Karin Zetterholm, Lund University

Modified Aim

The aim of the study was to examine the strategies that rabbinic Judaism developed in order to justify innovations in scriptural interpretation and tradition and defend rabbinic tradition and interpretive authority in face of challenges from non-rabbinic groups. The ability to adapt to new situations while simultaneously grounding innovations in tradition that was largely developed by rabbinic Judaism still has relevance for the continuous development of Jewish law within contemporary Judaism.

The starting point of the study was the observation that the rabbis (the Jewish leadership) seem to have perceived a challenge to their authority to legislate and interpret Scripture during the Talmudic period (ca 250-500 CE), a challenge that is reflected in the traditions about the prophet Elijah in the Babylonian Talmud. Elijah embodies the rabbinic ambivalence to prophecy and the Elijah traditions seem to reflect different stages of the rabbinic struggle for authority.

During the past two years the scope of the study has been significantly enlarged and the focus has shifted to an exploration of the causes behind the rabbinic sense of a challenged authority. I looked at a few Christian (sometimes defined as Jewish Christian) texts from Mesopotamia, which is where the Babylonian Talmud was compiled, mainly the Didascalia Apostolorum and the Pseudo-Clementines, leading to the conclusion that the construction of an interpretive tradition and authority among non-rabbinic Jesus oriented groups during the fourth and fifth centuries likely challenged rabbinic Judaism giving rise to various strategies to legitimize and bolster rabbinic tradition and interpretive authority.

Main Results

1. Like the rabbis, these non-rabbinic Jesus oriented groups claimed to be the authentic heirs of biblical tradition and the challenge posed by their construction of an interpretive tradition and authority outside of rabbinic Judaism was particularly serious because they based their claims on the Hebrew Scriptures and used the same interpretive methods as the rabbis, making their arguments potentially persuasive to rabbinic Jews.
This should be understood against the backdrop of much recent scholarship demonstrating that rabbinic Jews, Jewish disciples of Jesus, non-Jewish Jesus disciples as well as adherents to Greco-Roman religion and Zoroastrism lived in close proximity to one another in Mesopotamia, and that there was no clear boundaries between "common" Jews and Christians. Due to these blurred boundaries the risk of influence from Jesus-oriented groups was considerable and the fact that some of them seem to have had some sort of Jewish identity only made it worse from a rabbinic perspective. Ultimately it was a question of who was the authentic heir and continuation of biblical tradition, in other words, who was God's true people.

2. Some scholars have argued that the Didascalia Apostolorum should be regarded as a Jewish, non-rabbinic text (rather than a heretical Christian one) and that the author(s) constructs an interpretive tradition and authority as an alternative to rabbinic Judaism, rejecting rabbinic tradition while developing its own with Jesus as the hermeneutical key. Based on this, I argue that such a rejection of the validity of rabbinic tradition together with claims to possess an authentic tradition transmitted from the "True Prophet" (Jesus) as those articulated in the Pseudo-Clementines, contributed to the emergence of the idea that rabbinic tradition in its entirety, that is, all rabbinic laws, interpretations and innovations were revealed by God to Moses at Mount Sinai. Through a comparison of assertions of authenticity and interpretive authority in the Didascalia, the Pseudo-Clementines and rabbinic sources, I attempt to demonstrate that the idea that rabbinic tradition is wholly divine emerged as a polemic response to claims made by Jesus-oriented non-rabbinic groups, designed to bolster rabbinic tradition by showing that rabbinic legislation and interpretation were actually dictated by God.

The idea that rabbinic tradition in its entirety was divinely revealed appears only in texts from the early fourth century, indicating a connection to the claims made by the Didascalia and the Pesudo-Clementines. These texts were composed in Syria in the third century, and by the fourth century they were translated into Syriac, an Aramaic dialect that closely resembles rabbinic Aramaic, and enjoyed a wide circulation in the region. Rabbinic sources predating the early third century understand innovations and reinterpretations as the result of a divinely sanctioned human intervention, rather than revealed by God and the fact that a change of perception takes place is another indication that the idea that rabbinic tradition was divinely revealed emerged as a response to claims made by competitors of the rabbis. The assertion that interpretation and innovation are the result of human intervention assumes that the interpretive authority of those humans, that is, the rabbis, is unanimously accepted, but if challenged by groups claiming to possess prophetic authority and a divine tradition transmitted from Jesus the True Prophet, via Peter to the office of the bishop, the rabbis defended their version of Judaism by claiming that it was divinely revealed.

3. The traditions about the prophet Elijah in the Babylonian Talmud reflect the rabbinic struggle for authority and their ambivalence to prophecy. The rabbis are not willing to let prophets or heavenly voices, as represented by Elijah, to have any say in matters of Jewish law, but that does not prevent them from having Elijah provide divine affirmation of rabbinic interpretation and legislation in non-legal texts. By portraying Elijah as a prophet-turned-rabbi who has retained his prophetic insight into God's will, they rabbis were able to bolster disputed rabbinic interpretations or practices by providing them with divine affirmation through Elijah. They also seem to have used Elijah to support criticism of certain views and practices within rabbinic circles.

New Questions

Reading texts that have traditionally been defined as Jewish Christian as evidence of a variety of Jewish voices raises the question of Jewish identity outside of rabbinic Judaism. What did a self-identification as a non-rabbinic Jew mean in the third and fourth centuries and how did such a person relate to the rabbinic movement? In one chapter of the study (ch. 4) I argue that the emergence of Christianity affected the rabbinic definition of who belonged to the people of Israel and this topic could be pursued further. Another topic that would benefit from further study is the relationship between the rabbinic assertion that prophecy had ceased and the prophetic claims made by the Christians.

Publications

In addition to the planned monograph, the project has generated a number of articles, among which are:

Elijah's Different Roles-A Reflection of the Rabbinic Struggle for Authority" published in Jewish Studies Quarterly 16 (2009): 163-182 and

"Elijah and the Books of Kings in Rabbinic Literature." Pages 585-606 in The Books of Kings, Sources, Composition, Historiography and Reception (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum) eds. A Lemaire and B. Halpern. Leiden: Brill 2010.

In the article published in JSQ I argue that the Elijah traditions in rabbinic literature reflect the rabbinic struggle for authority and their ambivalent attitude towards prophecy. In legal texts the rabbis take pains to limit the influence of prophecy or heavenly voices, represented by Elijah, and his views are declared either irrelevant or subjected to rabbinic authority, while he is deployed in non-legal texts to bolster rabbinic tradition and interpretive authority by providing them with divine affirmation. They assert that prophecy has ceased, but they are still in need of divine affirmation of their views and practices, in particular those that were disputed.

The book chapter treats the Elijah traditions in rabbinic literature with special attention to the development from the Mishnah to the Babylonian Talmud and the unique function that Elijah has in the latter. This chronological study of Elijah traditions also illustrates the transition of religious authority from prophets to rabbis and the fusion of their respective roles that takes place in the process.

Lectures and Seminars Related to the Project
I have presented some project related results in conference papers and public lectures among which are:

"Sadducees-Jewish Disciples of Jesus?" Paper given at The Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, Atlanta, USA, November 2010.

"Jewish and Christian Identities in Antiquity: A Struggle Over Biblical Legacy." Seminar with the master program Religious Roots of Europe, Lund University Oct. 11, 2010.

"Möte mellan gamla texter och nya förhållanden I judisk tradition ["Ancient Texts in a New World: Tradition and Innovation in Jewish Tradition"] Lecture held at Center for Interfaith Dialogue, Sigtuna, Oct. 31, 2010.

"Identitet och auktoritet i den tidiga judendomen" ["Identity and Authority in Early Judaism"], Lund University, April 9, 2008.