Avi-Yonah: Caracalla visited Palestine at least twice, once in the entourage of his father Septimius Severus in 199, and one other time during his trip from Antioch to Alexandria, in 215. His last visit was most suitable for consultation on Egyptian matters, where a rebellion was fomenting against him; and Rabbi, the man who stood at the head of all the Jews in the Empire, was an important source of information

bt


50

on Egypt, where Jews still were an appreciable part of the population. This, however, seems dubious, since it elongates the life of Rabbi excessively. Nevertheless, we can still relate the meeting tothe year 199, for then Caracalla was with his father; and also at that time Severus and Caracalla had many opponents in Egypt. It is clear from the order of Avi-Yonah's comments that he prefers the year 215, but rejects it as too late for Rabbi.

According to recent dating,

however, 215 would precede Rabbi's death by at least five years thus qualify ing as a potential date for the meeting reflected in the Talmudic account. Even

if the identification of Caracallawith

the Talmudic Antoninus

and the determination of the year 215 as the most likely date of their

meeting

is accepted, the identification of the Emperor's son remains enigmatic. Note, however, the Talmud does not maintain that the son of Antoninus elevated Tiberias to the rank of a colony, only that Antoninus hoped that his son would succeed him and thereby be in a position to so elevate Tiberias. Identifying who actually was thought to have realized that hope involves determining under which emperor would such an act be credible; and determining which emperor actually visited that general area.

An emperor who meets

these criteria is Alexander Severus. Alexander Severus (222-235) succeeded his cousin Elagabalus, grandson of Julia Maesa, aunt of Caracalla.

A later romatic account of the lives of

the emperors highlighted the positive relationship between this emperor, as well as the rest of his family, and the Jews.^^ renewed all Jewish privileges and tions.

He is said to have

evidenced an appreciation of their tradi

He was alleged to be such a liberal donor to Jewish congregations that

resentful pagan mobs in Antioch and Alexandria dubbed him "archisynagogus. Among the statues in his private chapel, there was, supposedly, ere of Abraham.

12

His affinity with the Jews has been seen in the fact that he

reportedly castigated pillaging troops with words which echo Hillel's maxim:


51

"What you would not have someone do to you, do not do to another;" a rule

which he had inscribed on his palace and other public buildings.

13

His

practice of announcing the appointments of public officials by "urging the people in case anyone wished by clear evidence,"

to bring accusations against them, to prove it

parallels that of the Na s i . ^

Alexander Severus was also in Antioch in 231 to repel the Persian in vasion.

It is not unlikely that upon his return from that quasi-successful

campaign that he expressed his appreciation to the Jews by raising Tiberias to the rank of a colony in 232.^

Previously, Tiberias had been the Roman

administrative center for the Galilee.

It now becomes both the academic

and administrative center of Rabbinic Judaism. Tiberias was founded by Herod Antipas about 18/19 and named in honor of the emperor Tiberius.

Subsequently,Claudiopolis Syriae Palaestinae was

appended to its name.

As capital of the Galilee, Tiberias was ruled by Herod

Antipas followed by his brother-in-law Agrippa I until 44 when it was subjected directly to Rome.

In 61 Nero gave it to Agrippa II.

purposes, this detached it from the Galilee. his kingdom was annexed by Rome.

For administrative

Upon Agrippa's death (ca. 93)

The situation remained stable until Hadrian

"disfranchised the Jewish and Samaritan aristocracies which had hitherto ruled these cities and entrusted their government to pagans."

Subsequently,

Tiberias minted a coin bearing a temple with the figure Zeus.

This temple

may have been the Hadrianeum which Epiphanius mentioned as being in the city.^ Tiberias was a major commercial center of the Galilee.

The Galilee, as

a whole, was known for its ceramics and Tiberias had a factory for pottery, and one for glassware which produced the renowned "Tiberean cup."^ may have also been a source of poultry (B BM 24b).

Tiberias

S i- t u a t e d on the Sea of

— 4 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

52

Galilee, it and its suburbs became a piscine center exporting possibly dry T-i 18 fish. While nearby Bet Sha-an exported its renowned fine l i n e n , s u b u r b of Tiberias, Arbella, produced, for local consumption, a coarser linen (GR 19,1). The number of metal weavers in Tiberias was sufficient to create a separate congregation.

20

The commercial robustness of the Tibereans extended to Rome 21

where they maintained a commercial outlet (statio).

Apparently, Tiberias

also became a necropolis, especially for prominent Babylonians.

22

Over the wall, westward to Bet Ma'on, in addition to the pottery works, there was a large stadium ( CfTaSlou ) a spectator's bleechers ( TtTft'UCl Mausoleum of Sirikios.

) an8- t*ie

Within the wall was the palatial castra (of Herod Antipas?)

a castellum (J AZ 3,1 42c) and a boule fronted by a statue (J AZ 3,13 43b) named after Herod Antipas.

23

Tiberias was famous for its hot springs and public bathhouses (STpoCTia )These succeeded in attracting some of the great scholars of the generation of Yavneh.

24

So desirable were these bathing places that, according to the

agada, R. Simeon b. Yohai deigned to purify the city of their account.

25

Indeed, one Friday, even R. Joshua b. Levi forgot to review with this grandson the Sabbath lectionary and entered the bathhouse (J Shab 1,2 3a).

Also RY

and Resh Laqish once delayed giving to a "poor" man until they returned from there.

26

(J Az 4,4 43d).

The Tiberean bathhouse was interiorly decorated with statues Its pillars were so impressive that RY compared the arms

of Jacob to them (Tan WYffY 6 = MHG Gen 830). Roman fashion

Indeed, RY

held in typical

that one "graced" a city by constructing bathhouses for it.

27

What better "good," he thought, could there be than bathing in warm water (see B. Shab 25b)? Populated almost entirely by Jews, century

28

this city was by the end of the third

probably the largest city in the Galilee.

Based on the length of its


53

land walls (2500 maters), Avi-Yonah estimated its population in the third century to "have roughly numbered between thirty and forty thousand souls."

29

By then it boasted of thirteen synagogues (B Ber 8 a, 30b) which in this class conscious city included one for the decurionate (J Shek 7,3 3c; Tan 1,2 64a) and one, apparently, for Babylonians. (

One synagogue, constructed in basilica

SlTtXr^TTOG ) fashion, served also as an elementary schoolhouse; another was

called the Great Synagogue.

30

The degree of the rabbinization of the Galilee has been a subject of debate.

A. Buchler contended that in the first two centuries the Galilee

was neither a center of Jewish observance nor of rabbinic learning.

G. Alon

has qualified considerably Buchler's judgement by demonstrating the level of observance of some, at least, and underscoring the presence of numerous rabbis. Tiberias itself enjoyed the presence of many distinguished tannaim.

For

example, R. 9alsfta chanced upon Rabban Gamaliel reading a translation of Job in Tiberias.

32

Both R. Yosi Hagalili and R. Eliezer b. Jacob expounded

the laws of the red heifer in the presence of R. Simeon b. Hananya, and R. Meir and R. Eleazar b. Shamoa there.

33

Also R. Yosi b. Qisma strolled through

Tiberias with his students (Tan B. WYSLff 8 ).

He was also present at an alter

cation between R. Eleazar and R. Yosi (Hagalili) in a Tiberean synagogue ^ t J which resulted in a Torah scroll being t o m (B Yeb 96b). Once even R. Meir interrupted his Sabbath exposition academy

in the Tiberean

to greet his former teacher, Elisha b. Abuya, who was riding by.

35

On another Sabbath, in the same generation, R. Reuben (b. Istrobli) told a philosopher-type that the source of all sin is he who denies his Creator (T Shabuot 3:7).

Also at that time, R. Hananya b. Aqabya ruled on several

Sabbath laws for the Tibereans,

36

a generation before (M Er 10:10).

as Rabban Gamaliel and the Elders had done There was even a scholar, R. Yosi b. Tadai,


54

who was called "the Tiberian" (Maseket Derek Eres, 1).

And Simeon b. Azai

was so associated with Tiberias that later generations would vaunt their proficiency by saying, "I am as Ben Azai in the market places of Tiberias."

37

These rabbis are all second, third, and fourth generation tannaim who flourished during the first half of the second century.

Afterwards, Rabbi

visited Tiberias (B Meg. 5b) and two first generation amoraim, R. Hiyya and R. Simeon b. Halafta studied together in the Great Academy of Tiberias. R. Hiyya

38

also reciprocated R. Joshua b. Levi’s hospitality in Tiberias (Lam R 3,6).

To return to the issue raised at the outset, how did Tiberias become the center of the Galilee at this juncture in history far outshadowing its longtime competitor, Sepphoris? of three factors:

39

This centrality is due to the confluence

the new status of the "colony" of Tiberias; the departure

of RY from Sepphoris to Tiberias; and the "defection" of the Patriarchate from Sepphoris to Tiberias during the administration of Rabbi II. These three factors are interrelated.

The granting of colony status to

Tiberias under Alexander Severus at the latest in 232, along with the previous enactment of the Severans allowing Jews to participate fully in its civil administration,enabled Tiberias to realize its founder’s wish that it be the capital of the Galilee.

40

Its special administrative status with its concom-

itant tax exemptions which applied to officially appointed rabbis

41

made it

an ideal location for RY to preside over his academy and for the Nasi to maintain his position vis-a-vis the rabbinic center and the Roman administration. It is likely that RY preceded the Nasi to Tiberias and played a role in his coming.

42

This order of events would make most sense or material discussed

in the first chapter where we concluded that RY had achieved stature in Tiberias in the early 240s.

Accordingly, he was called a "great man" by Rabbi II in a


55

communication to R. Hoshaya (d. ca. 250).

And in the lifetime of R. Hanina,

Tiberias was known already as his residence.

On the other hand, Rabbi II had

been presiding as Nasi in Sepphoris from about 230.

43

He was still there when

RY had preached against his previously mentioned favoritism coward the curial class (p.12).

Whatever the case may be, the joint presence of RY and the

Nasi for the next several decades ensured the preeminence of Tiberias as the capital of Rabbinic Judaism.

This dominant position was maintained in Palestine

for several centuries up to the Arab invasion.

Indeed, it was RY's fervent

hope that the first rumblings of the Messiah would reverberate out of the depths of Tiberias (B

RH 31b).

Tiberias would then bestow the Sanhedrin on

the Messiah who would reinstate it on the Temple mount.

C.

44

RY and the Nasi

Knowledge of the relationship between RY and the Nasi, Rabbi II, in Tiberias is imperative for understanding the subsequent development of Rabbinic Judaism.

To understand properly this relationship, it must be

placed in the context of the development of rabbinic leadership of the preced ing century. Among the disruptive consequences of the Bar Kokba rebellion (132-135) and the Hadrianic persecutions were the spiritual trauma and social dislocation of much of the Jewish population.

This crisis induced the rabbinic leadership

to convene in Usha to pass ordinances which dealt with the socio-economic, familial, and juridical problems resulting from the post-war aftermath.

45

Although R. Simeon b. Gamaliel was the Nasi, his authority in the academy was 46 shared with R. Nathan, the ab bet din.and R. Meir, the hakam.

This division

of authority reflected the tension between the hereditary patriarchate which claimed its authority by virute of descent from King David through Hillel, and the meritocracy of the sages whose claim to authority was by virtue of


56

Torah scholarship. Owing to the political and scholarly stature of R. Simeon's son and successor, Rabbi, these positions became centralized in the person of this new Nasi.

47

This Nasi arrogated to himself the exclusive right of appointing

judges; thereby becoming the center of both administrative and patronage power.

Due to his imposing stature and probably also Roman backing, the sages

acquiesced to this centralization of power. 48 During Rabbi's administration, the Patriarchate moved from Bet Sha-arim to Sepphoris.

According to Babylonian sources, the purpose of this move was

the salubrity of the air of Sepphoris. cal political move.

49

Actually, however, this was a tacti

Heretofore, the Nasi and his court had been located in

relatively insignificant towns starting with Yavneh and Usha, and then Shefaram and Bet Sha-arim.

Under the perceptive leadership of Rabbi, the rabbinic

hierachy moved into the wealthy, large, and politically significant Sepphoris. Rabbi realized that if the Patriarchate was to extend its influence throughout Palestine it needed the semblance of power which provincials derived from associa ting with the Roman authorities.

Moreover, chances for co-opting the Jewish

municipal aristocracy and land-owning class were best in Sepphoris.^®

By so

using or co-opting alternative power centers, Rabbi turned the Patriarchate into the recognized judicial institution of third-century Palestine, indeed of all Jewry. For this achievement, Rabbi had to pay a price.

To identify with the

Romans and to alîgn himself with the municipal aristocracy, he had to strain his relationship with the more vociferous members of the Rabbinate.

Some

zealots could not but help think of this move as a form of collaboration.

52

Moreover, Rabbi's honoring of the wealthy (B Er 86 a) entailed appointing some of them to judicial positions regardless of their merit.

This, of course,


57

piqued the more independent-minded rabbis.

Rabbi had the learning, wealth,

and political astuteness to achieve this relatively unscathed.

It was,

however, to plague his successors, especially Rabbi II, and possibly contri buted to the weakening of patriarchal prestige vis-a-vis the rabbinic hierarchy over the course of the following century.

54

These centrifugal forces were sensed already by Rabbi. he

On his deathbed,

appointed one son, Gamaliel III, Nasi, a second son, Simeon, hakam; and

had R. ganina (b. Hama) appointed as Head of the Court (ab bet din).

This

reinstitutionalized the previous separation of powers between the Nasij and the leadership of the academy which seems to have functioned, at times, also as a judicial body.

During this transitional period some principle of

collegiality operated and a clear demarcation of authority was absent.

This

ambiguous situation is reflected in the divergent r e p o r t s . T h e reasons for this may be that the awesome authority of Rabbi still hovered over his son who was not quite the equal of his sagacious father,^ and that R. Kanina was not the undisputed academic master of his day,or to assert himself. ^

at least

was too self-effacing

By the next generation the situation was clarified.

Rabbi II was Nasi, and RY was undisputed Head of the Academy.

Initially R.

Hanina may have presided over the Academy at the outset of Rabbi II's reign; subsequently, it was RY who shared authority with Rabbi II for over a quarter of

a century until Rabbi II’s demise (ca. 27C). The relationship between RY and Rabbi II forms an important stage

the development of the rabbinate of the third century.

in

The pivotal institu

tional question which arises was whether RY had the authority to ordain Rabbis who would then enjoy immunities from personal liturgies,or was this the sole perquisite of the Nasi as it had been in Rabbi’s days.

58

The answer to this


58

question is dependent

upon an analysis of three Babylonian sources:

1.

It is obvious that a partial authorization is valid... But how is it with a conditional authorization? Come and hear. RY said to R. Shaman: You have our authorization until you return to us (B San 5b).^9

2.

RY was grieved that R. Shaman b. Abba was not with them (in Palestine) to receive his ordination...RY was sorely grieved at not being able to ordain R. ganina and R. Hoshaya, but it was to no avail (ibid. 14a).

3.

R. Simeon b. Eliakim was anxious for R. Yosi b. R. Hanina to be ordained,but it was to no avail. One day, as he was sitting before RY, the latter asked them (the students): Does anyone know the halakah...R. Simeon b. Eliakim replied: This man here (R. Yosi b. R. Hanina) knows. Let him answer, said RY. Thereupon R. Simeon b. Eliakim said: Let the Master first ordain him. So he ordained him and then asked...(RY was dissatisfied with the answer. Nonetheless) he said to him: Since you have ascended (to ordination) you will not descend. R. Zera said: We may infer from this that once a great man is ordained he remains so (ibid. 30b).

On the one hand, parts of these sources illustrate RY's power to confer different levels of authority on his students including ordination. ordination, however, the recipient had to On

For

be in Palestine.^

the other hand, the end of source two records RY’s pain at not being

able to ordain certain worthy disciples.

Also Lieberman has argued cogently

that ordination was not dependent solely upon piety, character, and knowledge of the law, but rather upon a quota which the Nasi was careful not to exceed.^ Lieberman's position receives additional support from the statement of R. Zera at the end of source three from which it may be inferred that R. Yosi was considered a great man

(xm

Kina) despite the fact that he lacked ordination

The apparent contradiction between these two sets of data may be resolved by assuming that RY as Head of the Academy and/or Court had the authority to ordain his students within the limits of the quota set by the Nasi.

If, however

the quota was full, RY had to await further authorization from the Nasi.

63

Alternatively, or in the meanwhile, RY could confer some type of limited or


59

temporary authority as in the case of R. Shaman.

This arrangement assumes

that legally the source of authority for ordinations was the Nasi who determined their n u m b e r P r a c t i c a l l y , however, RY determined within these limits who

actually received ordination. This situation may be reflected in the last part of the statement of R. Abba which described the three stages in the development of the relationship between the Nasi

and the rabbinic court

(J San 1 19a):

R. Abba said: (1) At first everyone (of the sages) would ordain his own students...(2) They then bestowed the honor on this house (i.e. Hillel's = the Patriarchate). They said: if the court makes an appointment without the consent of the Nasi, then the appointment is of no validity, but if the Nasi makes an appointment without the consent of the court, then the appointment is valid. (3) They subsequently decreed that the court can only make an appointment with the consent of the Nasi and the Nasi only with the consent of the court. The first period

is pre-Rabbi, the second is that of Rabbi, and the third that

of his successors, which encompasses the period of Rabbi II and RY. D.

"RY of the House of the Nasi:i

Any official tension there might have been between RY and the Nasi was alleviated by the fact that "RY was of the house of the Nasi" (B Sot 21a). This is understood by some historians to mean that RY was financially supported by the Nasi.^

In return, the Nasi was •morally supported by R Y . ^

this term requires some elaboration.

Still,

It is clear from other rabbinic sources

that to be "of the house of the Nasi" entailed the "right" to dine at his table. In fact,

RY would say: "I am going

escapesuch repasts (B

to fast until I come home"

in order to

Tan 12a) . ^ The phrase may also be parallel to the

Roman phrase to be "of the house of Caesar" a title ascribed to RY's disciple R. Abbahu (B Hag 14a).

If the phrases are parallel, it can be assumed that RY

was part of the official bureaucracy in the Nasi's administration.^


68

60

In this position, RY's policy was that the sages were subject to the Nasi.^ He insisted that the Nasi should appear in regal splendor, except mourners and sick persons, rise at his approach.

73

72

and that everyone,

The Talmud

employs the Greek word for receiving a king (apanta) when reporting RY's going to greet the Nasi.

74

RY urged everyone to strive to run to greet kings.

75

It is no wonder that Origen, writing in the early 240's, noted that the Nasi was indistinguishable from a king.^ This alliance was mutually beneficial.

RY succeeded in keeping the

scholarly class under the patronage of the Nasi and the Nasi, in turn, allowed RY great latitude in using the authority of the Patriarchate to promote the concerns of the Rabbis.^

This partnership accounts for the many dicta of

RY which, on the one hand, reflect the interests of the wealthy and, on the other hand, the concerns of the scholarly class. The degree to which RY hobnobbed with the wealthy is reflected in his judgement of one of the prominent landowners of Tiberias. R. Simeon b. Abba was offered a tithe by Elupusa.

Once his student

Not knowing whether the man

was to be trusted with having properly tithed his produce he sought the advice of RY.

Without any hesitation, RY replied exuberantly:

is trustworthy."

78

"Elupusa our brother

On another occasion, "RY permitted those (women) of the

house of Bar Bun to put drops of pearls (beads) over the tunic."

79

And it

was RY who allegedly first allowed the teaching of one's daughter Greek (literature), surely a social asset for the daughters of parvenus'-

80

Much of RY's economic advice had special relevance for the proprietary classes.

In order to be blessed in land investments, RY counselled investing

in cereals, olives, and vines, — produce.

81

the major agriculture branches of Palestinian

In Italy, "rich Italians at all periods put their money into land"


61

and in Pompeii, at least, "wine growers... represent the governing aristocracy of the city" for "land was by far the preponderant ultimate producer of wealth."

82

In Palestine of the third century, this was especially poignant

advice, for "as money lost its stability, people sought frantically to purchase land thinking it a point of constancy in the economic flux."

83

Land was the

one permanent source of wealth and prestige in the ancient world. it became the ultimate status symbol. Eleazar, noted:

In Palestine

As RY's impoverished colleague, R.

"He who owns no land, is not a man.”

84

RY was well aware of how fortunes were dissipated by profligate heirs. He wryly observed:

"If a person is left a fortune by his parents and wishes

to dissipate it, let him wear linen garments, use glassware, and engage workmen and not stand over them."

To underscore the point the Talmud glosses;

'Let him wear linen garments', especially of Roman linen; 'use glassware* especially white glass; 'and engage workmen and not stand over them', (especially to work with) oxen, which can cause much damage (to them and the crops).

85

As Plutarch noted, there will always be people who "think that to

be deprived of the chance to display their wealth is to be deprived of wealth itself" (Cato maior 18.4). On the other hand, RY advised:

"who so wishes to become wealthy should

engage in (the breeding of) small cattle (sheep and goats)."

This was es

pecially profitable in light of the minimal expenses and the growing cloth industry.

Of course, nothing could be more detrimental to the long-term

agriculture situation.

86

RY did not even neglect that most tried and true

way of attaining sudden wealth under the Empire - marrying into wealth, which in the Galilee probably meant marrying into a priestly family.

87


62

What is most significant is the connection between his adirice to the would-be wealthy and subsequent legal interpretations in their favor.

As

already mentioned, RY counselled investing in olives (for oil) and vines (for wine).

And in B(BB 91a) he glossed: Our Rabbis taught: Public prayers are offered for goods gg (which have become dangerously cheap) even on the Sabbath. RY said: For instance linen garments in Babylon and wine and oil in Palestine (emphasis R. K.)

This tendency

to help the wealthy maintain

their holdings isalso

illustrated by RY's

ruling with regard to interest.

loaning on interest

was a major source of wealth

In addition to land, under the Empire.A

regulation attributed to Alexander Severus allow 2d the senators to lend money up to a rate of six per cent.

In the eastern provinces one could

get in the area of eight per cent mostly from mortagages. of this situation came before RY.

89

The legality

Not wanting to upset the economic basis

of the well-to-do, he replied to a query, whether debtors could recover interest through recourse to the courts, saying:

"If we do this, we shall

* 90 not be leaving the "grandees"of Israel anything."

Indeed, RY did not

even allow for direct interest to be recoverable through recourse to the courts (B BM 61b).

This position, as B. Cohen pointed out, "was rejected

as being too radical, and too big a step in the abolition of the enforcement of laws against usury."

But why was RY so lenient with regard to usury?

Because as H. Gamoran concluded in his study, "Talmudic Usury Laws and Business Loans," "The clamoring of the day for leniency was not from the poor nor from lending agencies; it was from the business community."

91

A ruling of RY on an issue of genealogical purity is also in line with his position that rabbinic ruling must take into consideration the interests of


63

the upper classes.

The social status of the upper classes enabled them to

contract marriages which did not always meet the rabbinic standards of genealogical purity.

The problem was compounded by the fact that the

Babylonians were casting aspersions on the genealogical purity of all of Palestinian Jewry.

In fact, a Babylonian student of RY had rejected RY's

own daughter on this account (B Qid 71b).

Normally, one in RY's position

would zealously eradicate all traces of such impurity.

RY's roligio-

political program precluded that option. RY .sought to allign the upper classes with the scholarly class.

Rabbinic rulings, hence, had to take into consideration the interests of the monied class.

In return, these classes would be more supportive of scholarly

interest including their material well-being. Academic leaders had previously urged and preached the virtues of supporting those whose occupation was Torah.

Rabbi previously had preached:

"Whosoever gives charity to those who labor in the Torah, God would watch over them for a thousand generations" (Mid Tan 82). to a long-term problem. enhance this integration.

But alms were no solution

It was the genius of RY to have promoted a way to He propounded his position in discussing the

promises and consolations of the prophets which, he argued, had special reference to "one who gives his daughter in marriage to a scholar and who conducts business on behalf of a scholar and who allows a scholar the benefits of his possessions."

92

RY needed a long-term solution.

A

scholarly class which is dependent on the public dole or on the occasional pity of the very people it is trying to influence lacks the requisite prestige to have compelling moral forced What better solution thought RY than to have budding scholars marry the daughters of the wealthy (see B Pes 49a =


64

MHG Lev 618)?

They would then enjoy the benefits of their father-in-law's

business while keeping to their studies. There was one obstacle in the way of this scholarly dream. were raising doubts with regard to lineage. RY's strategy. issue.

Purists

This issue could have imperilled

RY hardly could have risked alienating the well-to-do on this

His ambivalent response reflected his dilemma:

"(I swear) by the

Temple Service, I know who they are (i.e. the genealogically defective) but what can we do?

being that they have mixed with the "grandees" of the

94

generation." In addition to these social and economic issues, RY sided with the municipal aristocracy against Roman political directives which had deleterious economic ramifications.

In the third century, Rome increasingly imposed the

burdens of taxation and liturgies on the wealthy who were singled out for "nomination" to the decurionate (boule).

"The only aristocracy which the

95 Roman government recognized, that of wealth, became decurions, bouleutai." As RY noted - ^ (This is the policy) of the wicked government which begrudges a man his money. 'This one is rich, let us appoint him magistrate (archon); this one is rich, let us appoint him councilor (bouleut€s). Realizing the impoverishing burdens of such a position, RY permitted a nominee "to petition before the authorities to be released from the decuri97 onate" and its

concomitant responsibilities for tax gathering and payment.

There was considerable distress for one "caught" in the position of tax collector who had a "a fixed monthly quota to pay to the government, irres pective of the amount actually collected."

Not meeting this quota could lead

to the indignity of public lashing.


65

Accordingly, "In the extant documents...petitioners repeatedly plead illegal nomination, lack of means, and impoverishment caused by previous performance of liturgies."

98

If the petition were rejected, RY even permitted

one to (leave the Land of Israel and) flee across the Jordan. innovation in this dispensation is questionable.

99

The

Tiberias was to see

its decurions flee the burdens of the aurum coronarium, ^ ^ and an Egyptian oracle of the early third century had deliberated over the question of becoming a member of the municipal council or taking to flight.

102

On this issue, RY clearly met the interests of those intending to flee. Indeed, he applied the verses - Happy is he that considers the poor; the Lord will deliver him in the day of evil...do not deliver him into the greed of his enemies (Ps 41: 2-3) - to one who rendered assistance to one fleeing from the government.

103

Such assistance included misdirecting those who

had been commissioned to "drag such persons back to the municipal councils."

104

The upshot of this imperial policy was to deal "a mortal blow at the civic spirit of the higher classes, and induced them to conceal their wealth and appear as poor as p o s s i b l e . A s

RY noted in commenting on Prov 13:7,

Some pretend to be rich, yet have nothing; others pretend to poor, yet have muctr

"So-and-so is rich in the market, but poor at home; So-and-so is rich

at home, but poor in the market" (J Shabuot 7,2 37d). As head of the rabbinic court, RY^s responsibility to these hapless landowners did not stop at their safe flight across the Jordan. the safekeeping of their landholdings. property rights in his absence.

He guaranteed

Two groups threatened a landlord's

The first were the powerful members of the

Roman administration who may have nominated him with the intention of ex propriating his land as was frequently the case to the north in Antioch.


66

The second were squatters who thrived on absentee landlordism.

According

to rabbinic law, if one has "squatted" on land openly and productively for three uncontested years, he may claim that the land was sold to him by virtue of this uncontested occupation.

The one proviso for the acceptance

of this claim was ample opportunity for the "former" owner to have protested.' According to Mishnaic law, such a proviso could be met if the owner and usucapators who occupy the land were at the same time in the same country for example, both in Judaea, or in Trans-Jordon, or in Galilee (M BB 3:2). In J (BB 3,3 14c) there is an extensive discussion of this ruling by, among others, RY, his colleagues and disciples.

Their interpretation and

application of this law sheds light on their sympathies for those who took to flight.

According to R. Eleazar, it is not enough that the two parties be

in the same country, they must also be in the same city.

108

This ruling

benefits the landowner who in spite of being in the same country or juris dictional unit does not forego his right to protest nor does the time-limit elapse unless they both be in the same city. Ideally, a fugitive landowner would try to lease out his land to tenant farmers.

109

This was especially desirable in light of a Mishnaic ruling that

a tenant farmer has no right of usucaption (M BB 3:5).

Since a tenant has

a formal relationship with the owner, his occupation would not be interpreted as acquiesence or foregoing of title by the owner. The discussion in J to that mishna is revealing.

The Babylonian R.

Huna opines that this applies only to a life-tenant, but not to a temporary tenant.

According to him, if the latter after renting the land for three

years remains another three years he may claim ownership. both rejected any such distinction.

RY and Resh Laqish

They safeguarded the absentee landlord's


property by excluding the claim of any tenant.

Similarly, in Babylonia,

the rabbis ruled that even if the tenant had no claim RY and Resh Laqish denied his son any such right.

his son did, while

As D. Sperber notes, both

RY and Resh Laqish realized that a landlord might well have given his property over into the care of a temporary tenant, thinking that he himself would return to administering his own affairs within a short period of time. Much to his dismay, he discovers that he has to bide his time in discreet hiding for a further while. He can do nothing to get the tenant off his lands. He dare not loudly voice his official protests lest he reveal his whereabouts and jeopardize his safety. This delicate situation helps explain one of RY rulings easing the procedure of protest.

Normally, like the Roman litis contestatio, a protest

would lead to open court litigation.

If the landowner protested in his own

city, he would become known to the authorities.

If in another city, he may

be punished by having to "sustain the burdens of the decurionate of both municipalities."

One of the traditions in the name of RY, hence, ruled:

"A protest does not require a court" (J BB 3,3 14a).

D. Sperber concurs

with Gulak’s earlier study of this procedure which concluded that this is a modification of RY's earlier opinion which had required a court.

Sperber

concludes that this modification was in response to the growing problem of absentee landlordism due to flight from the decurionate.

In light of this

problematic situation, RY ruled that it was sufficient for a landowner to lodge "an informal complaint before witnesses."

112

RY’s calculated support of the proprietary classes in the social, economic, and political spheres did not stifle some oblique criticisms. For instance, RY pointed out the dire consequences which result from reneging on public pledges of charity.

XX 3

Still, although his more outspoken colleagues


68

poured out their wrath on the appointment of unfit judges of their day, RY limited his critique circumspectly to allusions to the judges of Jerusalem * yore. 114 of In times past when a man would go up to Jerusalem to plead a lawsuit, the judge would say: Split a couple of logs for me. Fill a couple of casks of water for me, (and so on). While the man was doing such chores, his money ran out, and he would have to leave Jerusalem with a broken spirit. When a widow happened to meet him on the way and asked him: How did your lawsuit come out? he would reply: My money ran out, and I got nowhere at all. The widow would then say: If this person, who is a man, got nowhere at all with his case, all the more certain will I, who am a widow, get nowhere with mine. Thus were fulfilled literally the words: They judged not the fatherless, nor does the cause of the widow come to them (Is 1:23) As any good preacher, RY addressed indirectly the butt of his criticism. Ostensibly, the scene was Jerusalem; in actuality, the listener sensed his own Galilean r e a l i t y . A s R. MacMullen notes Landlords likewise administered justice over their peasants. After all, governors on assize came around irregularly. Their courts involved unpredictable delays and responded to unpredictable influences. Also they cost a lot, if an advocate had to be hired... The Jews.... also had autonomous courts scattered through... Galilee... but sometimes usurped by a single big-property owner as judge and with a reputation for oppressive and venal verdicts. Nevertheless, the very exiguity of critical material from RY may reflect an effort on his part to maintain a low profile.

This is testimony to a

political astuteness demonstrated frequently (see especially chapter three). The normal reservations against arguing ex silentio are insufficient in this case due to the vast material from RY, his profuse commenting on related issues, and the material which records both his support of, and Resh Laqish's i. opposition to, the Nasi.


69

E.

RY and the Professionalization of the Rabbinate

The relationship between the scholarly community and the Patriarchate had long been tense.

Even in the third century, there were scholars who, at

least initially, rejected favors from the Nasi fearing their independence would be compromised.

118

RY, however, despite some reluctance, strove to exploit

his position with the Nasi and the ruling classes to integrate the rabbis into the administrative bureaucracy. Jewish life

120

119

His goal was the supremacy of Torah in

which he endeavored to accomplish by both enhancing the

status, and expanding the authority, of the scholarly class. Along with his program of integrating scholars into the economic structure, RY propounded a plan to produce scholars worthy of communal position.

121

It

was insufficient to inveigh against the Nasi for appointing men of means to judicial positions who were academically and morally unfit. produce an alternative.

122

One had to

RY was not in the position of Hildebrand!

As anyone who would try to integrate academics into the communal infra structure, RY met resistance from both sides.

On the one hand, the laity do

not comprehend what it takes to produce a competent scholar, especially a jurist.

They also have reservations about appointing inexperienced scholars

to communal responsibilities. to

On the other hand, the academicians want to keep

their four ells not wanting to threaten their peaceful existence, where

theoretical discussion reigns supreme, with the exigencies of social reality. Moreover, they mused: "Who wants to be accountable for all that responsibility? After all who needs hoi polloi.

They are such a burden.

Once one dons

the mantel of leadership, however, he cannot disregard the iniquities of his fellowmen.

Indeed, such disregard in a position of responsibility would

inculpate him.

After leaping into the arena of public affairs, one cannot

straddle the fence of academic equivocations.

123 In politics, one wins or loses.1'


70

As head of the intellectual establishment, RY must have ruffled the feathers of his more staid colleagues by advocating that the academy not be an intellec tual retreat.

Scholars, he averred, are obliged to translate their insights

into functional social reality. but life-time builders of it.

They are not to be recluses from the world,

124

In order to acquire clergy exemptions and appointments in communal administration for scholars, RY had to upgrade the scholarly class from within. Such upgrading demanded high standards of academic achievement and of personal deportment.

125

RY was well-aware of the many hecklers making snide remarks

and denigrating rabbinic appointments.

X26

A scholar had to be beyond reproach.

A scholar's comportment had to reflect positively on the rabbinate. would be quite offensive for a scholar to stroll about in patched shoes.

It 127

As a candidate for communal responsibilities he could not indulge in that distrait professorial syndrome of wearing clothes inside out (B Shab 114a). Obliged

to exemplify standards of propriety, he could not strut about

perfumed in public.

128

He also had to take care lest he bring derision on

his calling by going about with a grease stain on his garments. for scholarly comportment was condemned in the harshest terms. A scholar's integrity had to be beyond question.

Such disregard

129

Although others had to

give the proper identification markings (B BM 23b) to retrieve lost objects, it was enough for a scholar to claim them (B Shab 114a and Rashi). Above all, as a jurist, a scholar's life was to be patterned after his teachings. Nothing was considered more despicable than preaching against wresting judg ments, respecting persons, taking bribes, lending on usury, and afflicting the widow or fatherless, and then, committing all these offenses.

130

RY admonished aspiring students to eat only the fruits of the wisdom of worthy teachers (B Tan 7a).

Indeed, RY

thought that a teacher should

resemble an angel of God himself (B Hag 156 = MQ 17a).

Students, for their


71

part, were to dedicate themselves to full-time study, never absenting themselves from the academy.

131

The study of Torah was as demanding as standing in fire.

On the one hand, the perceptive student was to get as much under his belt as possible before assuming the distracting burdens of marriage.

133

other hand, he was to take care lest his learning go to his head. can dissipate real learning more than intellectual arrogance.

134

On the Nothing Instead,

such learning should be used for teaching others especially in forlorn places where his presence would be particularly appreciated.

135

Scholarly excellence also helped a student receive an appointment along with its corollary —

communal support, freeing him for full-time dedication

to study and communal concerns. This effort at professionalization induced RY to formulate the qualifica tion for judicial appointments and the proper considerations for judicial rulings.

To qualify for such a communal position

137

demonstrated competence

over the full range of rabbinic law was required by RY.

138

The rationale

for this was well-expressed by his Roman counterpart, the jurist Celsus:

"It

is improper either to give a decision or venture an opinion without taking into consideration the entire law." (Digest 1.3.24) RY also concurred with the Roman legal dictum:

139 "Non exemplis sed legibus

iudicandum est" (JC 7.45.13), by arguing chat practical rulings should not be deduced from theoretical discussion (B BB 130b, see J Bes

2,1 61b).

v/ithêgara t o co n su etadi'n ary law-'

He was also of one mind with Ulpian

who said^

"Mores sunt tacitus consensus

populi longa consuetudine inveteratus" (Reg. Pr 4, see Digest 84).

Conse

quently, RY is found often substantiating a position by referring to common practice (J Sheb 5,1 35d; B Ber 52a = Pes 103a; Pes 104a).

RY was wary also

of acting on conclusions based on analogical reasoning (B Git 19a = 37a) or of


132

72

extrapolating the wrong ratio from a single case (B Yeb 65b).

He also

considered it improper for one to render judgement in the presence of his teacher who taught him most of what he knew.^^ In another forensic area, RY agreed with his Roman counterparts.

The

standards of judicial rhetoric required competency in debating successfully both sides of an issue — language of RY:

"disputare in utramque partem," or in the ritualist

"Whoever is not qualified to offer a hundred arguments for

declaring a reptile ritually clean or unclean will not know how to argue for acquittal"(in trials of capital cases).

141

In addition to this demand for

judicial versatility, RY echoed the sentiments behind Cicero's maxim — letter of the law is the height of injustice" (On Duties 1.10. 33) —

"The

by blaming

the courts for the destruction of Jerusalem through their adherence to strict law rather than to the standards of equity (B BM 30b).

"The essence of the

wrong complained of is not that it is illegal, but that it is too legal." 142 This unscrupulous exploitation of legal advantage, the Romans dubbed subtilitas. Finally, RY tendered advice in conformity with the best tradition of Greek epideictic oratory:

"If one discourses on the Torah

in public, and his

words do not give as much pleasure to his listeners as a bride gives pleasure to the beholders

when sitting in her bridal chamber, it were better that he

had not delivered them" (Song R 4,11,1).

143

In order to ensure the long-term survival of the scholarly class, RY promoted the idea that academia become a family tradition from father to son to grandson.

144

With regard to communal administration, however, he transmitted

a tradition that, "One should not appoint any one administrator of a community, unless he carries a basket of reptiles on his back, so that if he became arrogant, one could tell him: 'Turn around'" (B Yom 22b).

This has been interpreted as

opposing the family succession to these positions.

145

The fear was that if


73

political office became a family business occupants of positions would lord over their constituency rather than serve them.

One who had, as it were, a

skeleton in his geneological closet could always have been told to go back from whence he had come!

146

RY also sought to ensure that the integrity of the

system would be beyond suspicion.

And in view of the fact that a major function

of such communal administrators was the disbursement of community funds,

147

he ruled that two brothers may not serve simultaneously (J Peah 8,7 21a).

This

ruling was implemented by his student, R. Yosi (ibid.). There are other traces of the success of RY's program of insinuating rabbis into positions of communal responsibility. ceived such an appointment. the Nasi,

148

His student associate, R. Eleazar, rp-

Also R. Zera, who not only had refused gifts from

but even had fasted in order to be spared the burdens of such

responsibilities (B BM 85a) reluctantly accepted an appointment upon ascertaining that this would expiate his sins (J Bik 3,3 65 c-d).

In the next generation,

149 R. Helbo also became such a

administrator in Tiberias.

RY's

disciples

were even in a position to make appointments.

appointed

the archon;^*"* R. Haggai and R. Yosi appointed communal administrators.

A generation after R. Yosi, Jerome related that:

R. Hiyya b. Abba

152

the religious teachers were the leaders of the community. The spiritual guides were also the secular guardians. In the latter capacity they appear to have been styled praepositi. Before assuming office, they had to pass an examination, the object of which was to test their capacity for deciding ritual questions. An excellent precis of RY's program! At this point it would be helpful to have a discussion on the relation ship of the Patriarchate to the Roman government.

Even more helpful would

be to trace the power and influence of the Patriarchate in the Jewish community throughout the Roman Empire.

Lamentably, the data for such a discussion is


1

74

inadequate, undoubtedly due to the anarchic state of affairs in the third century.

Current discussions of the subject

upon fourth century data,

153

are dependent almost totally

as is most of the previous discussion.

The most that can be done is to assemble the allusions to mid-third century cooperation between the Patriarchate and the rabbinate.

This coopera

tion probably contributed to the enhancement and diffusion of the power of both for which there is extra-Talmudic documentary evidence from the fourth century. Direct evidence for RY's authority is also meager.

Indirect evidence

can be gathered from a description of a comparable figure and from two incidents with which RY was associated. First, in order to arrive at some more comprehensive picture of RY's relationship to the Nasi, it is helpful to compare the activities of Libanius who occupied a similar position in Antioch. ing century, headed a school of rhetoric.

Libanius, who lived during the follow His special relationship to Alexander,

the governor of Syria, may have paralleled that of RY to the Nasi. to a recent work, Libanius advised Alexander:

According

154

that the best way he could further Libanius' school was to give preference to such of Libanius' former pupils as appeared as advocates in his court. Similar requests were made to many another official. Pupils were to be given posts, registered as advocates, protected from the demands of their local council, their property was to be safeguarded while they were at school; they were to be 'known' by the governor when they returned home, and so on. Libanius might even go to the extent of finding an old pupil a wife. Second, there are two incidents which illustrate the extent of RY's authority.

In the first incident, the Talmud records that "in the days of

RY, began the painting on the walls (of the synagogue) and he did not object" (J AZ 3,3 42d).

It is important to note that synagogues of the third century


75

are frequently gifts of wealthy patrons,

155

and that it is the upper class

who would be most concerned that their houses of worship meet the aesthetic standards of their Roman c o u n t e r p a r t s . F u r t h e r m o r e , the text underscores the fact that only RY's protest may have countervailed, although he refused to exercise it.

This combination of factors has appeared frequently in the

discussion of the relationship between RY and the upper classes.

Of special

interest, is the suggestion that the synagogue referred to may be that of Dura. The paintings of Dura are dated to the late 240s.

158

If so, then we have additional

evidence of RY's significance before 250. In the second incident, RY authorized a Bar Derossai to: "Go down and break all the idols which are in the public bath" (J AZ 4,4 43d).

The mere

fact that this act needed no confirmation, nor met any opposition, from either the decurionate or the Nasi illustrates the prominence of RY in Tiberias.

159

In conclusion, the alliance of the rabbinic leadership, the Patriarchate, and the upper classes served the

interests of all three parties.

It enhanced

both the status and the authority of the rabbis, thereby helping them promulgate their ideal of a Torah-centered e x i s t e n c e . I t facilitated the balancing act of the Patriarchate which tried to exploit the wealth and power of the upper classes without losing the loyalty of the rabbis."*-^

And finally, tne

upper classes gained from rabbinic rulings which took into consideration their specific interests. It is in order to inquire whether some other purpose which combined or transcended the interests of all three was served.

Such an inquiry must

take into consideration what was happening to local governments throughout the anarchy of the third century.


76

F.

The Causes of the Alliance of RY, the Nasi

and the Ruling Classes

In the first century governors felt that legal privilege was owed to decurions and their families because of their status. Curial privilege was not a crude quid pro quo designed to compensate d ecurions for additional expenditures. The Imperial constitutions which defended those privileges ...reveal a sensitivity, at the highest level, to both the honorific and the functional aspects of the decurionate. In other words, they were a response to curial status, and to the functions which decurions were performing, and must continue to perform, if the Empire was to prosper. (emphasis - RK) By the third century, the Imperial policy was reversed. social policies of Septimius Severus

The liberal

served to consolidate his power and to

undermine that of the urban upper classes.

He was the first emperor to insist

upon the personal responsibility of the municipal magistrates. the first, with the help of his jurists, to develop

He was also

the oppressive system of

liturgies into a permanent institution legalized and regularized, and enforced by the state.

Simultaneouslys he exempted large groups of the municipal population

from municipal burdens. His son, Caracalla, was also determined to base his power not on the higher classes —

the city bourgeoisie and the Italian aristocracy —

the lower classes and their representatives, the soldiers.

but on

He openly showed

his contempt of, and hostility towards, the proprietary and intellectual classes.^ The main aim of Caracalla's constitutio Antoniniana was not so much to raise the lower class

as to degrade the upper

provinces, thereby reducing

not only in Rome and Italy, but in the

the pride and self-confidence of the ruling class

in the cities, the imperial and municipal aristocracy.

166

His method was to

make the richer members of the community responsible for the cultivation of the land which belonged to the state, for the collection of taxes and of requisitioned


goods and money, and for the transport of goods and men on behalf of the state.

There was a natural tendency to bind every individual alike to his

place of residence and to the particular group to which he belonged by birth and by profession.

Especially, a member of the municipal aristocracy should

be at hand in his own city to carry out the obligations of his position. This oppression reached its apex under Maximinus (235-238).

He extended

the policy of Septimius of the systematic militarization of the government which was intended to secure imperial power and to gradually eliminate the old upper classes from the administrative posts in the provinces.

168

His

pressing need of money led him to attack the bourgeoisie of the Empire, especially that of the cities, and to rob them as if they belonged to a conquered foreign state. In fighting Maximinus, the cities fought against this new system of administration.

Their enemy was the military monarchy, and their ideal was

the enlightened monarchy of the Antonines based on the city bourgeoisie. The triumph of the military monarchy denotes the failure of the city bourgeoisie to restore the supremacy of the intellectual and propertied classes.

The victory of the army was at the expense of the safety and the

prosperity of the Empire. What were the results? tion as the leading class.

The city bourgeoisie never recovered its posi Its forces were broken by the savage executions

and confiscations of Maximinus, and still more by the system of liturgies which completed the ruin begun by the acute spasms of terrorism.

172

The

deterioration of the land was due entirely to this pernicious system which ruined the medium-sized and small properties of the well-to-do. and the very large landowners survived.

173

The peasants

If this mediating class lost most,


78

the peasants gained least.

The late Empire is characterized by the gradual

absorption of this class into the lower class and a pervasive levelling of standards. The full impact of this policy was felt and its intent understood in Palestine.

The extraordinary liturgical impositions once caused the whole

decurionate to flee (B BB 8a). Rabbi II was distraught with his inability to meet the government's demands (GR 78, 12).

RY saw, as Rostovtzeff says, that "the state was

living not on its normal income, but on a system of more or less organized robbery"^^ and dubbed Rome "the robber.

Indeed, his student saw through

the facade of legality saying: "This wicked government robs and extorts and makes it appear as though it were holding court."^77

The preacher in the

Academy of RY, R. Levi, realized that Rome's appetite for revenue was in satiable (Qoh R 1,7).

RY saw Rome as a ravenous beast whose total range of

enactments had only one aim - to devour the monetary resources of the Empire.

There was no intention of fulfilling the implied purpose of such

revenue gathering, namely, service to the citizenry.

178

RY knew that the

Roman authorities could not be trusted to keep their word, for their mouth speaks falsehood and their right hand lies (Ps 144:11).

As long as they

have not fulfilled their promise, it was as if they had not promised at n 179 all. The increased militarization was felt just as well by RY. which tyrranized the citizenry,

180

This system

RY characterized as a pig according to

1 Ol

the insignia of the tenth legion.

In fact,the billeting of soldiers

became such an imposition that RY was impelled to ask, "Do our houses not . ,,,182 belong to us?


79

In light of this compelling reality, it is no wonder that the rabbinic leadership, the Patriarchate, and the city aristocracy made common cause. An academic culture could not be supported in Palestine without some degree of local autonomy.

The maintenance of a learned class needed friendly

sources of wealth.

The growth of Jewish religious life was dependent con

siderably on urban centers where Jews could congregate to form communities. Throughout the Empire, "cities were heavily dependent on their leading citizens, for their financial well-being."

183

The extirpation of the muni

cipal aristocracy would have placed the Jewish community under the direct rule of the militarized bureaucracy.

1

It was imperative for any foresighted rabbinate to be supportive of this mediating force.

Such support is reflected best in the contrast between

R Y ’s exhortation to artisans to stick to their professions (B Arak 16b), versus his allowing of decurions to leave their post to save them from financial ruin.

1S5

It could very well be that this alliance spearheaded by

RY's intellectual and social policies delayed the onslaught onto Palestine of what Rostovtzeff called the "barbarization of the ancient world."


X86

80

1. Ulpian, Digest 50.2.3.3: "Eis, qui Judaicam superstitionem sequunter, divi Severus et Antoninus honores adipisci permiserant sed et necessitates eis imposuerunt, quae superstitionem eorem nor laederent (the divine Severus and Antoninus have not only permitted those who adhere to the Jewish super stition to obtain public office (honores), but also imposed upon them such formalities (necessitates) as would not offend their superstition). Note that this same qualification appears in the comment of Modestinus with re gard to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus who admitted Jews to public office with responsibility over non-Jews (Digest 27.1.15.6). See Alon Toledot II 105f. Juster (II 258, n.2) also says, "le decurionat devint plutSt corvee qu'honneur." See Baron SRH 110, and 375, n. 26 for a discussion of the import and innovation of this enactment. 2. Cf., however, F. Millar, "The Date of the Constitutio Antoninianas," Journal of Egyptian Archaelogy 48 (1962) 124-31, who dates the enactment to 214. CAH (XII 46) notes, The grant of the citizenship would indeed be little more than an honour. Though it opened the way into government service for an increased number of provincials, especially Easterns.." See Rostovtzeff SEHRE 419; Dio Cassius 78.9.5. For the dediticii who were excluded from Caracalla's concession, see Alon, ibid., 108f.; and A. M. H. Jones, "The Dediticii and the Constitutio Antoniniana," in his Studies in Roman Government and Law 129-40. With regard to neighboring Dura, see C. B. Welles, "The population of Roman Dura" Studies in Roman Economic and Social History (in honor of A. C. Johnson) ed. P. R. Coleman-Norton, 272f^ n. 120. 3.

Avi-Yonah Bime 52

4.

Paraphrased by L. Ginzberg, JE I 657

5.

See ibid., 655; Baron SRH 400, n. 19 and Helfgott, op. cit.(p.33, n.17)182,185.

6 . For summaries of the evidence, see Alon Toledot II 103-10; Levine Caesarea 65f.; and JE, s.v., Septimius, Caracalla, and Alexander Severus.

7. In Dan. 11. 27, 34 (PL 25.13). See Greek inscription, Sefer HaYishub 151b. According to the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (SHA)— "Antoninus Caracalla"!,"The two sons left by Septimius Severus both received the sur name Antoninus (see Loeb notes., ad loc.). This was part of Septimius' policy to legitimize his usurped position by linking himself with the Antonines. Also his grand-nephew and successor to his son, Elagabalus, was renamed Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, see Rostovtzeff SEHRE 404, and 711, n. 13. 8 . Bime 52. M. Simon, Verus Israel 130, n. 1, writes confidently, "Sur la question de l'identite de 'Antonin' ami de Rabbi, et qui est sans doute Caracalla."

9. See above n. 7. Caracalla.

S. Krauss came to the same conclusion, JE, s.v.,


81

10. This relationship is reported principally in SHA, see above n. 6 . On SHA, see Rostovtzeff SEHRE 434-38; A Momigliano, "An Unsolved Problem of Historical Forgeries: The Scriptores Historiae Augustae," in his Studies in Historiography 143-80, esp. 158f., 163f; the extensive review of R. Syme, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (Oxford 1968) by A. Cameron, JRS 61 (1971) 255-67; and above all, the critical remarks of R. Syme, "The Composition of the Historia Augusta: Recent Theories," JRS 62 (1972) 123-33. 11. SHA - "Alexander Severus" 22.4; 28.7. See the Roman inscription in Alon Toledot II 104; and H. J. Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome 162-65. 12. SHA, ibid., 29.2. Although the reliability of the SHA material on the SeveranS* relationship to the Jews has been questioned, J. G. Gager, "The Dialogue of Paganism with Judaism: Bar Cochba to Julian," HUCA 44 (1973) 96f., is inclined to accept the general picture of the Severans* relationship to the Jews in SHA because the "references to the Jews occur almost exclusively in the biographies of the Severans." And because the Roman historian and consul under Alexander Severus, Dio Casius (37. 9-11) also depict the Jews with subdued admiration. 13. SHA, ibid., 51. 6- 8 : "quod tib fieri vis, alteri ne feceris." See A. Dihle, Die Goldene Regel who points out the pervasiveness of this maxim in the Greco-Roman world. Cf. J. Straub, Keidnische Geschichtspolitik in der christlichen Spatantike 106-25. 14.

SHA, ibid., 45. 6 f.

See Lieberman, "Palestine" 364.

15. For the rabbinic understanding of imperial largesse after returning from victory, see Mek 131; Mek RS 82; and I. Ziegler, Die Konigsgleichnisse des Midrasch 47f. For Alexander's positive attitude to both the cities and provincials, see D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor I 690ff; and Rostovtzeff SEHRE 725, end of n. 51. Apparently, Tiberias was granted "colony" status around the time that Alexander of Severus elevated Caesarea to the rank of a metropolis. According to L. Kadman, The Coins of Caesarea Maritima 24, this occurred probably on the way to his Persian campaign around 231-232. 16. On the founding and naming of Tiberias, see M. Avi-Yonah, " Tiberiah BeTeûfah HaRomaif ,“ 1 0a the disenfranchisement of the Jews, see A. M. H. Jones, Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces 272-80, esp. 279 and Alon Toledot I 89f. Jones reiterated his belief that Hadrian removed the Jews from the municipal administration in his The Greek City 81. This judgement has been qualified partially by Alon Toledot II 9,15 and 64. For Epiphanius (Panarion 30.12) see Sefer HaYishub 70; and Lieberman "Palestine" 367. On the basis of numismatic evidence, it has been suggested that the Hadrianeum in Tiberias was built around 119/120 after the emperor's visit in 117. (See A. Kindler, The Coins of Tiberias 32, and S. Follet, "Hadrian en Egypte et/en Judee," Revue de philologie de litterature et d'histoire anciennes 42 (1968) 54-77. On what was the Hadrianeum, see Urbach "Idolatry" 234, n. 80. On the "ten leading citizens" of Tiberias, see Josephus Life 69 and 296; and idem. Wars 2.21.9 (639),' and F. Millar, The Roman Empire and its Neighbors 94. 17. See Mid Ps 75,4; J Nid 2,5 50b: B Nid 21a, Cf. Y. Brand, Kli HaHeres BeSifrut HaTalmud 210, 215, 217 and 427. Apparently Resh Laqish had some


82

connection with the glassworks (see GR 34,7 p. 327 and n. 3; Mid Ps 2,11; and Sefer HaYishub 49, n. 4) which may have been situated by the sea (see Y. Brand, Sinai 16, 1953, 297-301) as well as with the pottery works (J Er 5,1 22b j MHG Gen 421) which were to the west of the city toward Bet Malon 18. See Avi-Yonah, below n. 21, 94f; Alon Toledot I 101; and D. Sperber, "Some Observations on Fish and Fisheries in Roman Palestine," Zeitschrift 6.

-la-r

; MHG reads

03ns

7. GR 97,2, p. 1245; GR 31,1 p. 277, according to most MSS, and parallels. 8 . This explanation solves T-A's difficulty, ibid., with regard to how "honor" applies to a shepherd and a flock. It is based on Kasher TS III 690, n. 14, and Avi-Yonah Bime 102. Some versions of this homily are more susceptible to a theological interpretation, see A. J. Heschel, Man Is Not Alone 243; and idem, Torah I 77. The text is sufficiently fluid and ambiguous to arouse the suspicion that it was intended to be polyvalent. On the use of ~na3 as dignitas, see above, p. 87, n.72. Cf. Lev R 11,8,p.238 for how Resh Laqish's second century counterparts defended the status of the "elders."

9. Also Josephus, Antiquities 7.11.3, maintained that Abijam (= Abijah) died directly after his victory over Jereboam. 10.

B Zeb 102a = Men 98a

11.

B Er 26a

12. Samaria, B San 102b, see PS, and the version in SER 10, p.49. E. Halevy, Parshiyot Ba-Agadah 429,n. 1, argues that the question is "how did Omri deserve to found a royal dynasty." 13. B San 102b; Tan B SMWT 26; MHG Dt 605. This justification is despite the fact that RY considered Ahab a compulsive idolator who flaunted his apostasy (B San 102b).


120

14. Zeb 102a Ginzberg Legends V 431, n. 197 seems to have confused Pharoah and Moses. See Kasher TE[ X 38f., n. 46. On showing respect to royalty, cf. Mek, Pislta 13, p.45 and parallels. For an alternative framework for this material, see E. Urbach, "Types of Leadership in the Biblical Period" (Hb) The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities (1973) 55-67. 15. B San 103 b (according to PS); YS Job 924; and Rambam ad_ Abot 1:10 (ed. Kafah) p. 271a. Note the addition in the standard editions: rtaansw n a i n Vy oann d t s a reading which is reflected in HaMeiri’s Commentary ad loc. 16. If the y is omitted from D*»yin it becomes the Aramaic of D"»wKn . See Ba-al Haûrim to Num 1:7. Urbach, Hazal 542, n. 53, suggests that Resh Laqish likened the talit of a judge to the saddle of an ass (B Shab 114a; J Bik 3,3 19d). The'contrast with RY is illuminating, see above p. 87, n.72jand p.100, n.142. 17. On the assumption that the structure is ababj this presumes that since RY is named first, his opinion is cited first. 18. By interpreting Scripture in David’s favor, RY, as would be expected, identified with the predilections of the Patriarchate. As Rab noted with regard to his teacher : "Rabbi, who derives from David contorts and expounds scripture in David's favor" (B Shab 56a). 19. Esther R Proem 9. This version is consistent with their respective positions, as opposed to the abbreviated text in DR 5,9 (see Halevy Mid 125 and notes) and in DR (ed. Lieberman) 98. Note that R. Gordis understands Job (34:30) as does RY: When he allows a godless man to rule, it is because of the sins of the people (The Book of God and Man 292). 20. DR 5,9; DR (ed. Lieberman) 99. This is cited in the name of "our rabbis," but it follows a comment of RY which is prefaced by 'RY and Resh Laqish.' Since no other statement by Resh Laqish is recorded there, this could be his. Of course, if, as I have argued in n. 19, that the first statement is by Resh Laqish, then "our rabbis" would, by the above reasoning, be RY, This inter changing of "our rabbis" and RY has occurred elsewhere (see above, p. 83, n. 103) cf. below n. 24, and DR (ed. Lieberman) 12f. with DR 1,9. Sometimes one source names RY and Resh Laqish (e.g., B Ket 50b) while the parallel cites "our rabbis" (J Ket 6,6 30d). I sense this is most prevalent in J. 21.

B San 103a = Arak 17a.

22.

J Er 5,1 22b according to Lieberman YKF 289, see Alon Mehqarim II 149.

23.

B Arak 17a; J San 2,6 20d; GR 80,1, p. 952 and end of n. 3,

cf. DR 2,19.

24. J RH 2,9 58b. The parallel, in Ruth R Proem 6,has the names reversed. Matnot Kehim.^h . ad loc., noted the superiority of the J version (see Ratner ASY, ad loc., 29). For an example of the transposition of RY and Resh Laqish, see Lieberman A1 HaYerushalmi 11. See DR 1,10 for further contemporary reflections on the benefits which accrue to all when the rank and file heed their leader. Cf. Tan B I 171, end of n. 66 . 25.

Following Weiss Dor 68


26. see Ginzberg Ginze I 394. For a similar ploy by Resh Laqish, see DR'(ed. Lieberman) 12f., and 13, n.l.

i [ j

27. B BB 8 a. Trans, of Sperber, "Flight..." op. cit., p. 92, n. 95. Both Sperber, and Safrai, op. cit.fp. 36, n. 54) 69f., feel this reflects more Rabbi II’s reality than that of Rabbi's. M. Aberbach and L. Smolar "Jereboam and Solomon: Rabbinic Interpretations," JQR (1969) 121, n. 6 , argued that this identification of 'Rabbi' with Rabbi II is "unacceptable." They contend: That Rabbi there is identical with the Patriarch Judah I is proved by the entire context: a) the story immediately follows ( - and is directly connected with the word Kinna to) [a better reading is s i n m - RK] the account of Judah I opening his storehouses during a year of famine. In that account, the presence of Jonathan b. Amram and Simeon, the son of Judah I, demonstrates that "Rabbi" can be no other than Judah I. There is no doubt that the first case deals with Rabbi (Judah I). The identity of the "Rabbi" in the second case, however, is in doubt. Aberbach and Smolar feel that since it is juxtaposed to the first it follows that "Rabbi" of the second case is also Rabbi (Judah I). The weakness in this argument lies in the fact that the Babylonian Talmud was arranged several hundred years after these events, and that the juxtaposition of pericope has minor historical significance. S. Lieberman (JQR 36, 1945, 249) writes: The sequence of statements of rabbinic sages in the Talmud proves absolutely nothing. An opinion of a rabbi of the end of the fourth century may follow directly the statement of a rabbi of the beginning of the third century, a well known fact. The last editor arranged them according to the subject matter. In fact, if the argument from juxtaposition were valid, it would just as well be evidence for the opposite conclusion, since subsequently (B BB 143a) a similar case (see Alon, Mehqarim II 83, n. 25, who reservedly conjectures that this may be the same episode) is related about "Rabbi" juxtaposed to the name of RY by the connective im and related by RY's student, R. Isaac b. Joseph after the latter's arrival in Babylonia! Just as the juxtaposition to Rabbi (Judah I) is no argument that the adjacent pericope also deals with Rabbi (Judah I) in the first source; so is the juxtaposition to RY no evidence that the second source deals with Rabbi (Judah) II. The second argument of Aberbach and Smolar, ibid.,is just as inconclusive: On top of that, the Patriarch in both accounts appears as an extreme opponent of the ignorant am-ha-arez. No such opposition to the am-ha-arez is recorded in the case of Judah II who, on the contrary, was accused by the scholars of appointing ignorant men to judgeships.


Awareness of the different connotations of the term am-ha-ares is in order. See, most recently, Safrai, op. cit., (p. 104, n.160) w^° repeats mostly Alon Toledot II 181. In the first case of Rabbi, the epithet is used in contradistinction to learned. In the second case, the epithet denotes the city bourgeoisie (i.e. the decurionate) who bore the brunt of the tax burdens. Rabbi certainly "was not an extreme opponent” of this group of am-ha-areg. On the contrary, his political program sought to integrate their interests with those of the Patriarchate. Consequently, he was dubbed "respecter of the rich" (B Er 86 a). Moreover, these rich "people of the land" could fend for themselves. It is the pagani who were dependent upon the munificence of Rabbi. As far as Rabbi (Judah) II's relationship to the am-ha-eres, that is precisely the issue at hand, petitio principii. Methodologically, extrapolating from an incident in a person's life for the whole of his life is risky. Just because a policy entails the appointing of am-ha-ares to judgeships does not mean that it calls for the revocation of rabbinic immunities. On the contrary, it can be maintained that in order to have allowed for rabbinic immunities new sources of revenue must have been sought by the Nasi which might have entailed the selling of judgeships. Alternatively, it could be that initially the Nasi maintained both rabbinic immunities and the non-âppointment of am-ha-ares to judgeships. As the economic crisis intensified, he was compelled to rescind both decisions , thereby reaping the compounded scorn of the rabbinate. Cf. below, n. 31. Heretofore evidence for rabbinic exemptions is lacking (see Alon, Mehqarim II 52, n. 141, who ascribes this development to Rabbi). It may very well be that large.-rscale rabbinic exemptions resulted from RY-Rabbi II cooperation. This development was a corollary of the growth of the rabbinic class becoming hereditary and professionalized. This development in Palestine parallels the increasing number of exemptions for the hereditary professorial class in Rome. 28. For background, see Juster II 287f.; Rostovtzeff SEHRE 515; and T£ 13.1.20. This episode gives the impression of dealing with large numbers. Alon, Mehqarim II 83, n.27, thinks that the number of the decurionate in Tiberias may have reached several hundreds In Josephus' day, it numbered 600 (War 2.21.9-641, cf. his Life 169). This raises the issue of how many rabbis were exempt. In view of the subsequent hullabaloo a considerable number must have been involved. Although only a few secured official positions (e.g. p a m a s ) many of the rabbinic estate (i.e. n ’^nn = o’nan '’T ’oVn see RY B BB 75a) must have been tax-exempt. (See A. Marmorstein, "HaMasab HaKakali shel HaYehudim BaGalil BeDoro shel R. Yohanan bar Nappaha UBeDor shel Aharav" Festschrift fur Jakob Freiman 83). Thus, the repeal cf the exemption, or just the nongranting of an exemption, could provoke a considerable outcry. If we are correct in assuming a considerable number of rabbinic exemptions then we may lay to rest the opinion that the exemption was under the guise of the Roman exemption for sophists or rhetors, since that exemption was so limited. Although Hadrian was extravagant in the amount of immunities that could be tolerated, Antoninus "Pius imposed strict limits: small cities were allowed... three sophists (or rhetors); moderate-sized cities could have... four rhetors...; and the biggest cities could have...five rhetors" (G.W. Bowersock, Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire 33f.).


123

It could be objected that just as the Severans were more lax in enforcing Pius' curtailment of provincial embassies' junkets to Rome, so were they in this regard. That, however, was due to the delicate political situation of Severus where "extravagant demonstrations of loyalty were to be welcome, even though they violated established imperial policy" (W. Williams, "Antoninus Pius and the Control of Provincial Embassies," Historia 16, 1967, 481). Another consideration, albeit possibly anachronistic, for excluding rabbis from the sophist-rhetor category is Constantine's proclamation of 333 that teachers "in the provinces shall not have soldiers quartered among them" (JC 10. 53 (52) 6 ). This immunity was notenjoyed by RY, see above, p. 78, bottom. It follows, as Alon, Toledot II 142,noticedthat the large number of rabbinic exemptions reflects "an internal development which assisted or symbolized the special status of the sages." It does not seem that Rome gave such a boost to education until the fourthcentury when "teachers of philosophy were also exempted from municipalities and service to the curia" (T. 0. Martin, "'Aid to Education' in the Late Roman Empire,” Seminar 10, 1952, 62 who cites TC 13.3.16). On the other hand, continues Martin, "Antoninus Pius made it virtually impossible for them (philosophers) to be immune at all" (cf. Digest 27.1.6.7; and Bowersock, ibid., 34. A relevant parallel may be Diocletian's exempting of the students of Berytus from munera up to the age of 25(JC 10.50.1). Since the exemption from munera was to help government trainees, it's possible to speculate that the rabbinic exemption was to help train scholars for the administrative and judicial bureaucracy of the Patriarchate. 29. See, e.g., MacMullen, Soldier and Civilian in the Later Roman Empire 89; and idem,Enemies of the Roman Order, Appendix B "Brigandage" 255-68. For the collusion between soldier and brigand, see Mann I (English) 90, n. 79. 30. Avi-Yona'n, Bime 249, n.3, cites the archaelogical evidence for the wall which he dates to the Severan period or shortly thereafter. 31. B BB 7b. Some versions hold that the wall levy was a karga (see Krauss PR 270-72; and Geo Widengreen, "The Status of the Jews in the Sasanian Empire," Iranica Antigua I, 1961, 149-53) which is a (Babylonian) poll tax (see B BB 55a). It is likely, therefore, that Rabbi, despite rabbinic protestations, was not, strictly speaking, reversing policy. The clergy-exemption was from Roman liturgies which are imposed on the city council, not for locally initiated capitation taxes, see Alon Mehqarim II 18, n. 18. Cf., however, Beer AB 241, n.62. 32.

According to MSS (PS 28, n.9).

33. os Since Epstein, Mebo-ot 216f., considers this a Babylonian term, he concluded that the passage reflects a Babylonian reality. Even if the technicus terminus were Babylonian that reflects only a Babylonization of RY's statement (see above, n. 31) on the part of the Babylonian rabbis in order to garner support for their own effort to acquire the same rabbinic privileges (see Neusner History IV 85-91). More recently, Y. Kutscher rejected Epstein's contention and derived os from the Latin fossa which are the trenches before the wall (Erke HaMillon HaHadash LeSifrut Hazal I 100f.). S_. cit., 125.

108.

Goodblatt, op. cit., 254,

256.

109. See above, p. 5. Onthe arrangement of the rows in the Palestinian academies, see Albeck Mabo 17. 110.

Op. cit., 122.


170

111.

See Ginzberg CPT I 393.

112. Indeed, it is RY who insinuates there that he would be better off returning to where he was respected. See Ginzberg ibid., 393f.; and S. Goren HaYerushalmi HaMeforash 8 8 . 113. See B Yeb 17a, 101b; Shabuot 36a; Hul 19b. A later date is unlikely since the Babylonian heads of the next generation, Rabâ and Abaye, were already partisans of RY. See above, n. 82. 114.

There may be a play on Nappaba = "inflaming", see above, p. 2.

115. The parallel in Qoh R 9,10,2 has R. Jonathan b. Amran,instead of R.Yannai and R. Hanina, separating RY from R. Hiyya. This contemporary of R. Hiyya refused to benefit from his Torah learning (B BB 8 a) and is found between RY and R (Hiyya?) in another statement of R. Zera (B AZ 36b, following MS - Abramson p. 64). The version in B BM 85b may represent a Babylonian reworking of the dream of that R. Zera who emigrated from Babylonia to Palestine to verify the teachings of RY, see above, p.139; and Tanenblat Peraqim 292f. 116. See above, p.139; Epstein Mabo 699f.; especially B Shab 115a which mentions a halakic epistle from RY; and B Ket 46a-b which records a later correspondence refuting an earlier one. 117.

See above,p. 83, n. 30; and above, n.

92.

118. See Melamed Mabo 442f. According to Frankel Mabo 44b:"The logia of Palestinian sages which were dxsse/ninated in Babylonia d e r iv e m osily from the time that Ulla, R. Dimi, and Rabin arrived in Babylonia." 119.

See Bacher, op. cit. (n. 11) 505-19.

120.

Ibid., 515.

121. See B Hul 116b; and Albeck Mabo 264f.The printed edition has also a R. Abin as a tradent (B BQ82a) and a Rabina (B Yeb 78a) but, in both cases, the MSS read Rabin. 122.

E.g.,B Shab 147a; Yeb 55b; AZ 73a.

123. For illustrations with regard to RY, see Halivni Ml Nashim, Preface, 15; ibid., 145f.; idem, Moed 6 , 140; Dor Torat 154, n. 37; and Ginzberg CPT I 399, n. 3. In general, see H. Albeck, Mabo LaMishna 93ff; idem, "Derek Lemmudam shel Hazal," Sinai 46 (1963) 103ff; and idem. Mabo 514f. 124. "HaHishtamshut BeMamare Amoraim," Tarbiz 9 (1939) 163ff. See Albeck Mabo 452ff. The idea that a tradent is frequently an "exegete" is becoming a common place in rabbinic scholarship. 125. See above, n. 123, esp. Dor, 116-40. On the other hand, Dor presents a case where, he argues, that B has a more original version of a RY-Resh Laqish controversy than J (ibid., 52-9). See below, n. 128.

Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

171

ii 126.

Ibid., esp. 123f.; 41, n. 27.

127.

See above, n. 48.

128. See Frankel Mabo 40a-45a; and esp. Ratner SOR, Preface, 15-9 who rejects the assumption of the Shak, Yoreh Deah 145.100.1, that RY's logia in J are more reliable than those in B. See also above, n. 125; and p. 35, n. 40. 129. The aforementioned works of Albeck, Dor, and Halivni are all pioneering works laying the groundwork for a source criticism of Talmudic literature. For a concise formulation of the problem, see D. Halivni, Encyclopedia Britannica (1963) xxi 645, s.v., Talmud: Source Criticism. 130. This study is a traditional historical analysis ofthe sources. I am unaware of any study which comprehensively does this basic groundwork with regard to RY who is the central figure in this issue. (This is a prior task to the sophisticated, frequently speculative, undertakings of the aforementioned scholars (n. 129).) S«e Y a J M alaKd *'*zv

Why else would RY proclaim:

are rightfully applied to the Jewish people.

108

"Since the destruction of the Temple, poverty

has not departed from them (Israel)"?

109

How did these two competing claims substantiate themselves?

The Ebionite

claim was made by virtue of their voluntary poverty and communistic mode of life. ^

The rabbinic claim may be reflected in the following midrash (NR 11,1):


197

To the poor/meek He gives grace (Prov 3:34) These are the Jewish people who are poor among the nations going about meekly in their midst and bearing the yoke imposed upon them in order to sanctify the name of God. In conclusion, in this study of RY and the Minim, there has been found no evidence which would the

militate against accepting the conclusions of one of

earliest remarks on the subject, namely, that of Jerome in his Epistle

^• 111 to Augustine: What shall I say of the Ebionites, who pretend that they are Christians? Even to this present day there is a heresy amongst the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East, which is called (sc. the heresy) of the Minaei and which is even now condemned by the Pharisees: they call them popularly Nazaraeos... while they desire to be both Jew and Christian, they are neither Jew nor Christian. ~

The equation Min = Ebionites = Nazaraioi is still a tenable hypothesis. Three quarters of a century ago, Herford came to the same conclusion.

113

112

The

major difference is that we have argued for a gnostic element within Jewish Christianity and limited the scope of the inquiry to RY material and other directly pertinent material from third century Palestinian Judaism. From this Epistle, it is evident that by Jerome’s day the rabbis had condemned the Jewish Christians whom they called Nazaraioi.

Some confirmation

for this may be derived from the Genizah version of the Birkat HaMinim which reads

114 a ’l i w n .

Avi-Yonah has argued against this being the

original version, but rather an updated fourth century version intended to exclude Jewish Christians from the synagogue. The expression o ’3’a m

o ’irisr?

could be interpreted to mean something

like "the Nazaraioi who are the Minim (read-'heretics) of our day,” understanding the connecting vav as "namely."

Another suggestion would be to translate it

as "The Nazaraioi and other M i n i m . W h a t e v e r the case may be, if it is


true, as Jerome avers, that these Jewish Christians were "amongst the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East" then the way to exclude them was by means of the communal statuatory prayer. When did this change in attitude occur?

There does not seem to be

any animus in RY's relationship to the Minim.

Indeed, the literature

unabashedly reports a Min attending RY's synagogue sermons. There is some evidence that this change in attitude occurred between the generation of RY and that of his disciple, R. Abbahu. passages which reflect a greater tolerance for

There are several

non-conforming Jews on the

part of RY and his colleague Resh Laqish than on the part of R. Abbahu, who politically was the most significant rabbi in the next generation at the turn , _ „ 118 of the century. For example, when R. Abbahu recited a teaching to RY about throwing an apostate into a pit, RY objected, stating that the Biblical obligations (see Dt 22:3) to brethren still apply.

119

Onanother occasion, when

approaching Caesarea, R. Abbahu turned toResh Laqish

and asked (Song R 1,6);

Why are we going into this blasphemous and shameful city? Resh Laqish dismounted from his ass, scraped up some sand and put it into his mouth. (R. Abbahu) said to him: Why do you do this? He replied: God is not pleased with one who caluminates Israel. It was not as if blasphemy were a rarity.

RYruled that it was so common

that there was no longer a need to tear one's garment out of deference to the desecration.

Resh Laqish, on the contrary,

would tear every time he

heard a Cuthean blaspheme. RY did not live under any illusion with regard to Jewish apostates.

He

encouraged learning how to retort to such, realizing that their untowardness exceeded even that of a Gentile epiqorus (= Epicurean!)

121

In light of R. Abbahu's oalumination, it is safe to suppose that


Greek-speaking Caesarea was the center for such Jewish defections.

122

This is reinforced by RY's explanation for the prohibition against the teaching of Greek, lest it enhance the possibility of informers.

123

RY's response to Jewish deviation was not a hardening of the walls between the faithful and the heterodox. was quite conciliatory. he repudiated idolatry.

On the contrary, his orientation

He was willing to consider one a Jew as long as 124

In factjeven if one had participated in some

idolatrous civic rite under the pretense that any homage rendered to a man may be rendered to a statue,

125

RY was willing to overlook that infraction

if the individual observed the Sabbath properly.

126

RY sought to encourage penitents by rejecting any assertion that Manasseh had no place in the future life.

127

He even took R. Aqiba to

task for lapsing from his usual compassion when he excluded the Ten Tribes from the future life.

RY, for his part, not only contended that Jeremiah

(3:12) prophesied that Gud would be compassionate with them,

128

that Jeremiah actually brought (some of) them back to Israel. to be lost to Israel.

but also

129

No one is

130

Did this conciliatory approach apply to the Minim?

If, according to

RY:"anyone who repudiates idolatry is considered Jewish," then this should apply to those Jewish Christians who did not accept Jesus' divinity. After all, even RY had said:

131

132

In every matter, if a prophet tells you to transgress the commands of the Torah, obey him, with the exception of idolatry; should he even cause the sun to stand still in the middle of the heavens for you, do not hearken to him. If we accept Urbach's position that "Gehazi represents the min and the seceder,"

133

then the following RY passage may be illustrative:


200

The stranger did not lodge in the street; my door I opened to the roadside (Job 31:32). From here one learns that one should thrust them aside with the left and bring them near with the right. Not as Elisha did, who thrust Gehazi aside with both hands (J San 10,2 29b). On the assumption that the right hand is stronger than the left, this represents a positive, albeit circumspect, open-door policy. This difference in attitude between the rabbis of the middle of the third century and those at the turn of the third century

134

is also reflected

in the statements of Resh Laqish and R. Abbahu's younger contemporary, R. Berakiah, with regard to Jewish sinners.

According to Resh Laqish:

"The

fire of Gehenna has no dominion over Jewish sinners (B Er 19a = Hag 27a). R. Berakiah, on the contrary, sinners

135

groups together apostates and Jewish

and avers that God is willing even to "uncircumcise" them to i 36

assure their smooth descent into Gehenna.~

Based on the conclusion of Resh Laqish's statement that these Jewish sinners are full of Mitzvot as a pomegrante and similar statements reflecting their conformity to Jewish praxis, Marmorstein argued persuasively that these Jewish sinners are frequently Jewish Christians.

137

Finally, there are two statements which mention Jesus which may have been authored by RY.

The first is an exposition of Psalm 144:14:

1^8

There is no breach - may our company not be like that of David from which issued Ahitophel. And no going forth - may our company not be like that of Saul from which issued Doeg the Edomite. And no outcry - may our company not be like that of Elisha, from which issued Gehazi. In our broad places - may we produce no son or pupil who burns his food in public like Jesus 237

The last expression is enigmatic, but it is generally thought to express 33 7a.

figuratively the idea that Jesus we/jf astray.


201

The second instance is in an extract which forms part of a long exposition by RY concerned chiefly with events which may have lead to the destruction of the Second Temple.

Through necromancy Jesus was brought

up and interrogated with regard to who is honored in the other world and on the worthwhileness of becoming a Jew.

Jesus answers:

"Seek their good,

and avoid harming them, for he who touches them touches the apple of His eve.

,,140 This comment of Jesus in contrast to a previous comment of Balaam is

so positive that the Talmud exclaims:

"Observe the difference between the

sinners of Israel (i.e. Jesus) and the prophets of the Nations of the World.” From these two pericopes flow several conclusions: who has gone astray.

Jesus is a pupil

He is identified with the "sinneis of Israel"!

the Talmud appreciates his positive attitude toward Jews and

And

his acknowledge

ment of their closeness to God. This composite picture-of Jesus may reflect the various components in the ambiguous relationship between the rabbis and the followers of Jesus. If this assumption be accepted, then clearly the Jesus of Gentile Chris tianity is not the Jesus of these two pericopes, for Patristic literature, from at least Justin on, reflects a much more intense adversary relation. . 141 ship. In light of making credible a Jewish Christian provenance for RY's reflections on Jesus, it might be possible to place into a Jewish Christian context his punning on the evangelion as

7 1 ’Va

71?

> whatever that

• might mean. 142 ^ 3

On the assumption that indicate

a single Gospel.

7 i,1?i

denotes Gospel,

7 T»ba

717

would

Evidence for this conjecture lies in the fact


that the only citation of the Gospels in rabbinic literature parallels Matthew 5:17 and reads:

"I did not come to diminish the Torah of Moses, but

rather to add to the Torah of Moses have I come."

144

In addition, G. F.

Moore claimed to have found an echo of Matthew 6:31 in the words of minut of R. Eliezer in B Sot 48b: | I

and says:

"A man who has a piece of bread in his basket

What shall I eat tomorrow? is one of little faith.

Thirdly, in the aforementioned interrogation (B Git 57a) Jesus is condemned finally for scoffing at the Pharisaic teaching or the rabbinical interpretation of the law.

According to Lauterbach, "This legend then

|

echoes, or presupposes a knowledge of the charges reportedly made

; i

against the Pharisees" (see Matthew 15:3f£; 16: 6-12).

by Jesus

146

Finally, the source for the aforecited parallel to Matthew5:17 called

7 T ’ba

717

is

, the identical name that RY called the Gospel.

All this suggests that the rabbis were aware of a version of the Gospel of Matthew.

147

This makes sense especially in a Jewish Christian milieu,

since it is well-attested that the Ebionites and the Nazaraioi used only the Gospel of Matthew and that in a Hebrew or Aramaic rendition!

148

Finally, in that Jewish Christian source "discovered" and discussed by Fines there appears also a variation of Matthew 5:17: "I did not come to diminish, but, on the contrary, to complete (or fulfill:

mutammiman,"

149

)

which, at least, by the word diminish evokes the rabbinic version!

D. The result

Conclusion

of this investigation is that the most likely referent in

the Min-passages of RY is Jewish Christian. :

This conclusion is supported by

RY's reference to the Nazaraioi and his allusion to the Ebionites, along with their version of the Gospel of Matthew.


Furthermore RY's

statements on Jewish Christians and Jesus

reflect the position that although they are considered somewhat marginal, they are not yet excluded from the Jewish fold.

Accordingly, they are not

yet subsumed under the category "Nations of the World" which would be the case if they were considered Gentiles.


Notes

1. These various terms are grouped together according to a MS of SOR 3 (see Lieberman TKF Ber 54) under the category of nonconformists (’>3 Tto biisb Tins) who endanger communal unity.

’a

2. See K. G. Kuhn, "Giljonim und sifre minim," Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche, Festschrift fur Joachim Jeremias 24-61,cf. below, n. 117. 3. The Hibbert Journal 3 (1904) 197. 4. For Judaism, see M. Simon, Jewish Sects at the Time of Jesus. For Christianity, see A. H. M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire 284-602 950-56 and nr.. 5. Early Gentile Christianity and its Hellenistic Backgro*mu. xxv* 6 . See E. R. Dodds, Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety 18 and n. 2. Admittedly, it is difficult to present any scholarly consensus with regard to the focal points of the gnostic problem. Disagreement is rampant, see the colloquies which follow the essays in Le Origini Dello Gnosticismo, ed. U. Bianchi, passim. Cf. below, n. 13.

7. By the third century, it is insignificant whether Min, etymologically, is derived from the Hebrew 7a / u ’aa Tnr>o / 7 x23 / / o r 7 ’qko or the equivalent of the Greek genos. See M. Goldstein, Jesus in the Jewish Tradition 45 and nn. 8 . JBL 73 (1954) 159.

9.

An Unknown Jewish Sect 2, n. 4.

Cf. Ginzberg cited by Marcus, ibid., n. 4.

10. See D. Flusser's review of G. Scholem, Jewish Gnostocism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition,in JJS 11 (1960) 65. 11. For example, Origen’s affinities with gnostic-type thinking has been under scored recently by G. Quispel, "Origen and the Valentinian Gnosis," VC 28 (1974) 29-42. For earlier literature, see Levine Caesarea 203, n. 178. 12. See J. Danielou, "Judeo-Christianisme et Gnose," Aspects du JudeoChristianisme - Travaux du centre d 1etudes superieures specialise d'historie des religions de Strassbourg 139-164; E. Hennecke, New Testament Apocrypha, ed. W. Schneemelcher, I, Ch. 3, "Jewish-Christian Gospels," 117-65, passim; and the careful methodological comments of R. M. Wilson, "Jewish Christianity and Gnosticism," RSR 60 (1972) 261-72. Conversely, H. J. Schoeps, in his works on the subject, is adament in his disassociating of Ebionitism, at least, from Gnosticism (for his most recent statement, see his Jewish Christianity 121-30. On this thesis, J. A. Fitzmyer ("The Qumran Scrolls, the Ebionites, and Their Literature," The Scrolls and the New Testament.ed. K. Stendahl, 292, n. 16) remarks:


205

"He (Schoeps) finds it convenient for his thesis to attribute all Gnostic elements that might be found in the Ebionite tenets to the Elchesaites. This may well be true, but it does not follow that Epiphanius has confused the Elchesaites and the Ebionites. Later Ebionites may well have been Gnostics, precisely because of the Elchesaite influence. Does this seem to be indicated by the fact that Epiphanius notes a distinction between Ebion and later Ebionites? Accordingly, it is not implausible, even according to Schoeps' assumptions, that there were third century Ebionites who could be characterized as gnosticising Jewish Christians. Also Alon, Toledot I 183, while not identifying Ebionites with any Gnostics, allows for a group characterized as "JewishChristian, gnostic-syncretistic." It should not be inferred from the phrase "gnosticising Jewish Christians" that we identify with the position that the gnostic revolt reflected Jewish disappointment of apocalyptic hopes. H. Jonas' strictures (in Bianchi, op. cit. (n.6 ) 457) are too cogent. 13. See above, n. 10; idem, "Mo§a HaNo?rut min HaYahadut," Yjgfraq Baer Jubilee Volume 93. For a discussion of the problem in defining Gnosticism, see E. M. Yamauchi, Pre-Christian Gnosticism 13-28. 14. See M. Simon, Verus Israel 214-38. 15. For the classic discussions of Jewish Gnosticism, see Blau JE V 6 8 6 . For a comprehensive critical assessment of the literature on Jewish heterodoxy, see A. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven (Yale University dissertation 1976) I, ch. 1. Cf., also S. M. Wagner, Religious Non-conformity in Ancient Jewish Life (Yeshiva University dissertation 1964). For a pithy treatment of the issues in the research of Jewish Christianity, see M. Simon and A. Benoit, Le Judaisme et le Christianisme Antique 258-74, 286-88. For the literature, see, B. J. Malina, "Jewish Christianity: A Select Bibliography," Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology 6 (1973) 60-5; and the survey article by A. F. J. Klijn, "The Study of Jewish Christianity,"New TestamentStudies 20 (1973/74) 419-31. 16.

See Avi-Yonah Bime 120; andbelow,

17.

J San 10,£ 29c.

18.

Op. cit. (n. 9) 1.

19.

TS_ 199, see ibid., 206.

n. 78.

20. "Class-Status" 39, who says that this passage "evidences numerous schisms that existed at the close of the second Temple period." Elsewhere, however, Urbach admits that an appreciable part of the evaluation of the Second Temple period by third century amoraim served contemporary polemical goals (Hazal 477).


206

21. Ginzberg, op. cit., n. 2.Also Lieberman TS_ 199, n. 69, says, "The Rabbi apparently refers to the first dispersion. But this was theusual way of the Rabbis to apply later events to earlier situations." 22.

B Shab 119b and elsewhere, see below, p. 281, n. 70.

23.

P.

95, n. 115; .

24. "The Minim of Sepphoris and Tiberias in the Second and Third Centuries," Studies in Jewish History 247. See also T. R. Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash. 25. In his Panarion; note especially his statement that "Ebion was a many headed monster" (Panarion 30.14). The Panarion is summarized by J. Quasten, Patrology III 387f. 26. G. Quispel, f,Christliche Gnosis und jiidische Heterodoxie/Evangelische Theologie (Codex Jung) 14 (1954) 475. 27. So Heschel Torah II 101. According to Pene Moshe, ad loc., thenumber twenty-four connotes multitudinous and multifariousness. The anonymous commentator in the Krotoschin ed. arrives at twenty-four by dividing the twelve tribes by two. H. J. Schoeps, Theologie und Geschichte des Judenchristentums 388, n. 2, remarks, "Die Zahl hat keinen weiteren Beweiswert, weil sie aus Ez. 2,3 kunstlich abgeleitert wird." 28. This verse has long been a locus vexatus, see M. Greenberg, Understanding Exodus 139f.; and N. Leibowitz, Iyunim Hadashim BeSefer Shmot 110-17. 29.

ER 13,3

30. AAEY 48, n. 2. Gnostics.

Buchler, op. cit. (n. 24) 271, saw them as Marcion-type

31. Buchler, ibid., n. 2, renders Prov 3:34 as follows: "God deals with sinners by copying their own behaviour." See Leibowitz, op. cit., 116f. 32.

0£. cit. (n. 24) 321-23.

33.

Hazal 621.

?4 On First Principles 171, n. 1, referring to Origen's mention of the schools of Marcion, Valentinus, and Basilides (ibid. 2.9.5). It should be noted that "Origen repeatedly admonished the Christian not to become involved with the teaching of Marcion and the Gnostics, Basilides and Valentine," (Levine Caesarea 131, see, ibid., 238, n. 156 for references). A recent dis cussion of the text is that of E. H. Pagels, The Gnostic Paul: Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters 38. 35. See H. Jonas' discussion of "The Gospel of Marcion" in his The Gnostic Religion 141f. Cf. The Clementine Homilies (18.3) which report Simon (=Paui ) saying: "...to me it seems impossible that the lawgiver who is good should also be just."


207

36. This citation follows the Greek, as do the others, unless specified otherwise. The Latin translation reads: God’s actions and desires do not aim at hardening the man who is hardened, but that during the time in which he is displaying kindness and forbearance those who treat his kindness and forbearance with contempt and pride have their heart hardened while the punishment of their misdeeds is being deferred, whereas they who receive his kindness and forbearance as an opportunity of repentance and amendment obtain mercy Compare the part of Resh Laqish's comment which states: "Since God sent five times to him and he took no notice." Other answers of Origen are cited in R. P. C. Hanson, Allegory and Event 214f., and ibid., n. 5. 37. For RY, see above, pp. 14f.; for Resh Laqish, see below, p. 198; for Origen, see below, Ch. VI, introduction. 38. "M of C" 398. 60 (1969) 197-212.

See S. T. Lachs, "Rabbi Abbahu and the Minim," JQR

39.

"The Background of the Haggadah," Studies 1-71.

40.

Op. cit. (n. 24) 271.

41.

See below, Ch. VI, introduction.

42. See R. P. C. Hanson, "The Date and Order of Origen's Works,"in his Origen's Doctrine of Tradition 12, who cites Harnack, Cadrou, and Koetschau. Subsequent dating of events in Origen's life and of his works follows this work, especially the chart (p. 26f.) Hanson also remarks that "Origen is on the whole more concerned about this (sc. Marcionite) school of exposition in his earlier writings than in his latter" (op. cit., n. 36, 135). That is, prior to his extensivestay in Palestine, Marcionism was of greater concern to him. Actual evidence of Marcionites in third century Palestine is slight. Eusebius (EH 7.12) mentioned a Marcionite woman, probably from Caesarea, as having been martyred during Valerian's persecution, and of a Marcionite bishop who was executed about 310 (Martyrs of Palestine 9. 2-11,31; 10.3). Also a synagogue of the Marcionites was built near Damascus about 318 (see Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, ed. W. Dittenberger, 608. On the other hand, several scholars have argued for a Jewish Christian element in Origen's native Alexandria, see Quispel, op. cit. (n. 11) 31. It is, however, difficult to ascertain what exactly "Jewish Christian" would denote in third century Alexandria. For the difficulties in defining the phenomena, see B. J. Malina, "Jewish Christianity or Christian Judaism: Toward a Hypothetical Definition," JSJ 7 (1976) 46-57. Nonetheless, S. G. F. Brandon, The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church 225, says:


208

It would appear that Christianity reached Alexandria early being brought thither by persons who had learned their faith in Jerusalem and who continued loyal in their allegiance to the Mother Church there. This firm establishment cf Jewish Christianity in the Egyptian metropolis satisfactorily accounts for Paul's remarkable omission of Egypt from the wide field of his missionary endeavor..." 43. See Levine Caesarea 204, n. 207; and Simon, op. cit. (n. 14) PostScriptum 501. 44.

Op. cit. (n. 24) 270.

45.

See below, p. 255.

46.

Similarly, Urbach Hazal 64.

47. Indeed, B AZ 4a, states that such Minim are not found in Babylonia. With regard to the RY passage recorded in ER, early research thought there was a Babylonian influence on ER, subsequent research, however, has rejected this thesis, see Halevy Mid ER, Preface 35f. 48.

See R. M Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity 17 and 107.

49.

See the Book of Jubilees 2:2 and the Slavonic Enoch 11:8.

50.

See Tan B BR*SYT 1 and 12; Mid Ps 24,4; GR 1,3, p. 5 and parallels.

51.

See Jonas, op. cit. (n. 35) 132f; and Segal, op. cit. (n. 15) 248ff.

52. Jonas, ibid.; Iranaeus, Against Heresies 1. 22-25. See J. Danielou, The Theology of Jewish Christianity 72-5 for the connections between these three and Jewish Christianity. Cf., however, the conjectures of R. M. Grant "Jewish Christianity at Antioch in the Second Century," RSR 60(1972) 97-108. Grant, ibid.. 97, refers to the "Samaritan heretic Simon" and "the Samaritan Gnostic Meander." Still, there is no scholarly consensus on whether Simonianism is rooted in Samaritanism or not. Note that in RY's time the Samaritans had not yet been excluded from the rabbinic Jewish Community, see Levine, Caesarea 108-12. Indeed, S. Z. Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture: The Talmudic and Midrashic Evidence 71, considers the possibility that ’’ywis in one instance (Tan R3HI) may refer to the Samaritans. Even in that instance, however, Jewish Christian seems the more probable denotation. 53.

Jonas, ibid.

54. See above, n. 12. Irenaeus. (Against Heresies 1.25.2; 1.26.1 and 2) Tertullian (Against All Heresies 3) and Hippolytus (Philosoph. 7.34; 10.22) all asserted that the Ebionites depend on or are similar to Cerinthus and Carpocrates who stated that the world was created by angels far removed from the unbegotten Father or First God.


209

The thesis of a gnosticising Jewish Christianity helps mediate between two heretofore mutually exclusive positions, namely, that of M. Friedlahder (Per vorchristliche judische Gnosticismus) and that of Herford, op. cit. (n. 24). The former saw Minim only as Gnostics; the latter almost always as Jewish Christians. For a list of scholars who have argued one of these two positions, see Goldstein, op. cit. (n. 7) 46f. Goldstein, himself, comes to a conclusion similar to ours (ibid., 49). On the Judaic element in the thinking of Cerinthus and Carpocrates, see Danielou, op. cit., 68 f. and 84f. 55. For Simon Magus, see. esp., Danielou, op. cit.., 69-71; and the critical survey of opinion by G. Van Groningen, First Century Gnosticism: Its Origins and Motifs 128-64. 56.

Op.cit. (n. 52) 121-131, esp. 127.

57. Mid Ps 24,4. "north and south."

Cf. GR 1,3, p. 5, which instead of "east and west" reads

58. See J. N. D. Kelly, "Third-Century Trinitarianism," in his Early Christian Doctrines 109-37. In that discussion, the closest idea to the Jewish Christian "Trinity" is that of Hippolytus (c. Noet. lOf.) who has both God’s Word and Wisdom involved in the Creation. But even this, Kelly describes as aspects of "the threefoldness of God's intrinsic being" (ibid., 111). 59. See a most helpful listing of the Ebionite and Nazaraioi tenets by Fitzmyer, op. cit. (n. 12) 292f. 60. The rest of the source cites five other passages. They are: Gen 2:5-7; 35:3-7; Dt 4:7; 2Sam 7:23 and Dan 7:9. In all these verses there is a plural form which suggests that the Bible speaks of more than one God; yet, in con text, the singularity of God is affirmed. In the parallel passages (see Gen R 8,9, p. 62 parallels and notes) R. Simlai is mentioned and in some of the parallels Jos 22:22; 24:19; and Ps 50:1 are also cited. With regard to the Daniel passage, see Herford, op. cit. (n. 24) 296f. For a comprehensive dis cussion of the issues involved, see Segal, op. cit. (n. 15) 222-44. 61. J. Bergmann, Judische Apologetik im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 83-8, already argued that this polemic was directed equally against Christianity and Gnosticism. References to both Christian and gnostic material are found in Ginzberg Legends V 69f. For Christian exegesis of Gen 1:26, see M. J. Rouet De Journel, Enchiridion Patristicum pp. 93, 131, 190, 258, 361, 561; and R. Me. L. Wilson, "The Early History of the Exegesis of Gen 1:26," Studia Patristica I (1957) 420-37; see also Marmorstein Studies 97-100; A. Altmann, "Homo Imago Dei in Jewish and Christian Theology," Journal of Religion 47 (1967) 235-53; and Urbach Hazal 182f. 62.

Op. cit. (n. 24) 258.


210

63. "Stir deux heresies juives mentionnes par Justin Martyr," Revue d'hlstoire et de philosophie religieuses 18 (1938) 54-8. Syrian Christianity also had dualistic overtones, see J. J. Gunther, "Syrian Christian Dualism," VC 25 (1971) 81-93, esp. 92f. This probably contributed to the subsequent blurring of the distinctions between these two communities. See below, n. 148. 64.

93-6.

On Min = genos, see Schoeps, op. cit. (n. 28) 387f., n. 3.

65. Quoted in G. Quispel, "Christliche Gnosis und judische Heterodoxie," Evangelische Theologie 14 (1954) 2. Fitzmyer, op. cit. (n. 12) after presenting a profile of the dualism of Qumran and that of the Ebionites (pp. 215-18) con cludes "that the dualism of Qumran, though similar in its general conception to that of the Ebionites, is of a simpler type. An ethical dualism, like that of Qumran, could have developed - especially under other influences - into a dualism that was both physical and ethical, like that of the PsC" (= PseudoClementines) . 66 .

See above, p. 96, n. 126.

67.

Urbach "Yerushalayim" 170.

68 .

Epistle 89, see below, n. 111.

69.

Rabbinic Essays 567.

70.

SRH 134.

71.

Ed. Higger 17,4, p. 301 (Herford notes the reference as 17,5).

72.

Op. cit. (n. 24) 172.

73.

Op. cit. (n. 12) 114.

74.

The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount 283.

75. ICorinthians 18:2 and Acts 20:7 do not constitute evidence that Sunday was already the Christian Sabbath. And Revelation 1:10 is post 70. With regard to the impact of Christianity on Judaism, pre 70, see Urbach, below p. 248, n. 81. Note also that the sign of the cross, originally a Jewish symbolwAlTLS found in the Jewish catacombs at Rome in the synagogue at Dura and on Jewish sarcophagi from Jerusalem dated from the last century B.C.E., does not fall into desuetude until the early third century due to the impact of Christianity. See E. Dinkier, Signum Crucis; and G. J. Ormann, Qiryat Sefer 43 (1967) 583f. For how Sunday became che Christian "Sabbath," see H. Riesenfeld, The Gospel Tradition 111-37 76. See above, n. 23. 77. Eusebius (EH 3.27.5) mentioned that a second group of Ebionites observed the Sabbath as the Jews and Sunday as the Christians. Epiphanius (Panarion 29) described a group whose characteristics overlap those of Eusebius' Ebionites and calls them Nazaraioi (Panarion 29). For a critical discussion of the Patristic accounts and the meaning of the term, see M. Black, The


Scrolls and Christian Origins 66-74. On the origin of the word, see C. Rabin "No§erim," Textus V 44-52. For their relationship to the Ebionites, see Fitznryer, op. cit. (n. 12); and Simon, op. cit. (n. 63) 103-07. 78. Mostly east of the Jordan and Coele-Syria (see Schoeps, op. cit., n. 12 28f.); an area with which RY had contact, see above, p. 104, n. 159. Most significantly, Kefar Sekania (Suchnin) in Galilee, about twenty kilometers north of Sepphoris, is not only referred to as a place of minut (see Herford, op. cit., n. 24, 103-08, for sources and comment) but according to S. Klein (see Soncino, Git, p. 263, n. 4) and G. F. Moore (Judaism II 67, n. 1) a place of D ’-ixia I For a possible relationship of the Nazaraioi to rabbinic exegesis, see A. F. J. Klijn, "Jerome's Quotations from a Nazoraean Interpretation of Isaiah." RSR 60 (1972) 241-55. 79. SRH 134, see, ibid., 380, n. 6 , citing Aptowitzer, "Bemerkungen zur liturgie und Geschichte der Liturgie," MGWJ 74 (1932) llOff. 80. In the Didache 14, Sunday is a day of communion, confession and re conciliation. Ignatius (Epistle to the Magnesians 9) gave the day its joyful character, thereby precluding any fasting. This emphasis on joy is also reflected in The Epistle of Barnabas 15.10. In general, see H. von Schubert, Geschichte der christlichen Kirche im Fruhmittelalter 663f. 81. In Hennecke, op. cit. (n.ll) 458. On the provenance of the document, see ibid., 442 who underscores its "Gnostic character"; and below, n. 83. 82. Trans. H. Hugh Connolly (Oxford 1929) 183, pagination follows this edition. 83. See, ibid., Ixxxvii-xci; and A. F. J. Klijn, The Acts of Thomas, Supplement Novum Testamentum 5 (1962). Also The Apostolic Constitutions 4.3.15 and 5.3.20, end, opposed Sunday fasting. 84.

"Judaism and Christianity in the Middle of the Third Century," HUCA S t t e ^ K e r ^ bejou/ 2 $ 8 - 6 0 , 274-.

10 (1935) 2 3 1 f S « e

85.

Op. cit. (n. 18) 61f.

Cf. Klijn, op. cit. (h. 15) 430, n. 4.

86 .

Die Syrische Didaskalia 257-387, esp. 366, n.

87. In this connection, note R. Murray, "Asceticism in the Ancient Syriac Church," New Testament Studies 21 (1974/75) who states (p. 63, n. 2) "that nazir is a title of Christ in the Syriac Acts of Judas Thomas 48...and naziruta remained a word for ascetical self-denial." M. Black, op. cit. (n. 77) 74, n. 1, notes that B. Gartner, Die ratselhaften Termini Nazoraer und Iskariot "is prepared...to connect Epiphanius 's WttCCCpa’to I with the...rabbinical Nosrim... " It may be of some value to note that the chapter (8 ) immediately pre ceding Ignatius' urging that "every friend of Christ keep the Lord's Day as a festival" (o£. cit.. n. 80) cautioned against living according to the


212

Jewish Law, while the succeeding chapter (10) warned against Judaizing, "for where there is Christianity there cannot be Judaism." Since this last state ment of Ignatius is the official position of the Gentile Church towards Jewish Christianity, it may very well be that Ignatius is saying that being a friend of Christ entails keeping the Lord’s Day as a festival and not as a fast day. This would then be a third indication for the practice among some Jewish Christians of fasting on Sunday. On Ignatius and "Judaizers", see V. Corwin St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch 57ff. The fact that a Christian group fasted on Sunday may point to Docetic influence. This, at least, seems to be behind the ascetic Priscillians fasting on Sunday. They were condemned for fasting on Sunday by the Council of Saragossa (canon 2) in 380 as were the Eusthatians by the Council of Gangres (canon 18) in 340, see C. J. Hefele Histoire des Conciles I, 2, pp. 1040f., 987. In am indebted to Professor Jochanan Winjhoven for this line of inquiry. (By the way, a pervasive mistake in pagan literature was that the Sabbath was a fast day, see M. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism I 277). Although this analysis seems to indicate that RY meant by C ’nsis Nazaraioi, B, which recorded the passage, probably understood it as Christian, in light of its own Babylonian reality. As M. L. Chaumont said, "dans le monde mesopotamien et syrien le terme nasraye "nazareens" est le nom habituel des chretiens" ("Les Sassanides et la christianisation de 1'Empire iranien au Ille siecle de notre ere," Revue de I ’historie des religions 165 (1964) 195. There is also the possibility that Mandaeans are alluded to since they are also dubbed Nasoreans, indeed called themselves Nasirutha. The Mandaeans had an antipathy to Judaism and did not work on Sunday. Moreover, they may have been influenced by some type of Jewish Christianity, see E. Segelberg, "The Mandaean Week and the Problem of Jewish Christianity and Mandaean Re lationship," RSR 60 (1972) 273-86. 88. Torah II 190; see, similarly, M. Simon, "The Ancient Church and Rabbinical Tradition," Holy Book and Holy Tradition, eds. R. Bruce and E. Rupp 107f.

89. See Heschel, ibid., 190f.; Connoly, op. cit. (n. 82) 216-19, and Intro duction Ivii-lxix; and Simon, ibid., 120f. 90. See L. Smolar and M. Aberbach, "The Golden Calf Episode in Post Biblical Literature," HUCA 39 (1968) 91-116 who cite Justin, Dialogue 20.3: 21.7; 22.1; Apostolic Constitutions 6.4.20; Origen, Com, on Romans 2:14; and .usctantius, Drvane Institutes 4.10. In addition, see Connoly, ibid.; Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.16.1; and R. M. Grant, "The Decalogue in Early Christianity," HTR 40 (1947) 13ff. For the Didascalia on this point, see G. S t r e c k ^ r i.n W. Bauer, Rechtglaubigkeit und Ketzerei im altesten Christentum 25'?. In general, see M. Werner, "The Problem of the Abrogation of the Law," in his The Formation of Christian Dogma 77-94. 91.

0£. cit. (n. 35) 174.

92. Ed. G. Quispel 50. Stevenson, 92.

See English rendering in A New Eusebius, ed. J.


213

93. Ed. F. C. Conybeare,

66 (Fol 77A).

94. P. 66 , (Fol 77A). 95. For this source, and several others, I amindebted M. Grant (private correspondence October 3, 1975).

toProfessor Robert

96. Heschel, Torah II 116, n. 16, notes that Matthew 19.8 was so explicated to Origen and Ambrosius and refers to P. Dausch, Die Schriftinspiration 61,64. 97. J Sot 7,2 21c. In GR 74,14, p. 871, the author is R. Samuel b. Nahman. MHG Gen 553 just reads ’’2T . Bacher, AAEY 41f., n. 3, defended RY's authorship. On the relationship between Hebrew and Aramaic in rabbinic literature see Kasher TS V 1246f., nn. 107f. 98. B Shab 12b = Sot 33a.This statement remains enigmatic (see OSH Shab HaTeshubot p. 6 ) despite efforts to uncover its social setting (see, e.g., Alon Toledot II 135). Nonetheless, Alon's thesis (Mehqarim II 254, n. 9) that "it is directed against those who ascribe to Aramaic some type of sanctity (as Hebrew) and employ it in prayer," may be supported by the fact that authorities in the Church did contend that "Syriac was the language in which God conversed with Adam, (and) That Hebrew did not appear when the Confusion of Tongues took place, but that it was introduced by Abraham" (A. Levene, The Early Syrian Fathers on Genesis 214). Although Rab also held that Adam spoke Aramaic (B San 38b) RY held that the generation of the Tower of Babel spoke the language of the Unique One the language of the Holy One (i. e. Hebrew). Conversely, R. Eleazar (following Bacher AAEY 57, n.7) explicated Gen 11:1 to mean all seventy languages (J Meg 1,11 71b, see Ratner ASY Meg, p. 21 for parallelsând the later opinion in GR 13,4). Origen also "believed that Hebrew was the original language of the human race left with the Jew when at the Tower of Babel the other races adopted other tongues" (Hanson, op. cit., n. 36, 165, who cites Horn on Num 11:4), see also Origin £C 5.30f. Cf. H. A. Wolfson, Religious Philosophy 228f. 99.

So Bacher AAEY 41, n. 7 noting B Sot 49b = BQ 82b.

100. The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity Accord ing to a New Source, Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Science and Humanities II, no. 13. 101. Heschel, Torah J.I 112, also considered the possibility that there were Minim who doubted the authenticity of Aramaic Biblical passages. Our analysis follows Pines' in an effort to confirm his thesis. Nonetheless, we are aware that the "Hebrew" of the Gospel of the Nazaraeans is problem atic, see Eennecke, op. cit. (n. 12) 123-36, and that Pines' thesis has been called into question by E. Bammel, Novum Testamentum 19 (1968) 1-9; and by S. Stern, JTS 19 (1968/69) 128-85. Incidentally, the Syriac Church is also known to have disparaged Hebrew and exalted Syriac. Levene, op. cit., (n. 98) 29, is somewhat at


F

214

a loss at how to account adequately for this disparagement. Possibly, Jewish Christian exaltation of Hebrew helped trigger this negative reaction. If so, this instance would fall into the pattern which underlies much of this study, namely, that both Syrian Christians and the rabbis responded to Jewish Christians in, mutatis mutandis, similar manner. See below, n. 122 , paragraph five. 102. Mid Ps 5,6, see GR 71,1, p. 821. For other possible allusions to Ebionites, admittedly weak, see Moore, Judaism, note to I, p. 186. t f !

| I

j

103. See, e.g.. Is 61:1 and Schoeps, op. cit. (n. 18) 352f., for an analysis of the terms in the Septuagint. On ff’m y / o ’ây in the Bible, see Z. Zinger, "The Biblical Quotations in the Pesikta De Rav Kahana," Textus V 124. 104. Qumran called themselves o ’j r a s m y 1 QpHab 12:3, 6,10; 4QpPss 1-2 ii 9; and elsewhere. Also some early Christians were referred to as poor (Romans 15:26; Galatians 2:10). See the material collected by L. E. Keck, "The Poor among the Saints in Jewish Christianity and Qumran," Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 57 (1966) 54-78.

i

105.

"Blessed Are the Poor in Spirit...," IEJ 10 (1960) 1-13, esp. 9. Cf., Sfrecker, op. cit. (n.pro) 2.7^-f^ 106. "Jewish Religious Parties and Sects," The Crucible of Christianity, ed. A. Toynbee, 95. h o w ev er,

107.

VC 22 (1968) 89f.

108. Similarly, both the Ethiopic Enoch (5:7) and the Greek version (5:6-8) understood Ps 35:11 as an eschatological promise to the elect community of the eschaton. In the same vein, R. Meir applied it to the future Jewish people - DR (ed. Lieberman) 19. See below, n. 122, paragraph four. 109. Mid Ps 9, 12, p. 8 8 , n. 8 6 . RY also found a reference to the prophets of Israel in the term for poor in Prov 18:23 mh (DR 2,4). 110. Schoeps, op. cit. (n. 12) 11 and 101-03. See A. F. J. Klign and G. J. Reinink, Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects in Supplement to Novum Testamentum 36 (Leiden 1973) 28-38; note, esp., the nature of the evidence cited by Epiphanius; and Keck) op. c i t . , £ 3 - 5 111.

Epistle 89, cited from Herford,

op. cit. (n. 24) 378.

112. In 1935, J. Thomas also argued for this hypothesis (Le mouvement baptiste en Palestine et Syrie 161f.) as did J. Block in 1953 ("Outside Books," M. M. Kaplan Jubilee Volume, English Section) who said (p. 95, n. 31) "Whenever Minim is mentioned in early rabbinical texts itusually refers to the early Jewish Christians, the Nazarenes." AlsoBaron thinks,


215

"a good case has also been made for relating some references to the JudeoChristian Ebionites" (SRH 381, n. 8). Cf., however, Simon, op. cit. (n. 14) 238, n. 2. Note that according to Epiphanius, the Nazoraeans (Panarion 29.7.8) and Ebionites (ibid., 30.2.7) split up in the region of Pella. See below, n. 115. 113.

Op. cit. (n. 24) 378.

114. For cf. E. J. 164, n.6, BeYisrael

this version, see P. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza 41, reprintedoften, Bickerman, "The Civic Prayer for Jerusalem,"HTR 55 (1962) see ibid., n. 35. On Birkat HaMinim, see Y.Elbogen, HaTefilah 31; Li-'berman TKF Ber 54; and Baron SRH 381, n. 8.

115. Bime 122. Alon, Toledot I 180f., also saw this formulation of Birkat HaMinim as directed against Jewish Christians, albeit of the first century. Avi-Yonah, ibid., 250, n. 10, underscores that only fourth century sources (Jerome, ad. Is 52:4 Epiphanius, Panarion 24.9) mentiontha*" the imprecation included the term "Nazaraioi." Accordingly, M. Liberismost cogent when he says ("Structure and History of the Tefilah," JQR 40, 1949, 350, n. 43): The testimony of Epiphanius and of Jerome (4th century), regarding the execrations levelled at the Nazarenes in the Synagogues proves nothing about the terminology as far as the rabbis and the Second Century are concerned. Epiphanius, bishop of the Oriental Church, designates as Nazarenes the Judeo-Christians whom the Palestinian rabbis called Minim. As for Jerome he likens the Nazarenes to the Minim, both the former and the latter being Judeo-Christians. See below, n. 117, for evidence that the Minim were still frequenting synagogues in the first half of the third century, thus militatingagainst the possibility that a blessing had already been formulated to exclude them. Moreover, what would first century rabbis have against contemporary Palestinian Christians? If Acts' report of Gamaliel is indicative of rabbinic attitudes after 70, then the rabbis were not on the verge of excluding them from synagogue life. Indeed, Brandon, op. cit. (n. 42) 100, is willing to assert "that the Palestinian Christians were not an outcast body from the national life of Israel, but rather that they enjoyed a certain measure of sympathy from the Pharisees." If it be countered that their flight from Jerusalem while under seige changed all this, it may be said that those rabbis who had R. Yohanan b. Zakkai as their leader, who reportedly left Jerusalem in similar fashion, would hardly be in a position to fault the Jerusalem Church for this act. Indeed, the historicity of both tradition? has been seriously questioned. See A. J. Saldarini, "Johanan ben Zakkai's Escape from Jerusalem: Origin and Development of a Rabbinic Story," JSJ (1976) 189-204; and Brandon, op. cit. (n. 42) 168-73; and idem, Jesus and the Zealots 208ff. Lieberman, TKF Sot 991, however, believes that the story of R. Yohanan b. Zakkai's escape bears the hallmark of truth. And M. Simon defends, in general, the traditional account of the migration to Pella in "La Migration a Pella iegende ou realite? RSR 60 (1972) 37-54.


216

116.

Simon, op. cit. (n. 14) 236.

See also Alon, ibid.

117. See above, p. 187. The rulings of RY's senior colleagues, Rab (B Ber 29a) and R. Joshua b. Levi (J Ber 5,4 9c) also assume that Minim are secretly participating in the synagogue service. This disconfirms Kuhn's thesis, op. cit. (n. 2) 39, that circa 200, Minim no longer existed within the bounds of Judaism. Kuhn's thinking is paralleled by the comment of Baron (SRH 135) that Birkat HaMinim "represented the formal recognition by official Judaism of the severance of all ties between the Christian and other schismatics and the national body of Jewry" (emphasis - R.K.) If Christian and other schismatics is Baron's rendering of the Geniza version under discussion, then this is more likely an end of the third century phenomena than as Baron thought (ibid.) an "end of the first century phenomena." The situation is more accurately described by J. Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue 94, who said, "The Church of the second century was no more the Church of the fourth than was the Judaism of the second century the complete Judaism of the Talmud. Neither had yet absorbed or rejected various intermediate groups which existed at the earlier period." 118.

See Levine, ”R. Abbahu of Caesarea.”

119. B AZ 26b. For different versions, see ed. Abramson, p. 172b. The term for apostate is nam or naiwa which according to T. Hor 1:5 is simply a non-observant Jew, not necessarily an adherent of an alternative theology. Note that the term Min does appear in R. Abbahu's initial statement and that it is not excluded by RY. Due to the various readings, I am wary of drawing conclusions based on the terms of any single reading and have limited the discussion to the fact that RY objects to the inclusion of one category. 120. J MQ 3,7 83b = San 7,10 25b. See E. Z. Melamed, Mefarshe HaMiqra I 36f. Although a cuthean ( ’m a ) could be a censored version for Min, it may very well denote an actual Cuthean, viz., Samaritan. This is supported by the fact that Caesarea, which in the aforementioned citation was dubbed a "blasphemous city," had a large Samaritan population, see Levine Caesarea, "The Samaritan Community," 107-12. 121. E San 38b = MHG Dt 73 (R. Judah). See Urbach Hazal 311, n. 37. Note Cyril of Jerusalem's observation: "Jews are always prepared for controversy" (Catechetical Lectures 13.7). 122.

According to GR 48,5, p. 480, R. Jonathan comments on Is 33:14: "ima m n a n o m ^ a a tnpoa n m a x n namn â According to G. F. Moore ("The Definition of the Jewish Cannon and the Repudiation of Christian Scriptures," 121, reprinted in The Canon and Masorah of the Hebrew Bible, ed. S. Z. Leiman, New York 1974, 137) this translates as, "Rabbi Jonathan teaches that wherever the Bible speaks of defection ( n m 3 n , often with the connotation of hypocrisy) it means heresy ( m a ’a )."


217

According to MHG Gen 284, however, the logion is ascribed to RY where, significantly, to Is 33:14 is appended the latter part of Jer 23:15 which, in toto, reads: Therefore, thus says the Lord of Hosts concerning the prophets; I will make them eat wormwoodC my!? ) and drink hemlock, for from the prophets of Jerusalem defection ( n a n n ) is gone abroad to all the land. Moore, ibid., on his own, juxtaposed Jer 23:15 to R. Jonathan's statement to support his thesis that niyV is associated with apostasy. Striking confirmation of the fact that Jer 23:15 was applied to the minut of Jewish Christianity lies in the fact that the anti-Jewish Chris tian work, the Didascalia, used the same verse against the Jewish Chris tians (23, "On Heresies and Schisms," p. 198)! In light of this parallel, there is warrant in accepting the version in MHG Gen and the attribution to RY. If so, the resultant pattern is the Jews, specifically RY, Jewish Christians, and/or Christians applying to each other the nanin of Scripture and claiming for themselves the 7 t*>am *»iy of Scripture. Incidentally, much of the material in this study reflects the fact that Syrian Christianity, the Didascalia in particular, and the rabbis depict and respond to the Jewish Christian in similar terms. To this may be added the following striking parallel: R. Tarfon: The heathen do not know Him and (therefore) deny Him, but those (the Minim) know Him and(still)deny Him (T Shab 13:5) The heathen are judged because they have not known, (Him) but the heretics (sc. Jewish Christians) are condemned because they withstand God (Didascalia 23, p. 197). See above, n. 101, end. It may not be insignificant to note that according to Eusebius (EH 7.32.2) a younger contemporary of RY, Dorotheus, "who was thought worthy of the presbyterate at Antioch" was learned in Hebrew. 123. = nnoiD J Peah 1,1, 15c. This would apply regardless of whether these informers undermine the authority of the Jewish courts by appealing to the Roman courts (Lieberman GJP 24, see above, p. 105, n. 162) or whether they be Jewish Christian missionaries (Baron SRH 385, n. 1, cf. however, Alon Toledot I 192, n. 348). 124. Origen 13, p. also a nn3 pn7

B Meg 13a = Agadat Esther (ed. Buber) 2,5, p. 18. Philo, Clement, (see de Lange„ Origen and the Jews 160, n. 29) and the Didascalia 126 understood ’n n ’ to derive from m i o ( confess). There is midrashic statement somewhere which says: orrm 7 V o ’Tin’ ixapi o ’n a Cf. Sifre Dt 54, p. 122: haa nsna m i mnaya m a n 73 nVia n n n n Vaa m i o mi m n a y a aaian Vai .nVna rrnnn and n. 9, ibid. Also a twelfth century source said that "they are called* Jews (yenudim) because they recognize (modim) and confess (mithwadim) before the priest," (Sefer nizanon vetus, LXX) - as cited by F. Talmage, "R. David Kimhi as Polemicist*"*HUCA 38 (1967) 223.


218

125. Literally: "worship idolatry as the generation of Enosh." rendition follows R. Isaac GR 23,4, p. 227.

Our

126. B Shab 118a = MHG Ex 334; see Kasher TS XXI 75, n. 98. For a suggestive historical setting, see Baer, below p.239, n. 2, 34. Cf., however, Marmorstein Studies, Hebrew Section 27f., and 87. 127. B San 103a. Cf. SOR 24, p. 100. The position that Manasseh's repentance (see 2Chron 23:11 and Targum, ad loc.) was accepted is already recorded in the apocryphal works of The Prayer of Manasseh, and Tobit 14:10. According to Ginzberg, however, "the prevalent opinion in rabbinic literature is that Manasseh is one of the few Jews who lost their portion in the world to come" (Legends VI 376, n. 108, see sources, ibid., and Sifre Dt, p. 58, n. 7). RY's deviation from this prevalent rabbinic opinion may have been intended to encourage penitence on the part of those who were involved in the aforementioned Enosh-type idolatry. This supposition is supported by the fact that the Didascalia 7, p. 74, after recounting the Biblical story of Manasseh and the Prayer of Manasseh drew the following moral: You have heard, beloved children how Manasseh served idols...yet when he repented God forgave him, albeit there is no sin worse than idolatry, wherefore, there is granted a place for repentance. Cf. below, p.252, n. 104. Similarly, R. Joshua b. Levi claimed: "Israel only made the (golden) calf in order to provide a pretext for penitents" (B AZ 4b). 128.

B San 110b, see Moore, Judaism II 369.

129.

B Meg 14b; Arak 33a.

130. This is RY's consistent position. See B San 111a against Resh Laqishj and B Ket 111b against R. Eleazar. On the former, see Heschel Torah I 134f. In general, see Bacher AAEY 117f., n. 4. 131.

See Fitzmyer, op. cit. (n. 12 ) 293, on Ebionites, letter 1.

132.

B San 90a = MHG Dt 425.

133.

Hazal 489, n. 88 *.

134. de Lange, op. cit. (n.124) 47, 84-6, concludes after analyzing the material from Origin that "we have very little evidence that attacks (of Jews against Christians) continued beyond the middle of the second century" (85). He notes that this finding is in consonance with that of J. Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue 144-50. 135. ’yw*n tj’i m n - according to the Venice edition (see Urbach Hazal 450f., n. 69). Recall that n m n was considered by RY in the category of 'brother. ' Note that Vxiw’ ’Von can be a variant for f see, e.g., PRK, p. 94, variae lectiones to line 13, and parallels. Cf. Ginzberg CPT III 281f.


219

136.

ER 19, 4.

137.

Op. cit. (n. 84) 223-63, esp. 259. According to Ginzberg, CPT I 336, o ’y m n 0 ’ 3 ’n can all refer to the same thing.

138. B Ber 17a according to MS (PS, ad loc.). For commentary on each part, see Soncino, ad loc. It is not clear whether the statement is RY's or R. Eleazar. For present purposes, it does not matter. For the fate of the explicit references to Jesus in the Talmud, see A. M. Haberman's edition of R. Rabbinovicz, Ma-amar al Hadpasat HaTalmud 28, nn. 25f. 139.

See Goldstein, op. cit. (n. 7) 117.

13?a. S e e

140.

2 2ba as an apheresis of £ U a Y Y ^ l O V » see literature cited by Leiman, op. cit. (n. 52) 190f., n. 511. 144.

B Shab 116b (see DS, adloc.). Cf. Urbach "Halaka"

145.

Op. cit.(n. 122) 109 n.t .

146.

3, n. 25.

Op. cit. (n. 69( 502.

147. Apphrahat reported, (Homily 21), that Jewish sages spoke to him with reference to Matthew 17:19; and 21:21, cited by S. A. Lukyn Williams, Adversus Judaeos 101. Also Jerome reported that Jews studied the NT in order to refute Christians (In Is 2:1). 148. See Fitzmyer, op. cit.(n. 12) 293; and Hennecke, op. cit. (n. 101). Alternatively, this book could be the Diatessaron written by Justin's Syrian pupil, Tatian (fl. 172) the founder of the Christian sect of the Encratites. A Greek fragment of the text was found in Dura, attesting to its dissemination i n RY ' s i i m e , see B. Wetzger, The £j,r/y V e rn o n s o F bhe.I\!c.ur 11. Indeed L. W. Bernard describes Tatian's Diatessaron as "the Gospel par excellence of Syriac-speaking Christianity" which "for nearly two and a half centuries was the only version of the Gospels which was used in Syriac-speaking Christianity" ("The Origins and Emergence of the Church in Edessa during the First Two Centuries A.D.," VC 22, 1963, 169). In fact, that whole study (pp. 161-75) underscores the affinities between and the influence of Jewish Christianity on Syrian Christianity. This connection is rein-


220

forced by M. Black's conjecture that Tatian may have used the Ebionite Gospel as one of his sources (An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts 201). Cf. above, n. 63. Two other notices are important for placing a Hebrew or Aramaic Matthew-like Gospel in the environs of third century Palestine.

First, according to Jerome (de viris inlustribus 3), a Hebrew Gospel "is still preserved in the library at Caesarea which the martyr Pamphilus (ca. 240-309) collected with great care." Although the identity of this Gospel is as problematic as is its Hebrew, Hennecke, ibid.-, 127ff., nevertheless, concludes from his study of the available data that that an Aramaic Gospel "was at hand in the library in Caesarea, is not to be disputed" (132). Second, there is some evidence, at least for the fourth century, to indicate that a Semitic Gospel of the Nazaraeans (our Nazaraioi) was used by Syrian Jewish Christians (see Hennecke, ibid., 139). 149. Op. cit. (n. 100) 5. Interestingly, the Marcionites asserted that this logionof Jesus had been falsified by the Jewish Christians (see Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.7); according to them it read originally: "I am not come to fulfill the Law, but to annul it." (n. 90) 90.

Cf. Werner, op. cit.

k Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

221

VI

RY and Origen on the Song of Songs A Third Century Jewish-Christian Disputation

A.

Introduction

The rabbinic influence on Origen's exegesis of the Song of Songs (henceforth Song) has been argued in two major studies.^- The first was by Y. Baer in 1956;

2

the second by E. Urbach in 1961.

3

These two studies

are significant contributions to the general study of the relationship between Origen and the rabbis.

The link, however, in the transmission of

rabbinic traditions to Origen remains obscure. Origen mentioned having consulted a certain (Comm on Ps, PG XII, 1056B).

is probably a scribal error for 4

7taTp tapX'HS

H. Graetz identified him with Hillel, the

brother of the Patriarch Judah II.

Judah II, himself.

IovWOQ

G. F. Moore contended that

I o u 6 cl53.

Schubert, H. Von. Geschichte der christlichen Kirche im Fruhmittelatter. Tubingen, 1921. Schubert, K. "Jewish Religious Parties and Sects," Christianity, ed. A. Toynbee. London, 1969. Schulz, F.

Principles of Roman Law.

Sefer Tiberiyah, ed. 0. Avishar. Segal, A.

The Crucible of

Oxford, 1936.

Jerusalem, 1973.

Two Powers in Heaven. Yale University dissertation. 1976.

Segal, M., ed. Sefer Ben Sira BaShalem.

Jerusalem, 1972.

Segelberg, E. "The Mandaaan Week and the Problem of Jewish Christianity and Mandaean Relationship," RSR 60 (1972), pp. 273-286. Shak - Shabbetai Hakohen. Shulkan Aruk. Sherwin-White, A. N. Oxford, 1963. Shulzinger, E.

Commentary to the standard edition of the

Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament.

Yad Eliyahu, 5 vols.

Jerusalem, 1961-1971.

Simon, V. "The Ancient Church and Rabbinical Tradition," Holy Book and Holy Tradition, eds. R. Bruce and E. Rupp. Grand Papids, 1968. .

Jewish Sects at the Time of Jesus.

. "La Migration a Pella: pp. 37-54.

Philadelphia, 1967.

Legende ourealite?

RSR 60 (1972),

. Sur deux heresies juives mentionnes par Justin Martyr," Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuses 18 (1938), pp. 54-58. .

2

Verus Israel . Paris, 1964.

i

L Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

322

See Benoit. Snowden, F. M. Solomon, N.

Blacks in Antiquity.

Cambridge, 1970.

An Encyclopedia of Talmudic Lore (Hb.)

New York, 1951.

Soncino (Press). The Babylonian Talmud... translated into English with notes, glossary and inaa.c°s, ed. I. Epstein, 18 vols. London, 1935-1952. Midrash Rabbah,

ed. H. Freedman and M. Simon, 10 vols.

London,

1939. Sorek, Y. "Hellenistic-Roman Land Tenancy Systems as Reflected in Talmudic Literature,"(Hb). Zion 39 (1974), pp. 217-223. Sperber, D. "Angaria in Rabbinic Literature," Antiquite Classique, (1969), pp. 164-168. .

"Costs of Living in Roman Palestine,"

JESHO 13 (1970), pp. 1-15.

. "Drought, Famine and Pestilence in Amoraic Palestine," (1974), pp. 212-298.

JESHO 17

. Economic Conditions in Palestine during the Third Century CE," Abstract, Proceedings Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies II. Jerusalem, 1972. . Flight and the Talmudic Law of Usucaption: A Study in the Social History of Third Century Palestine," Revue intemationale des droits de 1*antiquite 19 (1972), pp. 29-42. .

"Gilgule Misparim,"

Sinai 62 (1968), pp. 278-280.

. "The Inflation in Fourth Century Palestine," 34 (1966), pp. 54-66.

Archiv Orientalni

. "Objects of Trade between Palestine and Egypt in Roman Times," JESHO 18 (1975), pp. 113-147. . "On Social and Economic Conditions in Third Century Palestine," Archiv Orientalni 38 (1970), pp. 1-25. . "Patronage in Amoraic Palestine (c. 200-400)," (1971), pp. 227-252. .

Roman Palestine 200-400 Money and Prices.

JESHO 14

Ramat Gan, 1974.


323

. "Some Observations on Fish and Fisheries in Roman Palestine," ZeitschriftcferdeutschenmorgenlandischenGesellschaft 118 (1968), pp. 265-269. "Trends in Third Century Palestinian Agriculture," (1972), pp. 227-255. Spiegel, S.

The Last Trial.

New York, 1969.

Steinzalts, A. HaQesharim ben Babel Le-Eres-Yisrael," (1965), pp. 294-306. Stern, M. 1974.

JESHO 15

Talpiot 9

Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism I.

Jerusalem,

Stern, S. M. " Abd Al-Jabbhr's Account of how Christ's Religion was falsified by the Adoption of Roman customs," JTS 19 (1968), pp. 128185. Stevenson, J., ed. A New Eusebius. Strack, H. L. 1963.

London, 1958.

Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash.

Philadelphia,

Straub, J. Heidnische Geschitspolitik in der christlichen Spatantike. Bonn, 1963. Sukenik, E. L. "Ma-arat Qebarim Yehudit BeMorad Har-HaZetim," Tarbiz 1.4 (1930), pp. 137-143. Syme, R. "The Composition of the Hlstoria Augusta: JRS 62 (1972), pp. 123-133. Talmage, F. E. . _

.

David Kimhi:

Recent Theories,"

The Man and the Commentaries.

"R. David Kimhi as Polemicist," HUCA 38 (1967), pp. 213-235.

"David Kimhi on the Messianic Age," in Disputation and Dialogue, ed. F. E. Talmage. New York, 1975.

Tanenblat, M. A. Peraqim gadashim LeToledot Eres-Yisrael UBabel BeTequfat HaTalmud. Tel Aviv, 1966. Taubes, H. S., ed. Osar HaGeonim Sanhedrin. Jerusalem, 1966. Thomas, J.

Le mouvement baptiste en Palestine et Syrie.

Gembloux, 1935.

I


324

Tishby, I.

Mishnat HaZohar, 2 vols.

Torczyner, N. H.

Jerusalem, 1961.

Yohanan Levy Memorial Volume.

Jerusalem, 1949.

Tosefot HaRosh. Sefer BerakahMeshuleshet al Maseket Berakot. Warsaw, 1863. reprinted Jerusalem, 1968. Umanski, J.

Hakme HaTalmud.

. Hakme HaYerushalmi.

Jerusalem, 1949. Jerusalem, 1951.

Urbach, E. E. "Class-Status and Leadership in the World of the Palestinian Sages,'' Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities II. Jerusalem, 1964, pp. 38-74. .

"Halakah UNebuah," Tarbiz 18 (1946), pp. 1-27.

. "HaYehudim BeArsam BeTequfat HaTannaim," Behinot 4 (1953), pp. 61-72. .

Hazal-Emunot VeDeot.

Jerusalem, 1969.

. ’’The Homiletical Interpretations of the Sages and the Expositions of Origen on Canticles, and the Jewish-Christian Disputation," (Hb). Tarbiz 30 (1960), pp. 148-170. Translated into English SH XXII. Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 248-275. . "The Laws Regarding bravery as a Source for Social History of the Period of the Second Temple, the Mishna and Talmud," Papers of IJS I, ed. J. G. Weiss. Jerusalem, 1968. pp. 1-94. . "The Rabbinical Laws of Idolatry in the Second and Third Centuries in the Light of Archaeological and Historical Facts," IEJ 9 (1959), pp. 149-245. . "Teshubat Anshe Nineveh VeHavikuahHaYehudi-No§ri," Tarbiz (1950), pp. 118-122.

20

. "Types of Leadership in the Biblical Period," (Hb). The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Jerusalem, 1973. pp. 55-67. . Tarbiz 40 (1970), pp. 390-392. . Tarbiz 34 (1965), pp. 158f. . "Yerushalayim shel Matta VeYerushalayim shelMa-alah," Yerushalayim LeDoroteha, Israel Exploration Society. Jerusalem, 1968.

V Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

325

Vermes, G.

Scripture and Tradition in Judaism .

Vilnay, Z.

Masabot Qodesh Be-Ereg-Yisrael.

Leiden, 1973.

Jerusalem, 1951.

Wagner, S. M. Religious Non-Conformity in Ancient Jewish Life. Yeshiva University dissertation, 1964. Warhaftig, Z. W. Weaver, J. S. (300-438).

HaBazaqah BeMishpap Halbri.

Jerusalem, 1964.

The Persecution of the Jews in the Roman Empire Lawrence, Kansas, 1952.

Wegener, E. ?., "The 'boulai' and the Nomination to the 'archai' in the Metropoleis of Roman Egypt," Mnemosyne, Fourth series I (1948), pp. 15-42, 115-132, 297-326. Weiss, A.

A1 HaYegirah HaSifrutit shel HaAmoraim. New York, 1962.

Weiss, I. H.

Dor Dor VeDorshav, 5 vols.

Vienna, 1871-91.

Welles, C. B. ''The Population of Roman Dura," Studies in Roman Economic and Social History in honor of A. C. Johnson, ed. P. R. ColemanNorton. Princeton, 1951. Werbiowsky, R. J. Z. "Metropolis of all Countries," (Kb). Yerushalayim LeDoroteha. Jerusalem, 1968. Werner, M.

The Formation of Christian Dogma.

New iork, 1957.

Widengreen, G. "The Status of the Jews in the Sasanian Empire," Iranica Antigua 1 (1961), pp. 149-153. Wilde, R. The Treatment of the Jews in the Greek Christian Writers of The First Three Centuries. Washington, 1949. Wilken, R. L.

Judaism and the Early Christian Mind.

New Haven, 1971.

Willcox, W. F. "Length of Life in the Early Roman Empire," Inter national Congress for Studies in Population II. Paris, 1937, pp. 14-22. Williams, S. A. Lukyn.

Adversus Judaeos.

Cambridge, England, 1935.

Williams, W. "Antoninus Pius and the Control of Provincial Embassies," Historia 16 (1967), pp. 470-483. Wilson, R. McL. "The Early Hisuory of the Exegesis of Genesis 1:26," Studia Patristica 1 (1957) pp. 420-432. .

"Jewish Christianity and Gnosticism," RSR 60 (1972), pp. 261-272.

Wohlman, M.

MeSitre HaAgadah, 2 vols.

Tel Aviv, 1930.


326

Wolfson, H. A. .

The Philosophy of the Church Fathers.

Religious Philosophy.

Yabes, Z.

Cambridge, 1961.

Toledot Yisrael^, Vols. IV-VII.

Yamuchi, E, H.

Pre-Christian Gnosticism.

Yefeh Qol - Samuel Yafeh Ashkenazi. of Midrash Rabba. Ziegler, I. ?

f

Cambridge, 1956.

Jerusaler Tel Aviv, 1933-1936. Grand Rapids, 1973.

Commentary

in the standard edition

Die Konigsgleichnisse des Midrasch.

Breslau, 1903.

Zinger, Z. "The Biblical Quotations in the Pesikta De Rav Kahana," Textus V. Jerusalem, 1966. Zunz, L.

HaDerashot BeYisrael, ed. 5 . Albeck.

Jerusalem, 1947.

Zuri, J. S. Rabbi Jochanan - der erste Amoraer Galilaas.

Berlin, 1918.

. Toledot HaMishpat HaSiburi Halbri • Shilton HaNesiut VeHaVa-ad. Vol. I, books 1 and 2. Paris, 1931; Look 3, part 2. London, 1934.


327 Corrigenda P. 33, n. 21: "B Meg 5b. See Hyman Toledot 603f. ; and Rabinowitz STB 72. Rabbi also traveled to Lydda (B Nid 47b) Akko (0 Sheb 6,1 36b=Git 1,2 43c) Ludaqia (Sifre Dt 335, p. 385) and Diaspora (B Shab 46a)." P. 39, n. 81, add: "and G. Landau, "Meqomah shel Tiber i y a h, ” Kol Eres Naftali 176f. C f ., however, Dotan (below, p. 83, n. 30) 117." P. 41, n. 103, 1. 11, after 85 insert; "and E. Halevy, Agadot HaAmoraim 64f." P. 82, n. 17, 1.2, after 4 insert: "cf., however, Braude PR p. 45, n. 45" P. 82, n. 23, add: "Dotan (below, n. 30) claims to have uncovered a first century gymnasium-like structure there

(118)."

P. 83, n 26, add: "Also the Nasi would bathe there before the Sabbath (J Ter 8, 10 46c, cf. GR 63,8, p. 689)." P. 84, n. 39, 1. 1, after friction insert: ", see Avi-Yo..ah, op. cit. (n. 16) 157f." P. 99, n. 137, 1. 12, add: "and S. Safrai, "Hair HaYehudit Be-Eres Yisrael BeTequfat HaMishnah VeHaTalmud, " 235." P. 104, n. 158, add: 11 Cf., however, Dotan, op. cit. (n. 30) 120, who dates the mosaic of the Tiberean synagogue to 250-300, thereby obviating the need to seek an extra-Tiberias setting." P. 105, n. 166, add: "See J. Gage', Les classes sociales dans 1 'empire romain 38f." P. 119, n. 1, add: "Resh Laqish's reservations with regard to the Nasi's authority may reflect the attitude of the rabbis of Lydda (see above, p. 86, n. 63) where he once studied (see Lieberman S^Z 124, n. 177). I owe this suggestion to Professor Abraham Goldberg." P. 120, add note:

"18a.

rpn, see Midrash Abba Gorion 1, 13,p.1."

P. 121, n. 26, 1.2, add: "For a different interpretation, see I. Epstein, "The Religious and Psychological Motives in the Halachah of Rabbi Johanan and Resh Laqish," lOOf." P. 122, n. 27, 1. 9, after 86a insert: ", see 0 MQ 3,1 81c and B Ned 51a with regard to ben Elasha" P. 124, n. 43, add:

"Cf., however, E. Halevy, Agad o t HaAmoraim 94.

P. 172, add note: "145a. See Rashi, B Ket 57a, s.v.^"'25? ^ and Halivni MM Moed 400. I owe these sources to Professor Halivni."


328

P. 173, n. 170, add: "On considering RY as authoritative as a b a r a i t a , see B Shab 61a with Melamed Mabo 364" P. 214, n. 107, add: "Cf. the Christian apologist, Minucius Felix: "That many of us are called poor is not our disgrace, but our glory" (Octavius 3 6 ).'.' P. 214, n. 109, add: "This contradicts RY's position that the prophets were wealthy (B Ned 38a) thereby hi gh lighting the polemical setting here, see below p. 2 7 7 f ., n. 40." P. 217, n. 124, add:

"I was not able to locate this source there."

P. 241, n. 122, 1. 15, after 273 add: "; and E. Halevy, A g adot HaAmoraim 53, n .1." P. 274, n. 10, add: "On Christian use o f :the Bible, see B. Lindars, New Testament A p ol o g e t ic ." P. 278, n. 40, add:

"See, e.g., above, p. 214, n. 109."

P. 299, 1.3 should read:

"the Genizah version of the Birkat"

P. 294, add: "Midrash Abba Gorion in Sifre D e Aa adata, ed. S. Buber. Vilna, 1887." P. 300, add to Avi-Yonah: "Tiberiyah BeTequfah HaRomait," Kol Eres N a f t a l l , ed. H. Z. Hirschberg. Jerusalem, 1968." P. 304, 'i. 7, add: "eds. M. Brahn and J. Elbogen.

Breslau, 1911."

P. 305, add: "Dotan, M. "Bate-HaKeneset B e Ha m at-Tiberiyah," Qadmoniyot 1,4 (1968)op; 116-123." P. 305, add: "Epstein, I. "The Religious and Psychological Motives in the Halachah of Rabbi Johanan and Resh Laqish," Mayer Waxman Jubilee V o l u m e . Jerusalem, 1966." P. 306, add: Gage", J. Les classes sociales dans 1 ‘empire roma i n . Paris, 1964." P. 309, add to E. Halevy:

"Agadot HaAmoraim. Tel Aviv, 1977."

P. 313, add:"Landau, G. "Meqomah shel Tiberiyah," Kol Eres Naft a l i ,ed. H. Z. Hirschberg. Jerusalem, 1968." P. 315, add:Lindars, B. New Testament A p ol o g e t ic . Philadelphia, 1961 P. 320, S a f r a i , third entry, should read: " "Bet Sna-arim BeSifrut HaTalmud," Eres-Yisrael 5(1959) pp. 206-212." P. 320, insert in Safrai: " "Hair HaYehudit BeEres-Yisrael BeTequfat HaMishnah VeHaTalmud," Hair VeHaQehila. Jerusalem, 1967"


329

p. 60, last line after 81 insert: "The mention of olives is especially significant since as L. Finkelstein noted, "the olive with its wide-spreading roots could be cultivated economically only on large holdings" (Akiba 8 5) . P. 161.- n. 15, add: "Another of R Y ’s teachers, Hizqiah, acclaimed RY's "superhuman" perspicacity (B Shab 112b=Er 24a')." P. 174, n. 176, add: "An amora not mentioned by Albeck is R. Simon b. qwy (or qosi/qozi) who cites RY in PRK 17,8, p. 292." P. 208, n. 52, 1.9, after 12 insert: "LeKetobet shel Gibat HaMibtar," 375-79.

and S. Lieberman,

P. 212, n. 87, 1. 13, after 987 insert: Indeed, L.W. Bernardwrote, "There can... be little doubt that in ad Magn. he accuses the same persons of Judaism and docetism" (VC 17 (1963) 193ff.) P. 213, n. 96, add: "According to Quispel, op. c i t ., 23, this position originates in "les conceptions des cercles judeo-chretiens sur 1'Ancient Testament." P. 219, n. 140, add: "This correlates well with the positive attitude toward Judaism of the Jewish Christian source Kerygmata Petrou, see Strecker, op. cit. (n.90) 264. P. 250, n. 93, add: "Cf. E. S. Rosental, HaMibtar," Peraqim II 353, n. 91.

"HaKetobet MeGibat

P. 274, n. 4, add: "These exceptions may illustrate an upsurge of pagan interest in the Bible in the third century. Also Origen wrote: "... the writings of Moses have moved many even of those alien to Jewish culture to believe..." (CC 1.18) see Augustine, City of God 6.11 P. 308, insert as entry two for Goldberg: Masseket Shabbat. Jerusalem, 1976.

"Perush LaMishnah

P. 314, insert as entry ten for Lieberman: shel Gibat HaMibtar," Peraqim II. Jerusalem, P. 317, insert as entry one for Metzger: of the New Testament. Oxford, 1977. P. 320, insert as line five: MeGibat HaMibtar," Peraqim II.

" "LeKetobet 1969-1974.

"The Early Versions

Rosental, E. S. "Haketobet Jerusalem, 1969-1974.

P. 320, begin entry five for Safrai with: ""LeBa-ayat HaKronologia shel HaNesi-im BeMeah HaSheniah VeHaShelishit.::::

f 1 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.