Search

The Synoptic Problem in Rabbinic Literature, edited by Shaye J. D. Cohen. BJS 326. Providence: Brown University Press, 2000. Pp. xiii + 167. $60.00. Talmudic Stories: Narrative Art, Composition, and Culture, by Jeffrey Rubenstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999. Pp. xvi + 436. $55.00. Shaye Cohen's edited volume The Synoptic Problem in Rabbinic Literature and Jeffrey Rubenstein's Talmudic Stories: Narrative Art, Composition, and Culture are major contributions to the field of rabbinics, the former for its explicit attempt to deal with methodological issues pertaining to the study of this literature, the latter for the ways in which it analyzes several notable rabbinic stories in a fresh and detailed manner. While prima facie these works are different in terms of style and scholarly agenda, each nonetheless deals with the question of the extent to which rabbinic literature can be used to enhance our understanding of the rabbis, and of Palestinian and Babylonian Jews of late antiquity. The Synoptic Problem in Rabbinic Literature comprises six papers given at a small conference held at Brown University in 1998. Topics included the relationship of the Mishnah to the Tosefta, the relationship of these texts to Tannaitic midrashim and beraitot, the relationship of the Bavli (Babylonian Talmud) to the Yerushalmi (Palestinian Talmud), the relationship of the Talmuds to both the Tosefta and the Tannaitic midrashim, and the relationship of the Yerushalmi to Genesis Rabbah, Leviticus Rabbah, and Lamentations Rabbah. Given the caliber of the participants, undoubtedly this was an intellectual feast for those interested in current trends in rabbinic scholarship. While the collection covers a variety of topics and raises many methodological issues, its cohesion lies in its attempt to debunk the documentary hypothesis. As Robert Goldenberg refers to it, the Documentary Premise, espoused by Jacob Neusner, is an approach to rabbinic documents that treats rabbinic texts only on the redactional level with no serious regard for either earlier sources found within a work, or for similar sources found in other compilations. Each document must be understood on its own terms and as such tells us a great deal about the redactor of the compilation. That is to say, documents such as the Mishnah, Genesis Rabbah, the Tosefta, or the Yerushalmi are discrete works that attest to the coherent Weltanschauung of their respective redactors who intentionally shape their sources accordingly. Indeed, as Shaye Cohen avers, "Much of ancient rabbinic literature is as synoptic as Matthew, Mark, and Luke; because of their extensive parallels in structure, content, and wording, rabbinic texts should be `seen together (p. vii). It should be noted, however, that the synoptic problem in rabbinic literature is in many respects more complex and unwieldy than in the Gospels. While the Synoptic Gospels are more or less contemporaneous, rabbinic literature spans several centuries. In this instance, the synoptic problem does not deal with three Gospels, a commonly recognized Q source and two other putative sources, but rather it involves numerous iterations of similar stories, sayings and dicta in more than one corpus (for that matter in more than one type of corpus), which, depending on the corpus itself, could very well have undergone several layers of redaction. Cohen's collection of essays, despite lacking a synthesizing conclusion, offers the reader access into the complicated nature of the synoptic problem in rabbinic literature. Each of the six chapters merits a more detailed treatment than space allows. With this in mind, I will discuss briefly the main thrust of each paper and occasionally will make some general observations. In the first paper of the series, Robert Goldenberg sets the stage for the ensuing engagement with and criticism of Neusner's documentarian approach, which he considers a "deeply problematic stance. …

Bell & Howell Information and Learning: Foreign text omitted. The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties, by Shaye J. D. Cohen. Hellenistic Culture and Society 31. Berkeley: University of California Press 1999. Pp. xv + 426. $45.00. This invaluable book weaves together ten of Shaye Cohen's meticulous essays about Jewish identity in the Greco-Roman period (eight revised versions of previously published essays and two new ones). Part 1 posits that Jewish identity was "elusive and uncertain" in late antiquity due to the lack both of a normative definition of Jew and of objective criteria to establish such a definition. The study interacts closely with other studies that argue that identity is a construct based on social discourse and not on a simple set of shared beliefs, practices, or languages. The first chapter presents the problem of identity by outlining the Rorschach test of classification of Herod, whose father was a "Judaean" but not his mother. These included Jew (by Plutarch and Josephus), non-Jew (by the rabbis), and even Arab (by some early Christians). Chapter 2 puts to rest centuries of anachronistic depictions of late antique Jews: a careful review of the Greco-Roman sources demonstrates that Jews were indistinguishable from others based on looks, clothing, speech, names, or occupation. The third chapter traces the Greek term (...). Cohen builds on E. Bickerman's crucial observation that both Jews and non-Jews used the terminology of (...) to refer to Jews, setting them up as an entity parallel to the other (...) of the late antique world. Cohen then attempts to locate uses of the term (...) that point to distinct nuances in meaning: political, religious, ethnic, and geographical. Cohen argues that only in some cases should the term (...) be translated as "Jew." Disqualifying some uses of the term (...) as really referring to Jews is a slippery endeavor, as his examples show. For possible examples of geographical nuances Cohen turns to inscriptions made by manumitted slaves; here the use of the term (...) might appear to imply little more than a slave's geographical origin. This is not entirely persuasive since there is no clear evidence from the inscriptions that excludes these slaves from the Jewish (...) in a fuller sense, that is, that they observed Jewish customs, were loyal to the Jewish God, and even shared a common Jewish ancestry (genealogies are also a social construct). As to the definition of (...) as primarily being religious, although for generations Judaism has been primarily envisaged as a religion, it is hard, as Cohen notes, to find clear evidence of such a definition of Judaism in antiquity. Cohen nevertheless argues that what is ultimately distinct about Judaism is the manner in which they worship their gods (p. 7) or a "Jew" is someone who worships the God whose temple is in Jerusalem (pp. 78, 97). This conclusion does not emerge from the rich late antique data he himself presents. A prime example of (...) as a function of a politics is provided for Cohen by reports about the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus, who (according to some ancient sources) conquered and forcibly circumcised the neighboring Idumeans, after which they were referred to as (...). In Cohen's judgment the Idumeans did not become real (...). Instead "they still retained their prior ethnicity and much of their prior religion and culture, but they joined the Judaean people and declared loyalty to the God of the Judaeans" (p. 105; cf. p. 118). The question must be asked: In whose eyes did they not become real (...) like the others? The importance of the forced circumcision case is exactly that it shows us a moment when circumcising someone was deemed to make him part of the (...). Part 2 focuses on boundaries and boundary crossing. …

Jacob Neusner's Are there really tannaitic parallels to the Gospels ? (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism. Atlanta : Scholars Press, 1993) pretends to be a scholarly refutation of Morton Smith's Tannaitic parallels to the Gospels (1951), but is in reality abusive polemic. It is Neusner's obituary for Smith, bringing closure to an intense but troubled relationship. Because of its careless scholarship and vindictive tone, the book should not have been published without major editing, and, by publishing it in this form, Scholars Press has served as the author's vanity press