Jesus in the Talmud: Difference between revisions

This article or section is in a state of significant expansion or restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this article or section has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. If you are the editor who added this template and you are actively editing, please be sure to replace this template with {{in use}} during the active editing session. Click on the link for template parameters to use. This article was last edited by Noleander (talk | contribs) 13 years ago. (Update timer)

The two main forms of the Talmud, are the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud (Palestinian Talmud or Talmud de-Eretz Yisrael). The modern Talmud has no references to Jesus, as they were removed by censorship. However, the name of Jesus occurs 20 times in the unexpurgated editions. The allusions to Jesus are characterized by fear, disguised as hatred.^[1]

The Talmud (Hebrew; Learning) is a veritable encyclopedia of Jewish teaching,^[2] and is considered authoritative by Orthodox Jews.^[3] It is held that the written law called Torah Shebiktav and the oral interpretations called Torah Shebeal Peh were given by God to Moses on Mount Sinai.^[4] The Torah Shebeal Peh is said to have been transmitted by Joshua, the seventy Elders, the Prophets, and then to the Anshei Knesset HaGedola (Great assembly}. Finally, it is said to have been transmitted successively to certain Rabbis until it was no longer possible to retain it orally.

When the Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70, the successors to the Pharisees continued in their oral traditions. These traditions were collected and written down in the Mishna. Over time, additional traditions, or Gemara, were also preserved. These Mishnaic and Gemaran traditions became the basis for the Talmud.^[5][6][7]

It is a saying of Monsieur Renan that in the history of the origins of Christianity, the Talmud has hitherto been far too much neglected and the New Testament can only be understood by the light of the Talmud. There are several Talmudic passages that are said to be referring to Jesus, but some scholars and historians have contested this position and the evidence is unclear. There are four main passages in the Talmud that are generally believed to be about Jesus, along with others of varying degrees of dubious value.^[8][9]

(Talmud Sanhedrin 43a)

Our rabbis taught Jesus the Nazarene had five disciples, and these are they: Mattai, Naqqai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah. ^[10][11]

(Talmud Shabbat 104b)

Rav Eliezer told the sages "Did not the son of Stada bring sorcery with him from Egypt in a cut that was on his skin?"

They said to him "He was a fool and you cannot bring proof from a fool.

(The Talmud queries; Is he really) The son of Sitida? the son of Pandira (the common understanding is that he is the son of Pandira)! Rav Chisda said (explains the seeming contradiction); The husband was/is Sitida (but the) lover^[12] was/is Pandira. (The Talmud states as fact): (the true) Husband (is/was) Pappus Ben Yehuda. (so then, if his mother's true husband and his biological father where both not called Sitida then why is he called "the son of Sitida"?). Only (as the explantion of the contradiction) say, his mother was Sitida, (The Talmud furthur queries how this is plausible since) his mother (was called) Miriam (who) grow's/grew [the hair of] women^[13], (at this point the Talmud gives a final explanation to resolve the reasoning of him being called "The son of Sitida") As is said (explained) in Pumbedita; "She strayed from her husband"^[14]

— Sanhedrin 67a

The Pagan philosopher Celsus also relates a similar account meant to undermine the story of the Virgin Birth of Jesus:

. . .[Jesus] came from a Jewish village and from a poor country woman who earned her living by spinning. He says that she was driven out by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, as she was convicted of adultery. Then he says that after she had been driven out by her husband and while she was wandering about in a disgraceful way she secretly gave birth to Jesus. He states that because he [Jesus] was poor he hired himself out as a workman in Egypt, and there tried his hand at certain magical powers on which the Egyptians pride themselves; he returned full of conceit, because of these powers, and on account of them gave himself the title of God . . . the mother of Jesus is described as having been turned out by the carpenter who was betrothed to her, as she had been convicted of adultery and had a child by a certain soldier named Panthera. ^[15][16]

(Talmud Sanhedrin 107b, Sotah 47a)

The master said: "Jesus the Nazarene practiced magic and deceived and led Israel astray." ^[17][18]

(Talmud Sanhedrin 43a)

On (Sabbath eve and) the eve of Passover Jesus the Nazarene was hanged and a herald went forth before him forty days heralding, 'Jesus the Nazarene is going forth to be stoned because he practiced sorcery and instigated and seduced Israel to idolatry. Whoever knows anything in defense may come and state it.' But since they did not find anything in his defense they hanged him on (Sabbath eve and) the eve of Passover.

Ulla said: Do you suppose that Jesus the Nazarene was one for whom a defense could be made? He was a mesit (someone who instigated Israel to idolatry), concerning whom the Merciful [God]says: Show him no compassion and do not shield him (Deut. 13:9). With Jesus the Nazarene it was different. For he was close to the government.^[19][20]

Many scholars believe the Talmud gives us great insight into the Historical Jesus. The Talmud's importance and credibility as an early source lies in the fact that it gives the "opposition view" to Jesus.

If this were the only source to survive until today, and had to be read alone, it would tell us the following:

1) There was a religious man named Jesus.

2) His "father" was a carpenter and his mother was Miriam.

3) Miriam was accused of conceiving out of wedlock and it was believed that her "betrothed" was not the father of Jesus.

4) Jesus went to Egypt

5) Jesus had a number of disciples

6) Jesus performed miraculous signs, which were perceived by many as sorcery.

7) As Jesus became more widely known he was charged with practicing magic and leading Israel astray.

8) All deserted him and none came to his defense.

9) On the eve of Passover, Jesus was executed.

^{[21][22][23][24][25]}

There are many scholars who argue that the Jesus of the Talmud is not the "Jesus of Christianity". They point to the many inconsistencies. For example the accounts in the Tosefta and Talmud take place in different historical periods. Also, the tradition first seen in the writings of Celsus can not be regarded as a reliable reference to the historical Jesus. Furthermore Jesus was crucified and not hanged from a tree. Also the Bible makes no mention of a Roman soldier named Panthera.

Some modern critical scholars view these references as being linked to Christianity but not to the historical Jesus. Also Traditional and Orthodox Jewish commentators throughout the centuries rejected the view that the term "Yeshu" referred to Jesus. Whatever the case may be, in the medieval Toledot Yeshu narratives, "Yeshu" is used to refer to the Christian Jesus. The term was revived in the 20th century as a name for Jesus in modern Israeli Hebrew.^[26] And so the debate will continue.^{[27][28] [29]}

• Avodah Zarah, 16b-17a in the Babylonian Talmud essentially repeats the account of Chullin 2:24 about Rabbi Eliezer and adds additional material. It tells that Jacob quoted Deuteronomy 23:19: "You shall not bring the fee of a whore or the price of a dog into the house of the Lord your God in fulfillment of any vow." Jacob says that he was taught this by Yeshu. Jacob then asked Eliezer whether it was permissible to use a whore's money to build a retiring place for the High Priest? (Who spent the whole night preceding the Day of Atonement in the precincts of the Temple, where due provision had to be made for all his conveniences.) When Rabbi Eliezer did not reply, Jacob quoted Micah 1:7, "For they were amassed from whores' fees and they shall become whores' fees again." This was the teaching that had pleased Rabbi Eliezer.

The surname ben Pandera is not found in the Talmud account. (Rodkinson's translation drawing on the Tosefta account paraphrases the reference to Yeshu having taught Jacob by "so taught Jeshu b. Panthyra", in this case not translating "Yeshu" as "Jesus".) The name is found again in the Midrashic text Kohelet Rabba 10:5 where a healer of the grandson of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is described as being of ben Pandera. The source of this account is Shabbat 14:4-8 and Avodah Zarah 40 in the Jerusalem Talmud, but there ben Pandera is not mentioned. The word Yeshu is however found as a secondary marginal gloss to the first passage in the Leiden manuscript which together with the Midrashic version show that the account was understood to be about a follower of Yeshu ben Pandera. (Herford again takes liberty and adds "in the name of Jeshu Pandera" to his translation of the Talmud passages despite these words not being in the original text. Schäfer similarly provides a paraphrased translation mentioning "Jesus son of Pandera" which he admittedly has constructed himself by combining the Talmudic and Midrashic texts and the marginal glosses.^[30]) Kohelet Rabba also relates the account of Rabbi Eliezer (Kohelet Rabba 1:24) in this case some copies mention Yeshu ben Pandera as in the Tosefta passage but others instead read peloni a placeholder name equivalent to English "so-and-so".^[30]

Jeffrey Rubenstein has argued that the accounts in Chullin and Avodah Zarah reveal an ambivalent relationship between rabbis and Christianity. In his view the tosefta account reveals that at least some Jews believed Christians were true healers, but that the rabbis saw this belief as a major threat. Concerning the Babylonian Talmud account in Avoda Zarah, Dr. Boyarin views Jacob of Sechania as a Christian preacher and understands Rabbi Eliezer's arrest for minuth as an arrest by the Romans for practising Christianity (the text uses the word for heretic). When the Governor (the text uses the word for chief judge) interrogated him, the Rabbi answered that he "trusted the judge." Boyarin has suggested that this was the Jewish version of the Br'er Rabbit approach to domination, which he contrasts to the strategy of many early Christians, who proclaim their beliefs in spite of the consequences (i.e. martyrdom). Although Rabbi Eliezer was referring to God, the Governor interpreted him to be referring to the Governor himself, and freed the Rabbi. According to them the account also reveals that there was greater contact between Christians and Jews in the second century than commonly believed. They view the account of the teaching of Yeshu as an attempt to mock Christianity. According to Dr. Rubenstein, the structure of this teaching, in which a Biblical prooftext is used to answer a question about Biblical law, is common to both the Rabbis and early Christians. The vulgar content, however, may have been used to parody Christian values. Dr. Boyarin considers the text to be an acknowledgment that Rabbis often interacted with Christians, despite their doctrinal antipathy.^[31]

The meaning and etymology of this name are uncertain:

Besides the form Pandera, variations have been found in different Tosefta manuscripts for example Pantiri and Pantera ^[32]. Saul Lieberman's investigation of Tosefta variations revealed Pandera to be the original form. (Some authors such as Herford spell it Pandira in English.)

Celsus in his discourse The True Word gives the name as Panthera in Greek ^[32]. This name is not known from any graves or inscriptions, but the surname Pantera (a Latin rendering) is known from the first century tombstone of Tiberius Iulius Abdes Pantera ^[33]. Origen (c. 248 CE) responded to Celsus' claim by saying that Pantheras was the patronymic of Joseph the husband of Mary on account of his father, Jacob, being called Panther. An alternative claim was made in the Teaching of Jacob (634 CE) where Panther is said to be the grandfather of Mary.^[34] Friedrich August Nitzsch (1840) suggested that the name may refer to a panther being a lustful animal and thus have the meaning of "whore", additionally being a pun on parthenos meaning virgin.^[30] Herford also considered the Greek pentheros meaning son-in-law ^[32], however he dismissed all of these forms including Celsus' Panthera as spurious explanations of the Hebrew Pandera as they do not match phonetically. He noted that Hebrew would have represented the sounds correctly if any of these were the origin.^[32] The interpolated form Panthyra appearing in the Rodkinson translation of the Talmud suffers the same problem.

Neubauer understand the name to be Pandareus.^[35] The Toldoth Yeshu narratives contain elements resembling the story of Pandareus in Greek mythology, namely stealing from a temple and the presence of a bronze animal.

Robert Eisler ^[36] considered the name to be derived from Pandaros. He also argued that it may not have been a real name but instead as a generic name for a betrayer. He notes that in the Iliad, Pandaros betrays the Greeks and breaks a truce confirmed by solemn oath. He argues that the name came to be used as a generic term for a betrayer and was borrowed by Hebrew. The name is indeed found in Genesis Rabba 50 in the expression qol Pandar (literally "voice of Pandaros" denoting false promises of a betrayer) used as a derogatory placeholder name for a judge of Sodom. The -a at the end of the form Pandera can be understood to be the Aramaic definite article ^[32].

Sanhedrin 43a relates the trial and execution of Yeshu and his five disciples. Here, Yeshu is a sorcerer who has enticed other Jews to apostasy. A herald is sent to call for witnesses in his favour for forty days before his execution. No one comes forth and in the end he is stoned and hanged on the Eve of Passover. His five disciples, named Matai, Nekai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah are then tried. Word play is made on each of their names, and they are executed. It is mentioned that leniency could not be applied because of Yeshu's influence with the royal government (malkhut).

In the Florence manuscript of the Talmud (1177 CE) an addition is made to Sanhedrin 43a saying that Yeshu was hanged on the eve of the Sabbath.

In Gittin 56b, 57a a story is mentioned in which Onkelos summons up the spirit of a Yeshu who sought to harm Israel. He describes his punishment in the afterlife as boiling in excrement.

Sanhedrin 103a and Berachot 17b talk about a Yeshu who burns his food in public, possibly a reference to pagan sacrifices. The account is discussing Manasseh the king of Judah infamous for having turned to idolatry and having persecuted the Jews (2 Kings 21). It is part of a larger discussion about three kings and four commoners excluded from paradise. These are also discussed in the Shulkhan Arukh where the son who burns his food is explicitly stated to be Manasseh.

In Sanhedrin 107b and Sotah 47a a Yeshu is mentioned as a student of Joshua ben Perachiah who was sent away for misinterpreting a word that in context should have been understood as referring to the Inn, he instead understood it to mean the inkeeper's wife. His teacher said "Here is a nice Inn", to which he replied "Her eyes are crooked", to which his teacher responded "Is this what your are occupied in?" (This happened during their period of refuge in Egypt during the persecutions of Pharisees 88-76 BCE ordered by Alexander Jannæus. The incident is also mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud in Chagigah 2:2 but there the person in question is not given any name.) After several returns for forgiveness he mistook Perachiah's signal to wait a moment as a signal of final rejection, and so he turned to idolatry (described by the euphemism "worshipping a brick"). The story ends by invoking a Mishnaic era teaching that Yeshu practised black magic, deceived and led Israel astray. This quote is seen by some as an explanation in general for the designation Yeshu.

According to Dr. Rubenstein, the account in Sanhedrin 107b recognizes the kinship between Christians and Jews, since Jesus is presented as a disciple of a prominent Rabbi. But it also reflects and speaks to an anxiety fundamental to Rabbinic Judaism. Prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70, Jews were divided into different sects, each promoting different interpretations of the law. Rabbinic Judaism domesticated and internalized conflicts over the law, while vigorously condemning any sectarianism. In other words, rabbis are encouraged to disagree and argue with one another, but these activities must be carefully contained, or else they could lead to a schism. Although this story may not present a historically accurate account of Jesus' life, it does use a fiction about Jesus to communicate an important truth about the Rabbis. Moreover, Rubenstein sees this story as a rebuke to overly harsh Rabbis. Boyarin suggests that the Rabbis were well aware of Christian views of the Pharisees and that this story acknowledges the Christian belief that Jesus was forgiving and the Pharisees were not (see Mark 2:1-2), while emphasizing forgiveness as a necessary Rabbinic value.^[31]

Another title found in the Tosefta and Talmud is ben Stada (son of Stada). However in Shabbat 104b and Sanhedrin 67a in the Babylonian Talmud, a passage is found that some have interpreted as equating ben Pandera with ben Stada. The passage is in the form a Talmudic debate in which various voices make statements, each refuting the previous statement. In such debates the various statements and their refutations are often of a Midrashic nature, sometimes incorporating subtle humour and should not always be taken at face value. The purpose of the passage is to arrive at a Midrashic meaning for the term Stada.

Shabbat 104b relates that a ben Stada brought magic from Egypt in incisions in his flesh. Sanhedrin 67a relates that a ben-Stada was caught by hidden observers and hanged in the town of Lod on the Eve of Passover. The debate then follows. It begins by asking if this was not ben Pandera rather than ben Stada. This is refuted by the claim that it is both, his mother's husband was Stada but her lover was Pandera. This is countered with the claim the husband was Pappos ben Yehuda (a second century figure elsewhere remembered as having locked up his unfaithful wife and visiting R. Akiva in jail after the Bar-Kokhba revolt) and that the mother was named Stada. This is then refuted by the claim that the mother was named Miriam, the dresser of women's hair, but that she had gone astray from her husband (a Miriam the daughter of Bilgah, is mentioned elsewhere as having had an affair with a Roman soldier). In Aramaic, "gone astray" is satat da, thus a Midrashic meaning for the term Stada is obtained. Real historical relationships between the figures mentioned cannot be inferred due to the Midrashic nature of the debate. Pappos and Miriam might have been introduced simply as a result of their being remembered in connection with a theme of a woman having gone astray.

The character of Miriam the dresser of woman's hair is of interest. (Her name is also mentioned briefly in Chagigah 4b in the Babylonian Talmud where it is used together with Miriam the teacher of children simply as an arbitrary choice of names in illustrating a point.) Some^[who?] suggest that the expression "dresser of women's hair" is a euphemism for a woman of ill repute. The original Aramaic for her name is Miriam megadela neshaya in which many^[who?] see Mary Magdalene. Some^[who?] have thus identified her with Mary Magdalene while others^[who?] are more cautious merely suggesting dresser of women's hair as a possible meaning of Magdalene alternate to the traditional understanding of the name as a toponymic surname (Migdolit, from the town of Migdol).

Ben-Stada is also mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud. In Shabbat 12:4 III he is mentioned as having learnt by cutting marks in his flesh. In Sanhedrin 7:12 I he is mentioned as an example of someone caught by hidden observers and subsequently stoned. This information is paralleled in the Tosefta in Shabbat 11:15 and Sanhedrin 10:11 respectively.

The literal meaning of the term Stada is no longer known. It does not correspond to any known name, suggesting that son of Stada might also be a designation of a class of individuals rather an a patronymic, or perhaps an invented title like that of the Jewish general Bar Kochba (son of the star). The only known parallel to the term is found in the apocryphal Christian text the Acts of Peter where the villain Simon Magus describes himself as `uios `o stadios - the son who remains standing. The Toldoth Yeshu narratives combine elements from the Talmud about ben-Stada with elements resembling the account of Simon Magus in the Acts of Peter suggesting that there is indeed a connection. As a result of the difficulty in understanding the name some attempt to explain it by focusing on variant spellings in certain manuscripts containing an r (resh) instead of the d (daleth), however these variants are generally regarded as copyist errors.

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

To explain the dearth of references to Jesus in the Talmud, it has been argued that^{[citation needed]}

• The Talmud was subject to censorship, as passages deemed blasphemous by the Church were expurgated as of 1264 (the entire Talmud was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books by Pope Paul IV in 1559).
• Although restoring these passages still produces only a few mentions of Yeshu, the Mishnah, which forms the skeleton of the Talmud, was written at a time when Christianity was first emerging. The Christians were just one sect with which the authors contended (others included Sadducees, Samaritans, and Gnostics).
• The final redaction of the Talmud, the Babylonian Talmud was created in Babylonia, where Christianity did not have the same impact as it did in the Mediterranean Basin. As such, it was not perceived of as a particularly noticeable phenomenon.
• The Talmud was essentially the writing down of the basics of the Oral Law. Its 2,711 folio pages represent only part of the Jewish tradition. Midrash Rabbah and Midrash Halachah run to hundreds more pages and similarly fail to reference Jesus.

• Criticism of the Talmud #Insults directed at Jesus Christ

• Mark Hirshman, A Rivalry of Genius: Jewish and Christian Biblical Interpretation in Late Antiquity trans. Baya Stein. Albany: SUNY PRess 1996
• Joseph Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth (Beacon Books), 1964
• Jacob Neusner, Judaism in the Matrix of Christianity Philadelphia: Fortress Press 1986
• R. Travers Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash (KTAV), 1975
• Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud, Princeton University Press, 2007
• Gerd Theissen, Annette Merz, The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide, Fortress Press, 1998
• Dennis McKinsey, Biblical Errancy, A Reference Guide, Prometheus Books, (2000)