Читать книгу Judaism I - Группа авторов - Страница 72

8 Sacred Writings in Judaism of the Hellenistic-Roman Period

When did the Pentateuch become holy, immutable Scripture? Even for Judea it is difficult to say with any certainty when the biblical canon closed. The diversity reflected in the Qumran discoveries does not allow for certainty before 68 CE. Not before the manuscripts of Murabba‘at (135 CE) did the (pre-)Masoretic Text become the dominant form of the Bible.¹²⁶ The extent of the canon is given in numeric terms in 4 Ezra 14:13–48 as 24 writings, and Josephus (Ag. Ap. 1.37–41) lists them. Both texts require closer examination. 4 Ezra 14:37–48 is a Jewish apocalypse from the late first century CE and describes the restoration of the Holy Scriptures destroyed in the Temple fire in 70 CE. By divine inspiration they were dictated by Ezra in 40 days and 40 nights and written down by five scribes in Hebrew characters, which they did not know. Of the 94 books written, 24 were intended for publication and should be made known to both the worthy and the unworthy; however, 70 were to be accessible only to the wise. Josephus argues against the large number of writings among the Greeks and their mutual contradictions with the small number, 22, among the Jews, which span three thousand years of history. The two witnesses do not form the conclusion of the canon, as discussions into the Talmud show. Rather there is a basis for further arguments, in particular on the fringes of the canon (»rendering the hands impure« in relation to Esther and Sirach; t. Yad. II.13). Early Christian writings of the first century CE also indicate that besides the texts fixed in the later canon of the Old Testament they know of others that were authoritative for some authors or groups. For instance, unidentified texts are quoted as Scripture, like 1 Cor 2:9 (»What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the human heart conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him«) and John 7:38 (»Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water«).¹²⁷ Or when Ethiopic Enoch (1 Enoch) is quoted as Scripture (Jude 14f. ).

Our knowledge of the use and ranking of the scriptures that belong to the Hebrew canon entered a new stage with the Dead Sea discoveries (1947–1956). The approximately 200 manuscripts representing the books that belong to the Hebrew Bible all come from the pre-68 CE period. They are accompanied by hundreds of texts that did not find their way into the canon, some of them represented in more numerous copies than any biblical books, such as the book of Jubilees (16 Mss.) and the Enoch tradition (11 Mss.). The book of Tobit, also not adopted in the Hebrew canon but represented in the Christian Greek canon, is preserved in four Aramaic manuscripts and one Hebrew. Cautious conclusions are possible: The Pentateuch, Psalms, and Isaiah are held in the highest regard; they are followed by the Twelve Prophets, Daniel, Ezekiel, Jeremiah from the Prophets, and Job from the Writings.¹²⁸ Apart from the Psalms and Job, the so-called »Former Prophets« and the »Writings« do not have the same rank. We must take into account that an unknown number of scrolls have disappeared, but the relatively high number of references (ca. 1,000 Mss.) may provide indications. There is a remarkable consistency with quotations of these writings in the New Testament. The top rank is held by Psalms, Isaiah, and the Pentateuch, especially Exodus and Deuteronomy. Also in the top group are Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the Book of the Twelve. The high regard in which these texts were held in two different communities, namely the group behind the Dead Sea scrolls and early Christianity, demonstrates their authority in the first century before and after the turn of the era.

Even before a thorough standardization of a Torah text type had been achieved in Jerusalem and Judea, in Alexandria the wording of the LXX Torah was »canonized.« The account in Aristeas of course idealizes this process, but the claim it raises is remarkable. In the Letter of Aristeas we find a linguistic approach to what we call »Holy Scripture(s)« when the king orders that the books should be held »sacred.« In Philo, not only is Moses the most sacred of all who came into being, but the book of Exagoge (Exodus) is »a wholly sacred book of his lawgiving«¹²⁹ or »Holy Scripture.«¹³⁰ Since Demetrius, the earliest Jewish-Hellenistic exegete in Alexandria (late 3^rd century BCE), the interpretive treatment of the Torah as a binding text, but one requiring explanation, is tangible.

Centuries earlier, Homer had been the object of, and problem for, interpretation for the non-Jewish Hellenistic world. We also find the hermeneutic of allegorical interpretation applied to the work of Hesiod and to the verses ascribed to Orpheus, e.g. in the Derveni papyrus.¹³¹ Jewish-Hellenistic exegetes adopted the methods of allegorical interpretation elaborated there and applied them to the Torah. They could even apply this hermeneutic to Homer, using it to support the truth of the Torah.

The inclusion of Homer in the self-presentation of Judaism stands in the grand narrative of positive pagan testimonies about Jews and Judaism in Jewish self-representation and apologetics. The Iliad and the Odyssey in the Hellenistic period were also read by Jews and drawn upon for their own purposes. But they did not become »holy scriptures,« not even when they could be used to support the truth of Judaism. The fact that the writings of Homer were known in the Palestinian motherland is evident from the discussions in the Mishnah (m. Yad. 4:6): whether they »defile the hands,« i.e. were regarded as holy scriptures. One has to be careful not to draw far-reaching conclusions, but the facts of this discussion show that the writings of Homer were disseminated among Jews in the Land of Israel and were held in esteem in certain circles.

9 The Emergence of the Canon of Biblical Writings in Alexandria and Judea—Concluding Remarks

Thanks to the Dead Sea discoveries we have gained an insight into how texts became authoritative and absolutely binding in Judea. However, the process of canonization and the development into what we commonly call »holy scripture(s)« took place after the end of Qumran (68 CE).

There are several indicators pointing to the binding nature of a writing. Among these are: the number of manuscripts of a text, the number of quotations of a text, and the existence of commentary-style expositions. With regard to the place of a writing in Judaism, the two last aspects are especially relevant: quotation and exposition of a text.

The significance of the Pentateuch in Judea is evident in part from the number of copies in the Qumran finds. This is the starting point for expository paraphrases (»rewritten Bible,« »parabiblical texts«) which stand alongside an increasingly standardized (proto-Masoretic) text. The first expositions of Genesis (4Q252, 253, 254, 254a) are also found, in 4Q252 in cols. I–III as a kind of »rewritten Bible,« and in IV–VI in pesher style.¹³² Translations into Aramaic are documented by 4Q156 Targum Leviticus for the Pentateuch, and into Greek by pap4Q127. Writings outside the Pentateuch were also expounded in commentaries, whether in continuous pesharim (Habakkuk, Hosea, Isaiah, Nahum, Micah, and Psalms) or in thematic ones (Melchizedek 11Q13, Florilegium 4Q175, and Catena^a 4Q177).

In summary, from what the Qumran discoveries tell us, in Judea in the two centuries around the turn of the era, there were indications of the authoritative character of writings which were later admitted to the canon of Palestinian Judaism. It should be added, however, that there were writings that had a similarly authoritative character but did not make it into this canon (e.g. Sirach, Jubilees, Enoch, Tobit).

It is notable that although a particular Greek version was fixed in Alexandria in the second century BCE, this was not the case for the Hebrew text in Jerusalem/Judea. Even if a normative text version might have established itself already at the Jerusalem temple, the Dead Sea finds show that alongside this there were other text traditions up to the time of the destruction of the Temple, such as the proto-Samaritan or quite independent ones that cannot be attributed to hitherto known groups.¹³³

10 Final Reflections on Judaism and Hellenism¹³⁴

Jewish Hellenism is often seen by Christian scholars as a Praeparatio Evangelica, a preparation for Christianity. It is true that both literature and theological conceptions of Hellenistic Judaism were of eminent meaning for the formulation of Christian beliefs, especially in the 2. and 3. centuries CE when philosophical concepts were used to prove the truth of Christian faith. But two or three centuries earlier Jews already had argued that Jewish belief is not in contradiction to the Greek tradition from the very beginning in Homer and Hesiod. Especially Philo makes Homer a witness for the truth of Moses. And this is a most remarkable development: Greeks are no longer idolatrous pagans, but witnesses for the truth of Judaism. The presence and reception of Greek culture is not only true for the Diaspora but also for Judea as we can learn from the spread of Greek in Judea by inscriptions, Greek names, the knowledge of the Greek language, e.g. Josephus and the rabbinic discussions on the teaching of Greek. Hellenistic Judaism is not the little unsightly sister of Palestinian Judaism, but they are twins with equal right and beauty.

For further reading

Avemarie, Friedrich, Pedrag Bukovec, Stefan Krauter, and Michael Tilly, eds., Die Makkabäer, WUNT 382, Tübingen, 2017.

Bernhardt, Johannes Christian, Die jüdische Revolution: Untersuchungen zu Ursachen, Verlauf und Folgen der hasmonäischen Erhebung, Klio n.s. 22, Berlin/Boston/MA, 2017.

Bickermann, Elias, Der Gott der Makkabäer: Untersuchungen über Sinn und Ursprung der makkabäischen Erhebung, Berlin, 1937; Engl. transl.: idem, The God of the Maccabees: Studies on the Meaning and Origin of the Maccabean Revolt, SJLA 32, Leiden 1979.

Bringmann, Klaus, Hellenistische Reform und Religionsverfolgung in Judäa: Eine Untersuchung zur jüdisch-hellenistischen Geschichte (175–163 v. Chr.), AAWG.PH 3^rd ser. 132, Göttingen, 1983.

Hengel, Martin, Judentum und Hellenismus: Studien zu ihrer Begegnung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Palästinas bis zur Mitte des 2. Jh.s v.Chr., WUNT 10, Tübingen, 1969, 2^nd ed. 1973, 3^rd ed. 1988.; Engl. transl.: Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period, London/Philadelphia/PA, 1974.

Hensel, Benedikt, Juda und Samaria: Zum Verhältnis zweier nach-exilischer Jahwismen, FAT 110, Tübingen, 2016.

Honigman, Sylvie, Tales of High Priests and Taxes: The Books of the Maccabees and the Judean Rebellion against Antiochos IV, Oakland/CA, 2014.

Kreuzer, Siegfried, »Entstehung und Überlieferung der Septuaginta,« in: idem, ed., Einleitung in die Septuaginta, Handbuch zur Septuaginta (Handbook of the Septuagint) 1, Gütersloh, 2016, 29–88.

Lange, Armin, Handbuch der Textfunde vom Toten Meer, vol. I: Die Handschriften biblischer Bücher von Qumran und den andern Fundorten, Tübingen, 2009.

Lichtenberger, Hermann, »Der biblische Kanon und die außerkanonischen Schriften,« in Jewish Lifeworlds and Jewish Thought. Festschrift presented to Karl E. Grözinger on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, ed. Nathanael Riemer, Wiesbaden, 2012, 15–25.

Magen, Yizhak, Mount Gerizim Excavations, vol. II: A Temple City, JSP 8, Jerusalem, 2008.

Mittag, Peter Franz, Antiochos IV. Epiphanes: Eine politische Biographie, Klio n.s. 11, Berlin, 2006.

Oswald, Wolfgang and Michael Tilly, Geschichte Israels von den Anfängen bis zum 3. Jahrhundert n.Chr., Geschichte kompakt, Darmstadt, 2016.

Prestel, Peter, »Die Diversität des Griechischen in der Septuaginta,« in Die Sprache der Septuaginta. The Language of the Septuagint, ed. Eberhard Bons and Jan Joosten, Handbuch zur Septuaginta (Handbook of the Septuagint) 3, Gütersloh, 2016, 39–68.

Schäfer, Peter, Geschichte der Juden in der Antike, UTB 3366, 2^nd ed., Tübingen, 2010.

Schwartz, Daniel R., 2 Maccabees, CEJL, Berlin/New York, 2008.

Stegemann, Hartmut, Die Essener, Qumran, Johannes der Täufer und Jesus, Freiburg, 1993.