Nothing is really happening in the world unless a Shas MK has something to say about it. Take The Passion for example:
Meanwhile, Yishai's colleague in the ultra-Orthodox Sephardic party, former minister of labor and social affairs Shlomo Benizri, told a Haredi pirate radio station a number of weeks ago that the Jews did, in fact, kill Jesus. "According to Torah law, they decided to hang Jesus."Forget about stirring up anti-semitism; now I'm worried that The Passion might prompt a revolution in chareidi educational policies... Posted by Avraham at February 29, 2004 06:02 PM
Benizri, who confirmed the comments yesterday, said Jesus was put to death according to Sanhedrin (ancient Jewish court) tradition, Maariv reported. "They took him up to a high roof, and threw him crashing to the ground. Afterwards they hung his body on wooden beams in the shape of a "T," but not as the Christian legends say that he was crucified. That's nonsense."
Benizri told Maariv that Jesus' death was an internal Jewish affair. "What is there to deny? We're talking about a yeshiva student who left Judaism, and the Sanhedrin put him to death."
It's probably wrong of me to find that hilarious, especially with your concluding comment. Plus I can't figure out where, if anywhere, the "Torah law" in question might be found (hanging? throwing people off roofs? I think Jesus is killed in an airborne battle in Toledot Yeshu, but nobody seriously calls that Torah law....). But I'm too busy trying to suppress inappropriate giggles to analyze it properly.
Now, see, one of the great things about being Jewish is that we don't actually have to pretend we agree with this guy. ;)
Posted by: Naomi Chana at February 29, 2004 06:28 PMNaomi,
well, I'm assuming that the throwing off the roof would be some version of the first stage of seqilah. the hanging would be the hanging of the offender's body afterwards (see mishnah Sanhedrin chapter 6). according to this model, jesus would have been either an idolator or a mesit. This begs the question as to whether the Jewish Sanhedrin was actually killing people at that time or, even if they were, what their procedure was.
There is an interesting article by Moshe Bernstein (professor of mine here at YU) about a possible "hanging" or "piercing" passage in the Temple Scroll in Gesher 7 (1979) titled "Midrash halakhah at Qumran? 11 Q Temple 64, 6-13 and Deut. 21, 22-23" that could also be relevent, as it raises the possibility of Jews hanging/crucifying? political criminals.
The giggles, by the way, are entirely appropriate. In fact, many opinions state that Shas only exists as part of a grand divine joke, and, after all, it is adar...
Posted by: Avraham at February 29, 2004 07:09 PMYou might want to check out Babylonian Talmud 43a (Chapter 6) where it explicitly says that Jesus was killed by the Jews and gives some details about how it happened.
(For the record AB, this is probably the source of the Shas MK)
I am not claiming that this is historically accurate. But to reject an idea that is explicitly attested to in the Talmud shows little for either a "Smicha honors" students (it makes one wonder what is required to get into that program) but NC's ignorance is forgivable.
Before you go around quoting Qumron and the DSS you might want to start with Daf Yomi. Maybe that is the biggest joke of all.
Bob,
where did I "reject" the talmudic theory of Jesus getting seqilah and then being hung attested to in the talmud? re-reading my comment, I believe that I explained the background for and around it, although, mea culpa, I should have mentioned that gemara as well. NC asked where the sources for throwing people off of things and hanging them were, and I responded in kind. (you might be pleased to know that as YU is learning sanhedrin this year and the kollel started with nigmar ha-din, I learned that censored gemara way back in the first week of the year.) As far as myself, whenever someone discussed the anti-semitism the Passion contains or might generate with me, I have always countered that our version, which is just as historically viable, is even worse.
I also pointed out that there is debate as to the historicity of the account (as there is in the gospel accounts) and also some (admittedly speculative) basis to claim that Jews had the idea of crucifying people alive in certain situations, all of which is also a bit relevent to the discussion at hand.
Getting back to the shas comment, they didn't throw people off rooftops to kill them via seqilah, at least according to the rest of the pereq in sanhedrin. Similarly, to use the talmud passage as a reason to either screen or not screen The Passion is somewhat rediculous. Also, the notion of the sanhedrin killing the yeshiva students who went off sounds really funny and fully warranted my flippant reaction.
Posted by: Avraham at March 1, 2004 01:45 AMAvraham: Thanks for clarifying that! I do know that mishnah, and if this guy was talking about seqilah his statements make a lot more sense (for one thing, I know what the hanging business is doing there), but I'm still puzzled as to where he's getting (a) the roof and (b) the presumption that this particular case of seqilah didn't require an actual stone. (Yeah, yeah, casting someone down from twice a man's height. But a roof? I thought they pushed people off a platform (if they ever did any of this in actuality); maybe the roof thing is in some Sephardic law code somewhere. As for the lack of actual stoning, I know it could (indeed, was encouraged to) happen, but I don't know where a tradition exists that it did happen in this particular literary instance.)
Also, I'll have to check out that article -- I wasn't aware that piercing was a viable execution option for any Jewish communities in the first century, although I shouldn't be surprised; it's not like beheading was a traditional Israelite form of execution either.
As for considering Jesus a "yeshiva student": presumably this has to do with the passage about him in BT Sanhedrin 107b, but anachronistic much? ;)
Posted by: Naomi Chana at March 3, 2004 03:48 PM