eden Et Mead eta! Peete eee SICLIES POE MOGI SLT Ce eae iISBN go 04 04215 6 90 04 042199 Copyright 1975 by E, J. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands All rights reserved, No part of this book may be reproduced or sranslated in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, microfiche cor any other means without written permission from the publisher PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDSTABLE OF CONTENTS JUDAISM AFTER 70 Redactional Techniques in the Legal Traditions of Joshua ben Havatish: . . a ewee cs is WBE Ge ss BS ‘Wixitiam Scott GREEN, University of Rochester The Artificial Dispute: Ishmael and ‘Aqiva ........ 18 Gary G. Portox, University of Illinois Form-Criticism and Exegesis: The Case of Mishnah Ohalot 21 a 30 Jacos Nevusner, Brown University Two Traditions of Samuel: Evaluating Alternative Versions . 46 Barucu M. Boxser, University of California, Berkeley R. Abbahu of Caesarea... 1... pgs ee SG Lee I. Levine, Hebrew University, Jerusalem “Conjecture” and Interpolation in Translating Rabbinic Texts Illustrated by a Chapter from Tanna debe Eliyyahu. . . . « 7 Wit G. Braupe, Providence, Rhode Island OTHER _GRECO-RoMAN CULTS Iconoclasm among the Zoroastrians . . 1... sss 93 Mary Boyce, University of London Quellenprobleme zum Ursprung und Alter der Mandaer. . . 112 Kurt Ruporpn, Karl-Marx-Universitat, Leipzig The Religion of Maximin Daia . 2... 1... ee ee 143 Rosert M. Grant, University of Chicago Dositheus, Jesus, and a Moses Aretalogy ........ ~ 167 STANLEY IssER, State University of New York, Binghamton BiBLioGRAPHY A Bibliography of the Writings of Morton Smith, to December 501073 6 ee ee eee ERO ee 191 A. THomas KraaseL, University of Minnesota Index of Biblical and Talmudic Ref General Index... . 2 2 1 12... 2 12. 2 220vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Part OnE NEW TESTAMENT Foreword New Testament Introduction. A Critiq Hevmut Kosster, Harvard Universit Good News Is No News: Aretalogy and Gospel... ss ss = JONATHAN Z. SurtH, University of Chica Witttam R. Farmer, Southern Methodist University Blasphemy: St. Mark’s Gospel as Damnation History... 5 5. T. A. BURKILL, University of Rhodesia From Isaiah 61 toLuke 4g . ..) ee e teee James A. Saxners, Union Theological Seminary Luke 12, 13-14, Tradition and Interpretation... .. . ss. + 21 39 5r 73 107 Tyitze BAARDA, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam “Am Ta Jew ?”—Johannine Christianity and Judaism... 2... Wayne A. Mezks, Yale Unive The Kinship of John and Acts... 2... ee eee eee Prerson Parker, The General Theological Seminary A Foreword to the Study of the Speechesin Acts... ss... ‘Max Wr.cox, University College of North Wales, Bangor L’hymne christologique de Col i, 15-20. Jugement critique sur I’état des recherches 2. ove te eee Prerre Benotr, 0.p., Keole biblique et archéologique frangaise Jérusalem Paul and his Opponents: Trends in Research . 2... 2 ee E, Earte Ettis, New Brunswick Theological Seminary The Present State of Scholarship on Hebrews... ss ss ss GkORGE WESLEY BUCHANAN, Wesley Theological Seminary, Was- hington Parr Two EARLY CHRISTIANITY The Earliest Christian Communities as Sectarian Movement... . « Rosin Scrocas, Chicago Theological Seminary Power through Temple and Torah in Greco-Roman Palestine... . ‘SHELDON R. ISENBERG, University of Florida Réflexions sur le Judéo-Christianisme . . .. +... ss es “Mace Simon, Université de Strasbourg Asia Minor and Early Christianity ‘SuERMAN E. Jounson, Church Divinity School of the Pacific Peter in Rome. A Review and Position... 2-0. + ss es D. W. O'Connor, St. Lawrence University Une allusion de I’Asclepius au livre d’Hénoch , 2... 2. eee ‘Marc PHiLonsnxo, Université de Strasbourg Christ in Verbal and Depicted Imagery: A Problem of Early Christian Teonography . 2 te tee S. G. F, Brannon 163 187 206 226 264 299 ag. 53 72 146 161TABLE OF CONTENTS vu Das Thema “‘Vertreibung aus dem Paradies" in der Katakombe der Via Latina und sein jiidischer Hintergrund . .. 1. se 173 ‘Kurt and Ursuta Scuusert, Universitat Wien Vox Populi Voluntas Dei and the Election of the Byzantine Emperor. . 181 Mitton V. ANastos, University of California, Los Angeles Hypatius of Ephesus on the Cult of Images... . oie: Seis cs aR ‘STEPHEN Gero, Brown Universit Contemy Ecclesiastical Approaches to Biblical Interpretation: Orthodoxy and Pseudorthodoxy ... 1... .+.++.-s 217 “Spanner S. Frenicus, Brown Universi Part THRE JUDAISM BEFORE 70 Investitures in the Midrash in the Light of Neo-Babylonian Royal esc ee Yocuanan Murrs, The Jewish Theological Seminary of America On the Origins of the Aramaic Legal Formulary at Elephantine . . . . 37 Barucu A. Levine, New York University Myth and Midrash: Genesis 9:20-29 . . ss... sss. 55 Apert I. BAUMGARTEN, faster Universit ‘The Jewish Historian Demetrios...) ss 2 E, J. Bickerwan, Columbia Universi ‘The Tales of the Tobiads. 1... sete. 85 JoNaTHAN A. GOLDSTEIN, University of Iowa The Acta pro [udaeis in the Antiquities of Flavius Josephus: A Stud in Hellenistic and Modern Apologetic Historiography . ..... . . 124 ~ Horst R. Mognrinc, Brown University ‘The Archangel Sariel. A Targumic Parallel to the Dead Sea Scrolls . . 159 Gxza VerMes, University of Oxford mran and Tran: The State of Studies... .......... 167 icHarD N. Frye, Harvard Universi The Multiform Jewish Heritage of Early Christianity ....... 175 Rosert A. Krarrt, University of Pennsylvania A Note on Purification and Proselyte Baptism... 2... 200 R. J. Zwr WeRsLowsky, Hebrew University Jerusalem Sadducees versus Pharisees: The Tannaitic Sources... . 2... 206 Jack Licutstone, Brown University Masada: A Critique of Recent Scholarship... 1... 2... 218 Louis H. FEtpwan, Yeshiva Universita You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book4 WILLIAM SCOTT GREEN are unclear. Are they exempt from the entire penalty or merely from the fine of the Added Fifth? The answer will come from an analysis of F-I. In F the hallal-priest is offering sacrifices at the altar when his true status is revealed. Eliezer's rule, which fully states the issue, is that all his previous sacrifices are retroactively invalid. He was never qualified to serve at the altar. Joshua's position, which re- sponds to Eliezer's in G, but not to F, is that the past sacrifices are valid. This can only mean that he regards the fallal-priest as a legitimate priest, at least until the point that his status is made known. If the hallal-priest is judged fit to offer sacrifices so long as his status is assumed to be proper, he is also fit to consume Heave-offering in the same period. It follows that the exemption of E means that the priest, as well as the slave and the woman, is free from any penalty whatever.? What is striking is the im- plication that self-perception determines actual status. Objectively, the hallal-priest was always disqualified from eating Heave-offering and offering sacrifices, but while he was perceived by himself and others to be a legitimate priest, he is regarded as such in fact. Part I treats the problem of the blemished priest. Although it is difficult to imagine the case of a blemished priest who did not know of his ritual infirmity while others did, the language of I and the context in which it appears suggest that this is the situation envisioned, But here no disagreement is reported. Mishnah Terumoth 8:2 J-L deals with the problem of what to do if the person is in the midst of eating Heave-offering when his status is changed. It seems clear that the “And in all cases” of J is intended to apply to A, B, and C. Eliezer’s rule permits the person to swallow what he is eating. Joshua's position is that he must spit out the Heave-offering. The principle behind Joshua's rule seems clear. So long as the woman, slave, and hallal-priest are unaware of their true status, they are regarded as fit to consume Heave-offering, and he may offer sacrifices. Once they become aware of their disqualification, however, they must stop what they are doing. To continue in light of the new information would constitute a deliberate transgression. But Eliezer’s rule is problematic in this context. For if he regards the hallal-priest’s sacrifices as retroac- i , on What basis does he permit the defective priest to ing? If the sacrifices never should have been offered, tively inva continue e ? Cf. Bartinora, Tiferet Yisrael here.a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book8 WILLIAM SCOTT, G the law of Firstfruits, only wine and oil may be consecrated as Heave-offering. Therefore, the only liquids made from Heave- offering fruit which may be regarded as Heave-offering are wine and oil. We may, however, discern different reasons for the masters’ positions from the redaction of the superscription, A. Mishi Terumoth 11:3 states in part: 1. They do not make dates [of Heave-offering into] honey, nor apples fof Heave-offering into) cider, nor winter grapes (of Heave- offering into] vinegar. 2. And they do not alter the natural condition of any (KL) other fruits of Heave-offering or Second Tithe, except for olives (= oil) and grapes (= wine) alone 11:3 1 and 2 are two independent statements of law which have been placed next to one another. 11:2 A contains both the specific items listed in 1 of 11:3 and the language of 2 of 11:3 (“‘all other fruits of Heave-offering”), but in 11:2 A the problematic status of these items is assumed, not explained. The reason for the ambigious status of Heave-offering fruit juice is provided by 1 and 2 of 11: and this suggests that A of 11:2 has been drawn from them. Date- honey, etc. should not be made from Heave-offering fruit. We are not told what happens if this is done, but only what happens if such produce is consumed by a non-priest. Obj y, the juice has been made from consecrated produce. Eliezer, therefore, regards it as consecrated and requires the full penalty. From the perspective of Joshua’s rule, however, although the juice was made from Heave- offering, it should not have been. So the man who consumed it had no reason to suspect that he had done anything improper and is therefore exempt from the penalty. We observe that B-C of 11:3 appear verbatim in D-E of Mishnah Terumoth 8:1. There, as we saw, Joshua's exemption meant that although the priest objectively was unfit to offer sacril Heave-offering, so long as he assumed he was behaving correctly he had commited no wrong. Here the same tradition may be seen as demonstrating the same principle, although in a different case. Although the date-honey, etc. actually come from Heave-offering, the man may assume, for good reason, that it does not, In each case the actual status of the act is determined by the perception a ul Lieberman, Tosefta Kifshutah, Zera‘im, Part I (New York 1955) PP. 455a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book12 WILLIAM SCOTT GREEN H. He said to them, “We find that the limb from a living being is like a whole corpse. Just asan olive’s bulk of flesh which separates from the corpse is unclean, so an olive’s bulk of flesh which separates from the limb of a living being should be unclean.” I, They said to him, “No! If you have declared unclean an olive's bulk of flesh which separates from the corpse, since indeed you have declared unclean a barleycorn’s bulk of bone which separates from it, will you dectare unclean an olive’s bulk of flesh which separates from the limb of a living being, when indeed you have declared clean a barleycorn’s bulk of bone which separates from it?” J. They said to R. Nehunya, “On what basis do you declare unclean the barleycorn's bulk of bone which separates from the limb of a living being? K. He said to them, “We have found that a limb from a living being is like a whole corpse, Just as a barleycorn’s bulk of bone which separates from a corpse is unclean, so the barleycorn’s bulk of bone which separates from a living being should be unclean.” L. They said to him, “No! If you have declared unclean the barleycorn’s bulk of bone which separates from a corpse, you have also declared unclean an olive’s bulk of flesh which separates from it. But will you declare unclean a barleycorn’s bulk of bone which separates from the limb of a living being, when indeed you have an olive’s bulk of flesh which separates from it ? id to R. Eliezer, “For what reason did you divide your rules? Either declare unclean in both cases or declare clean in both cases.” N. He said to them, “The uncleanness of flesh is more virulent (MRWBH) than the uncleanness of bones, for (the uncleanness of] flesh applies both to carrion and to creeping things, which is not the case with bones.” O. Another matter: A limb which has the appropriate amount of flesh renders unclean through carrying, through contact, and in a Tent; if it lacks flesh, it is (still) unclean; if it lacks bones, it is clean, P. They said to R. Nehunya, ‘Why have you divided your rules ? Either declare unclean in both cases or declare clean in both cases.” Q. He said to them, “The uncleanness of bones is more virulent than the uncleanness of flesh, for the flesh which separates from the living being is clean, but a limb which separates from it, which is in its natural state (KBRYTW), is unclean.” R. Another matter: An olive’s bulk of flesh renders unclean by contact and by carrying and in the Tent, and the greater part of the bones render unclean by touching, by carrying, and in the Tent. If the flesh is lacking, it is clean. If the greater part of the bones is lacking, even though it is clean so far as the Tent is concerned, it renders unclean through contact and carrying. S. Another matter: All flesh of the corpse which is less than an olive’s bulk is clean. The greater part of the corpse's bulk and mem- bers, although they are not a quarter {gad), are unclean.a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this bookTHE ARTIFICIAL DISPUTE: ISHMAEL AND ‘AQIBA 25 testicles. C indicates how one discovers whether or not the sack contains a testicle. The sayings of Ishmael and ‘Aqiba do not re- spond to each other or to the supposed superscription. Dispite the the fact that all three statements deal with the testicles of an animal, they do not belong in the same context. The fact that none of the comments responds to the other sayings in the passage proves that this is not a real dispute. The form has been employed to juxtapose three originally independent lemmas on the same general topic. 2. A. What would they do with the remainder of the surplus [of the money in) the Temple treasury? B. “They would) buy wines, oils, and fine flours with them {and would sell these products to those who came to make private offerings], and the profit [from these sales would go) to the Temple” =the words of R. Ishmael C. R. «Aqiba “They [would] not engage in a business transaction (MSTKRYM) with what belongs to the Temple or (W) to the poor.”” (M. Sheqalim 4:3) Comment: M. Sheqalim 4:2 delineates what was done with the money from the treasury and what was done with the surplus: “The [Red] Heifer, the Scapegoat, and the crimson thread were bought with the teramah from the treasury. The causeway for the [| Red) Heifer, the causeway for the Scapegoat, the thread between its horns, {the upkeep of the] water-channel, the city walls and its towers, and the city’s needs were provided for from the surplus of the (funds) in the treasury. Our mishnah discusses the money was used which remained after all the needs mentioned in M. Sheqalim had been satisfied. Ishmael’s answer, B, responds directly to A; it specifies how the money was used. ‘Aqiba’s saying, C, is a general observation which indirectly refutes B. Ishmael is incorrect, for “they would not en- gage in a business transaction with what belonged to the Temple or to the poor.” It is significant that ‘Aqiba’s comment only in- directly refutes B. In a true dispute, ‘Aqiba would have listed items which were purchased with the money, or he would have negated Ishmael’s comment directly. It is also noteworthy that C does not respond to A, for the former does not explain what they would do with the funds. In fact, C does not directly refer to the funds mentioned in A. ‘Aqiba’s remark is awkward in this context. First, it is a generala You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this bookTHE ARTIFICIAL DISPUTE: ISHMAEL AND ‘AQIBA 29 sayings were not preserved in order to degrade him or to invalidate his rulings, They were preserved simply because Ishmael’s sayings were important to the redactor(s) of the Tannaitic traditions. The fair manner in which Ishmael was treated by the ‘Agiban redactors argues for the reliability of the situation represented in the texts. That is, Ishmael’s sayings were joined to those of ‘Aqiba because the men actually debated many issues. The fact that in several instances unrelated comments of the two sages were placed in the same context also suggests the authenticity of the implied relation- ship between the two rabbis. The fact that unrelated comments were placed in the same context and were not changed so that they would appear to be closer together argues for the conservative nature of much of the tradition. Clearly a limited number of forms were employed by the editors of our material. The forms necessi- tated that two sages be placed in the same context. While we surely do not have the actual words of these sages, we do have some evidence that once they were fixed, the sayings of the sages were not altered. They were placed in the form of a dispute even when they were inappropriate in this form. The fact that our ex- amples are drawn from the earliest stratum of material suggests that the forms had been selected by the end of the Tannaitic period. The evidence further testifies to the conservative nature of the tradition at a relatively early period. 49 My teacher Professor Jacob Neusner and my colleagues Professors William S. Green, Baruch Bokser, David Goldblatt, Robert Goldenberg, Shammai Kanter, and Mr, Jack Lightstone, Joe! Gereboft and Charles Primus offered many valuable insights into the matters discussed above; their help is gratefully acknowledgeda You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book4o JACOB NEW One thing seems clear: both T.’s Judah's and M. Ed.’s versions falsely claim to have a dispute between the Houses. The dispute has to concern a single issue. M. Ed. therefore is impossible. Its Shammaites argue about whether the corpse-matter has to come from a single corpse or may come from several. The Hillelites then should rule it has to come from a single corpse—as do the sages of M. 2:2/: M. Ed.’s Hillelites tell is that we require a quarter-gad of bones, of one kind or another. What now can be the contrary opinion? than a quarter-gab of bones may produce the same effect, that is, T.’s Shammaites. But inion alerts us to another possibility. Since he says, “even from a single bone,” the issue may concern the contents of the quarter- gab. Accordingly, the Hillelites will hold that the quarter-gab com- posed of either the larger part of the bone structure or the greater majority of the number of the bones renders unclean in the Tent. What can the opposite opinion be? I see two possibilities Either (1) “a quarter-gab of bones, even not the greater part in frame or number, renders unclean,” the words of the House of Shammai, Shammai then rules in a still more extreme way than his House: “Even a single bone which fills quarter-gab produces the same effect: Or (2) less than a quarter-gab of bon amma s, if constituted by the greater part of the frame or the majority of the bones, renders unclean in the Tent. Shammai now rejects the position of his House and follows the theory of the House of Hillel, but in a still more extreme way. The quarter-gab measure is decisive. Even a single bone—without relationship to frame or number of bones—which fills a gab suffices for the contamination of a Tent. So M. 2:1 B combines the opinions of the two Houses, Hillel’s, then Shammai’s. Since one tendency of Shammai’s lonely opinions is to repudiate his House and join the House of Hillel, Tam inclined to prefer the second of these two possibilit Let us now test our theory of the two distinct Houses’ disputes against Joshua's “reconciliation” of T. 3:5. First, we shall treat the pericope as a unitary saying assigned to Joshua: G. Said R, Joshua, “I can make the words of the House of Sham- and the words of the House of Hillel one: H. “From the shoulders and from the thighs are found the greater part [of the body-frame] in size.a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this bookHSMYM, BYN- MSNYM BYN MSLSH: Quarter-gab of bones, whether of the bones from two or from three {corpses) [conveys un- cleanness by overshad- owing]. M. Ed. 1:7 3. And the House of of Hillel say RB‘ ‘SMWT MN HGWYH, MRB HBNYN WRMB HMNYN Quarter-gab of bones form a {single} corpse), [from bone: which are the greater part in bulk and in number. 4. Shammai says, 2PYLW MSM HD. Even [a quarter-qab] from one bone M. Ed. has and (W). Tos. Ah. the exact words of the Hill inclusion of or (*W) in place of M. Oh, act 3. RBS SMWT MKB HBNYN 2W MRB HMNYN ruling; now we are told that even | (if it is from a single corpse). >WPW replaces BYN/BYN, not an important change. b. ) JACOB NEUSNER 2. RWBS «SMW HGWYH MRWB HBNYN °W MRWB. HMNY RWB BNYYNW WRWB MNYD SL MT ?P «L PY SYN BHN RWB« MN 2. RWBt‘SMWT Tos. Ak. 3:4 b. Naz. sab 3 3. And the House of Hillel sa RWB OM HGWYH, MRWB HBNYN OW MRWB HMNYN [4. See below, no. 0.] has Judah assign to the Shammaites sin M, Ed., no. 3, except for the and; 2° contradicts the foregoing ss than a gab will be sufficient 2 of b. Naz, is nearly exact; az., NO. 4 follows M. Ed. in specifying from the corpse, which M. Oh. leaves out, but it preserves or (’W) of ) stantive, to the ings of Joshua: Tos, Ah. 3:4 5. R. Joshua said, 6. 1 can make the words of the House of Shammai and the words of the House of Hillel one. 7. MSWOYM WMYRKYM_ NM: RWB BNYNW BGWDL WH RWB MNYNW °YNN MSTRPYN. From the shoulders and from the thighs are found the greater part of the larger bones in quantity. And half the greater part of the larger ones and half the greater part of the number do not join together. . Oh. Since that difference is sub- b. Naz. no. 4 seems closer to M. Oh. than to M. Ed. As 7. For the House of Shammai say MSNYM >W MSLSH OW SWOYM WYRK °HD °W MSNY YRKYYM WSWOQ ?HD, HWY. WRWB GWBHW SL ?DM MGWBH (From two or three—either from two shoulders and from one thigh or from two thighs and one shoulder since this is the major part of a man's structure in height).a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book48 BARUCH M, BOKSER them into such forms for the sake of transmission.’ The following pages present two cases, for which such considerations help explain diverse formulations of traditionso f Samuel. It shows, how, in these cases, the words attributed to Samuel have been changed, II We will present and analyze the version of the tradition in the PT and then turn to its parallel in the BT. A. TNY Fire and hybrids even though they were not created during the six days of creation, nevertheless were considered (LW BMHSBH) from the six days of creation. B. Fire. C, Rabbi Levi in the name of Rabbi Nezira, “The light that was created on the first day the light God created and then stored away for the righteous for the time to come] * served thirty six hours, twelve on Sabbath eve, twelve on Sabbath night, and twelve on the Sabbath. ince the light did not cease, the entire world began to sing, . .. As soon as the Sabbath departed it started to get dark. Man became frightened and said, . .. . i id Rabbi Levi, “At that very hour God prepared for him (ZYMN LW) two flints, and he struck them against each other, and from them came out fire, as it is written “And the night [will be) light about me (Ps. 139:11).” And he said over it the blessing “Who has created the light of the fire.” E. Samuel said, ‘Therefore (LYPKK), we say a blessing over the fire [The Vatican Ms. and several early citations, following SRAG, p. 85—see Ratner, p. 188,--read “over it”) on the end of the Sabbath since it (SHY? was the beginning of its creation.” *, RK. Hunain the name [SRAG, p. 85, and Gn. R. # 11, p. go, add “of Rav’) Rabbi Abbahu in the name of R. Yohanan, “Even (?P) at the end of Yom Kippur one says the blessing over it, since the fire rested that whole day.” (y. Ber. 8:5; p. 2b) The pericope consists of several parts. It explains the initial baraita, A, Rabbi Levi presents the remarks of Rabbi Nezira, C, and then adds his own comment, D. Then PT cites the statements amuel and Yohanan. Samuel connects the origin of the blessing night with this supposed etiology. Yohanan of over fire said Saturd: * Of course, certain “forms” may be editorial constructions, For an example, see Weiss Halivni, op. cit., pp. 569-70. * This is the reading on the margin of the Leiden Ms., in the text of the Vatican Ms., and in the text of R. Sirillio’s commentary. The text of the Leiden Ms., on the other hand, has “’The light for the first Sabbath ...,” which is erossed out, The reading, however, is discernible.a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book52 BARUCH M, BOKSER must assign the added words of emphasis in Babli’s version either to Judah or to the arranger of the pericope. There the tradition serves a purpose in the context and was shaped by redactional considerations. Thus both Talmuds attest to Samuel’s saying concerning the blessing for fire which is said Saturday night. UL For the following tradition of Samuel, we will first present both versions of the saying and then examine them together. One version appears in a pericope commenting upon M. Ber. 5:1. And even if a snake is clinging to his heel, he should not stop (L? YPSYQ) [from saying the Shema‘. (M. Ber. 5: A. Said R. Isaac the son of Judah,** “If he saw oxen, he stops (PWsQ).” B. For teaches (DTNY) R, Hoshaia, “One removes oneself toa distance (MRHYQYN) from a fam (= an ox not known to have previously gored three times} ™ 50 cubits, and a mu‘ad {a ‘warned’ ox, i. ¢., one known to have already gored) as far as one can see ML? «YNYW).” C. Said Samuel, “In these situations (HNY MYLY): With a black ox and in the days of Nisan, (M. and P, Mss, and Rid, add: when it is coming up from the marsh,) because the devil (HSTN) dances between his horns.” D. It was taught (TN?) in the name of R. Meir, “A head of an ox in the fodder basket [i.e., eating)—ascend to the roof and throw down) the ladder from behind you. The printed text presents D before C.) (b. Ber. 33a) “And A’. Four things our holy Rabbi commanded his son, *. ‘A ‘tam’ is an oxe which has not injured a person", Cf. the commentary of Abraham Ashbili, printed in M, Herschler, ed. Ginze Rishonim (Jerusalem, 1967), p. 378—see fn, or, there. Cp. Sefer Hameorot, ed. M. Y. Blau (Brooklyn, 1964), p. 106. If B supports A, the reference to fam and mu‘ad must encompass ail oxen. Accordingly, the definition of “tam” common in cases of torts, ‘an ox that has injured one time’, is in- appropriate. Thus Rashi defines “tam” here as he does. Hoshaia, though, may have meant “fam” in the usual sense. Yet the one who cited the text un- doubtedly uses it to refer to all oxen, not only those suspected to be gorers. Either way, Hoshaia’s text clearly refers to oxen all year long and is far closer to a universal principle than a statement applying only to animals when in heat. 2 See DS, p. 345, fn. 20.a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this bookR. ABBAHU OF CAESAREA LEE I, LEVINE Hebrew University, Jerusalem Halakhic discussions and homiletical discourses dominate rabbinic literature and have engaged the interest of scholars for generations; the personality and activities of individual rabbis have merited little, if any, attention. Rabbinic sages display a wide range of interests, attitudes, habits and beliefs. Some boasted expertise and renown in a particular profession or trade, others barely eeked out a living. Intellectually and religiously, there were those of conserv- ative and liberal proclivities, some open to the influences and demands of their age, others who studiously avoided any such confrontation.! R. Abbahu of area is one of the most fascinating of the rabbinic figures.? As a leading religious authority, he was conver- sant with all aspects of Jewish law, and his teachers, colleagues and students comprised the mainstream of Palestinian rabbinism for almost a century. The unique aspects of R. Abbahu’s career lay 1 CES. Lieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York, 1942), pp. 1; FE. E. Urbach, “The Rabbinical Laws of Idolatry in the Second and Third Centuries in the Light of Archaeological and Historical Facts”, EJ, 1X (1959), 149 £., 229 £ ¥ The most useful collections of traditions on R, Abbahu remain G, Perlitz, “Rabbi Abbahu", MGW J, XXXVI (1887), 60-88, 119-126, 269-274, 310-320; W. Bacher, Aggadot Hatannaim o'Amovaim, U1, 1 (Tel-Aviv, 1926), 84-13 > CL A. Hyman, Sefer Toldot Tannain v'Amoraim (3 vols.; Jerusalem, 1964), I, 62-71. R. Abbahu was presumably an extraordinarily wealthy man, In preparation for the Sabbath, he would sit on an ivory stool (B Shabbat trga) and on Saturday night he would have a three year old calf slaughtered, eating only its kidneys, @ practice found wasteful by his son, Abimi (ibi t19b; Midrash Hagadol - Exodus, ed, Margoliot, p, 331). His rather lavish eating habits are further reflected in an account of his visit to Bestra, One Jose (ef. Bacher, Aggadot, p. 88, n. 7) prepared an assortment of delicacies for him, while lamenting the inadequacy of the meal (Lamentations Rabba UL, 17, ed. Buber, p. 65b). R. Abbahu once undertook to provide a feast for the rabbis of Caesarea when his student, R. Ze‘ira, recovered from an illness (B Berakhot 46a), and when teaching, he would hold in his hands a di plomata- rion (3imopxréeiov), a box for valuable objects (J Beca I, 7, 6oc, ed. Fran- cus, p. 105; B. Ratner, Ahavat Zion ve Yerushalaim, p. 10. Cf. also Deuterono- my Rabba XXVIT, ed. Lieberman, p. 28; J Ta‘anit 11, 6, 65d). ‘Gothic* attendants are mentioned in connection with R, Abbahu and his visit to thea You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book60 LEE 1. LEVINE the world who sit in theaters and circuses. “And I am the song of the drunkards.” After they have sat eating and drinking and become intoxicated, they sit and talk of me, scoffing at me saying, “We have no need to eat carobs (food for the poor) as the Jews do!” They ask one another, ‘How long do you wish to live?” To which they reply, ‘As long as the shirt of a Jew which is worn on the Sabbath!” They then bring a camel into their theatres, put their shirts on it, and ask one another, “Why is it in mourning?” They reply, “The Jews observe the law of the Sabbatical year and they have no vegetables; so they eat this camel’s thorns, and that is why it is in mourning!” Next they bring a mime with a shaven head into the theater, and ask one another, “Why is his head shaven?” They reply, “The Jews observe the Sabbath, and whatever they earn during the week they cat on the Sabbath. Since they have no wood to cook with, they break their bedsteads and use them as fuel; consequently they sleep on the ground and get covered with dust, and anoint themselves with oil, which is very expensive for that reason! " (After a while they can no longer afford the oil and have to shave their heads).*7 We have here an example of sermonic technique at its best: a current issue (the scorn of gentiles), presented in dramatic fashion, drawn from the immediate experience of his listeners. Undoubtedly this depiction derived from a mime presented in the theater of sarea. In what way R. Abbahu developed this theme has not been preserved, yet it is not difficult to imagine that the sermon was intended to defend and explain Jewish rituals and practices in the wake of gentile mockery. The very fact that R. Abbahu addressed himself to such an issue reflects his concern for problems besetting the community at large. It is little wonder then that people would flock to hear him speak, Once when travelling with R. Hiyya b. Abba, he delivered a sermon, while R. Hiyya discoursed on a halakhic matter. According to this account, the townspeople came to hear R, Abbahu, leaving his colleague both insulted and humiliated. ® Lamentations Rabba, Prologue 17. ed. Buber, p. 7b. Poor Jews were also singled out by the satirists of Rome; cf. H, Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome (Philadelphia, 1960), pp. 234-235; J. Le Studies in Jewish Hellenism (Hebrew) (Jerusalem, 1960), pp. 197-203. In Alexandria, a burlesque of the Jewish king Agrippa was presented at the local theater in 38 C.E. leading ntually to widespread disturbances; cf, Philo, Im Flaccum, 33 . For other examples of the mockery of Jews by Alexandrians in their theaters; ef, V. ‘Teherikover, Corpus Papyrorwm Judaicarum (3 vols; Cambridge, 1957-64), Tog: HHL, 118. ® B Sota goa. In one instance, an audience laughed at one of R. Abbahu’s teachings, upon which he appealed to an older authority (Genesis Rabba, XXX, 9, p. 275)a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book64 LEE 1, LEVINE And Mar said: "The beauty of R. Kahana is like the beauty of R. Abbahu, the beauty of R. Abbahu is like the beauty of father Jacob, the beauty of father Jacob is like the beauty of Adam". The Hellenization of R. Abbahu, however, went far deeper than an acquaintance with Greek culture and practice. It affected in turn his halakhic decisions and personal behavior. It was R. Abbahu, for example, who quoted older authorities to justify writing the Bible in Greek,** and when necessary, reading the Scroll of Esther in a language other than Hebrew.? R. Abbahu’s liberal tendencies, avoided by some colleagues, are strikingly portrayed in one source, Archeological discoveries have shown that synagogues at this time were often decorated with stone reliefs, mosaics and even paintings. These practices are only occa- sionally reflected in rabbinic sources.“* One exception to this almost total silence is preserved by the Palestinian Talmud when discus- sing the verse, “And you shall not place a figured stone in your land, to bow down to it” (Lev. 26:1). Rav commanded the house of R. Aha and R. Ami commanded his own household not to bow down as is customary when they go (to the synagogue) on a fast day (so as not to appear to be bowing to the images decorating the synagogue). R. Jonah bowed sideway as did R. Aha. R. Samuel said: “I saw R. Abbahu bow as usual”, R. Jose said: “I asked R. Abbahu: ‘Is it not written, “And a figured stone (you shall not place in your land to bow down upon it Leviticus 26:1)".’" It should be solved (by applying this verse to situation) where one has a fixed place (in the synagogue) for bowing (P'nei Moshe—on or near the stone itself). R. Abbahu was thus not troubled by bowing in a decorated syna- gogue, as were other rabbis, The above passage is illustrative of the tolerance engendered in this Caesarean rabbi by his Hellenistic acculturation R. Abbahu's acquaintance h mysticism has been treated else- where in the general context of Caesarean Jewish mystical specu- B Bava Mezia 84a; B Bava Batra 58a. “ B Megilla ob. 7 J Megilla I, 1, 73a. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols, IV, 11 £; Urbach, “Rabbinical Laws of Idolatry”, pp. 154 £. J ‘Avoda Zara 1V, 1, 430. It is doubtful whether R. Abbahu offered the concluding explanation for his actions. The term ‘it should be solved’ (WNBA) is usually used by theeditor of the Palestinian Talmud to resolve an apparent contradiction,a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book68 LEE I, LEVINE of his Amora,* the latter bitterly complained that her husband, no less learned than R. Abbahu, had to stand before him and bend down in his presence (in order to hear his words). The only reason for this, she added, was ‘respect for the house of Caesar’.** Finally, when R. Hiyya travelled with R, Abbahu, he was wont to accom- pany the latter to his lodgings before retiring to his own, once again, in ‘respect for the house of Caesar’.* Ancient sources contain several parallels to the phrase ‘of the house of Caesar’. It is used several centuries earlier in connection with Agrippa I. In narrating the Alexandrian pogroms of 38 C.E Philo refers to Agrippa as ‘a member of the house of Caesar’ (x1 Ov ex vig Kaiougos olxinc). At that time Agrippa, enjoying close ties with the emperor Gaius, had been appointed ruler over the territory of Philip and, in fact, was en route to Palestine to assume his post. Again, in the third and fourth centuries, a group of Im- perial officials are called caesariani (‘those of the house of Caesar’), an exact translation of the title used with respect to R. Abbahu.® In these two parallels, Agrippa and the caesariani, we find two rather different meanings of the title. With regard to Agrippa, the title is unofficial: ‘House of Caesar’ refers to one on intimate terms with the emperor, eating at his table and enjoying his companion- ship. R. Abbahu’s activities in Caesarea bear some resemblance to Agrippa’s at Rome. Just as Agrippa had been approached to inter- cede on behalf of the Jews against the Alexandrians,® so eminent rabbinic authorities appealed to R. Abbahu to intervene on their behalf with the Roman government. This is well illustrated in the ‘Tamar incident cited above. The functions of the caesariani were altogether different. Their positions were more defined and they served as lower officials in the Imperial bureaucracy by helping to administer the emperor's lands and collecting revenues.”” We have no way of determining “A functionary of the academies, who stood next to the sage and repeated his words for all to hear; cf, Jewish Encyelopedia, 1, 527-528; Encyclopedia Judaica, 11, 363 6 * B Sota goa. Ibid. * Philo, Flaccus, #35. * Codex Theodosianus, Xx, 1X, 42,4: %, 1, 5. On the esteem in which so lestiastical History. VUIL, 1, Philo, Gaius, #266 f. Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, Real Encyelopadie, 1, 5, 5-1296; A. H. M, Jones,a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book72 LEE I. LEVINE If then you wish to ask a question on religious matters (lit. from the Torah), there is R. Isaac b. R. Eliezar in the Maradata synagogue in Caesarea. ‘And God is in his Holy Temple, be silent before him’ (ibid. v. 20), (this refers to R. Isaac) who is like God in his Holy ‘Temple."* Even assuming the tendentiousness of our sources, reflecting as they do the attitudes and thoughts of the rabbis, the impression remains that the Patriarchs enjoyed far less religious and intellec- tual authority at that time than their predecessors. Rabbinic literature has preserved several accounts of Patriarchs turning to various sages for consultation. A ducenarius presented R. Judah (II) Nesiah with a basketfull of denarii, He took one of them and returned the others, He (R. Judah) then asked Resh Lakish (about the one he retained), The latter said: “Throw it away (lit. take this favor to the Dead Sea)... R. Abbahu said: “A similar situation happened to me. Rabban Gama- liel (IV), son of Rabbi (Judah Nesiah) asked: ‘Is it permissible for me to go to the fair (in Tyre)’, and I forbade him”, ... How might one explain the two situations? Rabban Gamaliel was of inferior stature and R. Abbabu attempted to restrict him; R. Judah Nesiah was of great stature and Kesh Lakish tried to restrict (the use of) the object. It was not uncommon for the Patriarch of the third and fourth centuries to turn to the sages for advice on ritual matters.*® These two instances, however, are unique. In each case the sage invelved adopted a strict position in replying to the Patriarch. Whereas in the former incident Resh Lakish only restricted use of a particular object, he was nevertheless dealing with a prominent figure. Thus his ability to command the latter’s respect is of significance. In the ¢ of Rabban Gamaliel and R. Abbahu, the riarch was a less nportant figure, yet R. Abbahu regulated his personal behavior. This last account leaves no doubt that the Patriarch was asking % Midrash Samuel VII, 6, 34b. € 3, 65d, as well as comments of also B Sanhedrin 7b; J Bikkirim M11, Lieberman, “Palestine in the Third and VI (1946), 362; G. Allon, Studies in Jewish History (Hebrew) (2 vols. ; Tel-Aviv, 1958), TL. 45 £ MJ “Avoda Zara I, 1, 39b. Cf. also B ‘Avoda Zara 6b. % Ik. Mani was queried by R. Judah IV or V, as to whether he was allowed to vat just before the onset of the Passover holiday (J Pesahim X. 1, 37b). R. Judah IL also asked R. Ami about the possibility of reusing pagan vessels (B ‘Avoda Zara 33b), but there is no indication that this was anything but a theoretical question, and on several occasions R. Ami offered advice to the Patriarch on customs of fasting (B Ta‘anit r4b, 25b).a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this booka You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book84 WILLIAM G, BRAUDE then as he rests on the Sabbath, he forgets all the vexation he had previously had. Such is the nature of man—the day of rest brings about his forgetting of evil, and a day of trouble brings about his forgetting of good. The nature of man being what it is, the Holy One said to Israel: My children have I not written for you in My Torah This book of Guidance shall not depart out of thy mouth (Josh. 1:8)? Although you must labor all six days of the week, the Sabbath is to be given over completely to Torah.® Accordingly it is said that a man should rise early to study on the Sabbath and then go to the synagogue or to the academy where he is to read Scripture and meditate upon the Prophets. Afterwards, he is to go home and d drink to fulfill the command Eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart (Eccles, 9:7). (Thus the man who avails himself of the Sabbath to make his peace with his fellows at the same time is making his peace with God], For the content- ment of the Holy One comes only from those who are busy with Torah, as is said For the sake of all these things—{the ordinances and laws of Torah|—hath My hand made |the world) ® (Isa. 66:2) From this very verse in Isaiah (which goes on to say, The man Thave regard for ... trembles in his anxiety (to grasp the exact meaning of My word), the following is inferred: When a man reads [a text] he should have so good a grasp of it that no shame or embarrass- ment will overcome him when he is told ‘Stand up and set forth in proper fashion the Scripture you read,” or when he is told, “Stand up and set forth in proper fashion the Mishnah you recited.” The point is made plain by David, king of Israel, in post-Mosaic Scripture: O Lord, in the morning mayest Thou be pleased to hear my voice; in the morning I am at once ready to set forth in proper fashion the words which are Thine—indeed I look forward {to having ‘men ask me questions about Thy words] (Ps. 5:4).22 In another interpretation, the verse Among the days that were to be fashioned, one of those days was to be wholly His (Ps. 139:16) is taken to mean that God provided Israel with the Day of Atonement, eal ® And if given over, God will regard the precept in Josh, 1:8 as kept. Thus study one day puts out of mind the work done on’ the other si PR 23:0[Y 1, 490-91) 4 The preceding verse—Isa, 66:1—asks Where is the place that may give Me contentment ? ® So Landau. JV: O Lord, in the morning shalt Thou hear my voice, in the morning will 1 order my prayer unto Thee, and will look forward.a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book86 WILLIAM G, BRAUDE holder who hired workmen and kept his eye on them to see which of them did their work faithfully, as is said The eyes of the Lord .. yun to and fro through the whole earth (Zech. 4:r0). The one who did his work faithfully and the one who did not do his work faith- y—what each one has coming to him will be ready at “the -” 8(On the day of Gog], accordingly, the nations of the world, because they put forth their hand against Israel and Jerusalem and against the Temple, will be sentenced to be swept away, to perish from the world, and go down to Gehenna. And the proof? You can see it for yourself. When Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came and encompassed Jerusalem, the nations of the world spoke up, saying with one voice: Why should we have ever considered that we would have to reckon with Him whose city and Temple we are about to capture so easily ? 2° Thereupon the holy spirit responded, saying to them: “You cocksure fools, until this hour you had not been condemned to go down into Gehenna. Now, it is of this very hour that Scripture speaks, saying to you Your mother shall be sore ashamed, she that bore you shall be confounded” (Jer. 50:12). Even as the Chaldeans and other nations gathered into many armies who came to help themsel to the possessions of Israe so the Holy One will gather Gog and his allies upon the mountai of Israel to wreak harsh vengeance upon them, because they did not hearken to Torah’s commands, and afflicted Israel. Thus God is quoted as saying J am very sore displeased (Zech. 1:13); and so T will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the nations, because they hearkened not (Micah 5:14); then, when The day of the Lord cometh (Zech. 14:1), 1 will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle (Zech. 14:2); and at once I, The Lord, shall go forth and fight against those nations (Zech. 14:3). [But why does God put off the day of vengeance against Gog and his allies? Listen]: One day as I was walking through a great city of the world, there was a roundup and I was roughly seized and brought into the king’s house where I saw divans lavishly 2(YJS, 13, 2, 44) 8 In the two preceding verses it is said Chatdea shail be a spoil ... because you rejoiced, O ye that plundered My heritage. 3 Instacd of folam, “the world”, Chanoch Albeck suggests the reading of ‘evlam, “Elam” (Zunz, had-Dérasot, 56). Hence “the greatest city in probably Ctesiphon, capital of the Sassanids, See Jacob Mana, “Date and Place of Redaction of Seder Eliyyaht Rabba and Zutta", HUCA, 4, 302a You have elther reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing lil far this book88 WILLIAM G, BRAUDE, ought to be deemed as important as cattle, as beasts, at least as important as the variety of reptiles and creeping things which T created upon the earth.” At once He fei me measure of con- tentment and resolves not to annihilate mankind. And so you see that reptiles and creeping things were created in the world as a means of mankind’s preservation. Then the magus brought up another matter saying: You assert that fire is not God. Yet is it not written in your Torah frre elernally 34 (Lev. 6:6) ? I replied: My son, when our forebears stood at Mount Sinai to accept the Torah for themselves, they saw no form resem- bling a human being, nor resembling the form of any creature, nor resembling the form of anything that has breath which the Holy One created on the face of the earth, as is said Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves—for ye saw no manner of form on the day that the Lord spoke unto you in Hore (Deut. 4:15): they saw but one God—He is God of gods and Lord of lords (Deut. 10:17)—whose kingdom endures in heaven and on earth as well as in the highest heavens of heavens. And yet you say that God is fire! Fire is no more than a rod to be used upon men on earth, Its use is be to understood by the parable of a king who took a lash and hung it in his house, and then said to his children, to his servants, and to the members of his household: “With this lash I may strike you may smite you, may even kill you""—threatening them, so that penitence they would turn away from sin. If they do not repent, do not turn back, then God says, “I may have to strike them with the lash, may have to smite them, may even have to kill them.” This is what Scripture means by fire eternally and by the words For by fire will the Lord threaten judgment (Isa. 66:16). Of course you might attempt to refute me by quoting the words The Lord thy God is a devouring fire (Deut. 4:24). But a parable will explain the intent of these words. The children, servants, and members of the household of a mortal king did not behave prop- erly. So he said to his children, to his servants, and to the mem- bers of his household: Because of your ways I will growl yeu like a bear, roar at you like a lion, seem to be coming at you like the angel of death. Such is the intent of The Lord thy God ts a devourin 3* According to one Tradition, the fire seemed to rise from the very altar, as though the altar itself were aflame, See Lev. Rabbah 7:5 (ed. Mordecai Margulies, Jeursalem, 5713 [1953], 159. = CL, Lam. 3:10.Gen. Rabbah TA HUCA Landau MTeh or PR PRKM R i. T Tovah Sélemah yJs Zunz, had-Dérasot CONJECTURE” AND INTERPOLATION IN RABBINIC TEXTS 89 ABBREVIATIONS Genesis Rabbah, ed. Julius Theodor [1849-1923] and Chanoch Albeck (1890-1972), Berlin, 1912-31 Hebrew Union College Annual Isaac Elijah Landau (1801-76), Ma‘aneh Eliyahu, commentary on Tanna débe Eliyyahu, Wilno, 1839 Midrash Tebillim, ed, Solomon Buber, Wilno, 1891; translated by William G. Brande [r907- J, New Haven, 1959 (YJS, 13) Max Kadushin, Organic Thinking, New York, 1938 ikta Rabbati, ed. Meir Friedmann (1831-1908) Vienna, 1880; translated by William G. Braude, New Haven, 1968 (Y. Pesikta de-Rab ed. Bernard Mandelbaum 19; ]. 2 vols., New York, 1962; translated by William G. Braude, Philadelphia, 1975 Vatican MS of the year 1073 upon which TE is based ed. Solomon Buber, Wilno, 1885 Tanna débe Eliyyahu, ed. Meir Friedmann, Vienna, 1902 Menahem Kasher [1893- _], Compilation of Rabbinic comments on the Pentateuch and commentary thereon, Jerusalem, 1927-69 Yale Jud ries Yom Tob Lippmann Zunz [1794-1886], had-Dérasof bé- Yisrael, translated by Chanoch Albeck, Jerusalem, 5707/1947 Interpolation made for the sake of clarity or based on a parallel reading in another source Insertion made by Meir Friedmann in his e Tanna débe Rliyyahu tion ofOTHER GRECO-ROMAN (ICONOCLASM AMONG THE ZOROASTRIANS MARY BOYCE University of London The iconoclastic movement in Christianity has been carefully studied, as has Islamic iconomachy, but the origins of both still present problems; and in investigating these consideration should certainly be given to the fact that Zoroastrianism, ancient and until the gth century A.D. immensely influential, had an iconoclastic movement which preceded both, and which may well have played a part in inspiring them. Zoroastrian iconoclasm has been ignored for various reasons. The history of the faith is poorly documented for all periods before the 17th century A.D., and has to be pieced together (as far as this is at all possible) from sparse and diverse , therefore, to overlook whole strands in its com- position. Moreover, the assumption that the cult of temple fires was original to it, and remained its sole form of public worship, has obscured this particular issue. That such an assumption has been generally made is in itself a tribute to the success of the Zoroastrian iconoclasts, who triumphed so completely that in the end fire was the sole icon in the temples of their faith, and they and their co- religionists became known to the world at large simply as ‘fire- worshippers’. The fact is that, though veneration of fire is very ancient among the Iranians, and was of supreme importance in Zoroaster’s teach- ings, the cult of temple fires appears to have been unknown in early Zoroastrianism. Indo-Iranian religion had taken shape during mil- 1 This was argued forcefully by S. Wikander, Feuerpriester in Kleinasien und Tran, Lund 1946, 36 ff; but he obscured a sound case by postulating that a temple cult of ever-burning fire had existed independently of Zoro- astrianism and before that faith arose (a supposition unsupported by evi- dence) ; and that this cult was adopted into Zoroastrianism in the 4th century B.C, asa part of the worship of Aradvi Sara Anahita, Since this divinity is a ‘yazatd of water, the unlikelihood of such a supposition was apparent, (Note: the Avestan term yarata, fem. yazatd, Middle Iranian yazat/yazad, ‘being worthy of worship’ is kept throughout this article rather than being rendered by some imperfect equivalent which would obscure the characteristic Zoroastrian doctrine that all beneficent divine beings were created by Ahura Mazda (who in the beginning alone was), in order to help and serve him in his task of redeeming the world, Having been created, they are to be worshipped in their94 MARY BOYCE, lennia of nomadic wanderings on the Central Asian steppes, and its cult was therefore materially very simple, without temples, altars or statues. The Iranians, like the Vedic Indians, held tenaciously to this tradition. The essence of Zoroastrian devotional life was worship of Ahura Mazda, the Creator, in the presence of his own creations, namely the sky, water, earth, plants, animals, man and. fire. The last, held to be the all-pervading element which gave life and warmth to the rest, was represented visibly both by the sun on high and by fire on the domestic hearth, which from time im- memorial was tended with reverent care and never allowed to go out. In Zoroaster's teachings fire was linked with ASa, the yazata of righteousness and good order; and his followers were enjoined to pray either at their hearths or in the open, turned towards the sun, so that they had fire always before them to help fix their thoughts on righteousne: This tradition of worship under the sky or in the home was con- tinued evidently during the Achaemenian period. The great sanctuary at Zela in Asia Minor, founded, it is said, in thanksgiving in the 6th century B.C., consisted of an artificial mound raised on the plain so that men could go up to offer their veneration there; ® and at Pasargadae two massive plinths still stand in the open, one with steps leading up it; and it has been suggested that these were built so that the king, mounting upon the one, could fix his eyes on fire set on the other and thus pray in fitting manner before a great assembly.’ Still in the mid-5th century B.C, Herodotus records that ‘as to the usages of the Persians ... it is not their custom to make and set up statues and temples and altars’4 Instead they climbed high into the mountains to offer sacrifice there, The Western Iranians were exposed, however, to strong influences from their alien subjects and neighbonrs—Elamites, Babylonians, Assyrian: Mannai and others—all of whom used statues and altars in their worship. Near Hamadan, in Medean territory, a curious tower-like structure has been excavated, thought to belong to the 8th century n right, although always as subordinate to him, The Zoroastrian yazata is thus both more than an angel, and different in his station from the independ- ent god of a pagan panther * See Strabo, XL8.4.512 * See D. Stronach, ‘Urartian and Achaemenian tower temples’, JNES 26, 1067, 287; for a detailed account of the plinths see Stronach, Fran TIL, 1965, 24-27 with PL VIL “Ta3t