The Gospel According to the Pharisees, Part 5, or, The Acts of Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’

Jewish date: 26 Tammuz 5771 (Parashath Mas‘e).

Today’s holidays: The Three Weeks (Judaism), Thursday of the Seventeenth Week of Ordinary Time (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Marty Feldman (Church of the SubGenius).

Upcoming events:

• The group protesting for Jewish rights on the Temple Mount and against the Waqf’s destruction of everything Jewish up there (myself included, I hope) will be at the Shuq in Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) today (28 July 2011), probably around 7:00 PM, in an educational capacity. NOTE: I am still waiting to get final details on this.
• One of the people at the last protest (this past Thursday) was handing out pamphlets promoting Jews visiting the Temple Mounton Ro’sh Ḥodhesh ’Av (1 August 2011). Visiting hours for Jews are 7:30 AM to 11:00 AM and 1:30 PM to 2:30 PM. One should visit a miqweh, wear non-leather shoes, and bring a one’s identity card. See “The Temple Mount: Bird's Eye Guide to the Temple Mount” and “Ascending the Temple Mount: An Introduction and Brief Guide” and consult a competent Orthodox rav for more information. Remember: The more Jews who show up, the more the police and the politicians know that the Temple Mount matters to Jews and will be less likely to pander to Muslim discrimination.

Greetings.

And now for the final planned installment on Jesus-related material in the Talmudh. (See also “The Gospel According to the Pharisees”, “The Gospel According to the Pharisees, part 2”, “The Gospel According to the Pharisees, Part 3”, and “The Gospel According to the Pharisees, Part 4, or, The Gospel of Ben Seṭadha’”.) This last passage, which occurs in two versions, deals with a disciple of Yeshu the Noṣri.

Talmudh Bavil, ‘Avodhah Zara’ 16b-17a:

Our Masters taught: When Rabbi ’El‘azar was arrested for sectarianism, they brought him up to the scaffold for judgement.

That governor said to him, “An old [man] like you should keep busy in these empty matters?”

[Rabbi ’El‘azar] said to him, “Trustworthy on me is the judge.”

As that governor thinks on him he says, “And he does not speak but concerning his Father that is in Heaven.”

[The governor] said to him, “Since I believed you, [by] Dimos [= Deimos, a Greek god whose name means “dread”], you are exempt.”

When [Rabbi ’El‘azar] came to his house, his students entered near him to comfort him, and he did not accept upon himself their condolences.

Rabbi ‘Aqiva’ said to him, “Rabbi, will you permit me to say one thing from what you taught me?”

[Rabbi ’El‘azar] said to him, “Say [it].”

[Rabbi ‘Aqiva’] said to him, “Rabbi, perhaps sectarianism came to your hand and it pleased you, and because of it you were arrested?”

[Rabbi ’El‘azar] said to him, “‘Aqiva’, you reminded me [that] one time I was walking around in the upper market of Ṣippori [Sepphoris, a city in the Galilee], and I found one human from the students of Yeshu the Noṣri, and Ya‘aqov, man of Kefar Sekhanya’, [was] his name.

“He said to me, ‘It is written in your Torah, ‘You will not bring a prostitute’s fee (etc.) [or the price of a dog [to] the house of YHWH your god for any vow, for an abomination [to] YHWH your god are also these two]’ (Deuteronomy 23:19). What about to make from it a toilet for the Chief Priest?’

“And I said to him nothing.

“He said to me, ‘Thus taught me Yeshu the Noṣri: ‘For from a prostitute’s fee she gathered, and until a prostitute’s they will return’ (Micah 1:7)—from the place of filth they came; to the place of filth they will go.’

“And the thing pleased me, and because of this I was arrested for sectarianism, and I transgressed that which is written in the Torah: ‘Keep far from her your way’—this is sectarianism—‘and do not approach the entrance of her house’ (Proverbs 5:8)—this is the [Roman] government.”

And there are those that say: “Keep far from her your way”—this is sectarianism and the [Roman] government—“and do not approach the entrance of her house”—this is prostitution.

Qoheleth [Ecclesiastes] Rabbah 1:8:

[NOTE: Qoheleth Rabbah is not part of either Talmudh, but rather is a collection of midhrash (exegesis and legends passed down about the Hebrew Bible and which have grown up around it). This passage is included here, because it is clearly a version of the previous passage.]

Another thing: “All words are weary” (Ecclesiastes 1:8)—words of sectarianism weary humanity.

A deed of Rabbi ’El‘azar, who was arrested for sectarianism: They took him [to] the governor and brought him up on the platform to judge him.

[The governor] said to him, “A great human like you should busy himself in these empty matters?”

[Rabbi ’El‘azar] said to him, “Trustworthy on me is the judge.”

And he [the governor] thought that he spoke about him, but he did not speak but concerning Heaven.

[The governor] said to him, “Since you believed me about you, even I am thinking and say: it is possible that these academies err in these empty matters. [By] Dimos, you are exempt.”

After Rabbi ’El‘azar was dismissed from the platform, he was distressed that he was he was arrested on matters of sectarianism. His students entered near him to comfort him, and he did not accept [their condolences].

Rabbi ‘Aqiva’ entered near him. He said to him, “Perhaps one of the sectarians spoke in front of you something, and it was pleasing before you.”

[Rabbi ’El‘azar] said to him, “Behold, the heavens! You have reminded me: one time I was going up into the court in Ṣippori, and came to me one human from the students of Yeshu the Noṣri, and Ya‘aqov, man of Kefar Sekhanya’, [was] his name.

“And he said to me one thing, and it pleased me, and this thing was: ‘It is written in your Torah, ‘You will not bring a prostitute’s fee or the price of a dog [to the house of YHWH your god for any vow, for an abomination to YHWH your god are also these two]’ (Deuteronomy 23:19). What are they?’

“I said to him, ‘Prohibited.’

“He said to him [should be: to me], ‘For a sacrifice, [they are] prohibited; for ruin, it is permitted.’

“I said to him, ‘And if so, what will one do with them?’

“He said to me, ‘Let one make with them bathhouses and toilets.’

“I said to him, ‘Beautifully have you spoken.’

“And hidden from me was the halakhah [how one rules in Jewish law] for a moment.

“Since he saw that I acknowledged his words, he said to me, ‘From excrement they came, and to excrement they will go out, as it is said, ‘For from a prostitute’s fee she gathered, and until a prostitute’s they will return’ (Micah 1:7). Let them make thrones [probably a euphemism for toilets] for the masses.’

“And it pleased me.

“And because of this I was arrested for sectarianism. Moreover I transgressed that which is written in the Torah: ‘Keep far from her your way, and do not approach the entrance of her house” (Proverbs 5:8). ‘Keep far from her your way’—this is sectarianism—‘and do not approach the entrance of her house’—this is prostitution.

“Why? ‘For many slain has she caused to fall, and tremendous are all those killed by her’ (Proverbs 7:26).”

How much [should one remove oneself]? Rav Ḥisda’ said, “Until four cubits.”

From here died Rabbi ’El‘azar ben Dama’, son of the sister of Rabbi Yishma‘e’l, whom a snake bit. And Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’ came to heal him, and Rabbi Yishma‘e’l did not let him.

[Rabbi Yishma‘e’l] said, “You are not allowed, Ben Dama’”.

[Rabbi ’El‘azar ben Dama’] said to him, “Allow me, and I will bring you proof from the Torah that it is permitted.” But he did not bring him enough proof before he died.

And Rabbi Yishma‘e’l rejoiced and said, “Happy are you, Ben Dama’, that your soul went out in purity and you did not breach the fence of the Sages [to submit to the ministrations of one such as Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’]. For all who breach the fence of the Sages [his] end is that calamities come upon him, as it is written, ‘And one who breaches a fence, a snake will bite him’ (Ecclesiastes 1:8).”

And he was not bitten except that a snake should not bite him in the future to come [in the afterlife as a punishment].

And what was to him [Rabbi ’El‘azar ben Dama’] in it [that he should submit to the ministrations of Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’]? “That the human will do them and live by them” (Leviticus 11:5)—and not that he should die by them.

I find the timing of these passages rather difficult. The king of Yehudhah (Judea) at the time of Yeshu the Noṣri was Yanna’y (Alexander Jannaeus), who died in 76 BCE. Rabbi ‘Aqiva’, however, lived at the time of the Bar Kokhba’ revolt in 132 CE. Rabbi ‘Aqiva’ is said to have lived 120 years, but even if we place this incident at the beginning of his teaching career, 40 years before he was executed by the Romans, that still leaves us with a gap of about 168 years between Yeshu the Noṣri in Egypt and this incident with Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’. Perhaps Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’ was not being literal about having been taught by Yeshu the Noṣri, but rather is claiming to have received traditions which go back to him. Alternatively, there could have been multiple people named “Yeshu the Noṣri”.

There is also the question of what Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’ would have done in treating Rabbi ’El‘azar ben Dama’ that would have been in violation of Jewish law. Medical treatment is not prohibited, so it had to be known or at least suspected that Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’ was doing something forbidden. Since Yeshu the Noṣri is depicted as a magician, Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’ may have followed in his footsteps and used magic for healing. This may be related to many incidents in the Gospels where Jesus is depicted as faith-healing. (What one person views as a legitimate religious practice may be easily viewed by others as magic. The term “magic” comes from magus, the Latin term for a Zoroastrian priest.) Considering that Yeshu the Noṣri committed idolatry, the magic of Ya‘aqov, Man of Kefar Sekhanya’ may have also contained an idolatrous component. If so, Rabbi Yishma‘e’l was completely right in prohibiting it even to save a life; one is obligated to die rather than commit idolatry.

Peace.

’Aharon/Aaron

The Gospel According to the Pharisees, Part 4, or, The Gospel of Ben Seṭadha’:

Jewish date: 24 Tammuz 5771 (Parashath Mas‘e).

Today’s holidays: The Three Weeks (Judaism), Feast Day of Joachim and Ann (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Stanley Kubrick (Church of the SubGenius).

Upcoming events:

• The group protesting for Jewish rights on the Temple Mount and against the Waqf’s destruction of everything Jewish up there (myself included) will be at the Shuq in Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) this Thursday (28 July 2011), probably around 7:00 PM, in an educational capacity.
• One of the people at the last protest (this past Thursday) was handing out pamphlets promoting Jews visiting the Temple Mount on Ro’sh Ḥodhesh ’Av (1 August 2011). Visiting hours for Jews are 7:30 AM to 11:00 AM and 1:30 PM to 2:30 PM. One should visit a miqweh, wear non-leather shoes, and bring a one’s identity card. See “The Temple Mount: Bird's Eye Guide to the Temple Mount” and “Ascending the Temple Mount: An Introduction and Brief Guide” and consult a competent Orthodox rav for more information. Remember: The more Jews who show up, the more the police and the politicians know that the Temple Mount matters to Jews and will be less likely to pander to Muslim discrimination.

Greetings.

And now for the fourth in my series on Jesus in the Talmudh. (See also “The Gospel According to the Pharisees”, “The Gospel According to the Pharisees, part 2”, and “The Gospel According to the Pharisees, Part 3”.) The Wikipedia article I got a lot of the references from (thanks to Stephen), “Jesus in the Talmud”, lists some references to one Ben Seṭadha’ who sounds a bit like Jesus and Yeshu the Noṣri.

Talmudh Yerushalmi, Shabbath 12:4:

[Mishnah:] One who writes on his flesh [on Shabbath] is liable [to bring a sin offering if unintentionally and to death if deliberately]. And one who scratches [letters] on his flesh [on Shabbath], Rabbi ’Eli‘ezer declares him liable to bring a sin offering, and Rabbi Yehoshua‘ exempts [him].

[Expositing on the Mishnah:] The one who draws like the form of writing on the skin [on Shabbath] is exempt.

Rabbi ’Eli‘ezer said to them, “And did not Ben Seṭadha’ bring out sorcery from Miṣrayim [Egypt] just this way?

They said to him, “Because of one incompetent, do we lose many smart [people]?”

Talmudh Bavil, Shabbath 104b:

[Expositing on the Mishnah:] “One who scratches [letters] on his flesh [on Shabbath—Rabbi ’Eli‘ezer declares him guilty to bring a sin offering, and the Sages exempt [him].]”: It was taught: Rabbi ’Eli‘ezer said to the Sages, “And did not Ben Seṭadha’ bring out sorcery from Miṣrayim in a scratch that [was] on his flesh [i.e., scratched into his flesh]?”

They said to him, “He was an incompetent, and one does not bring a proof [of how people normally behave] from incompetents.”

The term which I translate as “incompetent” in both passages, shoṭeh, is frequently grouped together with ḥeresh (“deaf-mute”) and qaṭan (“minor”, someone under age 13 if male and 12 if female) as part of the canonical group of people who are not legally responsible for their actions; someone has to have severe mental problems to be considered a shoṭeh. The term also is part of the compound term ḥasidh shoṭeh (“incompetent pietist”), which refers to someone whose priorities are severely wrong, such as a man who declines to save a woman drowning in a river because if he does so, he will have to see her naked. It is no stretch to interpret this passage as meaning that the Sages thought Ben Seṭadha’ was some sort of idiot or lunatic.

Do note that Ben Seṭadha’, like Yeshu the Noṣri and the Jesus of the Gospels spent time in Egypt. And like Yeshu the Noṣri, Ben Seṭadha’ was a magician. Also note that while the passages about Yeshu the Noṣri do not approve of his behavior, none of them suggest that he was mentally defective. Keep in mind: doing wrong is not the same thing as being stupid.

Talmudh Bavil, Sanhedhrin 67a:

[[In a discussion of the trial of inciters:]]

And if he said, “Thus are our obligations and thus is beautiful for us [to worship idols]”, the witnesses that hear from outside bring him to court and stone him. And thus they did to Ben Seṭadha’ in Ludh [Lod, a city near Tel ’Aviv and site of the Ben Guryon Airport], and they hung him on the eve of Pesaḥ [Passover].

Ben [= son of] Seṭadha’? He [was the] son of Pandera’!

Rav Ḥisda’ said, “The husband [was] Seṭadha’. The one who had intercourse [with his mother was] Pandera’.”

The husband [was] Pappos ben Yehudhah!

[Yes, ] but his mother was Seṭadha’.

His mother was Miryam the braider of women[’s hair = Miryam meghadela’ neshaya’]!

As they said in Pumbedhitha’ [a center of Jewish learning in Babylonia]: This one turned [seṭath da’] from her husband.

Like Yeshu the Noṣri and the Jesus of the Gospel According to John, Ben Seṭadha’ is executed on the eve of Pesaḥ. Like Yeshu the Noṣri, Ben Seṭadha’ is stoned and hung by Jews, not crucified by Romans. That this specifically happens in Ludh is unlike the Gospels, in which Jesus is executed in Yerushalayim.

Note there is some confusion over who were Ben Seṭadha’’s parents, with the resolution being that his father was Pandera’, his mother’s husband was Pappos ben Yehudhah, and his mother was Miryam [= Mary]. Only the last agrees to any degree with the Gospels and the Aramaic suggests an identification of Mary the mother of Jesus with Mary Magdalene. (Digest that, Dan Brown and Lady Gaga!) Miryam was an adulteress, which fits well with the Gospel claim that Jesus was literally the Son of God and with the Christian tradition that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute or adulteress. (And, yes, I am aware the Gospels are silent on Mary Magdalene’s sex life and I have heard that such an identification may be late, but the parallel is still there.)

Though there was a bit of similarity of Ben Seṭadha’ to Yeshu the Noṣri and Jesus of the Gospels, there is not a lot to go on in the first place. That a scholar such as Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah could have at one point voluntarily associated with Yeshu the Noṣri suggests Yeshu was probably at least somewhat intelligent. This is confirmed by Yeshu being able to disgrace his learning—he had to be able to acquire the learning in order to be able to disgrace it. Ben Seṭadha’ seems to have not been mentally all there, suggesting that he was a different person.

Peace.

’Aharon/Aaron

The Gospel According to the Pharisees, Part 3

Jewish date: 22 Tammuz 5771 (Parashath Mas‘e).

Today’s holidays: The Three Weeks (Judaism), Seventeenth Sunday of Ordinary Time (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Sylvester Graham (Church of the SubGenius).

Upcoming events:

• The group protesting for Jewish rights on the Temple Mount and against the Waqf’s destruction of everything Jewish up there (myself included) will be at the Shuq in Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) this Thursday (28 July 2011), probably around 7:00 PM, in an educational capacity.
• One of the people at the last protest (this past Thursday) was handing out pamphlets promoting Jews visiting the Temple Mount on Ro’sh Ḥodhesh ’Av (1 August 2011). Visiting hours for Jews are 7:30 AM to 11:00 AM and 1:30 PM to 2:30 PM. One should visit a miqweh, wear non-leather shoes, and bring a one’s identity card. See “The Temple Mount: Bird's Eye Guide to the Temple Mount” and “Ascending the Temple Mount: An Introduction and Brief Guide” and consult a competent Orthodox rav for more information. Remember: The more Jews who show up, the more the police and the politicians know that the Temple Mount matters to Jews and will be less likely to pander to Muslim discrimination.

Greetings.

Image of Jesus making himself look like an ignoramus in front of Pharisees via Wikipedia

As intended, I am continuing my series on Jesus in the Talmudh. (See “The Gospel According to the Pharisees” and “The Gospel According to the Pharisees, part 2”.) Today’s installment (in what looks like it is going to drag out to at least five installments) deals with what the Rabbis thought about Yeshu the Noṣri, who may well be Jesus of Nazareth.

Talmudh Bavli, Berakhoth 17b:

[In a discussion of the eulogies of great scholars which ends up as exegesis of Psalms 144:14, giving examples of bad students:] “In our streets”—that we should not have a son or student that spoils his dish [i.e., disgraces his learning] in public, e.g., Yeshu the Noṣri.

This passage indicates that the Pharisees thought about as highly of Yeshu’s learning as he did of theirs.

Talmudh Bavli, Giṭṭin 56b-57a:

’Unqelos bar Qaloniqos [author of the canonical translation of the Torah into Aramaic] was the son of the sister of Ṭiṭus [Titus, emperor of Rome]; he wanted to convert.

[[’Unqelos raises up Titus and Bil‘am and questions them about who is important in the World to Come.]]

[’Unqelos] went [and] raised up with necromancy Yeshu the Noṣri. He said to him, “Who is important in that world?”

[Yeshu] said to him, “Yisra’el [Israel].”

[’Unqelos asked,] “What about to be joined to them?”

[Yeshu] said to him, “Inquire about their grace; do not inquire about their tragedy. Whoever touches them, it is as if he touches the pupil [better: cornea] of his eye.”

[’Unqelos] said to him, “The judgement of ‘that man’ [i.e., Yeshu] is in what?”

[Yeshu] said to him, “In boiling excrement.”

Your humble blogger finds it difficult to see this as an actual historical event. At best, it could reflect some meditative or drug-induced experience. What is obvious what whoever wrote it thought about Yeshu the Noṣri.

Both of these passages demonstrate a very negative view of Yeshu the Noṣri, which is in complete agreement with the passages I have already written about. They also reflect the negative attitudes of the Pharisees towards Jesus depicted in the New Testament, the big difference being that here Jesus is the bad guy. Note that while Jesus in the Gospels gets the upper hand in arguments (probably through omission of the Pharisees’ rebuttals of anything Jesus has to say, if these arguments ever took place at all), here he is not even given the opportunity to make a case.

Thus ends what I have managed to find on Yeshu the Noṣri in the Talmudh. Up next are passages on Ben Seṭadha’, which resemble the stories of Jesus and Yeshu and may—or may not—be the same person.

Peace.

’Aharon/Aaron

The Gospel According to the Pharisees, part 2

Jewish date:  24 Siwan 5771 (Parashath Ḥuqqath).

Today’s holidays:  Corpus Christi (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Archie McPhee (Church of the SubGenius).

I post this now in an effort to get caught up.  There are things going on religiously which are unlikely to be discussed by me, but at least I hope to make progress on what one might call “original content”.

About ten months ago I reported on a passage in Sanhedhrin 43a in the Talmudh Bavli dealing with one Yeshu the Noṣri (Jesus the Nazarene).  It is not clear if this Yeshu is the same as the subject of the Gospels, though there are suggestive similarities.

Around Shavu‘oth I was at a lecture which brought up another (commonly censored out) passage in Sanhedhrin which deals with Yeshu the Noṣri.  When I looked it up, I discovered it appears slightly differently in Soṭah, too.  Here are both versions, my translation (with apologies for any inaccuracies there may be, as the language is difficult):


Soṭah 47a:

Our Masters taught:  Always the left [hand] should push away and the right bring near.  [This is] not like [the prophet] ’Elisha‘, who pushed away [his assistant] Geḥazi with his two hands, and not like Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah, who pushed away Yeshu the Noṣri with his two hands.

Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah—what is this?  When King Yanna’y [one of the Maccabean kings] was killing Our Masters, Shim‘on ben Sheṭaḥ’s sister  [wife of King Yanna’y] hid him.  Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah went [and] fled to ’Aleksanderiyya’ of Miṣrayim [Alexandria, Egypt].

When there was peace, Shim‘on ben Sheṭaḥ sent to him:  “From me [in] Yerushalayim [Jerusalem] the Holy City to you [in] ’Aleksanderiyya’ of Miṣrayim:  My sister [says], ‘My husband dwells in your midst, and I sit desolate.’”

He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said, “Hear from this he [Shim‘on ben Sheṭaḥ] had peace.”

When he came [and] reached a certain inn, he [the innkeeper] stood before him with much honor; they did for him great honor.  He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] sat and praised, “How pleasant/beautiful is this hostess!”

Yeshu the Noṣri said to him, “Rabbi, her eyes are ṭeruṭoth [oval?  long?  narrow?  tearful?  at any rate, probably not intended as a complement].

He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said to him, “Evil [one]!  In this do you busy yourself?”  He brought out 400 shofaroth [for the sake of publicity] and excommunicated him.

Every day he [Yeshu the Noṣri] went before him [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah], and he did not receive him.

One day he [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] was reading Qeriyyath Shema‘ [a basic Jewish prayer].  He [Yeshu the Noṣri] came before him.  It was on his mind to receive him.  He showed him with his hand [i.e., made a sign to avoid interrupting his prayers].  He [Yeshu the Noṣri] thought that he [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] had pushed him away; he went [and] set up a brick [as] a worshipper.

He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said to him, “Return yourself!”

He [Yeshu the Noṣri] said to him, “Thus I received from you:  All sinners and those who cause the masses to sin cannot succeed in doing repentance.  For Mar [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said, ‘Yeshu the Noṣri performed magic and incited [to transgression] and tempted [to commit transgressions] and caused Yisra’el [Israel] to sin.’”

Sanhedhrin 107b:

Our Masters taught:  Always the left [hand] should push away and the right bring near.  [This is] not like ’Elisha‘, who pushed away Geḥazi with his two hands, and not like Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah, who pushed away Yeshu the Noṣri with his two hands.

Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah—what is this?  When King Yanna’y was killing Our Masters, Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah and Yeshu went to ’Aleksanderiyya’ of Miṣrayim.

When there was peace, Shim‘on ben Sheṭaḥ sent to him:  “From me [in] Yerushalayim the Holy City to you [in] ’Aleksanderiyya’ of Miṣrayim:  My sister [says], ‘My husband dwells in your midst, and I sit desolate.’”

He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] stood [and] came [and] arrived by chance at a certain inn.  They did for him great honor.  He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said, “How pleasant/beautiful is this hostess!”

He [Yeshu the Noṣri] said to him, “Rabbi, her eyes are ṭeruṭoth.

He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said to him, “Evil [one]!  In this do you busy yourself?”  He brought out 400 shofaroth and excommunicated him.

He [Yeshu the Noṣri] came before him [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] several times [and] said to him, “Receive me!”  He would not look at him.

One day he [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] was reading Qeriyyath Shema‘.  He [Yeshu the Noṣri] came before him.  He thought to receive [him].  He showed him with his hand [i.e., made a sign].  He [Yeshu the Noṣri] thought, “He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] has pushed me away.”  He went [and] set up a brick and prostrated himself before it.

He [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said to him, “Return yourself!”

He [Yeshu the Noṣri] said to him, “Thus I received from you:  All sinners and those who cause the masses to sin cannot succeed in doing repentance.   And Mar [Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah] said, ‘Yeshu the Noṣri performed magic and incited [to transgression] and tempted [to commit transgressions] and caused Yisra’el [Israel] to sin.’”

Like the Sanhedhrin 43a passage, this passage takes place at a time of Jewish rule, not Roman; Herod the Great ruled after the Maccabean kings.  Like in the Gospels, this Yeshu spent time in Egypt due to persecution from the government; however, the Gospels blame Herod the Great for trying to kill Jesus as a small child, while here Yeshu is presumably an adult.

Clearly there is a lot left out of these passages.

1) The cause of Yeshu’s excommunication, that he was criticizing the appearance of a married woman’s eyes, is odd.  That he noticed there was something unusual about a married woman’s eyes is nothing unusual; since he was presumably not blind, it is to be expected.  Talking about it, however, is rude and improper, as it is completely irrelevant to how the inn staff were treating Rabbi Yehoshua‘ ben Peraḥyah and Yeshu—people who are physically unusual can be just as nice as anyone else—but this would be the first time your humble blogger is aware of anyone being excommunicated for being rude.

2) Like in the Sanhedhrin 43a passage, this Yeshu also goes horribly wrong.  Idolatry is strictly forbidden in Judaism, but why he fell that far is never stated.  Many people screw up horribly without becoming idolators.

3) What Yeshu was doing to cause others to transgress or what he did magically is not stated.  Why he did either is never stated.

Humans, even when they go bad, have reasons for what they do.  These reasons may be anything from excellent to idiotic, but they do not happen arbitrarily or suddenly.  Is Yeshu’s comment on a woman’s eyes part of a series of other misbehaviors which together justify his excommuication?  What happened to Yeshu which gave him the idea of practicing idolatry or magic?  Why would he make other people do wrong, too?  I have no idea.  But I find myself wondering if there are other passages in the Talmudh about Yeshu the Noṣri.  I hope further searching will turn up more information on  him which will fill in the gaps in his life.

Peace.

’Aharon/Aaron

Siyyum for ‘Eruvin

Image of part of an ‘eruv, the focal topic of ‘Eruvin, via Wikipedia

Greetings.

Jewish date:  5 ’Adhar Sheni 5771 (Parashath Wayyiqra’).

Today’s holidays:  Great Lent (Christianity), Lent (Christianity), Bahá’í Month of Fasting (Bahá’í Faith), Friday after Ash Wednesday (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Bela Lugosi (Church of the SubGenius).

I started work recently, and I am trying to fit things, including blogging, into my new schedule.  One of the other things I am also struggling to find a right time slot for is the study of the Babylonian Talmudh.  I recently completed study of the tractate ‘Eruvin, and this Shabbath afternoon I should be having a siyyum, which is a festive meal in celebration of the completion of a tractate.  (We Jews are a rather academic people and like to celebrate Torah study.)  Often at a siyyum the person who has completed the tractate gives a speech on it, but I will not be giving such a speech then because 1) I will not have the time for it and 2) my Hebrew speaking abilities are probably not equal to the task (yet).  However, this is my blog, and I can write anything here I want with impunity, so I am going to write here a little bit on ‘Eruvin.


‘Eruvin ends discussing cases which many today cannot relate to easily, things like what one can or cannot do if a string breaks on a lyre in the Temple on Shabbath or whether or not a wart discovered on a kohen (priest) can be removed on Shabbath so he can perform the Temple service.  In such cases there are technical matters of whether fixing the string or removing the wart count as mela’khah (actions prohibited on Shabbath from the Torah) and if they do, whether or not the requirement that the Temple service be performed overrides the prohibition.  These technical questions will not be discussed here.  Instead, I will discuss another matter which is not discussed in the Talmudh or its standard commentaries of Rashi and Tosafoth.


One could easily ask, “Why do these cases matter?  The Temple is not some tiny rinky-dink institution.  They had lots of lyres and lots of kohanim.  If a string breaks on a lyre, so what?  They can just put the instrument aside, use a different one, and fix the broken string tomorrow.  And if a kohen has a wart, they can give him the day off and have a doctor remove it tomorrow.  What’s so important about this lyre and this kohen that they need them this particular day?”  Indeed, if a lyre had a broken string or a kohen had a wart on Shabbath, they probably did just take the day off.


Nevertheless, asking such questions does have a point.  Strings break periodically on string instruments, and it is statistically inevitable that given enough time, one Shabbath every single lyre on the Temple Mount will have a broken string.  If the chances of every lyre in the Temple having a broken string on any given Shabbath, is one in 1,000,000, over 10,000 years there is about a 40 percent chance that this problem will actually occur, and during 90,000 years, the chances that it will happen top 99 percent.  Considering the Temple service is supposed to resume and last indefinitely, perhaps till the end of our universe, even highly unlikely events are likely to happen at some point.



And should anyone think this discussion is purely hypothetical, consider this:  As a graduate student, I studied rare diseases.  Childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia has an incidence measured in terms of per hundred thousand.  This is a rate so low that one does not need to worry about one’s children getting this disease—and this is the most common childhood cancer.  A cancer which one’s chances of getting are one in 1,000,000 may be nothing for an individual to worry about, but given that there are about 7,000,000,000 humans on this planet, that means there are about 7,000 people getting this disease, suffering from it, dealing with its consequences, seeking treatment for it, and perhaps dying from it.  One in 1,000,000 may be trivial for an individual, but given enough individuals, even something so unlikely becomes something that happens to someone.  Rare events not only happen, but given enough opportunities to happen, they become practically inevitable.  It is thus no wonder that the Babylonian Talmudh discusses cases which at any instant are improbable:  it is simply a matter of being prepared for when they inevitably happen.


Peace and Shabbath shalom.

Aaron

The Gospel According to the Pharisees

Greetings.

Jewish date:  25 Tammuz 5770 (Parashath Re’eh).

Today’s holidays:  Dedication of St. Mary Major (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Lucretia Borgia/St. Enola Gay (Church of the SubGenius).

Worthy cause of the day:  “Tell Sarah Palin to Go Back to Alaska - The Petition Site”.

Topic 1:  For someone who was supposed to be the Jewish Mashiaḥ (= Messiah), Jesus is almost totally unmentioned in Jewish tradition.  I say “almost” because there is one passage in the Talmudh Bavli which might refer to Jesus, though the story presented is very different from anything presented in the Gospels.  Thus is it written in Sanhedhrin 43a (my translation):

[Quote from the Mishnah under discussion:]  “And a herald goes out before him [one condemned to death by a court]”—before him, yes, from the beginning [forty days before], no.

But it was taught:  On the eve of Pesaḥ [= Passover] they hung Yeshu the Noṣri; and the herald goes out before him forty days:  “Yeshu the Noṣri goes out to be stoned because he practiced magic and incited [to transgression] and tempted Yisra’el; all those who know for him any merit, let him come and teach it.”  And they did not find for him merit, and they hung him on the eve of the Pesaḥ.

‘Ulla’ said:  And you will think [this is something to bring a proof from]?  Is Yeshu the Noṣri one worthy to overturn [judgement] in his merit?  He was an inciter, and the Merciful One said “You will not pity and will not cover over him [an inciter]” (Deuteronomy 13:9).  But Yeshu is different, for he was close to the government [and thus the Sanhedhrin needed to give him every opportunity to have his name cleared, even though they knew this would not actually happen].

Our Masters taught:  Yeshu the Noṣri had five students:  Matta’y, Naqqa’y, Neṣer, and Buni, and Todhah.

They brought Matta’y.  He said to them, “Will Matta’y be killed?  Isn’t it written, ‘When [mathay] will I come and see the face of ’Elohim?’ (Psalms 42:3)?”

They said to him, “Yes, Matta’y will be killed.  For it is written:  ‘When [mathay] will he die and his name be lost?’ (Psalms 41:6, as if it were ‘Matta’y will die and his name be lost’)”.

They brought Naqqa’y.  He said to them, “Will Naqqa’y be killed?  Isn’t it written, ‘And one clean [naqi] or righteous you will not kill’ (Exodus 23:7)?”

They said to him, “Yes, Naqqa’y will be killed.  For it is written:  ‘In secret he will kill one clean [naqi] (Psalms 10:8).”

They brought Neṣer.  He said to them, “Will Neṣer be killed?  Isn’t it written, ‘And a stem [neṣer] from his root will bear fruit’ (Isaiah 11:1)?”

They said to him, “Yes, Neṣer will be killed.  For it is written:  ‘And you will be throw from your grave like an abominated stem [neṣer]’ (Isaiah 14:19).”

They brought Buni.  He said to them, “Will Buni be killed?  Isn’t it written, ‘My son [beni], my firstborn is Yisra’el’ (Exodus 4:22)?”

They said to him, “Yes, Buni will be killed.  For it is written:  ‘Behold, I kill your son [binkha], your firstborn’ (Exodus 4:23).”

They brought Todhah.  He said to them, “Will Todhah be killed?  Isn’t it written, ‘A song for thanks [todhah]’ (Psalms 100:1)?”

They said to him, “Yes, Todhah will be killed.  For it is written:  ‘One who sacrifices a thanksgiving-offering [todah] will honor Me’ (Psalms 50:23).”

The elements that are the same between this passage and the Gospels are the central character’s name (Yeshu the Noṣri = Jesus the Nazarean), that he had some sort of powers and incited people to violate the Torah, that he had disciples, that one of the disciples is named Matta’y (= Matthew), the Sanhedhrin tried Yeshu and found him guilty, and (in accordance with John) he was executed on the day before Pesaḥ.  On the other hand, this Yeshu was a magician and inciter to ‘avodhah zarah (“strange worship” = idolatry and polytheism) and not a prophet or the Son of God, he was stoned and hung and not crucified, his execution was announced 40 days in advance and was not done hastily, he was close to the government, he was executed by the Sanhedhrin and not the Romans, and he had five disciples and not 12.  And four of the disciples’ names are unlike those in the New Testament.  Notably strange is that the canonical Gospels all disagree with this passage and claim that the Romans, not the Sanhedhrin, executed Jesus, even though they go out of their way to lamely pin the blame on the Jews.  Intuition suggests that the Christian version of the story may have undergone a period in which they shifted blame to the Romans and then flip-flopped back again to blame the Jews, but this is just speculation on my part.


Rather unusual is the second part of the passage, in which every disciple gives a reason he should live, citing verse in the Hebrew Bible as word-play, and he is condemned with another verse in equal and opposite word-play.  While the first part of the passage is (so far as I know) at least historically possible, the second part is rather unrealistic and reads like fiction, and a truncated one at that since the charges against the disciples are not mentioned and neither are their executions.  Intuition suggests this section is a legend that was added to the first section.

Topic 2:  For today’s religious humor: “Cyoot Kitteh Of The Day: The Power Of Ceiling Cat Compels You!”:

NOTE:  You want to click the link for an additional LOLcat shown after the one displayed above.

Peace.

Aaron