of Chicago
libraries
AKIBA
Other boo\s by the same author
JEWISH SELF-GOVERNMENT IN THE MIDDLE AGES
KIMHl's COMMENTARY ON ISAIAH
A CRITICAL EDITION OF THE SIFRE ON DEUTERONOMY
A K I B A
Scholar, Saint and Martyr
BY
LOUIS FINKELSTEIN
Mind and spirit remain invincible.
-MILTON.
CO VI CI FRIED E PUBLISHERS
NEW YORK
COPYRIGHT, 1936, BY LOUIS FINKELSTEIN
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be
reproduced in any form without permission in
writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer
who may quote brief passages in a review to be
printed in a magazine or newspaper.
:>
w
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BY J. J. LITTLE AND IVBS COMPANY* NEW YOBK
TYPOGRAPHY BY ROBERT JOSEPHY
1245280
TO
DOCTOR CYRUS ADLER
My friend and guide through two decades, a true disciple of
Hillel, who loves peace, and pursues peace, loves people
and, through precept and example, brings
them nearer to the Law.
CONTENTS
Foreword ix
i. The Grave on the Hilltop 3
ii. In the Depths 6
in. Among the Foothills 73
rv. The Steep Ascent 92
v. On the Heights: Akiba and His School 136
vi. On the Heights: Akiba's Juristic Philosophy 177
vii. On the Heights: Akiba's Theological and Political Ideals 195
vin. A Perilous Summit 215
ix. Approaching the Precipice 235
x. The Apotheosis 272
APPENDIX
i. Akiba's Principles in Relation to Class Differences
A. Akiba's Plebeian Standards 279
B. The Defense of Traders 283
c. The Traditions of Jerusalem 284
D. The Defense of the Shepherds and Cattle Dealers 290
E. The Attack on the Priests 291
n. Akiba in the Pharisaic Tradition
A. The Admission of the Plebeians Into the Gerousia 293
B. The Principle of Bipartisan Leadership Among the
Pharisees 294
Vll
Vlll CONTENTS
c. The Usual Age for Marriage Among the Plebeians 304
D. The Shammaitic Inclinations of Gamaliel II 304
E. Comparative Monthly Rainfall in Various Parts of
Palestine 306
F. Akiba's and IshmaePs Rules of Interpretation and
Their Doctrines of the Revelation 308
G. Akiba and the Prayer for the Kingdom of God 312
H. The Trajan Declaration 313
i. The Identity of IshmaePs Colleague, Simeon 316
Footnotes 319
Bibliography 355
Index 357
FOREWORD
Akiba ben Joseph, the hero of this narrative, ranks in depth
of intellect, breadth of sympathy and clarity of vision with the
foremost personalities in the Hebrew tradition: Moses and
Isaiah among the prophets, Maimonides, Crescas and Spinoza
among the philosophers. He dominates the whole scene of
Jewish history for eighteen centuries, from the period of the
Second Isaiah, about 540 B.C.E. until the rise of the Spanish
school of Jewish philosophers about noo C.E. Certain aspects
of his genius appear also in other distinguished leaders of his
people. The authors of Ruth and Jonah were his equals in
universality of outlook and human tenderness; the Maccabees
and the Zealot leaders, in courage and devotion to principle.
Hillel, the founder of the plebeian School of Pharisaic learn-
ing, and Saadia Gaon, the pioneer in the study of medieval
Jewish philosophy, shared his originality of thought; Gamaliel
I, who reformed the judicial system of Palestine, and Gershom
ben Judah, who in the chaos of tenth century Europe created a
federation of German-Jewish communities, were as great in
legislative insight. But Akiba alone combined all these quali-
ties; and above all, he possessed that colorful personality which
made him the most revered, as well as the most beloved, of
talmudic sages.
In our own generation special interest attaches to Akiba
as one of the builders of civilization. His specific teachings
have, naturally, exerted their profoundest influence on the
development of Judaism. Wherever Jewish traditions are
ix
X FOREWORD
studied and observed, Akiba's decisions and doctrines are
recognized and authoritative. But in a wider sense, the con-
tour of western thought generally has been affected by his
philosophy. His ideas molded those of Maimonides, Gersoni-
des and Crescas. These men influenced a whole series of Latin
writers from Thomas Aquinas to Spinoza, who in turn laid
the foundations of modern thought. If, as has been said, "Spi-
nozism is not a system, but a habit of mind," it is a habit
of mind which derives, in large part, from Maimonides among
the medievalists, and Akiba among the talmudic sages. The
careful student will soon recognize the close relationship be-
tween Spinoza's Amor Dei Intellectudis and Akiba's teach-
ings that worship is an expression of love, and that study is
the highest form of worship. The amalgam of rationalism and
mysticism, which was basic to the advanced Jewish philosophy
of the Middle Ages, the conception of a God who was real
but not anthropomorphic, could hardly have taken the form
it did without the authoritative support of Akiba. Certainly
the unequaled freedom and tolerance of later Jewish thought
was in large part a result of Akiba's victorious assertion of
his right to be original. Even the absorbing concern with the
ethical, which was characteristic of all Jewish thought, and has
been perhaps its main contribution to the modern mind,
gained in impressiveness from Akiba's teaching.
Perhaps, however, it is the reconstruction of the social con-
flicts of his time which makes Akiba's life and teaching par-
ticularly relevant to us. Despite the vast changes which civili-
zation has undergone since then, the issues which confronted
him are once more with us, though in somewhat new form.
The problems of international peace, universal education, the
status of woman, the rights of laborers, the prerogatives of
hierarchy, the removal of superstition from religion, and the
FOREWORD XI
advancement of pure scholarship are still unsolved. Artisans
have been succeeded by factory hands; Samaritans and Am-
monites by powerful nations; scriptural studies by modern
science. Yet the questions he poses, and the solutions he offers,
still remain strangely applicable to our own time.
The correspondence between the two ages becomes particu-
larly marked when we consider the last twenty years of his
life. The collapse of Palestinian civilization through the rise
of extremists closely parallels the eclipse of reason in our own
day. His determined effort to avert cultural disaster in the
midst of political and economic chaos, and his ultimate vic-
tory, in spite of apparent, temporary defeat, is of permanent
significance to the statesman and the sociologist, as well as to
the historian and the general reader.
Yet, in spite of his heroic proportions and world signifi-
cance, Akiba has remained unknown outside the limited circles
of Talmud students. Whereas whole libraries have been writ-
ten about Paul the Apostle and Augustine the Philosopher, the
Christian teachers who most nearly approximate his genius,
the literature about Akiba covers no more than seven or eight
hundred printed pages. His best biography in any language
is a brief article by Professor Louis Ginzberg in the Jewish
Encyclopedia.
The contrast between Akiba's importance and the meager
studies devoted to him is particularly surprising in view of
the wealth of relevant source material. His opinions and ad-
ventures, carefully recorded by faithful disciples, are to be
found on almost every page of the Babylonian Talmud, with
its eighteen massive tomes, as well as in the smaller, more
compact Talmud of Jerusalem, and its kindred Palestinian
works.
The difficulty has been that these books were practically
Xll FOREWORD
sealed to all but rabbinic students. The gifted translator* who
popularized the Hebrew Scriptures, and made them man's
foremost literary treasure, had no interest in the Talmud,
and, in any event, were helpless in their approach to it. The
enormous compass of the work, its curious dialectic, its pecu-
liar idiom, its constant use of ellipsis and obscure academic
terms, combined to discourage even the boldest investigators.
The Jewish scholars who knew Akiba never thought of
writing his biography. For them he was not a figure out of a
remote past, but a contemporary. He was their companion,
and their intimate friend. The talmudic world in which he
moved was as much part of their lives as the paths and by-
paths of their own villages. The best hours of each day were
devoted to reconnoitering its hidden glades. Its study was
not merely a religious duty, but a cultural pleasure. It was
their hobby, their pastime, their sport, their theater, their con-
cert house, their cinema, their newspaper, their radio, their
life. The poetic outburst of the ancient psalmist, "Had not Thy
law been my delight, I should have perished in my affliction,"
became literal truth for the Jew of the Middle Ages. Facing
continual danger and persecution, he escaped from the appar-
ent reality of his dismal and sordid existence into the true
reality of biblical and talmudic learning. He could think of
no higher pleasure than that which rose from the folios of his
text. The study of the Talmud did not lead to Paradise; it was
Paradise. God, Himself, the Jew imagined, must enjoy the
study of the Torah!
Such scholars could not write a "life" of Akiba. Their
regard for the master resembled that of children for distin-
guished parents, or disciples for a renowned master. They
loved and admired him; and intuitively felt the greatness of
his genius. But their feelings remained unanalyzed and inar-
FOREWORD Xlll
ticulate. Being continually with him, they accepted his con-
tribution to their life and thought as a matter of course,
and could not appreciate the rarity of his gifts or his place in
world history. His brilliance as rabbi and teacher obscured for
them his equal distinction as a man.
There was, however, another, more inclusive, reason for the
failure of Jewish scholars to describe Akiba: their aversion to
biography. It was almost as if the commandment against
human images were extended from sculpture to literature. Not
that these scholars were deficient in the art of narrative or
character delineation. The Hebrews were the fathers of his-
tory, and, indeed, of all non-poetical composition. Their
histories of the patriarchs, the judges and the early kings,
are to prose what Homer is to poetry. Unaffected power,
smooth-flowing rhythms, simple yet passionate diction, the
attainment of that highest art which is the absence of all
studied effect, have made these works the literary as well as
the spiritual guides of half the human race. The Book of
Samuel has been built up about a contemporary chronicle
which remains to this day a classic. Nothing written in the
three thousand years since its time surpasses it in objectivity,
precision, or vividness of portrayal. The writer's clear anal-
ysis of opposing issues and hidden motives, his masterful
selection of the relevant material, and rejection of the inci-
dental, establish him as the world's first true historian. The
panegyrics which the Egyptians, Babylonians and Assyrians
wrote in honor of their imperial masters, the folk tales which
Herodotus so assiduously gathered into his chronicle, the
mythological reconstruction of early Roman history by the
writers of the Republic, important as they are, fall short of
the method and style of this unnamed literary master, the
Thucydides of the tenth century B.C.E.
XIV FOREWORD
But these biblical works, excellent as history, are not biog-
raphy. The depiction of personality is regularly subordinated to
the story of the nation. The histories of the Patriarchs are, as
the talmudic sages with their uncanny insight remark, "sym-
bolic for their descendants." The early Israelite kings and
judges figure in the accounts concerning them only as organs
of the body-politic. The religious historian deals with them as
instruments in the spiritual development of his people; those
decades of their lives which were not pertinent to his inter-
pretation of events are left unchronicled. That the characters
nevertheless are so vivid and distinct is simply proof of the
author's superlative genius; the sparks from his anvil are
brighter than the full flame of many another craftsman.
The so-called "biographies" of Elijah, Elisha and Isaiah,
from which certain chapters in the Book of Kings are sup-
posed to be excerpts, were not life-histories in the ordinary
sense of the word. They were collections of tales, intended to
increase respect for the prophets as religious teachers. The
biographical notes which Baruch ben Neriah apparently added
to the Book of Jeremiah simply provide the necessary back-
ground for the prophet's addresses.
This literary subordination of the individual doubtless was
a result of the strong group-consciousness in primitive Hebrew
thought. Like other ancient peoples, the Hebrews' did not at
first recognize the significance of the individual. The unit of
moral responsibility as well as of human interest was the clan,
the tribe or the nation. It was not long, however, before the
prophets realized how important the individual is in the moral
sphere. The principle of individual responsibility begins to
emerge in the eighteenth chapter of Genesis, and reaches its
highest expression in the Book of Ezekiel. But the develop-
ment of ethical thought left literary fashion unchanged. The
FOREWORD XV
individual, who had at last become recognized as the unit of
ethical teaching, still" remained without significance to the
chronicler. This doubtless explains the amazing preponderance
of anonymous and pseudonymous books in ancient Hebrew
literature. The authors of only a small fraction of biblical
books, and of but one of the apocryphal works, are known by
name. And, indeed, to this day, Hebrew writing contains a
curious disproportion of noms de plume. Even when the names
of the authors are known, the rabbinic scholar usually refers to
them by the titles of their books. He will say that "The Duty
of the Heart" (Hobat Hdebabof) was a Spanish Rabbi of the
eleventh century, when he really has in mind the famous
Bahya ibn Pakuda, the writer of that saintly volume; he will
say that the "Path of the Righteous" (Mesilat Yesharim) wrote
dramas in the Italian style, when he means this was done by
its compiler, Moses Hayyim Luzzatto. This seems peculiar to
those unaccustomed to the habit, but is in reality no more
strange than the opposite practice, common in other groups,
of referring to books by the names of their authors. We speak
of reading "Shakespeare," when we mean "Hamlet" or "Julius
Caesar"; "Milton," when we mean "Paradise Lost"; "John
^Bunyan," when we mean "Pilgrim's Progress." The difference
i fashion reflects a difference in point of view. The ancient
Hebrew was interested in the work, the introspective modern
is primarily concerned with the writer behind it.
The lack of suitable life-sketches of the rabbinic sages is
especially deplorable because only biography can serve as an
introduction to the spirit of the Talmud. Neither translations
nor " einleitungen" no matter how excellent, adequately meet
this need. The most accurate and literary translation can re-
move only one impediment to the study of the Talmud
that of language. The difficulties which arise from its recondite
XVI FOREWORD
allusions, its concise style, and its special forms of argument,
remain, and make a lifetime of devotion necessary for the
mastery of the text. The formal "Introductions" to the Talmud,
on the other hand, deal only with its externalities; they give
the reader no opportunity to see it from within. They list its
treatises and chapters, briefly summarize the themes discussed,
arrange the authorities mentioned in chronological order, and
attempt to explain the strange terminology and dialectic. But
they cannot undertake to discuss motives and characters, par-
ties and issues, the changing scenes and the human actors.
Above all, they cannot recreate the spirit which animates the
work.
The lack of such intimate descriptions of the rabbinic world,
especially in its earliest phases, has been disastrous to the study
of western religious history. Much in Christianity which only
an appreciation of the talmudic sages could make explicable
has remained a mystery; as, likewise, that in Judaism which a
study of the Christian revolt might have illumined has re-
mained in darkness. The conception of Pharisaism as narrow
bigotry, and of the apostles as opponents to the rabbinic ethics
is only part of this tragic misinterpretation. Forgetting that
Paul described himself, after his conversion, as a "Pharisee the
son of a Pharisee"; that his double standard of religious
observance for Jews and Gentiles had its roots in the older
tradition; that he and the other apostles were frequently saved
from punishment by the descendants of Hillel; and that the
Roman proselytes to Palestinian religion, like many Jews in
the Diaspora, for decades drew no distinction between Judaism
and Christianity; forgetting all these things, scholars created
false antitheses, and made a crude and impossible reconstruc-
tion of the annals of Palestine during the first century of the
Christian era. The effect of this misinterpretation has been
FOREWORD XV11
especially tragic for a large proportion of the modern Jews.
Unable to read the literature of their people in its original
tongue or in adequate translation, they cease to appreciate the
true greatness of the rabbinic authorities, and accept the judg-
ment of the world regarding them. Only in recent years have
Schechter's researches in Jewish theology, Herford's authorita-
tives studies of the Pharisees and Pharisaism, Dalman's anal-
ysis of the correspondence between rabbinic Judaism and
Christianity, Moore's monumental work on rabbinic Judaism,
and Torrey's masterful reconstruction of the spirit of the later
prophetic writers, begun to clear the mists surrounding the
origins of rabbinic Judaism and Christianity and enabled us
to see the development of both religions in true perspective;
The portrayals of the late prophetic and early rabbinic scenes
which these unforgettable masters have painted on their vast
canvases, excellent and lifelike as they are, necessarily suffer
from two deficiencies. Being group representations, they can-
not indicate the full significance of the component individuals;
and being "still" pictures, they cannot reproduce the dynamic
quality of talmudic civilization. To supply these needs, we
must turn to biography where we can see at least one indi-
vidual in every facet of his life, and follow each development
of his thought and career. No better choice for this purpose
can be made than Akiba ben Joseph, the foremost teacher of
the rabbinic world. Making him our guide, participating in his
struggles, sharing his adventures, listening to his arguments,
we may hope to emerge with a clear understanding of the
talmudists' lives, their aspirations and their significance.
The desire to depict the great sage came to me, however,
long before I realized his significance in the history of human
letters. Indeed, the present volume may be described as the
fulfillment of a life aspiration which I probably owe to the
XV1U FOREWORD
^influence of my father, whose enthusiasm for Akiba has re-
mained with me since childhood days.
Still, the early impulse might not have been translated into
action at this time without the stimulus of two eminent
scholars, Professor F. C. Porter of Yale and Professor A. D.
Nock of Harvard. At a symposium held in conjunction with
the meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, in December,
1929, the former remarked on the importance of a biography
of Akiba, and told how he himself had been moved when he
read the story of the martyrdom. During a visit to Cambridge
in March, 1935, 1 recalled this incident to Professor Nock, who
immediately suggested that he would be pleased to devote a
full number of the Harvard Theological Review to a mono-
graph on the subject.
Returning home, I set aside all other tasks, and began to
write the work. It soon became evident to me that it could
not be compressed into the limits of a periodical, no matter
how generous the editor was willing to be in the matter of
space. Nevertheless, I did not desist from the task. The work
grew until it emerged as the present book.
I have attempted no panegyric of the master; he would, like
Cromwell, have tolerated no painter who omitted his wrinkles
and his scars and tried to flatter him by being false to him.
His humble beginnings, his first awkward attempts to free
himself of their effects, his hypersensitivity to bad manners,
his temporary lapse from his own teachings when he ap-
proached his ninetieth year, are as much part of him as his
indomitable will, his unfailing courtesy, his copious mind, his
resilient spirit, his fine humor, and his ability to recapture his
youthful idealism, purpose and intellectual courage in the crisis
of his life's last years. I have tried to say as little about Akiba
as I could. Wherever possible his words are transmitted as he
FOREWORD XIX
uttered them. It was my purpose to let the reader see him not
through my eyes, but as he appears in the pages of the Tal-
mud. Whenever the evidence was too technical to be included
in the text itself, it has been added in the Appendix, in the
supplementary discussions, and in the notes at the end of the
volume.
I approached the final chapter of the book with a peculiar
gripping of the heart. It was as though I had voluntarily joined
Judah Ha-Garsi in watching our Master being taken from us.
When I had finished the task, I thought of Tineius Rufus and
the part he played in that tragedy, in the execution court of
Caesarea. He doubtless considered the event a trifling, if rather
unpleasant, incident in his career. He had liked Akiba, and
would have preferred to spare the old man; but naturally the
interests of the Empire came first. How the Roman general
would have been surprised had he been told that before many
centuries had passed he would be recalled in history only
through his association with the Jewish sage. Yet the impossi-
ble has happened. Nothing is recorded of Rufus's conversation
save what he said to Akiba; nothing is known of his battles,
save those he fought against the Jews. The empire he defended
perished centuries ago; it is only where students gather to
pore over the Talmud that the brilliance of Akiba's glory
lends a slight luster of immortality also to his executioner.
Could anything have demonstrated more completely the
truth of Akiba's teaching, that intellect alone is powerful, and
that violence is self-def eating? Had the Romans but been able
to grasp this idea, had they realized that in using force to
crush opposition they were training barbarian armies to rise
against them and destroy them, had their conversion to
prophetic religion been thorough instead of superficial, what
a different sequel their history might have had!
XX FOREWORD
It could not be. Man was still too low in the scale of evolu-
tion to act rationally in the mass. Rome was doomed to perish,
for lack of vision. Its people's gift for administrative organi-
zation, which might have enabled them to establish the empire
as a voluntary association of equal self-governing provinces,
retaining the pax Romana, but without fear of the sword, was
wasted in a futile effort to maintain the dominion of an effete,
otiose people consumed by wealth and luxury over powerful,
unspoiled, rugged barbarians and provincials. The abolition of
provincial tributes might have depopulated the Imperial City;
it might have emptied its slums; it might have removed some
vain fopperies from the palaces. But the Empire would have
been founded on a rock, European civilization would have
escaped the eclipse of the Dark Ages, and the world would
have been spared the pains of death and rebirth.
As it happened, the Palestinian academies, which failed to
save civilization, were ultimately the instruments of its restora-
tion. What occurred should be a commonplace of popular
historical knowledge; yet it is imperfectly realized by all but
a few antiquarians. The Western Empire fell victim to the
illiterate Vandals, who destroyed all semblance of its civiliza-
tion; the Eastern Empire was overcome by an equally fatal
obscurantism, which drove the philosophical schools from
Greece to pagan Parthia. Slowly, all of Europe sank into the
darkness of the sixth, the seventh and the eighth centuries.
Writing became a rare skill; Charlemagne himself could not
sign his name! Libraries were burned; works of art broken to
fragments; roads torn up; palaces demolished; wealth de-
stroyed. The world was thrown back two millennia; imperial
government gave way to feudal anarchy.
That this confusion was ultimately dissipated and civilized
life restored was due to the Church, the Caliphate and the
FOREWORD XXI
rabbinical academies in Europe and Africa, all three of which
had their ultimate sources in the inspiration of Palestine.
The Church remained the reservoir of what little learning
survived in Western Europe after the fall of Rome. As at the
beginning of history, the hierarchy the priests and monks
became the world's only scholars and copyists. The use of the
term clerk for both secretary and churchman is a permanent
reminder of this fact. But these ecclesiastics had no access to
the main body of Greek science and philosophy. A large part
of it had been irrevocably lost; and the rest was to be found
only outside of Christendom, under the rule of Persia.
Greek wisdom was brought back from its exile through the
Eastern Renaissance the rise of Islam and its Empire. The
Arabs, stimulated into new life through the teachings which
Mohammed brought to them out of Scripture, became apt
disciples of the philosophers of Persia, and provided them with
a wide field of influence, bringing their teachings to the gates
of Europe.
That they passed those gates was due to the rabbinical
academies of Spain, Italy, France, and the Rhine-country,
whose existence was a distant result of Akiba's activity and
courage. His insistence that study was a paramount duty,
which must be observed even at the risk of one's life and in
the face of the most brutal persecution, had prevented the
disappearance of Jewish learning during the crucial period of
Hadrianic oppression. Twenty years after his execution, his
pupils established a new academy in Galilee, and this became
the ancestor of other, equally distinguished schools, first in
Babylonia, and then throughout the Jewish Dispersion.
In some of these schools, like those of Kairowan in North
Africa and Otranto in Italy, the study of philosophy was
encouraged. Their teachers became expert in astronomy,
XX11 FOREWORD
mathematics, medicine and other skills. But even the schools,
like those of France and Germany, whose students were
limited to rabbinic subjects, may have served as stimuli toward
learning in the general community. It is a plausible surmise
that the ability of the minority to maintain its schools, gradu-
ate its teachers, and perpetuate its learning, moved the majority
to think also of its forgotten traditions. Thus not only the
rabbinical scholars who, by their translations from Arabic into
Latin, were the physical restorers of "lost" learning to Western
Europe, but also those who, by their intellectual interests,
exerted a less definable influence, must be credited with bring-
ing about the first European Renaissance, that of the twelfth
century. The founding of the Universities, which was one of
the first signs of this re-awakening, marks the end of the
Dark Ages.
It is an interesting, in some respects a melancholy, fact, which
must be noted, that when the rabbinical schools had performed
this function, they began to decline. Almost like flowers which
have produced their seed, they lost their glory and withered
away. They had escaped the desiccation of the Middle Ages
just long enough to save the world. The civilization which they
had helped to restore circumscribed their activities and threw
them into the narrow confines of a physical and spiritual
Ghetto. They gradually lost access to science and philosophy;
and even in their own fields, their beauty faded. From the
heights of the three great talmudic teachers of the eleventh
century: Alfasi, in Spain, the most distinguished of codifiers
(d. 1103); Nathan ben Yehiel, in Italy, still the foremost of
talmudic lexicographers (d. 1106) ; and Rashi, in France, un-
surpassed as talmudic commentator (d. 1105); we descend step
by step to the mediocre authorities of the fifteenth and six-
teenth centuries.
FOREWORD XX111
Not before the end of the eighteenth century did the dark-
ness which had settled on them begin to lift and the renais-
sance which the mediaeval rabbis had helped bring to the
world come to their own descendants. With the enlightenment
and the emancipation a new epoch opens both in the history
of Israel and in the history of the world. Whether we are mov-
ing to a brighter noon, or having passed the zenith of our
civilization are to experience once more the darkness of
medievalism, none can as yet dare say. Whatever be in store
for civilization in the immediate future, its ultimate destiny
undoubtedly depends on the preservation of intellectual life.
This may involve conflicts, perhaps martyrdoms, on a scale
far wider than that which Akiba dealt with or could have
envisaged. Yet who can doubt the validity of his doctrine, even
when applied to this worldwide field.
It is with much pleasure that I acknowledge the assistance
rendered me by a number of scholars and other friends in the
preparation of this work. Those to whom I turned with specific
questions are mentioned in connection with the replies I
quote from them. I have received more general help from my
wife who, reading the proofs of the book, made a number of
valuable suggestions, and from Doctor Solomon Goldman, my
friend since childhood days. The manuscript was read in its
entirety by Doctor Cyrus Adler, who gave me many detailed
criticisms, and who was particularly responsible for my writing
the second chapter. Mr. Maurice Samuel, with characteristic
generosity, devoted a considerable part of the summer of 1935
to a study of the manuscript, as far as it was then completed.
With unwearying patience, he went over the work with me,
contributing greatly to its improvement in content and style.
Finally I must record that the work could not have been pro-
XXIV FOREWORD
duced in its present form without the generous assistance of
the librarians of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America,
Union Theological Seminary, Hebrew Union College, Jewish
Institute of Religion, Dropsie College and Columbia Univer-
sity.
AKIBA
I. THE GRAVE ON THE HILLTOP
IN the year 26 C.E., not long before he executed John the
Baptist, Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great, built
at the southern end of the beautiful Sea of Galilee a health
resort which he named Tiberias, after his patron, the second
Roman Emperor. 1 For reasons which are no longer clear, the
Pharisees declared a boycott against the place, claiming that
at least part of it was an ancient cemetery, and therefore a
defilement to priest and layman alike! Neither the Idumean
tyrant nor his fiery antagonists foresaw that within two
centuries the accursed spot would become a haven of refuge
for Jewish learning and that it would remain a center of
rabbinical scholarship for almost a millennium, a longer time
than any other Palestinian city, save perhaps Jerusalem itself.
The prohibition was officially removed when, toward the end
of the second century, Simeon ben Yohai identified the actual
burial places and thus localized the defilement. 2 But in our
own times, Tiberias stands again under the sign of its tombs.
One tradition, certainly inaccurate, places the grave of Akiba
on a neighboring hilltop; 3 another, more reliable, puts that of
Maimonides in the city itself. Two such memorials in one
small locality turn our thoughts to the dead rather than the
living.
It was perhaps a curious fancy which associated the hilltop
with the memory of the illustrious Akiba ben Joseph. As
Moses is said to keep watch over Palestine from the southern
height of Mount Nebo, so Akiba, who in popular fancy and
3
4 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
in legend came nearest to being a reincarnation of the first
lawgiver, has set his guard on a northern hill, overlooking
the entrance to the valley of Jezreel. In our modern minds
another symbolism might apply to the grave on the hilltop:
the life of the man who is said to sleep there was one long
and painful ascent, ended and crowned by his magnificent
death. Though for a symbolism more in keeping with his
austere and rugged greatness we should look not to the hills
about Tiberias, but to the wild and snow-covered heights of
Hermon itself.
No other talmudic teacher impresses himself on our minds
so indelibly. Most of the great sages of the following genera-
tion were his disciples, and an authority of the third century
informs us that the Mishna, the Tosefta, the Sifra and the
Sifre those ancient compilations of rabbinic thought which
have survived until our own time all had their origin in his
scholarly activity. 4 The dialectic which he developed became
basic to all later rabbinic reasoning, and as we turn the folios
of the massive tomes of the Talmud we come everywhere
upon traces of his remarkable influence on the subsequent
systems of Jewish law, ethics and theology.
Of his physical characteristics, the rabbinic sages, always
contemptuous of accidental trivialities, record only his excep-
tional stature and his baldness. 5 In this instance, however, we
may regret their almost otherworldly indifference to the body.
Surely the strange blend of humor and pathos, of rigor and
mercy, of practical good sense and sentimental mysticism,
which characterized the man, must have found some expres-
sion in the cheek, the forehead and the eye. There must have
been something singular and arresting in the contrast be-
tween the intellectual preoccupation of the statesman-scholar,
and the powerful physique of the one-time shepherd. But the
THE GRAVE ON THE HILLTOP 5
Talmud records nothing of this. We are left to re-create Akiba
in our imagination out of his pithy maxims, his witty answers,
his ingenious arguments, his penetrating decisions, his mature
theology, his pedagogic method and the memorable events of
his life: his romantic marriage, the catastrophic incident of
his conversion, his rapid rise to leadership, his guidance of his
people and his martyr's death. Whether the personality, if
not the appearance, of Akiba can be reconstructed out of these
materials must be demonstrated in the following pages.
II. IN THE DEPTHS
A KIBA'S permanent significance to his people and the
jLX world derives largely from the extraordinary character
of the age in which he lived. Intellectually and spiritually it
was one of the most productive periods in history. It was
marked by new thoughts, widening horizons, reborn ideals,
daring adventures, creative personalities, heroic martyrs and
memorable teachers. In little more than a century tiny Pales-
tine produced the twin religions of rabbinic Judaism and
Christianity, the one destined to serve the world, the other
also to conquer it.
These supreme contributions to civilization would be re-
markable under any circumstances; they become amazing,
even unbelievable, in view of the political decline, social disin-
tegration and economic impoverishment of the times. When
Akiba was born, about the year 40, the last Jewish ruler,
Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod, still sat on the throne of
Judea. The country had reached the highest point in its
prosperity. Pilgrims flocked to Jerusalem from all parts of the
Roman Empire. In the words of Agrippa himself, Jerusalem
had become the metropolis not only of Judea, but also of
many other countries "by reason of the colonies which it has
sent out from time to time." * The income of the Temple was
so great that it could not be utilized in routine expenses, and
accumulated surpluses were each year set aside as invested
capital. 2 The market place of Jerusalem was equally affluent.
Without placing too heavy burdens on the people, the gov-
IN THE DEPTHS 7
ernment could undertake vast building operations, support
public games in foreign cities like Athens and pay enormous
tributes to the Empire. Prosperity brought with it an era of
unprecedented good feeling. The partisan divisions, which
had torn the Jewish body politic for centuries and had even
led to civil war, lost their bitterness. The Pharisees, represent-
ing the masses of the people, tolerated the appointment of a
high priest from the opposing party without fear that he
might violate the precepts of their sect. 3
Within their own ranks, factional differences had been
composed; and instead of the double leadership which had
become traditional among them, they had one head, Gamaliel,
called the First, to distinguish him from his grandson who
bore the same name and who was destined to be one of
Akiba's chief adversaries. In recognition of Gamaliel's great
achievements and his high prestige, a new tide was invented
for him: Rabban, "our master." The universal respect in
which he was held in Palestine, and the friendship which
Agrippa showed him, gave him influence also in the Diaspora.
The high priest still remained the nominal head of the
nation's supreme council, the Sanhedrin, which combined
in itself the functions of legislature and supreme court; but
the real president was Gamaliel. It was Gamaliel and his
associates who regulated the calendar, the one phase of Jewish
life which united all Israel. He issued his edicts to the various
provinces of Palestine, Lower Galilee, Upper Galilee and the
South, as well as to distant Babylonia, Media and "all the
other places of Jewish exile." 4 Both the scattered communi-
ties of the Roman Empire to the west and those of the
Parthian Empire to the east, looked to him and the Sanhedrin
for guidance in their internal, religious life. They sent funds
to maintain his academy, just as they helped to support the
8 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Temple. For the first and only time in their history, the Jews
formed an imperium in imperio, a little empire, with
Jerusalem as its capital, under the powerful aegis of the huge
Roman dominion. The common central government provided
a closer association between Palestine and the Roman Dias-
pora than had been possible while the little country was fully
independent.
Gamaliel, who was the center of this whole system, was
fortunately a statesman of the first order and knew how to
exercise authority with wisdom and restraint. He introduced
important reforms in the judicial procedure, encouraged the
schools of learning, won the support of the king and the
high priests, and meted out careful and generous justice to
the lowly and oppressed.
His task was made easier by King Agrippa's obvious
anxiety to win the affection of the people. The grandson of
Herod knew how profoundly the masses hated his family, the
descendants of the Idumean upstart who had slaughtered the
last scions of the noble Hasmoneans. He realized too that
his foreign ancestry and his Hellenized life before he became
king made the people look on him as a stranger, who had no
right to sit on the throne of David. It was with especial dili-
gence therefore that, after he ascended the throne, he avoided
any infringement of the law. So careful were both he and
the queen with regard to ritual observances that it was said,
"The King is guided by the Queen, and the Queen is guided
by Gamaliel"! 5 In the festive procession of the pilgrims bear-
ing the new fruit to the Temple, Agrippa could be seen with
his basket on his shoulder, side by side with the lowliest
plebeian of the kingdom. 6 When, walking through the streets
with his retinue, he noticed that a bridal procession had
stopped to let him pass, he halted and bade it take precedence. 7
IN THE DEPTHS 9
These fine gestures achieved their purpose. At the Sukkot
festival in the year -41, which was the seventh of the Sabbatical
cycle, the King, in accordance with the prescriptions of the
Bible, read the Book of Deuteronomy in public. When he
came to the verse, "One from among thy brethren shalt thou
set king over thee; thou mayest not put a foreigner over thee,
who is not thy brother" (Deut. 17:15), he suddenly remem-
bered that in the opinion of many present the law barred him
from the throne, and he burst into tears. But the sages, led
by Gamaliel, consoled him, calling out, "Fear not, Agrippa,
fear not! Thou art our brother!" 8
Gamaliel extended the same tolerance to the small, rising
sect of Christians. Less than a decade had passed since the
crucifixion of Jesus, and the Church was still in its infancy,
when Peter the Apostle was brought before the High Court
on the charge of heresy. For a little time, the leader of the
apostles stood in danger of severe punishment of scourging,
perhaps death. But Gamaliel, who was no less adamant than
his colleagues in his rejection of the new doctrine, saw little
danger in it. Peter and his fellow Christians still observed
every iota of Jewish law. They had not even broken with
rabbinic theology. They disagreed with the other Pharisees
only in their assertion that the Messiah had already appeared
in the person of Jesus of Nazareth and in their claim to
miraculous healing powers. Gamaliel could easily dismiss the
first doctrine as meaningless, since Jesus was no longer living;
and whether the expected Messiah, in whom all the Pharisees
believed, returned under one name or another, was obviously
immaterial. The therapeutic activity of the Apostles must have
seemed equally harmless to a teacher who did not regard their
sect as in itself dangerous. Moreover, Gamaliel probably
realized that persecution would only strengthen the new
io AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
group and drive it permanently out of the ranks of standard
Pharisaism. At any rate, he was determined that no one should
be punished with his consent, merely for teaching an un-
popular doctrine. His faith in God convinced him that false-
hood would fall of its own weight and that the truth could
not be conquered. Anticipating the modern advocates of
freedom of the press and freedom of speech, he held that the
Sanhedrin was without authority to punish expressions of
opinion; it was concerned only with action, not with words.
And at his insistence, Peter was freed. 9
Agrippa's sudden death in the year 44 brought an end to
this happy era. From that day onward disaster followed
disaster. The Roman procurators who succeeded Agrippa as
rulers of the country were entirely without interest in the
welfare of the land they governed. They did not even seek
the gratitude or respect of its people. Their only purpose in
coming to Palestine was to enrich themselves so that they
might return to a life of greater luxury and power in Rome.
Their avarice, their tyranny, their lack of any sense of re-
sponsibility, are described in vivid colors by Josephus who,
certainly, was not inclined to do them any injustice. Appeals
to their superiors in Syria and in Rome were of no avail;
the Roman bureaucracy, like every other, defended the mis-
deeds of underlings even when they were most patent. The
result was what might have been expected. Within a century
Jerusalem had become a heap of cinders, Judea was utterly
devastated, the Temple was plowed over and hundreds of
thousands of people had been slaughtered, sold as slaves or
driven into foreign lands.
The events which led to this final catastrophe followed one
another with the inexorable logic of Greek tragedy. Given the
character and position of the two opposing peoples, the one
IN THE DEPTHS II
obstinately idealistic, deeply religious and firm in its faith,
but without knowledge of strategy or military force; the other
arrogant, aggressive, well-organized and utterly ruthless, the
end could hardly be other than it was. Before Akiba was
thirty years old, the ultra-nationalists of Judea, maddened by
the oppression of the Roman procurators, had persuaded their
brethren to undertake a hopeless rebellion which culminated
in the capture of Jerusulem and the burning of the Temple.
Half a century later, a second rebellion broke out, because
Trajan violated his pledge to restore the Temple and Jerusa-
lem; and then, after another seventeen years, came the final
catastrophe of the Bar Kokba rebellion and its aftermath of
unforgettable destruction. Each of these conflicts cost the little
country treasures of wealth as well as thousands of lives.
Trade was interrupted, cities were burned and lands were
confiscated.
In the end, the straggling bands of Judean refugees who
made their way into Galilee, the northern province of Pales-
tine, were brought to the nadir of economic life. Six people
had to cover themselves with a single blanket; 10 children of
seven or under had to be put to work to earn their food; A1
men lay about in the streets, swollen with hunger, though
grain could be had at the low price of four seahs for a sela
(about a bushel and a half for a dollar); "none had even
that much." 12
It is difficult to think of another period in history when
such spiritual gains were made in the midst of progressive
decline and disintegration. The political and economic deca-
dence of Rome was accompanied by a darkening of its in-
tellectual horizons; the impoverishment of the Middle Ages
put an end to the development of science; the splendor of
Arabic culture disappeared with the retrogression of the cali-
12 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
phate. The Romans might well have thought that the destruc-
tion of Judea would end the spiritual life of its people. But
the very opposite happened. Judea died, but she died in
childbirth.
The most remarkable phase of this spiritual revolution was
its occurrence where it might least have been expected in
the lethargic Palestinian countryside.
Jewish thought had made memorable advances long before
the time of Akiba. There was a world of difference between
the simple faith of Elijah and the complicated theology and
ethics of Ezekiel, Deutero-Isaiah, and the author of Job. But
this development had been essentially a product of city life,
primarily the life of Jerusalem. For eight centuries that great
capital had been the center of Jewish spiritual energy: a crea-
tive dynamo in a dormant world. The sharp contrasts and
glaring inconsistencies which marked its activity, like that of
other metropolitan centers, stimulated thought, especially in
ethical and religious lines. Its numerous visitors, merchants,
pilgrims, travelers, soldiers, diplomats and statesmen brought
to it cosmopolitan ideas, challenging and widening its in-
herited conceptions. There Isaiah announced his epoch-mak-
ing conceptions of world peace, international justice, the saved
remnant, the inviolability of Zion and the Holy One of Israel;
there Jeremiah struggled for a formula which would combine
the traditional belief in divine providence with the newly dis-
covered doctrine of free will; there Habakkuk first questioned
the justice of the universe and Zephaniah proclaimed his
enduring faith in the poor of the land. It was the descendants
of the artisans and traders of Jerusalem who preserved and
expanded the prophetic teaching during the Exile. Among
them arose Ezekiel with his mature teachings of individual
IN THE DEPTHS 13
responsibility and human equality, and his powerful denuncia-
tion of imperial arrogance. Restored, Jerusalem produced the
eloquent skepticism of Job and the convincing replies of the
Hasideans. The beliefs in resurrection and immortality as reli-
gious ideals became fully developed; the moral responsibility
of the individual was most emphatically asserted.; the invig-
orating doctrine of the Oral Law took form; and the paradox
of faith plus freedom was fully recognized and accepted. ,
The country had resisted these teachings from beginning
until the end. The same conservatism which made the Jewish
husbandman of the first century an almost exact replica of
his Amoritic predecessor of Abraham's time and, except for
change of language, indistinguishable from his modern suc-
cessor, the Arabic-speaking fellah, prevented the provinces
from contributing new ideas to the thought or theology of
the people. The provincial peasant of Akiba's day still carried
about bones of the deceased as charms; he still poured out
drops of his wine to satisfy the greed and envy of the evil
spirits; he still ate enormous meals on the ninth of Tishri in
commemoration of forgotten Canaanite rites.
This was especially true in the province of Galilee which,
being farthest from Jerusalem, had been least affected by it.
Whatever light had pierced the darkness of the peasant men-
tality of this district had come from the Pharisaic teachers,
the scribes of Jerusalem. Their disciples had brought the con-
ceptions of the resurrection and immortality, of individual
responsibility and human worth, to the remotest corners of
the land. But even when the Galilean accepted these teach-
ings, he transformed them into ideals more in keeping with
his own simplicity and naivete. The doctrine of the resurrec-
tion ceased to be the robust prop of the downtrodden,
enabling them to face transient sufferings with equanimity,
14 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
and became a romantic call to deny the world and to live
only for a future life. The paradoxical combination of world-
liness and otherworldliness, of idealism and practical com-
mon sense, which is basic to Pharisaism, was too complicated
for the husbandman. Accepting the doctrines of Jerusalem, he
followed them to their logical conclusions. If God is the
Healer, why call on a physician ? If the soul is immortal, why
shun death? Thus the faith which had enabled the plebeian
of Jerusalem to live, moved the Galilean peasant to die. The
provincial Pharisees became either zealots burning with desire
to usher in the Divine Kingdom through force of arms, or
Christians holding that only faith was needed to put an end
to the Roman dominion. Both peasant groups agreed that the
Kingdom of God was at hand and that everyone ought to
act on that premise. The zealot became a soldier, ready to
die on the battlefield; the Christian gave his all to the poor,
and prepared for martyrdom.
The sudden acquisition of creative power by the intellect-
ually backward countryside can be explained, in part, by the
increased influence of the scholars of Jerusalem during this
period. As the doom of the great metropolis became evident,
many of them fled to the province as well as to the Diaspora,
hoping to save the ideals of their ancestors from destruction.
Certainly it was some such thought which motivated the high
priest Joslma^be^jQamalaJn establishing the first provincial
school system during the last decade of the Temple's
existence. 1 " 3 And certainly, too, it was this conviction which
turned the minds of the apostles from Jerusalem and Palestine
to the Diaspora for converts to their faith.
But no less important than these social forces was the
influence exercised by the two dominating personalities of
the age, Akiba ben Joseph among the rabbis, and Paul of
IN THE DEPTHS 15
Tarsus among the apostles. Laboring in different fields and
with different methods, the two teachers achieved varying
results. Yet in the perspective of history it is clear that both
contributed to the miracle of turning destruction into creation
and death into life. There is a remarkable correspondence in
the life history of the two men which, seen against the back-
ground of their magnificent but tragic age, ceases to be a
coincidence and becomes typical of it. Both of them in middle
life underwent conversions to causes which until then they
had hated and persecuted; both emerged as central figures
in their respective faiths; both undertook reformulations of
the traditions which they had accepted and struggled unre-
mittingly for the acceptance of their doctrines; both sought
to universalize the teachings of their colleagues and to impose
philosophic breadth and order on their religions; and finally,
both crowned their careers with the martyr's death. Consid-
ered in the light of these similarities, the two picturesque
figures appear almost as personifications of their time, with its
readiness for radical change, its impatience with tradition, its
wide interest in humanity, its restless search for new truths,
its desire for reformulation and systemization and its will-
ingness to perish for its ideals.
True, Paul died before the year 70, and Akiba after the year
130; Paul taught the abrogation of the Law, Akiba its per-
petuation; Paul gave himself to the Gentiles, Akiba to his own
people; Paul became a Christian, Akiba remained a Jew.
These wide divergences only emphasize their amazing simi-
larities in life and circumstance.
Perhaps indeed, their peculiar histories contain the secret
of Akiba's and Paul's enduring influence. The chaotic times
in which they lived demanded leadership which was free from
the trammels of tradition and precedent. The Palestinian
1 6 AKIB A: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
world was ready for fundamental changes; its teachers, reared
in their respective faiths, could offer it no guidance. Among
the Christians, the daring rejection of the Law by which the
Founder had lived could be proposed by no one who had
known him and followed him. Only Paul, who had under-
gone a complete transformation in his own life and who,
being without personal knowledge of Jesus, could reconstruct
him freely in his imagination, could tear the Church from
its pristine moorings. Similarly Akiba, brought into the Rab-
binic world in middle age, could view it and criticize it freely.
Overwhelmed at first by the grandeur of rabbinic Law, he
was later able to detect the flaws and weaknesses of its compli-
cated structure. The habits of thought and argument which
his older colleagues accepted without question because they
had grown up in them, aroused in him antagonism and
opposition.
It is not surprising that the transformation of rabbinic
Judaism was less radical, and occurred half a century later,
than that of Christianity. The difference was not due merely
to the accident of Akiba's later birth. Conceivably rabbinic
Judaism might have produced an Akiba in the year 50, had
the times been ripe for him. The fact is, however, that the
deeper foundations of rabbinic Judaism made fundamental
change in it far more difficult than in the new religion. Paul
had to contend with traditions which were only twenty or
thirty years old; those which Akiba undertook to recast had
the authority of centuries. In the year 50, Christianity was
still entirely fluid; even the Founder's sayings had probably
not been collected into fixed booklets. The Oral Law, with
which Akiba had to deal, had been handed down by a chain
of teachers which reached back beyond the beginnings of
Pharisaism, and indeed antedated the origins of the Second
IN THE DEPTHS
Commonwealth. To effect even a moderate change in so
ancient a system required extraordinary genius, as well as
extraordinary experiences.
The extent of the metamorphosis which Akiba underwent
in preparation for his task becomes apparent only when we
consider the surroundings in which he was reared. He was
born in southwestern Palestine, probably in the vicinity of
Ludd, the modern Lydda, in the low-lying plain near the
coast of the Mediterranean. The warm semi-tropical climate
of the district, the character of its soil and the abundance of
subterranean waters seeping down from the hilltops, makes
it, in spite of the comparatively small rain supply, one of the
most productive parts of the country. To this day, the fertility
of this coastal plain is three or four times as great as that of
the Judean hill country. 14 It Was there that Isaac received
returns of a hundredfold (Gen. 26:12); and it is only there
and in the Jordan Valley that such fertility is recorded today.
No wonder that this part of Palestine was settled long before
the rest; 15 and no wonder, too, that at all times the powerful
and wealthy landowners sought control of this plain, forcing
the weaker and the poorer farmers into the less productive
hills. 16 Archaeological discoveries prove that long before the
advent of the Hebrews there was a definite economic division
between the wealthy low country and the poor plateau, cor-
responding to that between the pediakpi and the diafyioi
of Attica. 17 The pre-Israelite people who dwelt in the moun-
tain differed from the Canaanite who lived by the sea, not in
language, or in culture, or in form of government, but in
riches and power. The Hebrews who invaded Palestine in the
fourteenth century B.C.E. found little difficulty in conquering
the weakly fortified cities on the mountains, but for centuries
they could not drive out the Canaanites who held the plain,
1 8 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
"for they had iron chariots," not to speak of superior organi-
zation and military technique. When, finally, the Hebrews
with their superior numbers did force their way into the plain,
the land was, as a matter of course, seized by the patrician
leaders of the army; and the natural division between the
lowland and the highland was emphasized by the difference
in the social status of its new owners.
Thus it came about that in the time of Akiba the upper
country was divided into a large "number of small holdings,
each barely sufficient to maintain its owner and his family;
while the lowland, in which he was born, was entirely under
the control of wealthy landowners, whose far flung estates
were tilled by slaves or hirelings. 18 Only in Jerusalem could
there be found wider differences in wealth and status than
were apparent in this coastal plain. The mighty patricians
who owned the soil lived in fine, well-built mansions, with
many rooms, even with upper stories. The walls might be
built of hewn stone or marble; the windows and doors, of
cedar or olive wood; there might even be found inlays of ivory
and coverings of beaten gold: 19
But it was not in such a palatial home that Akiba was
born and reared. His father, Joseph, was a poor, landless
peasant, a laborer on the estate of a rich neighbor. It was with
unconscious irony that these people were called am ha-arez,
men of the soil, for their lack of landed possessions was the
fundamental characteristic of their existence. But the term
had long lost its honorific connotations, and now meant noth-
ing but "boor" and "ignoramus"; and in these senses it could
be applied to Joseph with absolute precision. He knew noth-
ing and cared nothing about the national literature of his peo-
ple or the learned traditions of the Scribes. Probably he could
IN THE DEPTHS 19
neither read nor write; he was, furthermore, unconscious x>f
any void in his life because he lacked these skills.
The house in which Joseph lived had no hewn stone or
marble or wood of any kind. It was similar to that still to be
found among the Arabic fellaheen of the district. The walls
were built of sunburned bricks, unprotected by any cement or
plaster, and uninterrupted by any opening for light or air.
The roof, held up by sundry branches and boughs, consisted
of a mixture of clay, straw and earth, sufficient to keep out the
sun in the summer, and all but the worse rain in the winter.
Nothing but straw mats covered the bare earth, protecting the
inhabitants and their clothes from contact with the soil when
they went to sleep. If Joseph was removed from the lowest
strata of pauperdom, he may have possessed such luxuries as a
bed, a table, some chairs and an earthenware lamp. More
probably, however, he, like the rest of the poor husbandmen,
went to bed as soon as the sun set and worried little about
household furnishings.
The food of these peasants was of the simplest. Some barley
bread with cabbage, turnip, or perhaps garlic in the morning,
and the same in the evening, was all they could afford. The
scarcity of fuel made it difficult to cook even these vegetables.
To prepare them in some degree, they would obtain a jug of
hot water from a rich neighbor, or perhaps from a central
village supply, and dip the vegetables into it. 20 They regarded
this life as entirely natural, and considered it contumacy on
the part of their ancestors to have asked Moses for such deli-
cacies as leeks, cucumbers, and fish (Num. 11:5). It did not
seem to them at all grotesque that people who demanded
meat should have been punished by an unnatural death .for
their inordinate appetite. They probably agreed with the
scholar of the period who declared it sinful to eat meat unless
2O AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
one owned herds of sheep and oxen. 21 To purchase it in the
market was almost profligacy. According to this sage, a man
must accumulate a capital of no less than ten mina (five
times the dower right of a virgin) before he may indulge in
cooked vegetables every day. 22 If he has twenty mina, he may
eat fish; if he has fifty mina, he may eat meat once a week,
on the Sabbath; but not until he possesses a hundred mina
may he eat meat every day!
Since Akiba's father possessed far less than even one mina,
he must have contented himself and his family with the sim-
plest possible fare. Yet the delight of these meals, frugal as
they were, was never forgotten. Long afterward, when he
could afford to buy any food he desired, Akiba still insisted
that the meals he ate as a child were proper subjects for
gratitude to God. "He who eats but a little herb, provided it
be his regular meal, must recite the full grace after it," he
said. 23
Such was the poverty of the husbandmen in this rich wine
country, that most of them knew no other drink than water.
Many of them, making a virtue out of necessity, declared
the use of wine degrading and harmful. One of the scholars
who derived from this class used to say that the four cups
of wine which he drank, in accordance with the ritual, on the
Passover eve gave him a headache until Pentecost. 24 Akiba
himself, though he did not entirely abstain from wine in
later years, never outgrew his prejudice against it.
Clothes were as simple as food, drink or shelter. The fine,
multi-colored garments of imported linen and dyed wool
which were used by the wealthy were quite unknown among
the poor. Next to the body one wore a tight-fitting linen
tunic, and above it threw a rectangular piece of woolen cloth,
the prototype of the modern prayer shawl, which did service
IN THE DEPTHS 21
as cloak by day and blanket at night. Many had to use linen
sheets as substitutes for this woolen garment. 25 Other families
possessed a single woolen garment which was used by hus-
band and wife in turn, when they had occasion to leave the
house. 26 Special rules had to be made permitting the woman
remaining at home, only partly dressed, to recite the prayers
and benedictions. 27
It would be an error to infer from what has been said that
Akiba's childhood was unhappy. He knew hunger, he knew
toil, he knew exposure, and he doubtless was accustomed to
severe punishment. But the ancient Palestinian child had also
his games, his fun and his holidays. Like children of other
ages, he imitated in play what he saw his father or neighbor
do seriously. At harvest time, the boys would garner sand in-
stead of wheat, and could be seen measuring out little nut-
shells of their "produce" as ecclesiastical gifts to the "priest,"
the "Levite," and the "poor." 28 Like his father, Akiba was
out of doors most of the day, and could enjoy the bright sun-
light and the country air. Living in the fertile coastal plain,
he could look to the east and see the beauty of the Judean
hills, he could enjoy the wonder of the starlit, Mediterranean
sky, and when he stole away to the sea which lay only a few
miles off, he could let his imagination roam over the dark
mysteries of its unmeasured distances.
It was impossible for him, however, to receive any book
learning. Twenty years were to elapse before Joshua ben
Gamala was to establish his first system of general rural
education for Judea. At that time children could learn only
from their parents, and Akiba could get from his father
nothing more than the simple technique of sheep tending. 29
Presumably he was set to work at the same early age as other
plebeian children and, before long, apprenticed to one of the
22 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
large sheep-owners of the neighborhood, in return for food,
clothing and shelter.
The rabbinic maxim, "marriage at eighteen," 30 would have
sounded like mockery to him. It was meant for the affluent,
among whom the father, according to ancient custom, pro-
vided a house for his son on his marriage. 31 Among the poor,
a man usually passed his thirtieth year before he could think
of taking a wife. 32
Condemned to the companionship of animals, and of peas-
ants who were hardly more articulate, Akiba hated those to
whom he should rightly have belonged; and his hatred was
the more violent because his awareness of his rights was con-
fined to his subconscious mind. "When I was an am ha-arez"
he reported in later years, "I used to say, 'Would that I had a
scholar in my hands and I should bite him like an ass.' " 33
Those who knew Akiba in his older, mellow days, when he
had attained profound learning, social charm and gentle man-
ners, could scarcely have credited his words. To us, they are
evidence of the fierce intellectual energies which, imprisoned
beneath an uncouth pastoral exterior and denied their proper
expression, broke forth in hatred and envy.
From this pit of perdition Akiba was fortunately saved by
the love of the woman, Rachel, who became his wife. 34 Who
she was, and by what genius she was able to penetrate so
graceless an exterior and see the immense potentialities with-
in, we do not know. Cimabue found an untutored boy draw-
ing sheep by the roadside and launched the great Giotto on
his career; Johanan ben Zakkai, Akiba's older contemporary,
might have engaged the unlettered Judean shepherd in con-
versation and out of the fullness of his wisdom and experi-
ence recognized a potential equal. But how came a young and
inexperienced Palestinian maiden, of whom it is not even
IN THE DEPTHS 23
recorded whether she was literate, to perform this miracle?
Legend describes her as the daughter of Ben Kalba Sabua,
one of the three richest men in Jerusalem at the time. But
this is probably moralistic fiction. Nothing is really known
with definiteness about her identity or origin, and in a case
so extraordinary anything may have been true. The only
reliable record which has been preserved concerning her fore-
bears indicates that they were neither famous nor wealthy; for
it cites a tradition in the name of "Johanan, SO n of Joshua,
son of Akiba's father-in-law." 35 It is quite inconceivable that
so important and distinguished a person as Ben Kalba Sabua
should be referred to without the mention of his name, but
merely as related to Akiba. However, daughter of scholarship
and opulence, or of poverty and ignorance, she must be recog-
nized as one of the most remarkable women in the whole of
Jewish tradition. Throughout his life Akiba insisted that he
owed everything to her. "Whatever you have achieved, and
whatever I have achieved," he said to his disciples when they
gathered in hosts to greet him, "belong to her" ! 36
That this was neither modesty nor generosity nor pose, but
the plain truth, we know from the observations of Akiba's
colleagues. When one of the wealthier among them was up-
braided by his wife because he did not give her as fine pres-
ents as Rachel received from her poor husband, he remarked
with more candor than tact, "Had you done for me what she
did for him, I should have given you, too, a headdress of
gold" ! 3T To recognize the potential Akiba in the am ha-arez,
required insight of a high order; to accomplish the trans-
formation, needed character of equal distinction. Rachel per-
suaded Akiba to leave his goats and sheep and become a pupil
of the scholars whom he envied and loathed. This decision
24 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
made, they were married, and entered together on the strug-
gle for his education.
Numerous stories are current about the discouragements
which Akiba met and overcame in his first efforts to learn
how to read and write. His wife's father, who had opposed
the match from the beginning, refused to admit the poor,
ignorant shepherd into his home; and Akiba had no house
to which he and Rachel might go. His toil barely provided
enough for the family to eat. Added to these economic trou-
bles, were the disappointments of his student life. Apparently
he found his studies so difficult that more than once he was
ready to return to his sheep and his ignorance. And, in truth,
the system of education then in vogue was hardly adapted to
the needs of an alert, mature mind.
When the pupil had mastered the alphabet and was able
to read Hebrew texts, he was introduced not to the fascinating
narratives of Genesis, but to the incredibly difficult and tech-
nical laws of sacrifice which are found in the Book of Leviti-
cus. 38 This curriculum had originated centuries earlier in the
first public schools of Palestine, established by the priests to
train their children for Temple worship. In those early times
the priests had been the only people who could afford the
luxury of professional teachers and at the same time had some
interest in book learning. The other important social group,
the lay patrician landowners, like the barons of medieval
Europe, considered ignorance not only blessed but ennobling;
while the plebeians had to do their own teaching, as they
did their own mending, baking, cleaning and other household
chores.
When, ultimately, economic improvement of Jerusalem's
market place brought a new, learned, and more prosperous
plebeian class into being, the system of education had become
IN THE DEPTHS 25
fixed and unchangeable. Indeed, the Book of Leviticus was
so firmly established as the foundation of Jewish education
that even in medieval Germany, a thousand years after the
time of Akiba, a child was taught the first chapter of Leviti-
cus before he was permitted to read Genesis. 39 In Akiba's time,
not merely one chapter had to be mastered, but the whole
book, with its successive regulations for whole burnt offerings,
peace offerings, sin offerings and guilt offerings; its detailed
analysis of the laws of purity; its enumeration of the various
symptoms of skin and sexual disease; its description of the
service on the Day of Atonement; and its list of the marriages
prohibited as incestuous. Akiba, unaccustomed to the disci-
pline of book learning, and free to study only after the fatigue
of a day's labor, must have found it difficult to keep awake
as he struggled to remember which offering was sacrificed in
the north and which at the door of the sanctuary; whether
the sin-offering of the high priest was a bullock or a ram;
whether the presence of yellow hair on a leprous person was a
sign of impurity and, disease or of purity and healing. His
teacher, probably a country sage whose mentality and learn-
ing were just sufficient to meet the needs of six- and seven-
year-old pupils, could have been of little help to Akiba, who
apparently found the effort so unpleasant and discouraging
that despite his promise to Rachel he sank back to his earlier
life as a contented and carefree am ha-arez.
Meanwhile, Rachel had given birth to a child. The affec-
tionate shepherd's heart, already lacerated with his disappoint-
ment in himself, must have been torn as he asked him-
self whether his child too was destined to remain an am
ha-arez. The first gurgles of the infant, his attempts to walk
and speak, his rapid assimilation of new ideas, his ready ad-
justment to changed circumstances: what chords, which
26 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Akiba might have preferred to keep silent, they struck in his
very soul. Never had he been so conscious of latent abilities;
never so envious of those who had been trained in the Torah.
Brooding and ruminating over his unhappy lot, Akiba came
one day, it is said, to a spring, where for the first time he
noticed the deep groove which the falling waters had cut
into the rock. As frequently happens to a highly gifted and
imaginative person, the commonplace sight produced on him
an effect altogether unpredictable and quite incommensurate
with itself. The spring became for him what the almond tree
had been for Jeremiah and the sight of the Temple for Isaiah,
the catalytic agent of his conversion. Suddenly his thoughts
crystallized, his mind became clear, his purpose assumed
definite shape.
He took his child, then a lad of four or five, to a teacher of
children. "My master, instruct us," he said. The middle-aged
father and the little boy sat down, side by side, before their
teacher, who wrote an alphabet for them. Akiba took hold of
the tablet by one end, gave the other to his son, and they
followed the lesson together. "This," the teacher said, "is an
aleph, this a bet, this a gimmel," and so on through the whole
series of twenty-two letters.
Akiba easily recalled his forgotten studies and repeated the
lesson to the boy, watching with delight the response of the
immature mind to the strange creation of human artifice.
How the little fellow's eyes brightened when at last he could
recognize the letters himself, and how happy he was in his
father's evident satisfaction and pride. In the effort to help the
boy, Akiba found his own learning less tedious and painful.
He was now amused rather than chagrined at the simplicity
of the teacher who, fixed in his routine habits, insisted on
making him follow a technique fit for infants. When they
IN THE DEPTHS 27
could recite and recognize the letters as they had been ar-
ranged in the first place, the master wrote them again in
reverse, and then in confused, order. Only when they had
finally demonstrated to his satisfaction that they could recog-
nize each individual letter, no matter where it was placed,
were they admitted into the stately, forbidding portals of
Leviticus.
This time Akiba did not falter. What was hard to learn,
was easy to teach. He mastered Leviticus, and then the other
books which had legalistic significance: Exodus, Numbers and
Deuteronomy. Genesis, which contained only a few laws, and
was full of stories, was apparently not studied in the regular
curriculum. Yet Akiba, preparing for advanced rabbinic
studies, mastered this too, as well as the prophets and the
hagiographa. He had now far outstripped his little boy,
and was ready to apply for admission into the rabbinical
academy. 40
This was about the year 80. Akiba, approaching his for-
tieth year, the age when most people of promise have already
achieved some distinction in their chosen fields, had not yet
entered on his career. But his work was being prepared for
him. The momentous transformation in his private life had
synchronized with even more fundamental changes in the
structure of the body politic. The double process of decay and
growth characteristic of the period had already set in.
*****
While Akiba was still in his infancy, Agrippa's glorious
reign had come to an end, giving way to years of tumult and
rebellion, cruel hatreds, unjust denunciations and bitter strife.
The ancient struggles between the Pharisees and the Sad-
ducees, and among the various Pharisaic factions, had broken
28 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
out anew, and with redoubled vigor. Public arguments be-
tween the opposing sects were of daily occurrence, and at
least on one occasion a Sadducean high priest suffered physical
injury because he refused to follow the Pharisaic interpreta-
tion of the Law. One of the usually calm, peace-loving Hillel-
ite sages nipped his ear, thereby rendering him permanently
unfit for high priestly service. 41 Among the Pharisees them-
selves, there were equally bitter quarrels. United as they were
when their common doctrines were attacked, their various
factions were well-nigh at war with one another.
This clash of social forces, which was to affect Akiba's
public activity so intimately, becomes fully intelligible only
in its historical perspective. The fundamental class division
in Palestine was that between the semi-nomadic landless shep-
herds and the landowning farmers. 42 The conflict between
these groups antedated the appearance of the Israelites in the
Holy Land by more than a millennium, and is allegorized in
the biblical story of Cain and Abel (Gen. 4: 2). Almost
equally ancient, and in part related to it, already described, 43
was the struggle between the small farmers of the stony hill
country and the wealthy patricians of the fertile valleys.
Both of these class conflicts persisted after the Hebrew inva-
sion of the land, merely taking on new forms. It is no mere
chance, for instance, that the first king of Israel, Saul, was a
farmer of the tribe of Benjamin, while the second king was
a shepherd from the semi-nomadic hill country of Judah. Nor
is it strange that Jeroboam, when he rebelled against the
Judean dynasty, should have rebelled against the calendar as
well (I Kings 12:32). For Jeroboam drew his support largely
from the lowland farmers, and when the autumn festival was
being celebrated on the highlands of Jerusalem in the month
of September, he and his class were still enjoying summer.
44
IN THE DEPTHS
But neither the shepherds nor the small peasants of the
hills could offer effective resistance to the great patrician land-
owners who dominated Palestinian culture and politics. They
lacked organization, a program and class consciousness; it
was only in the city that the plebeians achieved partial vic-
tory. Here they were massed by tens of thousands; here con-
tact with each other and with visitors to their markets
developed in them a sophisticated outlook; here, finally, the
class divisions, which had been partially concealed by the
simple life of the country, took on sharpness and clarity. More-
over, it was from the two extremes of the social system that
the city recruited its population: the landowner rich enough
to appoint an overseer, and the fellah whose land he had ac-
quired. The former sought the court, the latter a job. 45
In the Second Book of Samuel (19: 39), for instance, we
are told how David persuades Chimham, the son of the rich
Barzillai, to leave his home in Transjordan and seek his for-
tune in Jerusalem; while in Genesis (4: 17.22) we read how
the clans of itinerant smiths gave up their nomadic life and
settled in the cities to enter the employ of the patricians.
By the second century B.C.E., the Holy City had attained
a population of more than seventy-five thousand, swelled in
times of pilgrimage to thrice that number. This offered an
unprecedented opportunity for plebeian organization and edu-
cation. The market place of Jerusalem became the corner-
stone of the whole plebeian edifice, and it was here that the
successive plebeian factions the Hasideans, the Pharisees, and
the Hillelites had their beginning and their inspiration.
The social cleavage was, however, most clearly visible in
the sanctuary. The lower class of Temple servants, the Le-
vites, who were the singers and the gate-keepers, made com-
mon cause with their fellow plebeians throughout the coiin-
3O AKIB A: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR .
try. The community of interest between these groups was
strengthened by the fact that the priests, who claimed de-
scent from Aaron the brother of Moses, were actually the
most powerful landowning group in the country. "Most
priests are men of wealth," was a current proverb. 46 More-
over, the differences of station, imperceptible in the country
but pronounced in city, were incontinently emphasized in the
sanctuary. The wealthy noble and the harassed artisan of
Jerusalem met only by accident, in the street; the great land-
owner of Ludd never saw the peasant of Tekoa; but priest and
Levite were always together. The Levite was essentially the
menial of the Temple, yet the majesty of the God whom he
served in common with the priest made him, in his own eyes,
the equal of the latter. The struggle became all the more
fierce because in the Temple social and political groups were
hardened into castes. There was nothing to prevent a fortunate
peasant from acquiring large estates; and some able merchants
had hewn their way into nobility; but never could a Levite, or
his descendants, become a priest.
Hence it came about that the most acrimonious class strug-
gle in ancient Palestine involved not the largest class of the
underprivileged, the small farmers; nor even the city prole-
tariat, who were also quite numerous; but the tiny group of
Temple Levites. In their championship of these oppressed
ecclesiastics many lay scholars found compensation for their
ineffectual efforts on behalf of the vastly larger sections whose
complicated problems defied any efforts at remedy. Neverthe-
less, the wide plebeian interests appear from time to time in
the opposition platforms; they are especially evident, as we
shall see, in Akiba's juristic system. Within his wide range of
sympathies he included the struggle of the shepherd against
the farmer, the highland against the valley, the town against
IN THE DEPTHS 3!
the country, the artisan against the noble; and the Levite
against the priest.
During the First Commonwealth the defense of the plebe-
ians had been conducted largely by the prophets; in the Sec-
ond Commonwealth, the prophet was replaced by the scholar,
whose forum was his school room. Here the humble teacher
would interpret the Law, applying it to new situations as they
arose, and demonstrating that its spirit was one of human
equality, merciful justice and universal peace. His words had,
of course, no immediate practical significance, for he had no
share in the government of the community. The control of
both the religious and civil life of the people was vested in a
Gerousia or Council of Elders, the patrician "heads of the
families," who qualified by lineage rather than accomplish-
ment. Even the high priests, who presided over this Gerousia,
stood generally on no higher intellectual or cultural level than
the other members. The decisions of the Gerousia in religious
and ceremonial, as well as civil, questions, were based entirely
on observed practice or precedent fixed by earlier patrician
landowners.
The objections of the plebeian scholars or scribes remained
unheard in the counsels of the great. But they were not
forgotten. They were handed down as dissenting opinions
from teacher to pupil, generation by generation. In time
they formed a body of traditions which, unrecognized and
rejected by the rulers of the people, were yet accepted as
authoritative by large masses. This was the Oral Law. Some
of it had doubtless originated in hoary antiquity, in the days
when the prophets of God struggled against the worship of
Baal. But the newer additions of later times were accepted
by the plebeians as equally authoritative with the older ele-
ments. The whole Oral Law, they said, had come down "from
32 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
master to master" along a chain of tradition which led back
to Moses on the summit of Mount Sinai. 47
From time to time, plebeian teachers, who, like the author
of Psalm 119, were especially vociferous in their denunciation
of their opponents, suffered persecution for their ideals. More
generally the movement was dismissed with contemptuous
tolerance, as doomed to a speedy end.
How long would people continue, the men of power must
have reasoned with themselves, to study as the word of God
an Oral Law which the high priests declared an imposture
and which was daily violated in the Temple? And, indeed,
it is difficult to see how plebeian scholarship could have sur-
vived the fourth century B.C.E., had it not received new life
and energy from a totally unexpected source the rise of
Hellenism.
The advent of Alexander the Great, and the ease with which
he demolished the great Persian Empire, had wrought a spirit-
ual revolution, in Judea as well as in the rest of the Near
East, without parallel in the history of this world. The patri-
cians, who had always been inclined, to imitate the ways of
their imperialist masters, were carried away by their admira-
tion for the Greeks. They desired for themselves nothing
better than to be called Hellenes.
But, as usual, it was only the externalities of the new civili-
zation which attracted them; they had no mind for its
intellectual attainments or spiritual ideals. There were no
students of Homer or Plato among them; no disciples of
Euripides or Aristophanes. They produced no mathematicians,
philosophers or physicians. Their Hellenism consisted in. at-
tempting to adopt Greek sports rather than in studying the
products of Greek intellect. They liked to give themselves
Greek names. But the names they chose were not those of
IN THE DEPTHS 33
Thales and Anaximander, the heroes of the Greek mind, but
of Jason, Menelaus, and Alexander, the foremost examples of
physical prowess. They made pathetic attempts to stammer
Greek, but succeeded only in forgetting their Hebrew. Young
priests, dressed in Athenian garments, could be seen rushing
from the altar, where they had offered sacrifices to the God of
Israel, to the gymnasium, where they disported themselves
naked in accordance with the pagan custom. Living in a
Jewish land, many of them felt a sense of shame in the sign
of the Abrahamitic covenant, and underwent painful opera-
tions to conceal it.
From the distance of centuries these attempts of the patri-
cians to remake themselves as Greeks must seem both comical
and pathetic. But to the contemporary plebeians, they were
tragic. The scholars realized that much more than class in-
terest was at stake in the conflict between them and the
patricians. The whole Jewish tradition was likely to be swept
away by the flood of Hellenization.
Determined to save their religion, they borrowed a weapon
from the civilization which they were so stoutly opposing.
During all the centuries of conflict which had passed, the
prophets and the scholars had had a following, but no organi-
zation. The plebeians listened to their words, obeyed their
instructions, memorized their teachings and handed down
their traditions. But it did not occur to either leaders or
followers to establish a plebeian party. It was the rise of Alex-
ander which first taught the Orient what power inhered in
ordered and united action. The Macedonian phalanxes had
won their victories not through superior numbers but by bet-
ter organization. They had torn through the Persian armies
like a well-aimed dart through the flesh of a large beast. The
lesson was not wasted, at least so far as the plebeians of
34 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Jerusalem were concerned. For the first time in history they
organized themselves as an active opposition the Hasideans,
or pietists.
No less important than this discovery of the meaning of
organization was the substitution of the national for the class
interest. So long as the plebeians had merely demanded new
rights and recognition for their own customs, they found the
patrician group united against them. But when they threw
themselves into the breach to oppose the flood of Hellenism,
they gained support from many members of the aristocracy.
The high priesthood, which had so long condemned the
scholars, realized at last what peril of widespread apostasy
was facing the whole faith.
The foremost of the converts to the plebeian cause was the
distinguished statesman-ecclesiastic, Simeon the Righteous. 48
He, more clearly than anyone else in his generation, saw that
the future of Judaism depended on study rather than on
worship. Priest as he was, he formulated the position of the
scholars better than anyone of them had done. "The spiritual
world depends," he said, "on three things; the Torah, the
ritual, and acts of lovingkindness." 49 The Torah came first;
ritual was second. The assertion was as significant and revo-
lutionary in its day as King Josiah's acceptance of the pro-
phetic teaching had been in his. The foremost patrician had
given recognition to the plebeians, and had himself placed
learning above lineage.
Acting on the principle he had formulated, Simeon con-
voked a Great Assembly to discuss the problems confronting
the people and their faith. Such assemblies had been called
before, in times of great emergency. They consisted not of
patricians alone, but also of representative plebeians. Artisans
and traders, priests and Levites, landowners and shepherds,
IN THE DEPTHS 35
townsmen and provincials, aristocrats and common people,
all sat together in the national council. Led by the high priest,
who presided, the Assembly reached a number of decisions
which became of historic importance. They closed the pro-
phetic canon; they formulated the prayer service of the syna-
gogue; they prepared a ritual for the Grace After Meat. But
the most important decision was of a constitutional nature:
they replaced the ancient Gerousia with a new Sanhedrin,
which was to include in its membership plebeian scribes as
well as patrician elders. 50
The admission of the plebeian scholars into the Sanhedrin,
and the open adherence of Simeon the high priest to their
cause, gave them new prestige and standing. The high priest's
example was followed by other, lesser aristocrats, especially
among the younger men. The most prominent of these were
doubtless Jeshua ben Sira, the author of Ecclesiastics, and
Antigonus of Socho, who in the next generation became the
leader of the Hasidean movement. There were doubtless
others, whose names have been forgotten, who were equally
talented and devoted. The Oral Law had ceased to be the
possession of a class; it had become "the inheritance of the
community of Jacob."
To those who regard the Hebraic-Christian-Moslem tradi-
tion of ethical monotheism as fundamental to western civil-
ization, Simeon's action must appear of universal, rather than
purely national, importance. It was one of those critical mo-
ments in history when the future really rests in the hands of
an individual. The tide of Hellenization could not indeed be
stopped, but it could be directed. Simeon the Righteous, mak-
ing plans both for the immediate and the distant future, com-
pelled the mighty force to flow and do its work in the
channels which he had dug for it. Had Simeon been an
36 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
assimilator, like his immediate predecessors and successors, the
victory of the decadent Syrian Hellenism over Judaism could
not have been prevented. The Jewish tradition would have
disappeared as completely as that of the Edomites, the
Phoenicians, and the other small near-eastern peoples. The
two magnificent syntheses of the Hebraism and higher Hel-
lenism, rabbinic Judaism and Christianity, would have per-
ished before they were born.
Yet, naturally, it is in the history of Jewish thought that
Simeon's activity looms especially large. For four centuries
after him, patricians and plebeians continued to sit together
in the Sanhedrin studying, arguing and at times quarreling.
The continuous discussions between the parties clarified their
opinions, sharpened their dialectical methods and amplified
the legal system. But most important of all, it brought the
different factions of the people into a body where they could
arrive at mutual understanding, if not common agreement. At
last, the conflict of classes had been brought into the Council
Chamber where it belonged.
The full measure of Simeon's influence becomes apparent
in the light of the curious and instructive history of the
century following his death. The Syrian government, watch-
ing the struggle between the Hellenists and Hasideans in
Palestine, finally became impatient of the slow process of
natural assimilation, and undertook to force the people into
apostasy. Antiochus IV, Epiphanes, King of Syria and thereby
ruler of Palestine, issued edicts in the year 168 B.C.E. trans-
forming the sanctuary in Jerusalem into a heathen Temple,
and prohibiting the study or practice of the Jewish faith in
his domains.
What followed forms one of the most amazing chronicles
in all human history. Were the events less well documented,
IN THE DEPTHS 37
or had they occurred half a millennium earlier, they would be
dismissed as myths. But their historicity is beyond doubt. The
Jews, undisciplined, unorganized, impoverished, few in num-
ber and divided in counsel, rose in revolt against the mighty
Syrian Empire, with its well-trained armies, its enormous
wealth and its excellent organization. Led by a family of
provincial priests from Modin, the Maccabees or Hasmo-
neans, the Hasidean pietists showed themselves indomitable
soldiers and heroes, as well as learned saints and pious mar-
tyrs. "The high praises of the Lord were in their mouths, and
a two-edged sword was in their hands."
But the diplomatic astuteness of these plebeians and peas-
ants is even more remarkable than their military skill. Their
most significant victories were won not on the battlefield but
in peace conferences. Playing off the rival empires and claim-
ants for the various thrones against one another, they obtained
greater and greater concessions, until they achieved absolute
self-government and freedom. The Maccabees, who had led
them both in the war and in the negotiations for peace, be-
came their high priests, replacing the old Zadokite dynasty
which had been in control of the Temple for almost eight
centuries. Together with this ecclesiastical authority, the Mac-
cabees obtained also complete temporal power. They were to
be the heirs of David as well as of Aaron. Yet they did not
dare to establish an absolute monarchy. They constituted the
executive branch of the infant government; its legislative and
judicial functions were vested in the Sanhedrin.
For a time it appeared as if the Messianic era had burst on
Palestine j there was complete harmony between rulers and
people, the land was prosperous, the study of the Torah was
making rapid progress. As in the days of Agrippa, so then,
prosperity was helping to break down partisan barriers. The
38 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
fHasidean party disappeared; the whole country was one
united theocracy. But this Golden Age endured for no more
than three decades. Within that time the history of the Has-
moneans was to demonstrate that the Hellenism of the earlier
high priesthood had not been the result of willfulness or
inner depravity; but was the natural concomitant of their
exalted, social position. A definite sociological law makes the
leaders of small peoples especially subject to influences ema-
nating from neighboring empires. No matter what their per-
sonal background might be, the rulers of Palestine in every
age tended to emulate the nobility of larger nations.
This division had been evident long before the time of the
Hellenists; indeed, it could be perceived as early as the first
days of Israel's entrance into Canaan. The defection of the
patricians to Baal worship, the attempts of Ahab and Jezebel
to foist the Phoenician gods on the people of Samaria, the imi-
tation of the Babylonian altars and ritual by Ahaz, the wear-
ing of foreign apparel by the princes whom Zephaniah de-
nounced, were all part of the same innate tendency of the
Palestinian nobility toward assimilation. No sooner had the
Maccabees placed themselves in the seats of the mighty than
they became subject to the same influences; they too became
Hellenists and assimilators.
Never was the futility of violent revolutions more cogently
demonstrated; never were the effects of social position more
clearly exhibited. The grandchildren of the men who had
given their lives for the Torah became willing apostates; they
were called by Greek names, Aristobulus, Alexander, and the
like; 51 they neglected the Jewish tradition; they hated and
persecuted the scholars. In the eyes of the plebeians their
Hellenism was, if anything, baser than that of their prede-
cessors, for their acceptance of the pagan civilization did not
IN THE DEPTHS 39
prevent them from becoming political and military chauvin-
ists and imperialists. Cultural apostasy and national ambition
the combination seemed most hateful of all to the peace-
loving pietists.
It was at this time that the full effects of the activity of
Simeon the Righteous were felt. Hah a century after his
death, his influence was still sufficiently potent to hold in
check the tendency toward assimilation and to save at least
some of the patricians for the Torah. The imperialistic, assim-
ilated Maccabees had to wage their struggle not with a sub-
merged class of plebeian traders, but with the combined forces
of all scholars and teachers.
The two groups of pietists, those of the urban market place
and those of the landed estates, united to form a single order,
replacing the forgotten Hasideans, calling themselves Ha-
berim, "comrades" or "friends." The outer world, however,
came to know them as Pharisees, "separatists," or "purists."
In response to this unified opposition, the groups sympathetic
to the high priesthood, too, organized. Since the Maccabees
now regarded themselves as descended from Zadok, the party
was called Zadokim or Sadducees. From that time onward
there was a double social struggle in Judaism: that between
the organized patricians or Sadducees and the scholars or
Pharisees; and that within the Pharisaic party itself, between
the faction which derived from the patricians and provincials,
and that which derived from the plebeians.
The name Pharisee was most appropriate to the order of
the scholars. Their basic principles were exactly what those of
the Hasideans had been. They believed in the resurrection of
the dead, the existence of angels, providential control of
human decisions and, above all, in the divinity of the Oral
Law. But what especially impressed their contemporaries was
40 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
their insistence on the observance of every iota of the Law,
especially that section of it which dealt with the rules of
Levitical impurity.
Few modern students of Scripture take the trouble to read
the part of Leviticus dealing with these ceremonial regula-
tions; those who do readily dismiss these rules as taboos,
similar to those current among most primitive peoples. To
the ancient Jews, however, they were of transcending impor-
tance. One-sixth of the Mishna, the basic code of Jewish Law,
is devoted to their exposition and elucidation. They affected
the daily life of the observant Jew more than any other part
of his religion. They regulated the type of food he could eat,
the clothes he could wear, the houses he could enter, and the
friends he could make; they fixed the time and manner of his
washing and of his bathing, and even of his relations with
his wife. Contact with the dead, or with persons suffering
from various sexual or skin diseases, or with menstrual women,
and a dozen other' "sources of impurity" defiled him. Once
unclean, he could not touch ordinary food or vessels, lest he
contaminate them. In fact, he had to leave his house, and
remain outside of the "camp" or city until he became pure.
In cases of minor defilement, this might be the same evening,
after he had bathed; for a major defilement, like that arising
from contact with a corpse or with persons suffering from
sexual disorders, a more elaborate ceremony was necessary,
involving visits to the Temple, sprinkling with the ashes of
the red heifer, or the sacrifice of two pigeons.
The Law, intended to make of the Jewish people a "king-
dom of priests and a holy nation," was too rigorous for
universal observance. People living at a distance from Jeru-
salem could not resort to the Temple for purification every
time they attended a funeral. Peasants could not accept a law
IN THE DEPTHS 4!
which barred them from their house for a whole day every
time they spoke to a person suspected of "suffering with a
flow." They justified and rationalized their impiety, however,
on the ground that the laws were not intended for general
practice. The rules applied only, the provincials argued, to
people who frequented the sanctuary. They were quite willing
to "purify" themselves when about to go on a pilgrimage;
but otherwise they practically ignored the law.
The pietists of Jerusalem could not accept this lenient inter-
pretation. They considered the law of purity as binding as any
other part of the Pentateuch, and carried out its precepts to
the minutest detail. The provincials who refused to be bound
by the Levitical Law were in their opinion perpetually "im-
pure"; contact with them or their possessions was defiling.
The merest drops of spittle which came from their mouths
when speaking carried contamination to the person they
addressed. It was for this reason the Pharisees were so amazed
when Jesus sat down to eat with publicans. As an observant
member of their sect, he could have had no commerce what-
ever with the defiled.
The Pharisees were "separatists," and this is the more re-
markable because they were altogether unaware of the broad,
human, hygienic significance of the Law they observed. They
intended only to do the word of God; they actually preserved
the health of men. 52 The careful washings, ablutions and
bathings, the insistence on separateness from any contact with
the dead, the quarantine of those afflicted with sexual or skin
ailments, were important prophylactics against disease. They
were especially necessary in Jerusalem, where the large aggre-
gation of people, the crowded streets and houses, above all,
the massing of the pilgrims in the Temple, might lead to the
rapid spread of epidemics. That Jerusalem remained a health-
42 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
ful city and, indeed, that the Jews in later ages were, in spite
of persecution, impoverization, and ghetto life, free from
many communicable diseases, was due in large measure to the
Pharisaic insistence on the observance of their sanitary regula-
tions. The "separation" of the Pharisees from the rest of the
people thus implied neither snobbery, nor bigotry nor self-
righteousness.
There has never been a religious movement more enlight-
ened or broadmincled or tolerant of differences than this
ancient sect. From the first, its adherents continued to wor-
ship in the Temple, though the high priest and most of his
associates belonged to the opposing group, the Sadducees.
More than that, the composite character of their own order
compelled the Pharisees to tolerate differences of opinion and
to encourage the preservation of variant rituals. The plebeian
and patrician members were agreed on a few fundamental
principles of belief and practice, but they were divided re-
garding a whole series of ceremonial detail. For generations
neither group made any attempt to foist its system on the
other. Even disagreements regarding the laws of marriage,
involving the most intimate concerns of the members of each
group, did not lead to a break. The rules of each group were
recognized as binding and authoritative for its own members.
"Although," the Mishna says, "one group permitted marriages
which the other prohibited, and declared pure what the other
considered defiled, they freely intermarried and permitted
food to be prepared in common." 53 "Both traditions are the
words of Living God," 54 the scholars taught^ with their usual
daring inconsistency and their fearless love of paradox.
To emphasize the equality of the two groups within
Pharisaism, a system of dual leadership was arranged, giving
each equal representation. If the first sage (later called the
IN THE DEPTHS 43
Nasi or president) was a patrician, the second or associate
sage (later called Ab Bet Din, or head of the court) had to be
a plebeian, and vice versa. 55
For many generations the two groups worked together
without the encumbrance of separate organizations. But the
long reign of Herod, with its bitterness, its absolutism and its
subservience to Rome, aroused the dormant nationalism of the
provincials and lower patricians. Acting on the principle
established by his Roman masters, divide et impera> the astute
King showed special favor to the peace-loving plebeians,
fomenting dissension between them and their patrician col-
leagues.
The factional quarrel became more bitter when, imme-
diately after the death of Herod, the nationalists sought to
destroy his dynasty. He had designated his son, Archelaus, as
his successor, but before the new king could go to Rome for
confirmation by the Caesar, the pilgrims, who had gathered in
Jerusalem for the Passover celebration, declared a revolt
against him. They encamped in tents about the Temple, con-
trolled the entrances to it, and were obviously preparing to
seize the city. For a day or two Archelaus could not make up
his mind. To begin his reign with bloodshed might cost him
the permanent affection of the people; to show any weakness
might prevent his confirmation in Rome. In the end he placed
his faith in the Caesar. He sent his whole army against the
rebels, killing three thousand of them and dispersing the rest
to their homes. 56 Having apparently settled the rebellion with
this decisive blow, Archelaus sailed for the imperial capital
with a light heart. Little did he realize the depth of the
resentment against his father's house. His absence enabled the
nationalists to increase their forces and prepare better plans.
Their boldness rose with their enthusiasm. They would drive
44 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
from the country not only the Herodian, but his Roman mas-
ters. They would restore the glorious days of the Maccabean
theocracy. Their war-fever infected even the Sanhedrin, which
now voted for war. "On that day, Hillel sat bent before Sham-
mai, like one of the disciples," records the Talmud; "and,"
the pacifist chronicler adds, "it was as grave a catastrophe for
Israel as when they made the Golden Calf." 57
Shammai, however, did not content himself with the victory
for his foreign policy; he took advantage of the situation, as
party men are wont to do, to force also the acceptance of his
social and ceremonial program. "If you anger me, I will
declare impurity also against the gathering of olives," 58 he
cried out to Hillel, who had apparently been outvoted, if not
temporarily removed from office. Such strong words could
come only from a man who felt certain of his control of the
Sanhedrin; a control which Shammai, as second to Hillel,
never possessed in normal times, and gained at the moment
only as a result of the nationalist excitement.
It was probably during this Passover, while the nationalists
controlled the approaches to the Temple, that there occurred
the almost incredible incident of HilleFs narrow escape from
physical violence at the hands of the enthusiastic Shammaites.
The old sage had brought a whole burnt offering to the
Temple on a festival day, and had put his hands on its head
in accordance with the usual custom. In the eyes of the
Shammaites, his action constituted a double offense. It was
first of all forbidden, in their opinion, to sacrifice a whole
burnt offering on a holiday; and it was additional transgres-
sion to lay one's hands on it. Being apparently in control of
the outer courts of the sanctuary, the excited partisans of
Shammai gathered about Hillel threateningly when they saw
him violate their traditions. To understand fully the signifi-
IN THE DEPTHS 45
cance of the incident, we must bear in mind that usually it
was left to the individual's conscience to accept the views of
either faction on the disputed question. But apparently the
Shammaites were tired of tolerance, and determined to enforce
their views even against the leader of the opposing faction.
Seeing his danger, Hillel resorted to stratagem. "It is not a
whole burnt offering," he said, "but a peace offering." This
mitigated the offense, and during the discussion which ensued
about the other half of the charge, Hillel made his way to
safety. Yet the next day the Shammaites gathered in the San-
hedrin and endeavored to outlaw formally the Hillelite prac-
tice which had always been permitted to those who adhered
to it. They would have succeeded had not one of their fore-
most leaders, Baba ben Buta, a man equally noted for his
piety, wealth, prudence and dignity, and a personal friend to
Hillel, dissuaded them. 59
Encouraged and strengthened by their victory in the San-
hedrin, the nationalists gathered in hosts for the next pilgrim-
age, that of the Pentecost, which occurs six weeks after the
end of Passover. They seized the Temple mount, which was
situated to the east of Jerusalem, and the Upper City, which
covered the western hills; thus completely surrounding the
Roman garrison in the center. A terrific battle ensued, in
which hundreds of nationalists were slain, the cloisters sur-
rounding the temple courts were burned, and the festival
celebration was broken up. Yet the uprising was not crushed
until Varus, Governor of Syria, came into the country with
two additional legions, burned several important towns, en-
tered Jerusalem and crucified two thousand rebels.
This ended the disturbance. The Hillelite members of the
Sanhedrin who had so suddenly become converted to the
nationalist cause returned to the fold, and Hillel was once
46 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
more the recognized Nasi. But the extremists were not so
easily reconciled. The provincial and patrician Pharisees hon-
ored the dead rebels as heroes; the peace-loving plebeians
denounced them as traitors. This controversy could not be
conducted with the calm, judicial patience and tolerance
which had become the rule in disagreements regarding cere-
monial. The fierce passions of the nationalists, clamoring for
war, and the eagerness of the plebeians to maintain peace at
all costs, left no room for an academic, rational approach. A
bitter quarrel arose within the Pharisaic order, and the two
wings established themselves as separate and opposing schools.
The patricians became known as the Shammaites; the plebe-
ians as the Hillelites, after their respective leaders, Shammai
and Hillel.
During the reign of Agrippa, and under the leadership of
Gamaliel, who was Hillel's grandson, the breach was tem-
porarily healed, as we have already observed. But as soon as
Gamaliel died, 1 it reappeared. The Shammaites continued to
gain new strength from the rebellious mood of the people,
who resented the insolence and the exactions of the Roman
procurators. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, who had no in-
terest in the patrician interpretation of the Law, joined the
School of Shammai, as a protest against the Roman rule, and
an expression of their deske to take forcible action. The most
notable of these converts was no less a person than Simeon
ben Gamaliel, the son of the late Nasi, and the great-grandson
of Hillel, the founder of the plebeian school.
The defection of this scion of the House of Hillel to the
teaching of the Shammaites was as characteristic of that agi-
^tated period as the conversion of Akiba to scholarship and
the apostasy of Paul to Christianity. But to his contemporaries
it was vastly more significant. It must have struck dismay
IN THE DEPTHS 47
deep into the hearts of the Hillelites. It was as though their
foremost prop had been taken away from them. True, Simeon
ben Gamaliel was, by reason of his wealth, no longer a
plebeian. The fortunes of the House of Hillel had improved
considerably during the preceding generation. Its founder
had been a poor artisan; Gamaliel had become wealthy;
Simeon had been born into affluence and power. Yet the
plebeians, remembering how recent was the family's advent
into better circumstances, could not but count him as their
own. Alas, they did not realize that it was his humble descent
which was driving him from them. Simeon the Righteous, a
born patrician, tracing his descent to Zadok and Aaron, could
join the plebeians without fear; Simeon ben Gamaliel could
remain with them only at the risk of losing his social position.
Social position meant everything to Simeon ben Gamaliel,
and he could not bear to risk its loss. His abandonment of the
Hillelite School was not merely formal and outward; it was
inner and complete. He had inherited the mind of his an-
cestors but not their spirit, their shrewdness but not their
understanding, their keen insight but not their broad sym-
pathies and social conscience. He could foretell as well as
Hillel or Gamaliel might have done the probable results of
his actions; but this prescience did not deter him from taking
steps certain to cause widespread suffering. Above all, he had
lost that fundamental quality of self-effacement, which had
made the House of Hillel universally revered. He could never
forget himself. Vain, pompous and egotistical, conscious of
scholarly inferiority among the Hillelites and of social in-
feriority among the Shammaites, he found his greatest de-
light in dramatic exhibitions of personal authority. It was
this love of showmanship which led him into actions involv-
ing danger to others. Unusual ability, especially among his
AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
subordinates, evoked in him both terror and jealousy. "Come
and see," the Talmud remarks, when it compares him with
his noble father, "the difference between the humility of the
former generation which was strong, and the arrogance of
the later generation, which was weak." 60
Everything that Simeon ben Gamaliel did reflected his
social ambitions. He lived in a fashionable court, where his
nearest neighbor was a Sadducee. 61 He gave one of his daugh-
ters in marriage to Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, one of the wealthi-
est of the young scholars, whose father was a provincial
landowner in the coastal plain. 62 More amazingly, he married
a second daughter to Simeon ben Nethanel, an ignorant but
extremely wealthy am ha-arez who, refusing to accept the
Pharisaic rules of purity, had to be bound in the marriage
contract not to interfere with his wife's observances. 63 Finally,
his respect for office led him to adopt as his third son-in-law
an illiterate peasant, Phineas the son of Samuel of the village
of Aphtha, perhaps the only person in history to attain fame,
position and immortality in a lottery** This man knew noth-
ing of the traditions of his people, or even the forms and
ritual of the Temple. Of the same social rank and intellectual
attainments as Akiba's father, he was working as a stone
cutter in a quarry when the revolution against Rome broke
out. The extreme revolutionaries, who were then in power,
impatient of the lukewarm support their cause was receiving
from the recognized Temple authorities, decided to replace
the officiating high priest with someone to be chosen by' lot
from among all the descendants of Aaron. When, to the
surprise of everyone, the choice fell on the poor stone cutter
of Aphtha, Simeon ben Gamaliel, who had bitterly opposed
the proceedings, admitted the new high priest into his family.
Even in his daily life, Simeon followed Shammaitic rules
IN THE DEPTHS 49
of conduct rather than those in which he had been reared. 65
Worse still, he opposed the fundamental plebeian principle
of the primacy of learning in Judaism. It was the recognition
of this principle which had first stamped Simeon the Right-
eous as a Hasid; its rejection necessarily classified Simeon ben
Gamaliel as a patrician. This did not necessarily involve his
resignation from the Pharisaic order. Difference of opinion
on this subject was permitted, for the patrician scholars had
long become wary of the endless legal arguments of the
plebeians. They had not, indeed, reversed Simeon the Right-
eous; they still agreed that the School took precedence over
the Temple. But they held that general ceremonial practice
was more important than either. "Say little and do much,"
was a favorite maxim of Shammai, the founder of their
school. 66 Simeon ben Gamaliel's doctrine, "Not the study but
the practice of the Law is essential," 6T expressed the thought
more clearly and unequivocally.
With the usual zeal of the neophyte, Simeon out-Sham-
maited the Shammaites. Not only did he affect to despise
argument in the Law, but he made no effort to teach at all.
Alone among all the famous rabbinic scholars, whether patri-
cian or plebeian, he had no disciples. His own sons-in-law had
to join the plebeian school in order to master the Law. More
than that, this child of the most culturally distinguished fam-
ily in Judaism tried to assume the manners of the backward
provincial and patrician landowners. He acted as though, like
them, he found conversation difficult, and feigned to despise
it as an art. With unparalleled effrontery, he asserted that he
had learned this from the experience of his father's house.
"All my life have I grown up among the sages," he said, "and
I have found nothing of greater benefit to one's body than
silence. Whoever is profuse in words causes sin." 68
50 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Whether Simeon's conversion to the patrician party helped
him in his obvious desire to succeed his father is uncertain.
The advance of the nationalist cause by the time of Gamaliel's
death (about the year 50 C.E.) may have placed its adherents
once more in control of the Sanhedrin. More probably, they
were still in a minority. But apparently the plebeians could
not bring themselves to oppose the election of the scion of
Hillel and Gamaliel. His desertion of their group had been
a severe blow to their pride. But it was easy to attribute it to
ardent youth and to hope that with age Simeon would achieve
the mellow wisdom of his ancestors.
Nevertheless, the Hillelites were not prepared to vest the
sole leadership in Simeon; they insisted that the bipartisan
government, traditional among the Pharisees for two cen-
turies, be restored. Simeon ben Gamaliel was chosen as Nasi;
Johanan ben Zakkai, a tradesman who had become a scholar
and acknowledged leader of the Hillelites, was made his Ab
Bet Din. Perhaps the Hillelites deluded themselves with the
thought that this arrangement gave them a double advantage.
Johanan ben Zakkai was theirs already; Simeon would join
them when he matured. In any event, their special relation to
him and his family would give them preponderant influence
not only in the Sanhedrin but also in the councils of the
opposing faction. With a scion of Hillel at the head of the
Shammaites any threatened rift in Pharisaism would be
averted.
If such were the thoughts of the Hillelites, they were
doomed to disappointment. The new Nasi had become a con-
vinced Shammaite and nationalist; nothing could bring him
back. His leaning toward the provincials involved graver
consequences than the acceptance of their ceremonial prac-
tices and the establishment of a new ethics based on their
IN THE DEPTHS 5 1
rural ideas. In fact, he was so completely estranged from the
life of Jerusalem that he ceased to have any understanding of
the city's problems. On no other basis can we explain the
utter irresponsibility which led him to render a decision
certain to bring ruin on a large section of the traders of
Jerusalem, and to aggravate the evil by the selection of a most
inopportune moment, as well as a most precipitate manner,
for the announcement.
It happened that as Passover approached there was a great
demand for pigeons in Jerusalem. They were needed for
various sacrifices of purification, but more especially for the
childbirth sacrifices of the women, which were usually offered
at the pilgrimage season. Some people were required to offer
as many as five or six pairs of pigeons at the altar. The
increased demand for these birds naturally raised their price.
Without consulting his associates or giving any intimation of
the action he planned, Simeon waited until the prices reached
their peak, then suddenly announced that, in his opinion, no
one had to offer more than a single pair of pigeons. The
validity of the Nasi's opinion was, of course, unquestioned,
and the unexpected shrinkage in the demand for pigeons
caused a panic on the market. A pair of birds which cost a
golden dinar (about six dollars) on the morning of that
fateful day could be purchased in the evening for half a silver
dinar (about twelve cents). Simeon had displayed his power;
he had brought disaster on the pigeon-dealers. 69
Simeon's impetuosity, his failure to warn the traders of
this imminent decision, and his utter unconcern for what
happened^ to them, were not an indication of legislative short-
sightedness. Josephus, who certainly bore him no good will,
speaks of him as "a man highly gifted with intelligence and
judgment." 70 He knew what would be the results of his
52 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
announcement, and he welcomed them. It did not occur to
him that, having failed to give his judgment before the
traders prepared for market day, he was no longer free to
offer it at a critical moment when his words meant ruin to
them. He saw the situation only from the point of view of the
countryside: the sellers of doves were profiteers who ought to
be destroyed.
Even more revealing, and of more enduring interest, was
the effort he made to crush Josephus in the year 67 when that
future historian was a young general in the revolutionary-
army. The insurrection had broken out the previous year
when the corruption and misgovernment of Florus, the last
of the Roman procurators, had culminated in his seizure of
seventeen talents from the Temple treasury. Some wags had
derisively passed baskets about the streets of Jerusalem, feign-
ing to beg alms for their impecunious ruler. This insult had
brought retaliations which further aroused the people, lead-
ing finally to the interruption of the daily sacrifices on behalf
of the Emperor a virtual declaration of war.
In vain did the men of rank and position, who had every-
thing to lose and nothing to gain in a war, urge the people
to be calm. Agrippa II, the nominal king of the country
(whose only prerogative consisted in his right to appoint the
high priest), spoke for the Herodians; Hanan, the high priest,
spoke for the Sadducees and the authorities of the Temple;
Josephus, who had just returned from Rome, described what
endless resources the Empire could command, how hopeless
it was for Judea to measure its strength against the world;
Johanan ben Zakkai headed the traditional plebeian lovers
of peace. All arguments were futile. The maddened people
could not be dissuaded. The Roman soldiers were driven out
of Jerusalem; and when Cestius Gallus, Governor of Syria,
IN THE DEPTHS 53
and his army invaded the country, they were met, surrounded
and put to ignominious flight. The impossible had happened;
a Roman army had suffered defeat at the hands of the Jews.
The victory was fatal. Even sober men like Hanan and
Josephus were carried away by the overwhelming enthusiasm.
Ever opportunistic, they deserted their teachings of peace as
soon as war seemed likely to achieve desirable results. The
fever infected even the more idealistic lovers of peace, who
thought the Messianic age was at hand. The pacifist faction
virtually ceased to exist. It was reduced to a few Romanophile
Herodians, like Agrippa II and his followers, who joined the
Roman army; and to Johanan ben Zakkai and his extremist
Hillelite colleagues who, refusing to desert the Sanhedrin and
yet unable conscientiously to join in the war, strove to main-
tain a doubly perilous, almost impossible neutrality.
Once more, as immediately after Herod's reign, the Sham-
maites were in complete control of the Sanhedrin. Again they
took advantage of the nationalist fervor to impose not only
their political, but also a large part of their social and re-
ligious program on the people. They organized the govern-
ment of the infant rebel state, giving the most important posts
to the priests who dominated their faction; 71 they made
preparations for the oncoming struggle; and, finally, they
voted a series of eighteen decrees which both in their, form
and content opened a new epoch in the development of Jew-
ish law. 72 For the first time in history a gathering of Jewish
teachers arrogated to itself the right to add ceremonial restric-
tions to those found in Scripture. Departing from the prece-
dent which required scriptural authority for new decrees, the
Sanhedrin frankly declared itself a religious legislature as well
as judiciary. And, indeed, it would have been difficult to find
any basis in Scripture for some of the rules which were estab-
54 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
lished, such as those prohibiting the purchase of wine, oil,
cheese or bread from the Romans, or the sale to them of land
or of animals to till the land.
Simeon ben Gamaliel, as president of the Sanhedrin, and
Hanan, the high priest, were recognized apparently as the
two chief officers of the State. 73 Among the priests who were
given responsible positions under them was Josephus, then a
young man of thirty, who was despatched as a member of a
commission of three to bring the Galilean zealots under the
control of the newly organized government and also, per-
haps, to prepare for the defense of Galilee.
It was almost inevitable that a bitter quarrel should ensue
between Simeon ben Gamaliel and Josephus. The two men
were so similar in ability and character that their minds were
open books to one another. Equally matched in personal
charm, mental alertness, intellectual subtlety, in physical as
well as spiritual courage, they easily won the affection and
confidence both of prominent individuals and of the general
populace. Simeon attained the presidency of the Sanhedrin
and, when the revolution came, was able to place his chair
above that of the high priest. He achieved such popular
acclaim that when in the third year of the war the extremist
Galilean revolutionaries overthrew the government of the
Sanhedrin and slew most of the earlier leaders, he continued
to hold his own. Similarly, Josephus, who on his arrival in
Galilee was the youngest and least recognized of the Com-
mission of Three, became in a few months the most widely
beloved hero of the province. When captured by the Romans,
he, a rebel general and a prisoner of war, made his way to
the hearts of such men as Vespasian and Titus.
The curious involutions and twistings of the young gen-
eral's mind, the conflict between his youthful idealism and
IN THE DEPTHS 55
his growing opportunism, the hesitations and inconsistencies
resulting from his fluctuating desires for temporal power and
eternal life, were all transparent to the older, more experi-
enced head of the Sanhedrin. Simeon knew that Josephus's
conversion to the rebel cause was incomplete, that he wavered
between a hope for Jewish independence and a conviction
that it was unattainable.
Josephus, on the other hand, realized that the Nasi dis-
cerned his inner difficulty, and feared the consequences of
entrusting to such a man the responsibility for the defense of
Galilee. For, whatever might be Simeon's deficiencies of spirit,
he was thoroughly sincere both in his piety and in his patriot-
ism. That his conversion to-Shammaism had been caused by
social prejudice, he was unaware. He believed that both the
Shammaitic interpretation of the law and their political ideals
were valid. Faith in God implied for him willingness to die
for the independence of Judea.
Josephus understood the sterling quality of Simeon's faith;
he also realized how completely he himself lacked it. He had
a deep love for the Jewish people and considered them in
many respects unique among the nations of the world; even
as apostate in Rome he could write warmly in their defense.
He knew, however, that if ever he should be confronted with
a choice between loyalty to his people and the satisfaction of
his ambition, he would not hesitate; he would reject his peo-
ple and follow his career. Josephus could not doubt that the
keen and discerning president of the Sanhedrin was aware
both of his inner vacillation and of the probable outcome.
The battle between the two men forms one of the most
interesting chapters in Josephus's autobiography. It is a pity
that, not having his opponent's account of the proceedings,
we must rely altogether on the colored, ex parte statement
56 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
of one of the contenders. Yet the main facts emerge with
sufficient clarity.
When Josephus arrived in Galilee, he was determined to
rid himself of his two colleagues. To accomplish this purpose
he practiced the most careful self-abnegation, while they in-
dulged in self-enrichment. As priests, they accepted the tithes
of the produce; he refused to do so. 74 He would not accept
even gifts. Rather amazingly, he takes the trouble to inform
us that "he preserved every woman's honor." The result was
that he was soon in a position to dismiss his fellow commis-
sioners, send them back to Jerusalem and install himself as
sole governor of Galilee.
His remarkable administrative and organizing ability soon
won him the loyalty of the whole countryside; and he might
have begun to give his attention to his chief duty, resistance to
the approaching Roman legions, had he not been worried
about one man, John, son of Levi, of Gishcala. This wealthy
oil merchant, a personal friend of Simeon ben Gamaliel, 75
submitted outwardly to Josephus but mistrusted him in his
heart. Perhaps he resented the intrusion of the priest of Jeru-
salem into the affairs of his province. A native of Galilee, he
may have felt that neither he nor his fellow provincials
needed the guidance of a townsman; indeed, he may even
have aspired to the governorship. True, he had opposed the
revolution at first; but so had Josephus and so had the high
priest, Hanan. Having joined the revolution, he was prepared
to risk everything for its success. He was not so certain about
Josephus and Hanan. The metropolitan townsmen, notor-
iously able to conceal their feelings, were always more than a
match for a simple Galilean.
John decided to oppose Josephus by force. With his usual
wit and courage Josephus escaped him; and John appealed to
IN THE DEPTHS 57
his friend, Simeon ben Gamaliel, as head of the Sanhedrin,
charging that Josephus planned to become dictator.
Simeon, who had watched the growth of Josephus's author-
ity and popularity with anxiety and fear, was only too ready
to interfere. What if the governor of Galilee should decide to
march on Jerusalem instead of against the Romans ? He could
easily impose his terms on the Sanhedrin; and, ambitious as
he was, he might demand supreme power. He might declare
himself a second Maccabee. Whether he could defeat the
Romans was problematical, but there could be no question of
his success against his superiors. When Simeon approached
the high priest Hanan with John's appeal for intervention,
tribal loyalty asserted itself and Hanan refused to participate
in action against his fellow-priest. Simeon outwardly accepted
Hanan's view but secretly contrived with John's brother to
win Hanan to their side by a display of special friendship.
Before long Hanan the high priest had agreed to send a com-
mission composed of two patricians and two plebeians to
examine the charges against Josephus and ultimately, doubt-
less, to supersede him.
The mission was futile. Had Simeon himself come, he
might have beaten Josephus at this game. His agents, acting
under directions which could not provide for every con-
tingency, were powerless before the daring and shrewd young
governor. Their first letter to him was a hypocritical invita-
tion to join them for a consultation regarding John of Gish-
cala. But Josephus plied the messenger with drink, learned
the true purpose of the commission, replied courteously but
firmly that he could not leave his post, and invited the Com-
mission to come to him. Simeon failed, apparently, to foresee
and plan for such an eventuality. Left to their own initiative,
the commissioners dropped all pretense and dispatched a
58 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
peremptory order to Josephus to appear before them. The
history of the following months is one of foxy schemes,
strange adventures, and hairbreadth escapes.
On one occasion the commissioners proclaimed a fast day,
and lured Josephus with but two guards into a synagogue.
When he was attacked, a tumult arose and he fled into the
street, only to meet John of Gishcala and his troops. Josephus
would have met his death then and there had he not quickly
discerned a passage through the crowded houses and rushed
to the Sea of Galilee where, seizing a boat, he escaped to a
friendly village. In the end, Josephus managed to get the
commissioners into his power and then, with a characteristic
gesture, he sent them back to Jerusalem under the "protec-
tion" of five hundred soldiers.
In the meantime, his own agents had been active in Jeru-
salem. Simeon and Hanan were accused of usurpation of
authority in sending the commission without consulting the
Sanhedrin. Josephus was vindicated, the dismissal of his col-
league was approved, and he became de jitre as well as de
facto sole governor of Galilee to justify in the fullness of
time every accusation which John of Gishcala had made
against him!
The story is soon told. Vespasian invaded Galilee, lured
Josephus into the fortified town of Jotapata, which he then
besieged and captured. Josephus and forty soldiers took refuge
in a cave where, realizing the hopelessness of their situation,
they decided to kill one another and cast lots for the order of
precedence in death. Josephus, as he shamelessly records, so
managed the lots that he was one of the last pair and then,
persuading his comrade of the folly of self-imposed death,
yielded to the Romans. Hearing that he was to be sent to
Nero in chains, he claimed the gift of prophecy and foretold
IN THE DEPTHS 59
Vespasian's election as Emperor of Rome. When in the course
of two years his words were fulfilled, he became the intimate
friend both of the new Emperor and of his son, Titus.
Throughout their lives he remained their companion, their
favorite and their tool. He was awarded the rights of a Roman
citizen, given a lodging in the former palace of Vespasian,
and provided with a pension, as well as a considerable estate
in conquered Judea. Josephus, in turn, undertook to write a
history of the triumph of the Flavians over his people. First
in Aramaic, "to deter," as he himself remarks, "others who
may be tempted to revolt"; 76 and then in Greek, "thinking it
monstrous . . . that while Parthians and Babylonians and the
most remote tribes of Arabia, along with our own country-
men beyond the Euphrates, and the inhabitants of Adiabene
were through my assiduity accurately acquainted with the
origin of the war, the various phases through which it passed
and its conclusion, the Greeks and such Romans as were not
engaged in the contest should remain in ignorance of these
matters." 7T It is to this work that we owe our detailed knowl-
edge of his people's calamity and his own perfidy.
For the moment, however, all this was part of the unborn
future. The result of the struggle between Simeon and Jo-
sephus was a draw. Simeon had been unable to oust Josephus,
but he had retained his own position. There was only one
loser: the Jewish people and the revolutionary government.
While the leaders were quarreling with one another, the
Romans were advancing and precious time was being lost.
Whether the Jews could have been victorious against Rome
under any conditions is more than doubtful. But certainly
harmonious cooperation of the saner elements might have
prevented the most violent extremists from gaining control in
60 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
the course of the following year, and might even have led to
some understanding with Vespasian.
During all this time, Johanan ben Zakkai remained in
Jerusalem as head of the vanishing peace party. He was as
near to the spirit of Hillel and Gamaliel as Simeon was re-
moved from them. A tradesman by vocation, 78 a scholar by
training, he brought into public life the pragmatic wisdom of
the market place and the theoretical insight and idealism of
the academy. But the two were not separate in his mind. His
idealism was permeated with practical understanding; his
practical endeavors were motivated by the highest ideals. An
erudite and ingenious student, a resourceful and determined
executive, an inspiring teacher, a stirring orator, a farsighted
statesman, an able judge, it was he who contributed more
than any other single individual to preserve rabbinic Judaism
when the Temple was destroyed.
He had demonstrated both his brilliance and his courage
when, as a young student not yet ordained, he had. through
ingenious cross-examination of witnesses persuaded the San-
hedrin to acquit a man about to be convicted of murder. The
case was recorded as a precedent, and is preserved to this day
in the Mishna. 79
The fundamental principle of Johanan's policy as Ab Bet
Din was the maintenance of peace and the development of
Jewish learning. Never did he waver, even for a moment, in
his opposition to the rebellion, which he felt was destined to
bring destruction on the people, the sanctuary, and the land.
The romantic nationalism which was moving men to un-
heard-of deeds of heroism and self-sacrifice appeared to him
altogether evil and irrational. Messianism was useful as a
consolatory doctrine; it was pernicious as a guide to practical
policy. He put this thought in vivid, concrete terms which
IN THE DEPTHS
6l
even the simplest peasant could understand. "If you are about
to plant a tree/' he said, "and someone tells you that the
Messiah has come, finish your work and then go forth to
meet the Messiah"! 80
When, heedless of the sage's advice, the people rushed head-
long into war, he warned them to be in no hurry to wreak
their vengeance on the Roman sanctuaries. "Do not destroy
the heathen temples," he said, "lest it turn out that you are
actually building them. You destroy temples of brick, and
will be required to restore them with stone; you destroy
temples of stone, and will be required to restore them with
wood." 81 He was vehement against those super-patriots who
tried to compel the unwilling to join the army. Military cour-
age, he held, was a virtue hardly commended in Scripture.
The faint-hearted is not only excused from battle, "but in
order to shield him from any possible insult, others are sent
home with him the newly married, he who has just pur-
chased a house, and he who has recently planted a vine-
yard." 82
Johanan's opposition to war had nothing in common either
with Agrippa's admiration for the Romans, or Josephus's and
Hanan's fear of them. He loved his people with as much
fervor as Simeon ben Gamaliel himself; and he was as firm
in his faith as the most devoted zealot. It seemed to him, how-
ever, that the aims of the revolution were irrelevant to life.
Anticipating one of Akiba's fundamental teachings, 83 Jo-
hanan held that the most important aspect of living was the
study of the~Torah. And he could not see how that could be
better promoted in an independent state than in a Roman
province.
He realized, of course, that his devotion to the Torah was
in a sense a flight from the troubles of the world. It was not.
62 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
however, an escape from reality into dreams, but rather from
dreams and shadows into the only reality. "If you have studied
much Torah," he remarked to his disciples, "take no pride,
for study is the purpose of your creation." 84 When a priestly
family whose members were dying in their youth asked for
his advice and help, he hinted that avarice might be the cause
of their troubles and suggested that they could find heal-
ing in devotion to the Torah. Recalling that the sons of Eli,
the famous priest of Shiloh, were denounced for their greed,
he said to them, "Perhaps you come from the same family;
study the Torah, and you will live." 85 There could be no
more thorough cure for mundane ambition than study.
Realizing how urgent was the need for learning in the
provinces, Johanan settled in Galilee, where for eighteen years
he struggled to establish an academy. But his rationalism
evoked no response in the Galileans. His appeal to study the
Torah seemed as irrelevant to them as their Messianic dreams
to him. In despair he returned to Jerusalem, foretelling in his
last address to the provincials the outbreak of the revolution
and its disastrous consequences. "Galilee, Galilee," he said,
"thou dost hate the Torah; thy end will be seizure by the
Romans." 86
The Ab Bet Din met no obstacles in establishing a school
for advanced studies in Jerusalem. All the younger men
flocked to him for instruction. Shammaites no less than Hillel-
ites attended his lectures and came under his influence. In-
deed, almost all the prominent scholars of the next generation
were his disciples. 87 In addition to the academy, where he met
the future teachers, he established a forum of public lectures
for the general populace. This lyceum attracted such large
audiences that they could meet only on the Temple mount,
IN THE DEPTHS 63
finding protection from the hot and dazzling Palestinian sun
in the shade of the vast Temple porticoes. 88
Some of the fragments of Johanan's addresses were memo-
rized by the hearers and preserved for future generations. On
one occasion he asked: "Why is it forbidden to use iron in the
preparation of the stones of the altar? Because iron is the
element out of which the sword, the instrument of human
suffering, is forged, while the altar is the instrument of
human reconciliation with God. It is not fit that the sword
should have power over the altar. Consider then," he con-
tinued, "if the stones of the altar, which can neither see, nor
hear, nor speak, are protected from the sword because they
serve to reconcile Israel to God, how much more will those
who study the Law be free from all evil?" 89
The further development of both the academy and the
lyceum was interrupted by the outbreak of the revolution in
the year 66. Johanan was already an old man. 90 He had
attained such a position in the community that his pacifist
teachings were heard with tolerance and even respect, though
they ran counter to the waves of popular emotion. No one
dared injure or repress him. The Herodian Romanophiles
were in peril of their lives from the beginning of the insurrec-
tion; the moderate leaders of the war party, like Hanan the
high priest, met their death when the extremists came into
power; but Johanan was left unmolested. Everyone knew that
there was nothing selfish in his opposition to the struggle;
his courage, his patriotism and his willingness to suffer death
for his country were unquestioned. His devotion to the Torah
might be rejected as the eccentric vagary of an impractical
academician; yet even in the moment of their severest con-
demnation of his ideas the people must have felt instinctively
that there was truth in them*
64 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Finally, in the summer of the year 68, Vespasian, having
conducted a typical colonial war against the Jews, reducing
their cities one by one, was ready to lay siege to Jerusalem,
their sole remaining stronghold. The conditions in the city
were indescribably bad. Two years of nervous strain had
robbed both the masses and their leaders of reason and self-
control. With their common enemy almost at the walls, the
factions fought one another, destroying the treasures of food
essential to protect the city against the siege, slaying able
leaders and condemning as traitors all who violated the least
of their regulations. The astute Roman, realizing what strife
was raging in the capital, had purposely delayed his attack,
lest he force the enemies to unite against him. He was quite
willing that the Jews should work havoc with one another
and spare his legions the trouble of destroying them. When,
however, the news arrived of a revolt against Nero in the
west, Vespasian, mindful of Josephus's prophecy and his own
secret ambition, decided to end the Palestinian war with all
possible speed. He encircled Jerusalem, cut off all its com-
merce with the rest of the country and prepared to starve the
inhabitants into submission.
This was a difficult moment for Johanan ben Zakkai and
his colleagues. They had hitherto abstained from active par-
ticipation in the rebellion, and had also refused to hold any
communication with the Romans. But now a new situation
confronted them. The city could not be saved. Even if the
Romans should fail to make a breach in its walls, famine and
thirst must ultimately compel surrender. And then what
would happen? Destruction and rapine, cruelty and violence,
slaughter of the men, violation of the women and enslave-
ment of children. The horrible aftermath of a prolonged
siege when the soldiers, finally liberated from their discipline
IN THE DEPTHS 65
and restraint, would be permitted to do their will in' the city
was only too vivid in the minds of all the people. Could any-
thing be done to avert the fearful disaster ?
Johanan called a secret conference of his nephew, Ben
Betiah, one of the revolutionary leaders, and his two foremost
disciples, Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, a nationalist, and Joshua ben
Hananya, a peace lover. 91 Ben Betiah admitted jthe desperate-
ness of the situation, but he could do nothing. He and his
colleagues were enmeshed in a net of their own weaving.
They had stimulated the mob spirit with their demagogic,
warlike harangues until the frenzied people would no longer
listen to the sober truth. If anyone were to reveal the futility
of further struggle against the Romans, he would be repaid
for his trouble with instant execution. Even those who knew
the facts would join in stoning such a candid and realistic
adviser. Josephus had been almost slain when he suggested to
his fellow captives that they surrender to the Romans; what
would happen to the leaders of Jerusalem if they made such a
proposal ?
Since the earlier foolhardiness and the present timidity of
the rebel chieftains had sealed the doom of Jerusalem, there
was but one thing to do to save the Torah. A plan was
evolved requiring utmost courage and almost unbelievable
self-control. Johanan was to feign illness, then death; and to
be taken out of the city by his disciples, as if for burial. He
was then to seek out Vespasian and obtain permission to estab-
lish a new academy in one of the provincial cities already
under Roman control.
The scheme was full of dangers. The revolutionaries were
on guard against any attempt to desert to the Romans. They
permitted no one to leave the city even to bury the dead. "For
burying a relative, as for desertion, the punishment was death;
66 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
and one who granted this boon to another instantly stood in
need of it himself." 92 The bodies were, presumably, thrown
immediately outside the walls and left there to putrefy in the
hot Palestinian sun. Special permission might, probably, be
obtained for the interment of so great a sage as Johanan ben
Zakkai. But would not the revolutionaries want to make cer-
tain of his dqath?
In spite of all perils the plan was carried out with the
utmost precision and success. No one but Johanan's two dis-
ciples, Eliezer and Joshua, were permitted to approach him
during his "illness" or to tend the body after "death." He
was placed on a bier (coffins were not used for interment in
ancient Palestine) hidden from the eyes of the guards only
by the death clothes, which completely covered every part
of his body, including the face. Lest the absence of the odor
of death, especially noticeable in the warm Palestinian climate,
arouse suspicion, a piece of animal meat was hidden under
the shroud.
Thus Johanan was borne through the narrow streets
prone, motionless, hardly daring to breathe. Days of practice
had given him control of every muscle; even his eyelids did
not betray the slightest quiver. Followed by wailing crowds,
Eliezer and Joshua, who carried the bier, made their way to
the city gate nearest the cemetery. No one interfered with
them until they tried to pass the guards. Wondering, perhaps,
at the temerity of the disciples who were willing to expose
themselves to Roman missiles in order to bury their master,
and wishing to make sure that death was not feigned, the
soldiers said to Ben Betiah, "Let us stab him."
"How can you?" he replied. "People will say, 'The revolu-
tionaries have violated the body of the Master/ "
"Let us at least push him," they said.
IN THE DEPTHS 67
"People will still say, "The revolutionaries have pushed the
body of the Master.' "
Ben Betiah's apparent sincerity convinced the guardsmen,
and the bier was allowed to pass through the gate.
Once out of the city, Johanan was removed from the bier,
and he made his way to the Roman commander. In spite
of his keen insight, Johanan could hardly have realized what
importance Vespasian attached to his surrender. Roman im-
perial policy demanded not merely the subjugation of the
Jews but also their reconciliation. Palestine lay within striking
distance of Rome's traditional enemy, the Parthian Empire,
and in even closer proximity to the restive tribes of Arabia,
Mesopotamia and Armenia. There were widely scattered
Jewish communities throughout the Roman Empire. Any dis-
turbance in Judea might lead to repercussions, the ultimate
results of which could hardly be foretold. Indeed, it was the
likelihoo'd of such widespread riots which had encouraged the
rebels. "The whole of the Eastern Empire," Josephus tells us,
"was in the balance." 93 It was essential that the Romans regain
the sincere loyalty of the defeated people and that they sepa-
rate Palestine from the Diaspora. How better could the
Romans achieve this double purpose than by a demonstra-
tion of respect for Judaism at the moment when they were
crushing the rebellion?
These considerations explain Titus's concern for the sacri-
ficial worship during the siege of Jerusalem and his anxiety
to spare the Temple when the city fell into his hands. 94 A
declaration of allegiance by a leading rabbinical sage was cer-
tainly an asset which the Romans could not afford to despise.
Vespasian must have known enough of Jewish life to be able
to distinguish between the pro-Romanism of Agrippa II, the
opportunism of Josephus and the idealism of Johanan; and to
68 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
realize that of the three only Johanan could exert any wide-
spread pacific influence.
Unaware of the full extent of his power, Johanan dared
not ask too much of the Roman commander. When Vespasian
asked, "What shall I give thee?" he was, doubtless, amazed
to hear that the aged scholar had undergone all his trials and
risked his life for no greater boon than permission to establish
an academy! The modest request was immediately granted.
Johanan decided to establish his academy at Yabneh, a city
on the Mediterranean coast which Vespasian had already
begun to populate with deserters from the Jewish ranks.
Never had Johanan shown himself a more clear-sighted states-
man than in making this choice.
The city consisted of two parts, a port and an inland bor-
ough. It was an important commercial center; but what was
even more significant, it lay in the richest part of Judea, the
district to which many refugees from Jerusalem would in-
evitably turn when their city was destroyed. They could expect
to find little help in the hill country, where the farmers were
barely able to subsist. Some would rush to foreign lands, such
as Egypt and Babylonia, and to Galilee; but most of them
would seek the nearer coastal plain. Within a short distance
from Yabneh, was the city of Ludd, where many might find
employment; there were the neighboring villages of Gimzo,
Bene Berak, and Emmaus, where they could obtain some
shelter. It was obvious that this district was destined to be the
future center of Judea, and necessarily, therefore, of Judaism.
In this warm and beautiful coast country there was no need
for a building to house the proposed academy; Johanan either
purchased or obtained a vineyard as a meeting place. When,
two years later, Jerusalem fell into the hands of the besiegers,
the school at Yabneh was ready to receive the refugee students
IN THE DEPTHS 69
and teachers. Johanan's position of favor with the- Roman
generals made his school a safe retreat; he alone had a work-
able program for reconstruction. Above all, time had vindi-
cated his views, and pointed to him as the spiritual guide of
the generation. Simeon ben Gamaliel had died during the
last year of the war and many of the other Shammaites had
gone into retirement. But a number joined the Hillelites and
became followers of Johanan.
Johanan was now ready for a more daring step. He de-
clared the assemblage at Yabneh the true Sanhedrin of all
Israel, the authorized successor of the body which had met
for centuries in the "Chamber of Hewn Stones." Character-
istically, he made this momentous announcement not in any
formal legislative or executive decree, but judicially, in con-
nection with a practical issue. The question before him con-
cerned the ancient ritual of sounding a ram's horn (shojar)
on New Year's Day. This ceremony had been observed for
centuries both at the Temple and in the synagogues. There
was this difference, however; the Temple ritual was carried
out whether New Year's Day occurred on Sabbath or week
days; the synagogue service of the ram's horn could be ob-
served only if New Year's Day occurred during the week.
It happened that at the time when Johanan was looking
about for some dramatic method of establishing the prestige
of Yabneh, New Year's Day fell on a Sabbath. Johanan im-
mediately recognized the opportunity. If the shojar were
sounded at the New Year's services, as had been done at
Jerusalem, that would be a formal declaration that Yabneh
had succeeded Jerusalem as the center of the Jewish world.
He made the necessary preparations for the ceremony. When,
on New Year's Day, the priests who were jealous of the pre-
rogatives of the destroyed Temple raised objections to his
70 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
plans, he refused to argue with them until the services were
concluded. "We will sound the shofar, and then we will dis-
cuss the Law," he said. When they tried to open the argument
after the services, he said, "The shofar has been sounded in
Yabneh; a precedent has been established; there is no further
room for discussion." 95
And indeed this was no time for academic debate. The sur-
vival of rabbinic Judaism depended in large measure on the
recognition of Yabneh, and this recognition could not be
demonstrated more effectively and dramatically than by en-
dowing the new academy with the ritual prerogative of the
old Sanhedrin. It was not, however, the clever retort that won
the day, but Johanan's immense spiritual power.
The "Vineyard of Yabneh," in which the conclave met,
became as famous and important as the "Chamber of Hewn
Stones." Though the conclave was destined to meet there for
only sixty years, while other centers of learning persisted for
centuries, the Vineyard of Yabneh holds a permanent, and
unequaled, place in Jewish tradition, for it was there that
Judaism was saved in its direst crisis. Although Johanan appar-
ently refused to accept the tide of Nasi and remained merely
Ab Bet Din, he came to occupy the position which had been
held by Gamaliel I. He, too, was given the title Rabban. He
guided the people through the difficult period of the recon-
struction, carrying on negotiations with Rome and maintain-
ing the loyalty of the scattered Jewish communities. Under
him, as in the time of Agrippa and the Maccabees, factional-
ism once more disappeared. Only now it was not the common
prosperity, but the common adversity, that made the people
forget their quarrels.
Curiously, Johanan was apparently dissatisfied with his
achievements. Like other intellectually creative personalities.
IN THE DEPTHS
he considered his practical endeavors unsuccessful. He, did not
realize the full significance of the academy he had founded,
and the conclave he had reorganized. He could not foresee
that these institutions were destined to more enduring glories
than the Temple had achieved. Indeed when one of his dis-
ciples asked him how Israel could obtain forgiveness from
God, now that it had lost its Temple, he no longer mentioned
study. "There is another means of atonement," he replied,
"lovingkindness, for it is written, 1 desire lovingkindness
rather than sacrifice.' " 96 He was approaching his ninetieth
year, he would soon have to give an account to God for his
lifework. Had he fulfilled his mission? Repeatedly he asked
himself whether more determined efforts to prevent the rebel-
lion, or more urgent appeals to Vespasian during the war,
might not have saved the country and the Temple. He re-
called with bitter pangs of conscience the remarkable story
of Hezekiah and Isaiah, in whose time Jerusalem was saved
from the Assyrian, and wondered why he and his colleagues
had been unable to save it from the Roman. Was he less
righteous than Hezekiah had been? Had he prayed less
fervently? Had he acted less wisely, or less energetically?
When he fell into his last illness these painful thoughts
brought tears to his fading eyes. His disciples, seeing him
weep, cried out, "Light of Israel, Pillar of Strength, Mighty
Anvil, why dost thou weep?"
"Alas," he replied, "if I were being taken for judgment
before a mortal human king, who could only be angry with
me, or imprison me, or kill me for a time, I should weep;
how much more reason have I to weep when I am about to
appear for judgment before the Holy One, blessed be He,
the King of kings, who can impose anger, imprisonment and
death for all eternity." 97
72 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Suddenly a new radiance came over his face. The tears
ceased and he smiled happily. All was well. His work had
been approved. Before him, regal and majestic, happy and
welcoming, he saw the very king whom he had so long wished
he might have emulated Hezekiah himself ! Those who stood
about Johanan and watched him focus his gaze on vacancy
must have thought his mind was wandering. They were
wrong; he was as lucid and practical as ever. He calmly made
the necessary preparations for the end. "Remove the vessels
from the house so that they may not be defiled when I die,"
he said. And then, in the same clear tones, "Set a chair for
Hezekiah, King of Judah, who has arrived." 98
It was shortly after this event that Akiba appeared at the
Vineyard of Yabneh, seeking higher rabbinic instruction.
III. AMONG THE FOOTHILLS
TT THEN Akiba came to Yabneh, Johanan's place was still
VV vacant. 1 Yet so firmly had the academy been estab-
lished that there was no interruption in its activity. Nor had
Johanan's death brought any diminution to its prestige. On
the contrary, its position seemed higher than that of any
earlier council. Its predecessor, the Sanhedrin of the "Chamber
of Hewn Stones," had always stood below the Temple in its
influence on the people, both within Palestine and outside of
it. The destruction of the Temple and, with it, the last vestiges
of hereditary ecclesiastical authority, had enabled the scholars
to come into their own. Jewish learning offered its devotees
not only the deferred rewards of Paradise, but immediate
returns of honor, prestige and influence. The dangers of
earthly temptation were recognized by the teachers. They
said: "Perhaps you may say, 'I will study that I may become
wealthy, or that I may be called Master, or that I may receive
divine reward'; therefore Scripture commands you to love the
Lord thy God." 2
The warning may have been needed by disciples; it was
altogether unnecessary for the sages. Nowhere, certainly,
could selfless love for God and the Torah be found in such
measure as among these scholars and teachers. Neither ma-
terial rewards nor the promise of glory could move them from
the path which they had set before themselves: the interpre-
tation of the Law according to their best understanding. In
many respects they formed the most brilliant and illustrious
73
74 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
governing body the Jewish people ever possessed. Never before
or since, have so much erudition and acumen, such a mixture
of statesmanship and scholarship, been found in any single
group. The assembly of the scholars had become a Jewish
senate, a far more spiritual replica of the mighty Roman legis-
lature. Judaism, which Simeon the Righteous, had transformed
from an aristocracy into a nomocracy, had reached the form
it was to keep for a thousand years, a sophocracy or govern-
ment by sages.
It was easy to enter the Vineyard where the scholars
gathered for their deliberations. There were no guards at the
gate; the sessions were held in public; the discussions were
open. When questions of grave importance arose, requiring
an executive session, the scholars would meet in trie mansion
of one of the wealthy members of the community, preferably
in an upper chamber, where their deliberations could not be
overheard. But such occasions were unusual; most frequently
the scholars took both the contemporary community and
future generations into their confidence. Differences of opinion
were announced and remembered; opposing arguments were
heard and refuted. The tone of the discussions was generally
calm. Indeed it was customary for the presiding officer or
lecturer to speak in so low a whisper that an attendant, stand-
ing by him, had to repeat his words aloud for the benefit of
the audience. But sometimes the sages would forget them-
selves; the debate would become heated, and even personal.
This was specially true when the provincial scholars, accus-
tomed to instant obedience in their homes, had to defend their
views against the better-mannered and more completely con-
trolled plebeians.
It must have been with a surging and violently beating
heart that Akiba approached the gate behind which the con-
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 75
clave sat. Within a few hours' journey of that Vineyard, his
former colleagues, the shepherds, were still watching their
flocks. He was about to leave them forever, to pass into a new
and unknown world, the world of the men whom only half
a dozen years earlier he had bitterly hated.
We may imagine what humility and bewilderment seized
him as he entered the enclosure and viewed the scene before
him. With their backs toward him sat rows upon rows of
students and disciples, most of them far younger than himself,
listening intently and trying to memorize each argument and
decision. Farther in front, in a wide semi-circle, facing the
audience and himself, sat the great sages, the foremost leaders
of his people, the authoritative interpreters of God's will to
man. Akiba could hardly have been conscious of them as
separate individuals; all he could discern was a series of keen,
intelligent faces. Some were clean shaven, some were bearded;
of the latter, most were gray, a few were still black-haired.
Above each forehead could be seen the huge, black, cubical
phylactery which, projecting vertically upward and glistening
in the semi-tropical sun, overshadowed all the natural features
by its prominence and gave the whole face a spiritual, other-
worldly appearance. The rest of the sages' bodies were swathed
and enshrouded in their characteristic garments, the rabbinic
Gulta, a vast, striped, rectangular woolen cloak, covering the
head, hanging loosely over the shoulders and extending to the
very sandals on the feet, its blue and white fringes trailing
from its four corners in easy disarray.
As Akiba gazed on these men, in wonder and admiration,
it must have seemed to him that they looked less like living
men than like sacred embodiments of the Law. Yet a few
moments' observation showed the great diversity and contrast
to be found in this world in miniature.
76 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Here were wealthy landowners and halfstarved artisans,
ambitious careerists and self-denying saints, ardent patriots
and cosmopolitan internationalists, uncouth peasants and
polished townsmen. There were among them Tarfon, the
wealthy, good-humored humanitarian, but direct and brusque
priest, who in a year of famine betrothed himself to three
hundred women so that he might enable them to share in
his ecclesiastical emoluments; 3 Samuel the Little, whose
epitaph was to be that he was fit for prophecy; 4 Jose Ha-
Kohen, whose extravagant saintliness (fortunately overridden
by his colleagues) forbade him to attend his wife's funeral
which occurred on the eve of Passover, lest, becoming defiled,
he should be unable to offer the paschal sacrifice; 5 Zadok, the
wealthy ascetic, who had fasted daily for forty years to obtain
Divine pardon for the Temple, and who achieved subsidiary
fame as the man who always chose the severer forms of a
disputed ritual; 6 Nahum of Gimzo, equally famous for his
learning, his poverty and his cheerful resignation in the face
of the most dreadful personal disasters; 7 Pappias ben Judah,
that strange mixture of simplicity and worldliness, whose,
anthropomorphitic ideas of God Akiba was destined to de-
nounce, and who, in turn, advised Akiba against undergoing
the risk of martyrdom for the sake of the Torah; 8 Judah ben
Baba, the sickly, perhaps tubercular, saint, whose only sin
consisted in the possession of a goat (an animal forbidden in
the country as an omnivorous pest) which he needed to supply
him with warm milk. 9 There were others, of inferior reputa-
tion, but not of inferior interest, such as Judah the Baker,
Huzpit the Announcer, and Yeshebab the Scribe. There may
even have been present some of the Galilean scholars like
Hanina ben Teradyon, and Halafta, the father of the more
famous Jose ben Halafta, who, living in the distant province,
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 77
undoubtedly attended some of the more important meetings
of the conclave.
Obscure among the others were to be recognized Gamaliel,
the son of the late Simeon ben Gamaliel, whom the conclave
wished to elect as Nasi, and his brother-in-law, Simeon
ben Nethanel, the illiterate am horctrez, who had finally de-
cided to enter the academy out of respect for his wife's family.
Two younger men who were to play an important role in
Akiba's life were probably still among the pupils: Eleazar ben
Azariah, the charming, polished and eloquent aristocrat who
traced his ancestry back to Ezra the Scribe; 10 and Elisha ben
Abuyah, destined to achieve unique and hateful preeminence
as scholar, apostate and traitor. 11
In the center of the whole magnificent group sat the two
men who had helped Johanan ben Zakkai found the academy:
Eliezer ben Hyrkanos and Joshua ben Hananya. Nothing
could more dramatically have illustrated the composite nature
of Pharisaism and the Sanhedrin than the juxtaposition of
these two leaders, alike in their erudition and piety, but differ-
ing from one another in every other aspect of material and
spiritual life. Eliezer, the foppish, rich landowner who, reared
as an am ho-arez, had fled from his father's house in order
to study the Torah, and had finally attained such proficiency
that Johanan had compared him to "a well-lined cistern which
never loses a drop"; and Joshua ben Hananya, ungainly in
form and plain of face but possessed of remarkable wit and
a melodious voice, a temple singer who, when Jerusalem
was destroyed, became a needle-maker, and in the midst of
direst poverty, in a soot-covered hovel, pursued his studies
until he had mastered not only Jewish learning but the secular
sciences of mathematics and astronomy.
Recent events had impressed on this gathering of types so
78 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
varied in their gifts, proclivities, temperaments and social
standing the supreme necessity of union. Nevertheless, the
cleavage between the patrician and the plebeian traditions,
which had been sharply marked in Jerusalem before its de-
struction, was bound to persist in the new center. For the
second reading of the Shema (the scriptural passages pre-
scribed for morning and evening recitation), Eleazar ben
Azariah and Tarfon reclined; their colleagues did not. 12
Eliezer ben Hyrkanos insisted that if a circumcision occurred
on the Sabbath, the necessary utensils could be prepared on
the very day; Joshua ben Hananya maintained that they had
to be made ready on Friday. 13 Gamaliel would not send his
clothes to a pagan launderer after Wednesday, lest they be
washed on the Sabbath; the other Sages considered this to be
over-fastidious. 14
The apparent triviality of these differences should not mis-
lead us into disregard of the social interests to which they
owed their origin. Lying down to read the Shema was a cus-
tom which grew naturally out of the rural habit of early bed-
time; it was carried into the city by the landowning patricians.
The patricians, who permitted the preparation of utensils for
circumcision on the Sabbath, followed the precedent set by
the priests in the temple service and opposed by the plebeians
for many generations. The objection to sending one's clothes
to a pagan launderer who might wash them on the Sabbath
involved a conception of property and personality which was
abhorrent to the free proletariat. 15 It implied that one's posses-
sions were in a mysterious way a part of oneself, and that if
one's garment was being cleaned on the Sabbath, it was as
though one were oneself engaged in labor. One extremist
patrician was so fastidious with regard to such considerations
that he never intrusted a letter to anyone but a Jew, lest it be
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 79
carried or delivered on the Sabbath! The plebeians might have
raised no objection to this pedantry had it been limited to
rules about clothes and the Sabbath. 16 Unfortunately the divi-
sion of outlook applied also to living property, especially
slaves, as extensions of the personality of the owner. 17 In the
eyes of the plebeians such a doctrine was shockingly foreign
to the assertions of human equality and freedom, which they
considered an integral part of Judaism. 18
In this tumultuous and dazzling assembly at Yabneh, Akiba
turned first, we gather, to Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, perhaps be-
cause he too had entered on his studies when he was a mature
man. If this was the reason for Akiba's choice, it was a pitiful
miscalculation. For, then as now, opinion was divided on the
spiritual privileges which ought to be accorded to the poor.
With the Shammaitic school, whose traditions Eliezer fol-
lowed, it was a cardinal principle that the poor ought not to be
taught the Law; 19 that was a perquisite of affluence. At any
rate, Eliezer held that just as God had given the Law to a gen-
eration which was fed with manna, so later teachers should
accept as pupils only those who had no economic worries to
distract them. 20 The man whom Eliezer rejected, received,
like many others before him, a warm welcome from the poor
Joshua ben Hananya. Joshua, however, could hardly spare
sufficient time for the beginner, and therefore sent him to
Tarfon, who was of Akiba's own age and who became his
closest friend. 2 *
Legends are current concerning the privations which Akiba
and Rachel suffered during those first difficult years. For a
time, Akiba hired himself out as a laborer for part of the day.
But his meager earnings did not cover the barest necessities,
and on one occasion, her own and her husband's hunger
drove Rachel to sacrifice her hair for food. 22 Finally, they de-
8o AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
cided to live apart, presumably because Rachel was able to
obtain employment elsewhere. This separation, doubtless the
most difficult of their trials, lasted several years. 23
Akiba may thus be regarded as the founder of the peculiar
institution of married "monasticism" which, while it never
became very popular in Judaism, has exerted an influence
throughout the centuries. Many of Akiba's pupils followed
his example, and hardly more than a generation ago there
were groups of people in the small Lithuanian communities,
called perushim (separatists), who resurrected the ancient
custom. 24 After marriage, they would devote themselves com-
pletely to their studies while their wives supported them.
Rightly or wrongly, the talmudists believed that as married
men, students were less open to temptation than as celibates.
"He who has bread in his basket," they said in a rather coarse
metaphor, "is safer than he who lacks it." 25 Projecting their
manners into more ancient times, they described Moses him-
self as living apart from Zipporah, his wife, and they asserted
that the slighting remarks for which Miriam was punished
concerned this marital separation. 26
Akiba was earning his livelihood at the time, according to
the popular story, by gathering pieces of wood, half of which
he sold for his food, using the remainder for fuel. When his
neighbors, who were annoyed by the smoke, offered to buy
all the wood so that he could provide himself with oil, he
declined to sell it. "The wood is of great benefit to me," he
said, "I study by its light, I am warmed by its heat and I
'11 55 97
use it as a pillow.
When, in the day of final judgment, God tries the poor for
their failure to study the Torah, he will point, the sages say,
to the example of Akiba. If the poor protest that they had to
support their families, God will remind them that Akiba too
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 8l
had a wife and child and yet he studied. But the severity is
mitigated toward the end: the poor will be able to offer as
defense that their wives were not like Rachel! 28
Tarfon, who was both wealthy and generous, would gladly
have supported Akiba, but the latter was either too proud or
too pious to accept from his teachers anything but instruction.
Anxious to be of help, Tarfon at last offered him a loan for
investment in a field. Akiba, instead of buying the field, dis-
tributed the money among others who were more needy.
When, some months later, Tarfon said to him, "Have you
bought the property?" Akiba replied, "Certainly." "Did you
get a deed?" "Yes, and here it is," Akiba continued, as he
opened a book of Psalms and pointed to the verse: "He hath
dispersed, he hath given to the needy, his righteousness en-
dureth forever" (Ps. ii2:9). 29
It speaks much for the good-nature of Tarfon, and his
affection for Akiba, that he does not seem to have been an-
noyed at the generosity which Akiba practiced at his expense.
The super-piety which Akiba displayed in this incident was
characteristic of him during this early period of his student
days. Unable as yet to grasp the spirit of the Law, and yet
anxious to observe its last letter, he sometimes found himself
guilty of transgression through his ignorance. Once, for in-
stance, he found a dead body by the road. Having learned
enough to know that any passerby is under obligation to pro-
vide proper burial for an unidentified corpse, he lifted it up
and carried it four miles to the academy. When Eliezer and
Joshua saw him approach with his burden, they rebuked him:
"For every step you are guilty as though you had shed blood,"
they said. "A dead body must be buried where it is found,
not carried along the road to a more convenient place." 30
When the news of his father's death reached htm., he re-
82 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
fused to obey the rule which forbids mourners to wear the
phylacteries. Even in bereavement, he could not dispense with
these sacred symbols of devotion to God and the Law. Though
the people who came to comfort him removed their phy-
lacteries in accordance with the general custom, he did not
follow their example. 31
In general, Akiba declined to avail himself, at this time, of
any lenient interpretations of the Law. He always accepted
the severer view, whether it had been handed down by the
Shammaites or the Hillelites. 32 Later scholars, receiving this
tradition, were amazed, for in their time such practice was
condemned as unnecessary and unwarranted obscurantism.
They failed to recognize that the stories belong to the initial
stage of Akiba's student days, when he possessed the piety,
but not the learning, of the rabbi.
Tarf on's love for Akiba was the more remarkable because
it soon became evident that the disciple was destined to out-
rank the master. Early in his studies, Akiba uncovered an
intuitive feeling for the correct interpretation of Scripture and
tradition which amazed his colleagues. On one occasion he
maintained that priests with a physical blemish were not per-
mitted to sound the trumpet in the Temple. Hearing this,
Tarfon lost his temper and cried out, "Akiba, how long will
you continue to pervert the plain meaning of the Scriptures ?
I distinctly remember seeing my uncle, who was a lame priest,
sound the trumpet in the Temple."
"Perhaps, my master," Akiba said, "that happened during
the informal Sukkot celebration, which was not part of the
regular service?"
Tarfon, suddenly reminded 'of the true circumstances, could
not restrain his admiration. "I swear by the Temple service,
that you are right. Happy may Abraham be that he has such
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 83
a descendant as Akiba. Tarfon saw the event and forgot;
Akiba interprets the verse and arrives at the truth. Oh, Akiba,
whosoever parts from thee, parts from life itself!" 33
On another occasion, Tarfon cried out, "Akiba, to thee may
be applied the verse, 'He bindeth the streams that they trickle
not, and the thing that is hid bringeth he forth to light' (Job
28:11). The things which are hidden from the children of
men Akiba has brought into the light." 34
A certain rough playfulness which Akiba still retained out
of his untutored youth was forgiven him by most of his col-
leagues because of his brilliance. It seems that the young
scholar-priest, Eleazar ben Azariah, following the usual cus-
tom of his class, had been receiving the tithes which Scripture
specifically reserved for the Levites (Num. 18:21). The priests
justified this perversion of the Law by the claim that as
descendants of Aaron, who was a great-grandson of Levi,
they were also Levites, and entitled to Levitical emoluments
as well as to their own. The controversy had been argued with
much bitterness for centuries. So large was the income in-
volved, and so determined were the priests to retain it, that
some of them had not hesitated to mutilate the text of a pas-
sage in Nehemiah, 35 by adding a phrase asserting their right
to the tithe.
The Hasmoneans, whose victories over the Syrians had put
them into control of the government, naturally endeavored to
assist their fellow-priests in the assertion of these rights. But
in spite of the prestige and power of the family, the Levites
would not yield. Assisted by some of the plebeian scholars,
they denied that the priests could justly demand this special
Levitical tax. God had given them their own ecclesiastical
emoluments, the heave offering, universally paid, which con-
stituted an average tax of 2.5 per cent of all Palestinian
AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
products; the redemption money for all firstborn male chil-
dren; the firstlings of cattle; the first shearings of sheep; parts
of most sacrifices, and of every animal slaughtered for profane
use; and numerous gifts which reverted to them from the
Temple. 36 These protests were, however, ignored by the richer
and more powerful priests. Josephus, for instance, being a
priest, takes it for granted that the tithe must be paid to his
fellows, and repeatedly states this as the law. 137
Eleazar was thus following group precedent in his actions.
In vain did Joshua, who was a Levite, argue with him. Rich
as Eleazar was, and little as he needed this additional income,
he continued to collect the tithe, holding it a matter of loyalty
to his fellow-priests as well as an assertion of his own rights.
Akiba considered this procedure as unethical as it was un-
scholarly. He resorted to direct action. He had noticed that
one of the fields from which Eleazar received tithes had two
approaches, one leading to another field and a second open-
ing into a cemetery. When the time for tithing arrived, Akiba
simply closed the usual gate, and opened that leading into the
cemetery path. This effectually prevented Eleazar from com-
ing into the field, for as a priest he dared not enter a
cemetery. 38
Eleazar did not resent this trick; he told the story in the
academy, laughing at his own discomfiture. "Akiba walks
about with his tools, and how shall I get my living!" he
cried. 39
The tradition as he received it from Tarfon did not, how-
ever, satisfy Akiba. Tarfon, as we have seen, was really a
member of the patrician wing of the Pharisees, while Akiba's
sympathies were with the plebeian group. 40 When purely
humanitarian questions arose, the two scholars were generally
in agreement. They both said, for instance, that had they sat
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 85
in the Sanhedrin when it possessed the right of capital punish-
ment, they would never have condemned a man to death. 41
But when questions arose which involved social and economic
issues, the two men parted ways.
Perennial interest attaches to some of the questions which
divided the ancient scholars, even though they involve situa-
tions far removed from our times and activities. They offer
us the most vivid insight into the daily life of the ancients,
permitting us to see them at their work, at their play, in their
homes and in their houses of worship. Like archaeological
remains, they help us re-create the whole of a forgotten age.
When we analyze their arguments we realize, what must
concern us more nearly, how easy it is to create a facade of
rationalization about our personal prejudices and immediate
concerns, and we begin to wonder how much of our own
discussion is pure logic and how much is mere baroque. The
ancients, like ourselves, were entirely convinced that they were
proceeding objectively and with unerring dialectic; it never
occurred to them that, since the same dialectic led different
people to opposing conclusions, there was need for looking
beneath the surface of the argument into the opposing
interests which evoked it.
Tarfon taught, for example, that olive oil, like wine, may be
offered to the Temple as a voluntary gift without an accom-
panying sacrifice either of grain or animal. 42 This may seem a
reasonable rule to us, but in its own setting it involved a social
conflict. For while the vine could be grown by any Pales-
tinian farmer, rich or poor, the olive with its wide-spreading
roots could be cultivated economically only on large holdings.
This, and not any special fitness of the soil, accounts for the
fact that Galilee, which in the Second Commonwealth as in
the First was the home of vast estates, became famous for its
86 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
olives. 43 A century before Tarfon's time this class interest in
olives had led to bitter controversies between the Pharisaic
factions. The Hillelites had openly accused the Shammaites
of unfair and illegal leniency toward the rich. "Why," the
usually pacific Hillel had demanded of Shammai, "do you
insist that grapegatherers must be pure, and impose no such
restriction on olivegatherers ?" 44 Shammai's reply was not an
argument, but a threat. Indeed, he had no logical reason to
offer, for his interpretation of the Law was, in this instance,
based not on logic but on the inherited custom of his
followers.
Tarfon, who was quite unaware of the deeper prejudices
which prompted his interpretation of the Law, showed equal
partiality for the olive in his halakic decisions. He held, for
instance, that only olive oil might be used for the Sabbath eve
lights. 45 When he announced this rule in the academy,
Johanan ben Nuri, who was himself a Galilean and friendly
to the patricians, but remembered the days of his own poor
youth when oil was an expensive luxury, sprang to his feet
and cried: "What shall the Babylonian Jews do, who have
nothing but the oil of mustard seeds ? What shall the Median
Jews do, who have nothing but the oil of nuts? What shall
the Alexandrian Jews do, who derive their oil from radishes ?
And what shall the Cappadocian Jews do, who have no
vegetable oils at all, but only naphtha?"
It is against this background that we must envisage Akiba's
impatience with what seemed to him Tarfon's partiality to
the rich and their olive oil. It was well enough to permit a
poor man who wanted to bring a gift to God, but could not
afford a cow or a sheep, to send his wine instead; but a farmer,
who had room enough on his estates to raise olives, should
send a more suitable sacrifice than some oil.
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS 87
A second disagreement arose from the habit of some priests,
who could not use all the heave offering they received, to
plant the remainder. According to rabbinic law, whatever
grew from such seeds inherited their sacredness and could
therefore be eaten only by priests. Hence, Tarfon argued that
the gleanings of these fields could be gathered only by poor
priests. Akiba, however, maintained that this was a denial of
the just rights of the other poor, who were in the vast
majority. They could gather these gleanings, he said, and sell
them to priests. 46
Tarfon's special interest in the priests and the heave offering
led to another controversy between the two scholars. Rab-
binical Law provides that if a woman who has gone abroad
with her husband returns and says that he died, her word is
accepted and she is permitted to remarry. If, however, the
man had several wives, this permission does not apply to
those who have no direct and personal knowledge of his
death. Since these other wives may not marry, Tarfon holds
that they may continue to eat the heave offering if the hus-
band was a priest. Akiba, however, insists that since the hus-
band is probably dead, none of the wives may eat the heave
offering, the use of which the Law limits exclusively to priests
and their families. 47
These controversies are typical. Perhaps, however, one other
should be mentioned because it concerned the rights of the
Temple, which was no longer in existence.
The Law provides that a person who unwittingly uses any-
thing belonging to the sanctuary must make restitution accord-
ing to the benefit hie received, adding, however, one-fifth as
fine, and bringing a ram, worth two silver pieces, as sacrifice
of atonement (Lev. 5:15 ff). There were, however, occasions
when people were not clear in their own minds whether they
AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
had transgressed the Law at all. Perhaps they had two oxen
in their fields, one their own, the other the Temple's, and
they could not recollect which animal they had yoked to the
plow. Tarfon maintained that since there was some possibility
that Temple property had been employed profanely, the usual
payment, fine and sacrifice were obligatory. Akiba denied
this. 48
Joshua, to whom Akiba would naturally have turned for
further guidance, was too much the pacifist and compromiser
for the ardent student who at forty was still young to the
world. Frequently when Akiba thought the plebeian view
should be stated with vigor, Joshua would equivocate, com-
promise or yield to the powerful patrician teachers. 49 Joshua
must have shocked the plebeians, for instance, when he pub-
licly declared that only wealthy men could be entrusted with
judicial office. He found support for this truly remarkable
opinion in the phrase, "men of might," used by Jethro in
his enumeration of the essential qualifications for judges
(Exod. 18:21). "'Men of might,'" he said, "means, 'men of
property.' " Eleazar of Modin, priest and patrician as he was,
protested against such an anti-Pharisaic interpretation of the
Law. "The expression means only 'trustworthy people,' " 50
he maintained. We may be sure that it gave the plebeians
little pleasure to hear themselves defended by one of their
opponents and maligned by their own leader. Moreover,
Joshua relied almost entirely on tradition for his views and
hesitated to establish new plebeian principles of law; Akiba
sought a comprehensive statement of the plebeian philosophy
which could be applied to new cases as they arose.
Finding himself in fundamental disagreement with Tarfon
on the social issues of the day, and unable to follow the slow-
moving, good-humored, half cynical, easily satisfied Joshua,
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS
Akiba turned for inspiration to the brilliant, but compara-
tively unknown, Nahum of Gimzo, who owes his fame almost
entirely to the greatness of his illustrious pupil. Nahum's value
to Akiba lay less in his inherited traditions than in the new
method of interpretation which he himself had developed.
According to Nahum's system, every word in Scripture, and
indeed every letter, has significance. Even the particle ct which
indicates the accusative in Hebrew (but which sometimes has
the meaning "with") must be explained wherever it occurs.
Thus when Scripture says that God created the heavens (et
hashamayim) we must infer from that particle that other
objects or beings, unmentioned in the text, were created at
the same time. This principle was in later times taken over
from Akiba by his famous disciple, Aquila the Proselyte, who
renders each ct in Scripture by the Greek preposition syn
(with), even when that makes no sense.
Absurd as this must seem to us, it appeared altogether
logical to Nahum, Akiba, and their followers, who could not
attribute to the Scriptures anything less than perfect economy
of expression. In this they represented the plebeian tradition
of the day and the mental bias of the trading groups, which,
true to type, placed high value on the virtues of thrift, crafts-
manship and efficiency. When Akiba once derived from an
unnecessary Vav (the sixth letter in the Hebrew alphabet)
that the daughter of the priest who commits adultery should
be executed by burning, one of his colleagues cried out, "Shall
we burn this woman because you must find an interpretation
for your Vav?"^ Perhaps the accusation was unjust; for
Akiba had common sense, and juristic reasons for his opinions,
and only used the superfluous letters as pegs on which to hang
his views.
There was one verse which puzzled Nahum so much that
90 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
he almost abandoned the whole method he had developed.
This was the verse, "Thou shalt fear the Lord (et YHWH)
thy God." (Deut. 6.5) According to the system, the particle
et preceding the divine name in this sentence, signified that
some other being, too, ought to be feared, and yet who could
deserve equal reverence with God? The very suggestion was
heretical, and at the moment especially so because the Chris-
tians, a rapidly multiplying sect, were actually teaching that
their Messiah was God's equal. Painful as it must have been
for him, Nahum decided to reject the whole method. "Just
as I pleased God with my interpretations, so I will please Him
with my rejection of them," he said to his colleagues and
pupils. It was precisely at this time that Akiba came forward,
ready to save the verse and the method and pure monotheism.
"The particle et in this verse," he explained, "refers to the
scholars, who must be paid as much reverence as is due to
God Himself." 52
Akiba's association with Nahum continued for twenty-two
years. Long after he had become an illustrious scholar, he
would travel forth and back between the village of Gimzo
and the city of Yabneh, bringing to the sick old man the
news of the conclave, and taking back to his colleagues ideas
born out of these fleeting contacts.
Having mastered the plebeian doctrines of Joshua and
Nahum, Akiba decided to return to Eliezer, who had rejected
him in the first place. In this, he was moved by a number of
considerations. True, Eliezer was a patrician like Tarfon, and
indeed one of the bitterest partisans of that faction. But he
was everywhere recognized as the foremost talmudist of the
age, and Akiba could not consider his education complete
until he had studied under him. Moreover, since Akiba began
to study, he had been living in Ludd, the city of his first
AMONG THE FOOTHILLS
master, Tarfon; and there Eliezer, too, resided. The great
sage was thus easier to approach than he could have been in
some other town. Eliezer, who must have heard of Akiba's
brilliance and promise, did not this time refuse to admit him,
but neither did he "recognize" him. He taught him, together
with the other pupils, and listened to his arguments with
what patience he could muster. He refused, however, to take
special pains with him or to assign him any important place
in the school. Akiba, who never resented any personal affront,
sometimes lost patience with his intransigeant, traditionalist
master's unwillingness to hear an argument. He would then
rush to Pekiin, where Joshua lived, to pour out his complaints
and explain his views. 53 But the prudent, cautious sage would
give him only partial encouragement. He praised Akiba's
dialectic, but frequently supported Eliezer's decisions. "Your
reasoning is right," he would say, "but what can we do since
the tradition is fixed?"
We do not know how long Akiba remained associated with
Eliezer in this way. But it is said that after he had spent
thirteen years in study under his various masters, he decided
openly to challenge the patrician traditions of the Shammaites,
although his new master, Eliezer, was their foremost exponent
in the conclave.
IV. THE STEEP ASCENT
THE day had opened in its usual fashion in the conclave
at Yabneh. Eliezer had offered an opinion, and Joshua
had raised an objection. There was nothing to indicate that
the occasion would assume historical importance until Akiba,
still comparatively unknown outside the limited circle of his
teachers and their immediate acquaintances, stood up to oppose
the man who, according to Johanan ben Zakkai, outweighed
in learning the entire host of his contemporaries. What fol-
lowed has become a saga of scholarship, and the arguments,
even the invectives, used by the protagonists still echo wher-
ever the Jewish tradition is studied.
Characteristically, the question which precipitated the com-
bat was of purely academic interest at the moment. The Law
required certain sacrifices to be offered on Sabbaths and holi-
days, and it had always been agreed that the performance of
the labor connected with these duties necessarily superseded
the Sabbath and festival prohibitions. The priests maintained
further that not only was the actual work of sacrifice per-
mitted, but with it also all ancillary activities, such as sharpen-
ing knives and preparing fuel. This the plebeians vigorously
denied. The Temple had been in ruins for almost a quarter
of a century when Eliezer mentioned the priestly tradition
and defended it in the academy. He urged that since slaughter-
ing an animal a major activity was permitted, sharpening
a knife a minor activity must, by implication, certainly be
permitted. Joshua made a feeble attempt to answer this argu-
92
THE STEEP ASCENT 93
ment but, in his usual fashion, was about to retire from the
field, when Akiba stood up to voice his opinion.
It was probably expected that a single word from the master
would rout the beginner; to the amazement of the assembly,
Akiba gave as well as he got. Joshua, watching the fray from
the sidelines, could not resist the impulse to call out the verse
from Judges (9:38), "Behold the people whom thou didst
despise, go out, I pray thee, and make war against them!"
Eliezer fought back vigorously and ingeniously. "Does not
the Bible say," he shouted, " 'In its season' (Num. 28:1) ? And
does that not mean that sacrifices must be brought at their
specified times whether on the Sabbath or on week days?"
"Indeed," Akiba replied, "but show me where it says that
knives must be sharpened in the appointed seasons."
To this there was no possible response, and Eliezer, seeing
himself refuted, could only cry out: "Akiba, you have refuted
me from the laws of slaughter, by slaughter shall you meet
your death!"
Akiba replied simply, "My master, you yourself have taught
me that purification, which is also a minor activity, must not
be done on the Sabbath; and I infer from your words that
the same law applies to other activities which are ancillary to
the sacrifice." 1
We may conjecture, with much plausibility, that this first
public argument won Akiba his ordination and, with that,
full membership in the conclave. Surely the scholar who could
refute Eliezer ben Hyrkanos in debate could no longer be
called a pupil; he was a Master of the Law. By virtue of his
new status, he was not only a recognized authority on all
ceremonial questions; he could also sit as judge in matters
of civil law, which were usually presented before three or-
dained teachers. He could also act as member of a court to
94 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
exercise criminal jurisprudence in so far as the Romans per-
mitted the Jewish community to enforce its law.
Both Akiba and Elie^er must have realized that this dis-
cussion was only an opening skirmish in the long-drawn-out
battle which life was forcing upon them. With unwearying
persistence, Akiba returned to the struggle each day, lying in
wait for any expression of Shammaitic opinion which he
might need to refute. 2 More than once when Joshua, the
titular leader of the plebeians, had yielded to Eliezer, Akiba
"sprang up" (the expression commonly applied to his action
at this time) to repulse the attack. 3 Whether the issue was one
of civil law or ceremonial observance, theological belief or
simple exegesis, the vigilance of Akiba was quick to perceive
the implication of opposed class interest behind the academic
facade.
During the eight or ten years which Akiba spent under the
tutelage of Joshua ben Hananya and Nahum of Gimzo, he
had become completely transformed; his interests now
transcended his provincial origin; he had absorbed the whole
plebeian outlook on life, in the form which centuries of
Hasidean, Pharisaic, and Hillelite thought had stamped upon
it. His manners were those of a polished gentleman; his
speech that of a cultivated townsman. His legislation pro-
tected plebeian interests, but it was expressed in terms of con-
crete legal rules and healthy, mature, sophisticated, urban
idealism. His political and theological ideals may be studied
with profit, in our own times, which, mutatis mutandis, have
so much in common with his.
Yet running through all which is permanently significant
in his thought, we continually find legal opinions which could
have no other aim than the increased prosperity of Jerusalem,
and especially of its workers and artisans. In his discussion of
THE STEEP ASCENT 95
such matters, Akiba exhibited a remarkable feeling and under-
standing for the economic interests of the capital which no
longer existed. Nothing can better illustrate the curious time-
lag of human thinking than the devotion of this scholar,
and even some of his later disciples, to needs which had dis-
appeared and might never again be recreated. True, Akiba
expected Jerusalem's speedy restoration, but the vision of the
future metropolis could hardly explain the passion with which
he came to the defense of positions traditionally held by the
plebeians of Jerusalem and yet were of no significance in his
own time.
In one of these discussions, Akiba endeavored to protect
Jerusalem's vested interest in the visiting crowds of pilgrims
which had contributed so greatly to its prosperity. Three
feasts brought into the sacred city tens of thousands of Jews
from every part of the world. Biblical law demands that every
Israelite present himself at the Temple thrice a year, but the
emphasis has always been on the Passover pilgrimage. Anyone
failing to come then is threatened with the penalty of being
cut off from his people (Num. 9:13), which was understood
in rabbinic times to mean early death without issue. It is
expressly stated, however, that the punishment does not apply
to such as live far from Jerusalem; they are still under obliga-
tion to come, but are not to be "cut off" if they fail to do so.
But, how far must one be from Jerusalem to be exempt? The
question had doubtless been debated while the Temple still
existed. The farmers who found the annual pilgrimage a
heavy burden were inclined to limit the zone. The Temple
priests, who gained little from the crowds who came into the
sanctuary, and who were wearied to death by the endless
series of sacrifices to be offered, agreed with them. So did the
patrician nobles of Jerusalem, who would have liked a quiet,
96 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
dignified festival at the Temple. The workers and the mer-
chants, however, who needed the custom of the pilgrims, were
moved to extend the obligation as far as possible. Eliezer,
reflecting the ancient rural and patrician view, maintained the
extreme opinion that "Only a person who is within the
Temple area and yet declines to offer the Passover sacrifice is
under the penalty of the Law." Akiba, whose sympathies were
entirely with the plebeians and the metropolitan traders and
artisans who had been associated with them, said that anyone
living within a radius of fifteen miles from the Temple must
attend. 4 Eliezer applied the same lenient principle, of course,
also to other festival pilgrimages, which he indeed practically
abolished. "I give praise," he said, "to the lazy men who do
not leave their homes during the festival periods, for it is
written, 'And thou shalt rejoice, thou and thy household' "
(Deut. 14 126) . 5
A second argument between Akiba and Eliezer gives us a
curious insight into the different materials used for writing
by the wealthy and the poor of Judea. Every Pharisee wore
on his head and on his arm, black leather phylacteries
(tephilin), containing little scrolls on which were inscribed
the four chapters of Scripture mentioning this rite. The most
pious and learned wore these phylacteries all day; others put
them on only for prayer.
The plebeians, who could afford only inferior grades of
ink and parchment for their tephilin, had to examine the
contents each year to be sure the writing had not faded. The
patricians used better and more durable materials, and could
dispense with these repeated inspections. From this difference
in circumstance emerged two views of the Law; the Hillelite
plebeians insisted that the tephilin must be examined once a
year, no matter what the materials used; the Shammaites
THE STEEP ASCENT 97
denied this. The subject had been debated in the Sanhedrin
as early as the time of Hillel and Shammai, and in the course
of the argument Shammai had exhibited his own phylacteries,
which he said he had inherited from his grandfather, as proof
of the durability of good ink and parchment. The issue had
remained unsettled at the time; now Akiba claimed that a
specific verse in Scripture corroborated the plebeian view. For
the Bible says: "And it shall be for a sign unto thee, upon
thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the
Law of the Lord may be in thy mouth, for with a strong
hand hath the Lord brought thee out of Egypt. Thou shah
therefore T^eep this ordinance in its season from year to year"
(Exod. I3I9). 6
"The passage can only mean," said Akiba, "that the phylac-
teries, which are the sign upon the hand and the memorial
between the eyes, must be examined each year in the proper
season."
Eliezer, representing the view of the Shammaites, said, "No,
the verse deals only with the observance of the Passover which
is the main subject of the chapter." 7
The difference between rich and poor with regard to their
writing materials was perhaps less important than with re-
gard to their landed property. The interest of the patricians in
the cultivation of olives, which had led to one of Akiba's
earliest controversies with Tarfon, formed the basis of an even
more prolonged and bitter discussion with Eliezer. Since the
olive had become the fruit par excellence of Galilee, 8 the
production of its oil in the prescribed "purity" involved serious
difficulties. Living at a distance from Jerusalem and the
Temple, the Galileans could hardly arrange to "cleanse" them-
selves when they became defiled by contact with the dead;
for that particular form of "impurity" could be removed only
AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
with the ashes of the red heifer which were kept in the
Sanctuary (Num. 19:1 ff). The Galileans, apparently, did
bathe to wash away minor impurities, 9 but in the eyes of the
scholars this did not mitigate the effects of the major im-
purity. Legally they were "impure" and their touch con-
taminated. What, then, was to be done about the olives which
they garnered? The Shammaites, who were especially con-
cerned with this question, had an easy solution. They pointed
to the verse in Leviticus (11:34) which denies that food can
become impure unless it is moistened. The plucked olives
were moist only with their own juice and, said the Sham-
maites, that liquid is not sufficient to render them susceptible
to impurity. The Hillelites asked why the juice of grapes and
all other fruits should be considered "preparation" for defile-
ment and not the juice of olives. No satisfactory answer was
given to this question, but the Shammaites insisted on their
i ft
position. u
This convenient rule did not, however, solve the whole
problem. What was the status of the oil derived from the
olives? The question was not merely academic and theoreti-
cal; nor did it concern only the super-pious who observed
the laws of purity after the Temple was destroyed. It had a
very practical importance, and involved vast property interests.
The heave offering which every Jewish farmer in Palestine
gave to the priest could be eaten only if it was pure. Obvi-
ously, if it was held that most of the olive oil produced in
Galilee was impure, the priests would lose a large fraction of
their income.
The situation was aggravated rather than mitigated by the
destruction of the Temple. While the ashes of the last red
heifer had somehow been saved and were available for purifi-
cation, they could be used only sparingly. Levitical impurity
THE STEEP ASCENT 99
thus became so widespread that the priests had to reconsider
the status of the heave offering of wine and other fruit juices,
as well as of olives.
Eliezer solved the whole problem with a sweeping declara-
tion that "liquids are not susceptible to any form of im-
purity." 11 The urgency which led to this decision is obvious
from the fact that it runs counter to a specific statement in
Scripture (Lev. 11:34) anc ^ certainly was opposed to the tradi-
tion of the day. It is especially noteworthy that Eliezer ben
Hyrkanos, who boasted that he never gave an opinion which
he had not received from his masters, 12 should have been the
author of this remarkable, and in a sense revolutionary, inno-
vation. The proof he offered as basis for his interpretation of
the Law effectually refutes him, as he himself must have
recognized. He maintained that his rule was a corollary of a
pronouncement made more than two hundred years earlier
by Jose ben Joezer, one of the earliest Pharisaic teachers, who
declared that the "liquids of the Temple slaughter-house are
pure." 13 Eliezer insisted that legally no distinction could be
drawn between the liquids which Jose ben Joezer mentioned
and others; if the old Pharisaic sage was correct so far as his
rule went, then all liquids were pure.
It is obvious that an opponent of Eliezer might argue with
equal, if not with greater, cogency that Jose ben Joezer's words
imply that other liquids arc impure. But Eliezer, like the
earlier Shammaites, did not listen to objections. Convinced,
doubtless, that the ruling was indispensable and justified, he
offered it to those who would follow him.
Akiba, however, was unmoved by the plight of priest or
provincial farmer. He knew that liquids had always been
considered impure, and he could see no good reason for mak-
ing a change in the tradition. On the contrary, he opposed
ioo AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
even the attempt made by his colleagues to effect a compromise
declaring liquids subject only to "rabbinical impurity."
An important difference regarding civil law had its origin
in the same opposition of interests. If a lender, having taken
a pledge for a loan, loses it, he can nevertheless, according to
Eliezer, recover the money due him by taking an oath to the
facts. Akiba insists that the pledge is not merely a token;
the borrower can say, "You lent me the money only on the
surety of the pledge; give me the pledge, and I will pay the
loan." 14 It must be borne in mind in justice to Eliezer that
loans in ancient Israel were not profit-making transactions;
they were simply favors. Yet Akiba holds that the poor bor-
rower obviously ought not to be compelled to pay a debt when
his pledge has disappeared.
A whole series of controversies had its origin apparently
in nothing more significant than the difference in bedtime
between town and country. City people who in ancient times,
as today, usually remained awake long after provincials had
gone to bed, were prepared to observe the Passover celebra-
tion at a correspondingly late hour. The Book of Jubilees
which, in part, represents peasant opinion, demands that the
Passover celebration be completed by the end of the first
watch in the night, i.e. before 10 P.M. 15 Eleazar ben Azariah
and other patricians of his day were willing to extend the
period until midnight. 16 But Joshua, Akiba and their plebeian
followers saw nothing wrong in continuing the festival through
the night into the morning. An interesting incident recorded
in rabbinic tradition, and nowadays repeated each year at the
Passover service, tells how once Eliezer, Joshua, Eleazar ben
Azariah, Akiba and Tarfon spent the Passover evening to-
gether, and so engrossed did even the patrician members of
the group become in the conversation which ensued that they
THE STEEP ASCENT IOI
forgot their early-to-bed principles, and remained awake until
they were called to the morning service! 17
Applying the same rule to the time for reading the evening
Shema, Eliezer limits it to the first watch of the night, but
Akiba holds that it may be read at any time before dawn. 18
Perhaps no controversy shows the different attitudes of these
scholars more strikingly than that concerning the vineyard
which produced only olelot, gleanings such as would ordi-
narily be given to the poor. Eliezer maintained that since the
produce of the field was uniform, it all belonged to the owner.
Akiba, defending as usual the interests of the poor, said the
olelot belong to them; if there be no other fruit, the owner
must suffer his loss. 19
One of tl}e most illuminating controversies between the two
sages is that concerning the "captive woman." Eliezer's view
is dominated by the social conditions of the patricians and
provincials, who still practiced polygamy; Akiba's by that of
the plebeians who had long been monogamists. The issue
arose from the rule set down in Deuteronomy permitting an
Israelite who finds a comely woman among the captives of
the army to take her to his home and after a suitable time
marry her. The Scriptures read: "Then shalt thou bring her
home to thy house; and she shall shave her head and pare
her nails; and she shall put the raiment of her captivity from
off her, and shall remain in thy house, and bewail her father
and mother a full month; and after that thou mayest go unto
her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife" (Deut.
21:12). Eliezer's interpretation of the passage, or rather his
literal acceptance of it, reflects the attitude of the patrician
and rural circles, where polygamy was practiced and held
justified. The feeling of the older wife or wives were not con-
sidered; there was no monopoly on the husband's affections.
102 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
But in the plebeian, monogamous circles, whose ideas Akiba
had imbibed, there was less concern for the captive stranger
than for the displaced wife. To Akiba it seemed that the
delay which the Law required was intended to give the
captor's first, legal wife an opportunity to win back her hus-
band's affections. While, therefore, Eliezer leaves the sense of
the passage unchanged, Akiba interprets it with some freedom.
"By 'her father and mother,' her native idol-worship is in-
tended," he says; "her nails are not to be pared, but rather
permitted to grow; the time is not one month, but three
months. . . . And why all these precautions ? So that he may
see his legal wife happy and properly adorned, and his new
love continually in tears and in plain attire." 20
Akiba did not confine his attention to these major issues of
right and ceremonial; he was prepared to take up the slightest
question of patrician exegesis. When, for instance, Eliezer
made the innocent remark that the honey, which Scripture
enumerates as one of Palestine's blessings, must mean the
honey of dates, Akiba vigorously objected. He saw in this
interpretation an attempt to enhance the prestige of the oasis
of Jericho, the ancient home of aristocracy and the only part
of Palestine where date palms grew. "No, it means the honey
of the bees," he said; for that could be found in the plebeian
upland country in even greater quantities than in the low-
lands. 21
When the verse was discussed, "In booths shall ye dwell
seven days, for I caused the children of Israel to dwell in
booths when I brought them forth from the land of Egypt"
(Lev. 23:24), Eliezer commented that the booths of the wilder-
ness were true bowers of leaves and branches. 22 Akiba, re-
membering that the booths erected by his poor plebeian fol-
lowers for the festivals were greatly inferior to the leafy taber-
THE STEEP ASCENT 103
nacles of the wealthy patricians and rural farmers, saw in this
interpretation an affront to his class. If the booths provided
by God in the wilderness were actually covered with vegetable
growths, then obviously such makeshifts as board-covered
huts, rooms so tiny that they could only admit a man's head
but not his body, tents built on the top of a wagon, or hovels
of which one wall for lack of boards was a tethered ox or
cow, and similar devices which the plebeians used, were
objectionable, as the patricians maintained. 23 But, said Akiba,
the booths of the wilderness were not of trees at all; they
were the "clouds of honor" which followed the Israelites in
their wanderings and, clearly, any covering could symbolize
these thin sheets of aerial vapor.
A similar disagreement arose when the law of the uniden-
tified slain person was debated. The Law provides that if a
person be found murdered on the highway, and the assassin
be not discovered, the nearest city must bring a calf as an
atonement. But if the body be found midway between two
cities, how exactly was the distance to be measured? Eliezer
says, One must measure from the navel of the corpse. Akiba,
however, insisted that this would be a derogation of man's
dignity, which is expressed rather in his face, the Image of
God. He therefore held that the measurement is made from
his nose. Likewise, if the head is found at a distance from the
body, Akiba said the trunk must be carried to the head,
Eliezer said the head must be carried to the trunk. 24
Sometimes Akiba would object to Eliezer 's efforts to re-
interpret the past from a pro-priestly or pro-patrician point of
view, for, though no direct contemporary issues were involved,
tradition always played a part in the accepted status of classes.
The priests were particularly anxious to minimize the guilt
ascribed to Nadab and Abihu in Scripture. According to the
IO4 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
story in Leviticus (10:1), the sons of Aaron actually attempted
to offer forbidden fire on the altar. This the later priests con-
sidered altogether incredible; and they were equally disturbed
by the story of the fire which came out "from before the
Lord" and killed these transgressors in the sanctuary. For
how could the bodies have been removed thence? No Levite
durst enter the sacred portals, and their brother-priests would
have been prevented from continuing the important dedica-
tion service by contact with the dead. Akiba answered simply:
an iron hook was thrown over their bodies, and with this
they were dragged into the open courts. Eliezer said, "Nay,
they died outside of the sanctuary's walls, where the Levites
could approach them." 25
In several instances, however, Akiba disagreed not with
Eliezer's decision, but with his mode of interpretation. 26 The
disciple of Nahum was impatient with the intermediary steps
even when the conclusions to which they led agreed with his.
In spite of these continual controversies on questions of law
and public policy, Akiba managed to win Eliezer's affections
to an astonishing degree. Inevitably the icy reserve of the old
patrician yielded before the charm of the young, ardent dis-
ciple. None of the other sages, even those who had known
Eliezer from his earliest days at the academy, dared approach
him with the unrestrained freedom assumed by Akiba. The
former shepherd intuitively recognized that the brusque-
ness of the Master was nothing more than a mannerism;
underneath his superficial harshness Eliezer possessed a pa-
thetic tenderness and hunger for affection. His vanity and
ill-temper rose from an inordinate, because thwarted, love of
praise, and not from native rancor. Few of his colleagues who
heard him bellow his legal opinions and personal insults in
the conclave would have credited him with the touching love
THE STEEP ASCENT 105
he could show in his family circle. A little niece who grew
up in his home became so attached to him that when she
reached the age of marriage and he urged her to accept a
suitor she refused to do so. His mother, who realized how
matters stood, urged him to marry the child. This he hesitated
to do, partly because of the discrepancy in age, partly because
she was his near relative. One day, however, when he spoke
to her of marriage to someone, she replied, "I am your hand-
maid, to wash the feet of your servants." 27 Hearing these
words, Eliezer married her. A man who could inspire such
devotion at home could not have been the ruthless tyrant
his colleagues considered him.
Seeing deeper into the man, Akiba bore patiently with his
outbursts. He was careful never to offend the Master, turning
aside with some light remark any incident which might give
pain. It happened, for instance, that once, during a drought,
a fast was declared, and Eliezer was asked to lead the public
prayers. He did so, "but there was no answer." At a second
fast, observed a few days later in accordance with the pre-
scribed ritual, Akiba officiated, and hardly had he begun the
services with the improvised prayer, "Our Father, Our King,
we have no King besides Thee. Our Father, our King, pity
us for Thine own sake," when the rain came! The general
astonishment at this miracle for it was interpreted as nothing
less is indescribable. God had indicated his preference for
Akiba. Of course, it could not be that the pupil was either
more learned or more pious than the Master. But, it was
widely held, the incident did prove that Akiba's kindliness and
his readiness to condone the faults of others made him superior
to Eliezer. Akiba himself paid no attention to the congratula-
tions which were heaped upon him. He only hastened to
mollify Eliezer. "My Master," he said, "what has occurred
io6 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
reminds me of the story of the king who had two daughters,
one lovable and the other repulsive. When the lovable
daughter appeared with some request, the king would be slow
to grant it, for he wished to prolong the interview that he
might hear the music of her voice and enjoy the wit of her
conversation. But when he saw the unloved sister approach,
he shouted to the servants and ministers, 'Give her anything
she wants and let her go.' " 28
It was Akiba's understanding affection which made it pos-
sible for the two men to live together in amity, notwithstand-
ing their fundamental differences of philosophy, manner and
opinion. No wonder that when Eliezer, being ill, was visited
by several colleagues, he listened to all of them with im-
patience and, when they had done, cried out to his attendants,
"Support me that I may hear the words of Akiba, my
disciple." a9
Meanwhile, Joshua watched the development of this
prodigy, who had already outstripped Tarfon and gave
promise of surpassing even him, with generous and uncon-
cealed delight and admiration. Time and again when the
old master reported traditions which he had received from
Johanan ben Zakkai, with the admission, "I have heard these
statements, but cannot explain them," Akiba would say, "I
think I can explain them," and usually his interpretation was
correct. 30
Once Joshua was so moved by a demonstration which Akiba
offered in support of an ancient plebeian rule that he cried,
"Would that the dust might be uncovered from thy eyes,
Johanan ben Zakkai, for thou didst say that in time the in-
direct defilement of a loaf of bread would be abolished be-
cause it cannot be inferred from the Law. Instead of which,
thy pupil's pupil has done the impossible and has found its
basis in the Law." 31
THE STEEP ASCENT * 107
On one occasion, which was long remembered in the
academy, Akiba successfully opposed both of his masters
Eliezer, who defended the patrician position, and Joshua, who
had proposed a compromise. The question arose out of the
law requiring a man to marry the widow of a childless
brother. This institution, called the Levirate marriage, had
its origin, as the sages recognized, in the primitive law which
deeds a man's wife or wives along with his other possessions,
to his heirs. But while the Levirate marriage began as a
privilege, it developed into a burden, for it would frequently
happen in a relatively advanced state of society that an addi-
tional wife would be a liability rather than an asset. It is this
situation which is envisaged in the Scripture (Gen. 38:9; Deut.
25:5). Yet among the patricians and provincials the earlier
significance was not entirely forgotten.
As usual the conflicting conceptions found expression in
a matter of technical, legal detail. The patricians insisted
that even before the surviving brother takes the widow into
his home she must be considered his wife, while the plebeians
maintained that his rights over her begin only when he per-
forms the marriage and receives her as his wife. One of a
husband's prerogatives in Jewish law is that permitting him
to annul his wife's vows. Eliezer, speaking for the patricians,
maintains that as soon as one of the surviving brothers has
indicated his intention of marrying the widow, he becomes
authorized to annul her vows. Joshua, demurring from this
extreme view, was ready to admit the rule when there was
only one surviving brother and there could therefore be no
question regarding the widow's destiny. But Akiba chal-
lenged the whole principle. What right did a man have to
annul the vows of a woman to whom he was not yet married ?
The widow was not bound to her brother-in-law, he insisted,
io8 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
by any tie save that which forbade her to marry anyone else
until certain ceremonies were performed. To make her his
wife, automatically, on the death of her husband, was to
accept as permanent law the primitive conception of the
inheritance of wives. It was when he heard this argument
that Ben Azzai, Akiba's close friend and admirer, called out,
"Alas, that I did not have Akiba for a teacher!" 32
So completely did Akiba win the hearts of both Eliezer and
Joshua that when they traveled about the country to raise
funds for the poor, they frequently invited him to join them.
One of their most reliable contributors on such journeys was
a certain Abba Judah of Antioch. In the course of time, it is
told, this Abba Judah suffered reverses and once, when he
heard that the scholars had arrived on their usual mission, he
hid in his house so as to avoid them. His wife, noticing his
embarrassment, said to him, "We still have one field left. Sell
half of it and give them the proceeds." He did so. The
scholars, unaware of the extent of his sacrifice, accepted his
gift and blessed him.
When they returned to Antioch some time later, they found
that he had regained his former wealth, and much beside.
When they asked about him, people said, "Do you want to
see Abba Judah? Who can call on him? He is Abba Judah
the owner of oxen, the owner of camels, the owner of asses.
Who can compare with Abba Judah?" When, however, he
heard that the sages had arrived, he came to see them, "Your
prayer has borne abundant fruit," he said to them, when they
met. "Whereupon," the story continues, throwing a curious
light on the relation of scholarship to affluence in those days,
"they seated him next to themselves, and they applied to him
the verse, 'A man's gifts make room for him' " 33 (Prov.
18:16).
THE STEEP ASCENT
Akiba tells us of one sea voyage which he took with his two
masters during the Passover week. Though the occasion of the
journey is not recorded, the matter which took them abroad
was apparently of pressing importance, for otherwise they
would hardly have left Palestine during the festival. Akiba
merely recalled that he kneaded the unleavened cakes
(mazzot) for Eliezer and Joshua, and since there was not
enough water available on the ship, he was compelled to use
fruit juices. 34
Tarfon, who had always loved Akiba, now openly acknowl-
edged him as master. Once the patrician sage rendered a
wrong decision, declaring a cow, the womb of which had
been removed, prohibited. The owner, accepting this opinion,
fed the animal to the dogs. When the matter finally came
before the conclave and Tarfon was adjudged in error, the
wealthy sage listened to the judgment with his usual good-
humor, merely saying, "Thine ass must be sold, Tarfon, to
reimburse the owner of the cow." But Akiba said to him,
"You are an expert judge, and are therefore free from liability
for damages." 35
A famous controversy between the two sages, which ulti-
mately had to be referred to the conclave for adjudication,
concerned the private pool of a man named Diskos in Yabneh.
This pool, built into the cellar or megaron of the rich man's
house, contained just enough water for ritual purification,
namely twenty-four cubic feet. Naturally it was measured
from time to time to determine its adequacy, and once it was
found deficient. The question arose whether the people who
had bathed in it since it was last known to have been full
were pure. Tarfon maintained that they were. "The mifyeh
(pool for ritual purification) retains its approved status until
it is demonstrated to be inadequate." Akiba, usually lenient
no AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
in questions of Levitical purity, was in this instance inclined
to be rigorous. He did not see any reason for establishing
special rules for the benefit of those who were too proud to
resort to the public pools which the community maintained
at proper standards. Hence, he insisted that everyone who had
used the bath since it was last known to have been full was
impure. "The man who enters a bath is presumptively im-
pure; he remains in that status until he is certain that he has
bathed in an adequate amount of water," he said. After a
long argument, the conclave voted to support Akiba. 36
To those unacquainted with the development of Law in
general it may seem strange that the extraneous considerations
which apparently influenced Akiba in his stand on this ques-
tion should possibly enter the mind of a jurist. But in justice
to the interpreters of law we must bear in mind that only
those questions are referred to them where precedent and
established rule do not offer clear guidance. Obviously the
technical arguments advanced by Akiba and Tarfon, in this
instance as in others, were of equal weight. Under such cir-
cumstances, the judge's or the sage's decision must depend
on what he regards as the social interest; this in turn will
depend on his general point of view regarding the community
in which he lives.
In his close friendship for Akiba, Tarfon frequently with-
drew opinions to which he was already committed, when he
heard that his former pupil disagreed with them. On the
other hand, it is recorded that Akiba once, after defeating
Tarfon in argument, reconsidered his position and accepted
the views he had just rejected. 37
Perhaps it was Akiba's sense of humor which more than
anything else won the hearts of his masters and his colleagues.
He soon outgrew the rough playfulness which had character-
THE STEEP ASCENT III
ized him in his earlier days, but he never lost his ready wit.
"Laughter protects one's honor," he used to say. 38
Only one member of the conclave regarded Akiba's rise
with ill favor: the patrician scholar, Elisha ben Abuyah. He
was not generous enough to share Tarfon's joy in the phe-
nomenal scholar, nor was he old enough to watch him with
the secure detachment of Eliezer and Joshua. Akiba was his
rival as well as his opponent. Neither Akiba's genius nor his
humility made any impression on Elisha, who denied the
existence of the one and despised what he called the affecta-
tion of the other. He could not believe that a man who had
begun his studies in middle age, and who had spent so much
of his time in earning his livelihood, could really attain to
such eminence as was ascribed to Akiba.
"He who studies the Torah in his youth, absorbs it in his
blood," he used to say, "and then the words of the Torah
come from his mouth clearly and distinctly; but if a person
begins his studies in advanced years, the words of the Torah
are not absorbed in his blood, and do not come forth from
his mouth clearly." Using another metaphor, he remarked,
"He who studies in his youth is like unto ink written on new
paper, while he who begins his studies in maturity is like
ink written on used paper." Because Akiba did not observe
the patrician rules, and frequently offered opinions which
were revolutionary in their leniency, Elisha was led to say,
"A man who has good deeds and then studies the Torah is
like to a house which has foundations of rock and walls of
brick. Even the approach of many waters will not harm it.
But a man who studies the Torah, but has not good deeds,
is like a house which has foundations of brick and walls of
-.*g
stone. Even a little water will wash it away." 39 One wonders
ii2 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
whether he recalled these words when he became an apostate
and traitor, the abject tool of the pagan oppressors.
Akiba could afford to ignore the envy of Elisha ben
Abuyah; he could not dismiss as easily the tyranny of Gama-
liel, whom the scholars had finally succeeded in making Nasi,
or president.
The conclave was no longer the free forum it had been in
the days when Akiba first came to it. Since Gamaliel was a
patrician, it was considered proper to choose a plebeian,
Joshua ben Hananya, as his associate, Ab Bet Din. 40 No
sooner, however, had Gamaliel attained the powers he had
coveted than he forgot the generous loyalty of the scholars
who had raised him to the office of his ancestors. Neither
Joshua, who was second to him, nor any other scholar, was
permitted any freedom of action. He insisted that his col-
leagues, some of whom were older than he, treat him as
their superior, and he was quick to show his displeasure when
his dignities were affected.
"This was the custom of Rabban Gamaliel. When he
entered the academy and said, 'Ask!' everyone knew that all
was well. But if he entered the academy and failed to say,
'Ask!' people knew that there was some complaint." 41 We
may imagine what terror fell on the assembled scholars as
they waited for the morose, angry face to melt into something
like a smile. Even those who had nothing to fear from him
naturally fell under the spell of the common terror, as they
waited impatiently for the magic Shadu, "Ask," which opened
the proceedings. No matter how urgent the business which
the scholars had on hand, it could not be taken up before the
formula had been spoken, and if the president was angry
they would all have to sit in silence until he was appeased.
Frequently his surliness took harsher forms. In order to
THE STEEP ASCENT 113
complete his control of the conclave or the academy, he insti-
tuted supervisors who were to report to him all offences on
the part of members. The first appointees were Eleazar Hisma
and Johanan ben Nuri. 42
Eleazar Hisma was an admirer and partisan of Akiba, who
had helped and befriended him. It had happened, for instance,
that once, on a visit to a certain town, Eleazar had been asked
to lead the morning service, which in those days was recited
by heart. When Eleazar, much embarrassed, admitted that
he did not know the service well enough, the people cried,
"Is this Rabbi Eleazar to whom we gave such a welcome?
What right has he to the title of rabbi?" Whereupon Eleazar
returned home, deeply ashamed and disgraced. Akiba, hearing
the story, said to him, "Would you like to learn the service,
my master?" And he taught it to him. In a short while
Eleazar could go back to the community and redeem his
reputation by reciting and chanting the whole of the service
in excellent fashion. 43
Since he sided with the plebeians, Eleazar did not have
much to do in the office, which had been created primarily
to hold them in check. But Johanan ben Nuri reports that
he had frequent occasion to complain to Gamaliel of Akiba
and that he caused him to be publicly flogged five times! 44
That such humiliating punishment should have been meted
out to one of the foremost members of the academy a man
in his forties would seem incredible, and indeed some copy-
ists, out of respect for both Gamaliel and Akiba, have tried
to soften the text. But the accuracy of Johanan's reports can-
not really be doubted. We could only wish that he had
described the derelictions for which Akiba was punished.
They cannot have been infringements of the ceremonial law,
for which the punishment would have been nothing less than
ii4 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
expulsion from the academy. We must assume that some vio-
lation of academic rules was involved and that even this
served only as a pretext; actually, Gamaliel could not forgive
Akiba his frank and forcible championship of the plebeian
cause. For Gamaliel, like his father, was really a Shammaite. 45
He observed Shammaitic rules in his household; he agreed
with Eliezer, his brother-in-law, in a number of recorded
Shammaitic decisions; and above all, he followed Shammaitic
principles in closing the doors of the academy to the poor. 46
Like most of the provincials and patricians of the day, he
charged the urban plebeians and their descendants with
hypocrisy. His dislike was probably based on other considera-
tions. The plebeians already outnumbered the patricians in
the academy, and the admission of scholars on the basis of
ability would have emphasized the disproportion. He ex-
pressed his feeling about the poor scholars quite frankly when
he said, "Students may be compared to four kinds of fish.
There is the unclean fish, which is useless; and the pure fish,
which is edible; there is the little river fish from the Jordan,
and the great sea fish from the Mediterranean. The unclean
fish corresponds to the impecunious student, who may have
studied Scripture, Mishna, halafa and aggada, and will never-
theless remain without understanding; the pure fish corre-
sponds to the wealthy student, who when he has mastered
Scripture, Mishna, halaJ^a and aggada will have understand-
ing; the small Jordan fish is the student who having imbibed
information cannot use it in argument; the great sea fish is he
who having learned his fill can argue with his teachers." 47
The coarseness of the similes betrays the prejudice of the
patrician. The fact is that the Shammaitic scholars of the day
were still not ready to accept the "scribes" or plebeian men
of learning as their equals. Eliezer ben Hyrkanos definitely
THE STEEP ASCENT 115
distinguishes between the two classes; 48 and many passages
in the Gospels show that the Galileans, who were under the
influence of patrician conceptions, spoke of the "scribes and
the Pharisees."
Gamaliel's prejudice derived from the traditions of his class;
he therefore considered it sacred and, like all partisans, he
claimed to speak for the people as a whole. Able administrator
that he was, and belonging to a family which had been at
the helm of Jewish life for almost a century, he recognized
that many of the issues which divided the scholastic world
were in their ostensible substance unreal. He could not see
why, since the whole Jewish population had been reduced to
peasantry, the factional groupings which had originated in
the struggle between town and country should be preserved.
What he failed to realize was that Akiba and his fellow
plebeians were using the traditional party labels as a means
to obtain reforms which were still needed now, perhaps,
more than before. Many of the ceremonial restrictions which
the Shammaites had established bore heavily on submerged
groups, such as the small farmers, the cattle-owners, the
women and the landless. This transferred significance is evi-
dent in some of Akiba's controversies with Eliezer, but it
became more fully apparent in the reforms which he intro-
duced when he finally attained power. Gamaliel was quite
correct in his insistence that the struggle between Jerusalem
and the provinces was over; he was, of course, wrong when
he implied that there was no longer any social conflict
whatever. The fact is that both Akiba and Gamaliel wanted
national unity; but each on his own terms. As the event
proved, Gamaliel was in the weaker position because he
believed that the ceremonial differences had produced the fac-
tionalism, whereas the truth was that factionalism had pro-
duced the ceremonial differences.
n6 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
The harshness which Gamaliel exhibited in the conflict was
not inconsistent with the personal kindliness which character-
ized all the members of the Hillelite family whose lives have
been recorded. We have observed that Eliezer at home was not
the tyrant he became in the academy; this was even more
emphatically true of Gamaliel. His relations with his servant,
Tabbai, whom he treated like a son, prove this beyond ques-
tion. "Have you noticed how well Tabbai knows the Law?"
he remarked to his colleagues when the servant acted in
accordance with the prescribed ritual. He taught him to wear
phylacteries during prayer, although this was usually consid-
ered a special prerogative of freedom, and introduced him
with such cordiality to the other scholars that they spoke of
him as "one who ought to be ordained!" "Alas for Canaan,"
Eleazar ben Zadok once cried when Tabbai was waiting on
them, "that he has brought the curse of slavery on all his
descendants. It would be altogether logical that Tabbai should
be sitting here, and I wait on him; but because of his descent
from Ham, he must wait on me!" The children of his aristo-
cratic house were trained to call the slave "Father Tabbai" and
his wife "Mother Tabita." When the old slave died, Gamaliel
sat in mourning for him as though he were a near relative.
"You have taught us, our Master," his colleagues protested,
that one must not observe mourning for a slave."
Tabbai was different," answered Gamaliel, "he was a man
of piety." 49
His tenderness is perhaps best illustrated by the story which
tells how for several days the students noticed that he came
to the academy red-eyed with weeping, and when they investi-
gated they found that he was awakened each night by the
moaning of a widow who lived next door, and that he could
not restrain his tears when he heard her. 50
"i
THE STEEP ASCENT 117
It was altogether natural that this sage should be the author
of one of the finest ethical maxims in the whole rabbinical
literature:. "He who pities fellow creatures will obtain pity
from God." 51
In the academy, Gamaliel's surliness was probably the result
of fear. With members of the opposition whom he did not
consider dangerous his relations could be cordial. Samuel the
Little, who was as much a plebeian as Akiba himself, exerted
a deep influence on the Nasi. It is said that once Gamaliel
invited seven scholars to join him in a Committee to decide
the difficult question of calendar regulation. When he came
to the meeting, he found eight men. Angry at this presump-
tion, Gamaliel cried out: "Let him who has come uninvited,
leave!" Samuel the Little, hearing these words, arose and
made his way to the door. Gamaliel remembering that he
had summoned him, immediately understood that the peace-
loving plebeian was trying to shield the offender. He also
recognized the implied reproach to himself, and at once
calmed down. "Remain, my son, remain," he said. "It is alto-
gether fitting that you should take part in this decision." 52
,But when he came face to face with energetic opposition,
his whole personality changed. The kindly master and the
tender-hearted neighbor was transformed into the rigorous
disciplinarian and implacable tyrant. Then, like a general in
battle, he considered tenderness to the enemy treachery to his
people. There was an objective to be reached the unification
of Israel under patrician hegemony. Individuals and their
feelings did not count. In line with this ruthless policy,
Gamaliel even refused to ordain such plebeian scholars as had
already been admitted. Among the scholars who were thus
kept in the rank of students when their learning entitled them
to seats in the conclave, were the three famous Simeons, ben
n8 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Azzai, ben Zoma and ben Nannos. Of these, Ben Azzai was
particularly close to Akiba; but Akiba, helpless himself, could
do nothing for his friend.
At last, weary of the continual struggle against Gamaliel
and the other patricians, Akiba left Yabneh and settled as a
village teacher in the small town of Zifron in Galilee. 53 He
did not remain there long. The scholars who had taken him
for granted while he sat with them in Yabneh suddenly
realized all he had meant to them. "The Torah is outside," 54
they declared, referring to his absence from their discussions.
Yielding ultimately to their clamor, Gamaliel invited him to
return to the conclave.
It appears that, whatever the duration of the exile, it was
of service to Akiba. His views crystallized, and many points
regarding which he had been in doubt became clear to him.
In any case, he returned strengthened in the struggle for
the plebeian traditions and interpretations of the Law. But
his determination did not blind him to the need for strategy;
he bided his time for the opportunity to inflict a decisive
defeat on the patrician rulers of the academy.
Akiba's chief support during these trying days was Joshua
ben Hananya, who suffered almost equally with him. We
are told of several encounters between Joshua and Gamaliel,
each of which became of historic importance. The first diffi-
culty arose out of a disagreement regarding the calendar.
It was the custom in those days for the scholars to fix the
calendar not by calculation, but by the testimony of witnesses
who had seen the new moon, and on the thirtieth day of each
month the judges would sit in court waiting for personal
reports. Two such witnesses marked that day as the beginning
of a month. Of special importance was the new moon of the
seventh month, which fixed the New Year's Day, Rosh Ha-
THE STEEP ASCENT Up
Shanah, a major holy day. Since no one could know before-
hand whether witnesses would appear, it became the custom
to observe the thirtieth day of Elul, the sixth month, as Rosh
Ha-Shanah. If witnesses came to corroborate the. assumption
that the new moon had appeared, all was well. If they failed
to come, then the next day was also observed as the second,
and true, Rosh Ha-Shanah. Thus originated the double ob-
servance of Rosh Ha-Shanah.
It chanced once that two witnesses arrived in the morning,
declaring that they had seen the new moon the evening
before, and Gamaliel ordered the day to be proclaimed as
"holy." That night, when the scholars looked to the west
to see the thin crescent which should now have been higher
in the heavens, visible to everyone, there was no sign of it.
Clearly the witnesses had misled the court. What was to be
done? The aged Dosa ben Arkenas, who had lived in retire-
ment for many years, demanded that the court reverse itself.
"How," he asked, "can witnesses testify that a baby has been
born, when the next day the mother appears visibly preg-
nant?" Joshua ben Hananya announced that he agreed with
Dosa. But Gamaliel would not admit his error. The day had
been announced as New Year's Day in proper form and on
evidence which the court had accepted. The matter was closed
and could not be reopened.
Joshua, hearing this decision, prepared to observe the Day
of Atonement, which occurs on the tenth of the month,
according to his own calculation. Gamaliel, who had taken
no action against Dosa, would, however, accept no such defi-
ance from Joshua. "I command thee," he wrote his associate,
"to appear before me with thy cane and thy purse, on the
day which is the Day of Atonement according to thy reckon-
ing." Only an observant Jew can appreciate the depth of
i2o AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Joshua's horror at this order. The Day of Atonement is the
most sacred day in the Jewish calendar and is entirely devoted
to fasting and prayer. And yet Joshua was ordered to violate
it by carrying his cane and his purse two major transgres-
sions.
It is highly suggestive for the position Akiba had attained
that the old man went to him for advice. Akiba felt that in
this instance Gamaliel was right. The decision which had
been rendered had not been partisan; it had simply been
based on misleading testimony. Akiba felt himself compelled
to say, "I can prove to you that so far as the calendar is con-
cerned, the judgment of the court is final; for it is written,
'These are the appointed seasons of the Lord, even holy con-
vocations, which ye shall proclaim in their appointed season.'
(Lev. 23:4). Whether they are announced properly or other-
wise, the proclamation makes them holy."
Still dissatisfied, Joshua went to ask Dosa's advice. He too
considered Gamaliel's decision valid. "If we are to review
the decisions made by Gamaliel's court, we must also be
prepared to reconsider every judgment which has been ren-
dered from the days of Moses to our own."
Finding so little support for his views, Joshua took his cane
and his money and came to Gamaliel on the day which,
according to his calendar, should have been the Day of Atone-
ment. The president could not repress the deep satisfaction
he felt as he saw the black-visaged needle-maker approach.
The authority of the Sanhedrin had been upheld. He rose
from his chair, ran toward Joshua and kissed him fervently,
saying, "Peace on thee, my master and my disciple: my master
in learning, my disciple in obedience." 55
Gamaliel's victory over Joshua mollified him for the mo-
ment, but it fed his arrogance. Once he actually threatened to
THE STEEP ASCENT 121
expel Akiba not only from the conclave but from the -Pharisaic
order. This quarrel, too, had its origin in the ceremony of
announcing the new moon, which Gamaliel considered espe-
cially important because it was a governmental function and
a symbol of the authority of the conclave. Witnesses to the
new moon were permitted, by Jewish tradition, to violate the
Sabbath in order to reach the court, which was awaiting their
evidence. On a certain Sabbath, more than forty pairs of
witnesses appeared in Ludd on their way to Yabneh, to testify
before Gamaliel. Akiba, seeing that a number of witnesses
had already gone to the court, dissuaded the others from con-
tinuing on the journey. When Gamaliel heard of this, he
wrote to Akiba: "If you interfere with these people, you will
discourage them from doing their duty next time. And any-
one who interferes with people about to fulfill a command-
ment deserves the punishment of excommunication." Not
satisfied with this threat, yet fearful of taking extreme meas-
ures against Akiba, Gamaliel removed from office a petty
official who, it seems, had been Akiba's agent in stopping the
witnesses on their journey. 56 The redactor of the Mishna,
Judah the Patriarch, respecting the memory of both Gamaliel,
who was his grandfather, and Akiba, who was his teacher's
teacher, omits from his record the story of the threat and the
punishment of Akiba's agent. But other texts attest the fact,
and there can be no doubt of its authenticity.
Gamaliel was fighting a losing battle, and Akiba knew it.
Even in the presence of the Nasi, the younger scholar would
follow the ceremonial tradition of the plebeians. Once on a
visit to Jericho, the city of palms, the scholars ate some dates,
after which, according to Gamaliel, a full Grace must be
recited. Akiba and the majority of the sages considered an
abbreviated Grace sufficient. While his colleagues were appar-
122 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
ently wondering whether they ought to follow their own
opinions or defer to Gamaliel's, since he was present, Akiba
began to intone the short Grace.
"Akiba," Gamaliel cried, "why do you look for quarrels?"
"My master, you have taught us," answered Akiba, "that
the decision of the majority is binding. Even though you have
given your opinion, we must follow the majority." 57
The repeated controversies sharpened the hostility of the
two factions until the situation was as tense as it had been
during the last decades of the Temple. The Nasi resented the
obstreperousness of the plebeians; the plebeians objected to
what they considered the insolence of the Nasi. Finally, Akiba
and his colleagues decided that the time had come for a
definitive test.
Unwilling to strike at the descendant of Hillel, the plebeians
decided to make an example of his equally haughty brother-
in-law, Eliezer, a leading patrician figure. To pick a quarrel
with this scholar was not difficult. His insolent bluntness, his
stubborn insistence on his own infallibility, his total disregard
of the rights of others, made him, in spite of his brilliant
record, especially vulnerable. The issue on which Joshua and
Akiba, with their followers, finally decided to fight him,
seemed incongruous even to the later talmudists. In spite of
the tragedy in which the skirmish culminated, they saw its
humor and entitled the narrative recording it, "The Stove of
the Serpent Rings." 58
Biblical law demands that earthenware pots and ovens
which have become defiled, as, for instance, by contact with
a dead insect, be broken (Lev. 11:33). To circumvent this
law, the prosperous had invented a "serpent stove," i.e., an
oven which made of tiles, joined together by loose layers
of earth could be taken apart and put together again. This
THE STEEP ASCENT 123
procedure they called "breaking the oven." Eliezer, -speaking
for the wealthy farmers, who could afford such complicated
utensils, defended the legal fiction. But the poorer scholars,
who had to be satisfied with ordinary ovens, resented the
subterfuge. They said that the oven would remain defiled
unless it was actually broken. This view was defended by
Joshua and adopted by the conclave. Eliezer continued to
declare these ovens pure. 59 When the conclave assembled to
hear charges against Eliezer, Gamaliel found himself in a
dilemma. He could not defend in his brother-in-law the
defiance he had repressed in others. Moreover, Eliezer made
no attempt to deny or mitigate the accusation; he merely
insisted that he was right and all the others were wrong.
Whatever may have been the original intention of Eliezer's
accusers, his attitude drove them into a frenzy of anger, and
they not only ousted him from the Sanhedrin, but expelled
him from the Pharisaic order. Not for hah a century had this
punishment been meted out to a scholar.
The last to suffer it had been the famous Akabiah ben
Mahalalel, the colleague of Gamaliel's grandfather, who lived
about the year 40 C.E. That great teacher had steadfastly re-
fused to recognize the authority of the Sanhedrin. "Renounce
the four teachings which you have rendered in violation of
our decision, and we will make you Ab Bet Din, the second
to the Nasi," 60 the scholars had pleaded with Akabiah. In
vain; he remained obdurate until the day of his death. He
had been ousted from the Pharisaic order, and when he died
the Sanhedrin had ordered a stone placed on his bier to
symbolize the death which they thought he should have died.
It was this penalty which the conclave revived for Eliezer
ben Hyrkanos, the most erudite of all its members.
Akiba undertook to break the terrible news to the aged
124 AKIB A: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
master, "lest some other, less tactful person go" and wound
him unnecessarily. Akiba approached Eliezer, but stopped
when he came within four cubits of him, for an observant
Pharisee durst not approach too near one whose observance
and purity is suspect.
Eliezer, noticing the unusual reserve, perhaps reading some-
thing sinister in Akiba's face, called out, "What is it, Akiba ?"
"It seems to me, my Master," Akiba replied, "that your col-
leagues are keeping away from you."
Eliezer, comprehending at once the full significance of
these words, realized that legally he was no longer a trusted
Pharisee, but a suspect am ha-arez. He had been divested not
only of authority as a scholar, but of standing as a Jew.
He vw&menuddah, "defiled," "impure," like any publican who
had failed to observe the Levitical laws of cleanliness. Broken-
hearted, the aged scholar sat down on the ground and re-
moved his shoes as became a mourner; he said nothing.
Had Gamaliel been of a more imaginative nature, he would
have realized that the attack against Eliezer was intended as
a warning to him. His position in the academy was definitely
weaker by reason of Eliezer's expulsion. For, aside from the
moral defeat he had sustained, there was the loss of the man
who was his main support in his patrician policies. He should
have learned caution from the fate of his brother-in-law;
instead, he was even more intransigeant than before, finally
driving the plebeians to open rebellion.
Two occurrences hastened the break. The first might be
called "The Incident of Zadok's Lamb." 6i Zadok, the old
priest-scholar, had received a firstborn lamb as an offering.
While the Temple existed such animals had been sacrificed;
when the Temple was no more, they were given to a priest,
who looked after them until they developed some blemish
THE STEEP ASCENT 125
making them unfit for sacrificial purposes. Then they could
be eaten. One day, while this particular lamb was munching
its oats, it split a lip. Since no scholar may decide a question
in which he has a personal interest, Zadok asked Joshua
whether the lamb could still be sacrificed. The question was
not easy to answer. The Law ordinarily takes no cognizance
of artificial blemishes, for the owner is suspected of having
produced them intentionally. But, surely, no doubt of Zadok's
piety could enter Joshua's mind. The man who had fasted
every day for forty years to save the Temple would not put
a blot on his conscience for the sake of a little mutton. Joshua,
therefore, declared the animal permitted. "We cannot apply
the same standard to an am ha-arez and a scholar," he said.
But Zadok could not let the matter rest there. Having
received Joshua's answer, he went to Gamaliel and asked his
opinion. "It is prohibited," said Gamaliel; "we make no dis-
tinctions between a scholar and an am ha-arez"
Zadok replied, "But Joshua said it is permitted."
"Wait, then," Gamaliel said, "until the 'shield-bearers' enter
the academy."
When the scholars assembled, Zadok was asked to repeat
his question. Joshua, who sensed the approaching storm, tried
to protect himself by prevarication. "It is prohibited," he said.
"But in thy name it has been permitted," thundered Gama-
liel; "stand up, Joshua, and let them testify against thee."
"If I were alive and he dead," said Joshua, "I could deny
his statement; now that both of us are alive, how can one
contradict the other?"
Gamaliel, not deigning to answer, began his lecture with-
out giving Joshua permission to resume his seat. The plebeian
members of the academy, seeing their leader's humiliation
and the schoolboy punishment meted out to him, suddenly
126 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
interrupted the lecture with the cries, "Stop! Stop!" and the
meeting disbanded in disorder.
The second incident occurred about a year later. Joshua had
told someone that the evening service was not obligatory, but
merely optional. When Gamaliel heard of this, he again ac-
cused Joshua of rendering decisions against the vote of the
conclave, which had declared this service to be as obligatory
as the others. Joshua confessed his guilt and was once more
ordered to remain standing while the lecture proceeded. But
the members of the academy were no longer satisfied with
interrupting Gamaliel. After the session broke up, they at once
reassembled and voted to remove the Nasi from office. 62
Joshua might have expected that, being associate, he would
succeed to the presidency. But the members of the academy,
even those of Joshua's own party, regarded this as too deep a
humiliation for Gamaliel. They were willing to oust Gamaliel
out of love for Joshua, but they were not sufficiently vindictive
to replace the deposed leader with the man who had been
the occasion of the revolt. One tradition tells us that Akiba
hoped he might be appointed. But this too could not be, for
one plebeian, Joshua, already held office, and the vacant place
had necessarily to be filled with a patrician. A number of
eminent patricians were available: Eleazar ben Zadok, Jose
Ha-Kohen, Simeon ben Nethanel, Tarfon and Elisha ben
Abuyah among the older group; and Johanan ben Nuri,
Halafta the father of Jose, and perhaps Haninah ben Tera-
dyon, who were somewhat younger. But none of these was
acceptable to the plebeians, who did not wish to replace
Gamaliel with another equally influential personality. Their
purposes would be best suited by the appointment of a
younger, well-mannered, somewhat timid teacher, who would
yield the leadership of the conclave to Joshua and Akiba.
THE STEEP ASCENT 127
To the amazement of all the older scholars therefore, the
insurgents announced the candidacy of Eleazar ben Azariah,
who was hardly known as an halakist, although he had a
growing reputation as an orator. Eleazar himself was sur-
prised when the post was offered to him. "I will go home
and consult my wife," he said.
"They will remove you as they removed Gamaliel," she
warned him.
"It is worthwhile," he replied, "to enjoy precious glass for
one day, even though the next day it may be broken."
"But you have no white hair," she said. Whereupon, the
story continues, a miracle occurred, and overnight eighteen
rows of white hair appeared on his head.
The real power in the reorganized conclave lay, of course,
not with Eleazar ben Azariah, who was the titular president,
but with Joshua and Akiba. So deep an impression did this
"palace revolution" make on Jewish scholars that for centuries
they referred to "that day" without further specification. 63
Soon after "that day" the conclave voted the Hillelite views
binding on all Jews, setting on the Jewish religion the stamp
which it has borne ever since. 64 In order to make this decision
effective, the conclave began at once to collect the traditions
of the opposing schools, both those of the Shammaites and
those of the Hillelites.
"Why were the minority opinions recorded?" says the
Mishna. "So that if some future scholar should say, 'I have
this tradition, which differs from that generally accepted,' he
may be answered, 'Indeed, your tradition is based on the views
of the minority.' " 65
Significantly, we are informed that on "that day" many
benches were added to the academy. 66 The new seats were
intended, doubtless, for the many students whom Gamaliel
128 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
had refused to admit and whom the victorious plebeians now
welcomed. But even more important, the membership of the
conclave, which had been reduced to thirty-two, was now
increased through the ordination of new members to no less
than seventy-two, one more than had been permitted, tradi-
tionally, to sit in the Sanhedrin of Temple times. 67 Perhaps
it was the intention of those who selected this number to
distinguish the conclave from the Sanhedrin, which it super-
seded but could not replace. Before long, thirteen more mem-
bers were added, making a total of eighty-five, equal to the
traditional number of those who sat in the Great Assembly of
Ezra and Nehemiah. 68
The deposition of Gamaliel was a decisive event in his life.
He seems to have realized at last that a Jewish conclave was
not a Roman cohort, and that its president was not a captain.
Whether in true humility or as a matter of policy, he reverted
to the gentle manner of his famous ancestor, the meek, peace-
ful Hillel. No longer holding office, he attended all the meet-
ings of the academy and took part in the discussions as an
ordinary member. His self-conquest melted the hearts of his
opponents. They forgot his tyranny and remembered only
his lineage.
Before long Gamaliel considered the time propitious for
his apology to Joshua, and it was probably no surprise to the
assembly when the humble needle-maker announced his belief
that Gamaliel should be restored to the presidency. Akiba,
piqued at this change, asked Joshua, "Did we take action
for any other reason than to defend your honor? Tomorrow,
let both of us call on him." Ultimately it was arranged that
Gamaliel should be reappointed president, but since Eleazar
had held the high office, he was to lecture every third week. 69
THE STEEP ASCENT 129
The leadership of the academy thus consisted of Gamaliel,
who was first in rank; Joshua, the second; and Eleazar, the
third. Freed from the incubus of his pride, Gamaliel became
a close friend of both Joshua and Akiba, learning to appre-
ciate their wit, their charm and their affection.
Some time later, Hananiah, Joshua's nephew and a member
of the academy, was asked by a private party to settle a
difficult question involving the Levitical purity of women in
childbirth. He rendered a decision which contradicted a previ-
ous ruling of the academy on the same question. Hearing of
the incident, the Nasi said to Joshua, "Send your nephew to
me." Just as Joshua was preparing to call on Hananiah to
deliver this message, Hananiah's daughter-in-law appeared be-
fore him to ask his advice on the very question at issue. Joshua
gave her the official reply; whereupon the young woman said,
"But when my mother-in-law asked you that question you
gave her the opposite answer." Joshua then remembered that
he -had originally shared his nephew's opinions and was there-
fore himself responsible for the breach of discipline. He said
nothing to Hananiah but wrote to Gamaliel, "My nephew de-
cided according to what I taught him." 70 It speaks volumes
for the change which had come over Gamaliel that he pur-
sued the matter no further.
The Nasi and Joshua, who had previously visited each other
only on formal occasions, were now frequently seen together.
When Gamaliel went to Emmaus to buy an animal for the
wedding dinner of his son, Joshua and Akiba both accom-
panied him, and several important halakic questions were
discussed on the way. Akiba also tells how he once had occa-
sion to provide Gamaliel and Joshua with gold coins in ex-
change for their silver. It is evident from such incidents that
in these later years the three men were intimate associates and
companions. 71
130 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Akiba does not appear to have held any formal office in
the academy, but he was universally considered a dominant
figure, the fourth member of the directing committee. Perhaps
it was at this time that he was appointed overseer of the poor,
a post for which he was admirably suited by character and
which he filled for many years. 72 It is said that when this post
was offered to him, he replied that he would have to consult
his wife. As he was going home, he was overheard repeating
to himself, "It will lead to error, it will lead to abuse!" 73
Nevertheless, he accepted the office.
One of his new duties, to which, apparently, he had be-
come accustomed in the years of apprenticeship under Eliezer
and Joshua, was traveling about to raise funds. His many
journeys took him to all parts of Palestine, as well as to Cap-
padocia, Arabia and Egypt. 74
Curious scraps of information which he brought back with
him to the academy regarding the customs and languages of
these countries, are preserved in the Talmud. Even mere
interesting are the tales which later scholars, who looked upon
him as something of a Jewish Sinbad the Sailor, invented
about him. They told how, when he was in Arabia, the king
consulted him on the very delicate question of the Queen's
fidelity. "I am black," his Majesty said, "and so is the Queen.
Yet she has given birth to a white child, and I have prac-
tically determined to kill her, for she has surely been faithless
to me."
"Do you have white statuary in your house?" Akiba asked.
"Indeed, I have."
"Then it is looking at them which affected the color of
the child, for the Scriptures tell us that Jacob outwitted Laban
by placing spotted sticks before the ewes in mating time." 75
Another story was told to illustrate his use of the maxim,
THE STEEP ASCENT
"Whatever God does is for the best." While Akiba was on
a journey with one or two companions, they came to -a city
without an inn or guesthouse. "It is for the best," he said and
they went out to sleep in the field. They had with them an
ass, a cock and a light. During the night the wind extin-
guished the light, a cat killed the cock, and a lion devoured
the ass. When Akiba awoke and noticed the havoc, he simply
remarked, "It is for the best," and went to sleep again. In the
early morning hours, a band of Bedouins attacked the city
and took its inhabitants captive. "Did I not say that whatever
God does is for the best?" Akiba asked. "Had we found
accommodation in the city, had the lights been burning in the
field, had the ass brayed, or had the cock crowed, we would
surely not be alive." 76
A more trustworthy story records his conversation with the
pious, wealthy, but frugal, Ben Boion. 77 While Akiba and a
companion were approaching Ben Boion's house, they over-
heard his servant ask him, "What shall I prepare for dinner
today?"
"Some vegetables," the master answered, "but get some
stale ones, for they are cheaper."
When Akiba heard this, he said, "How can we ask him for
a contribution?"
Nevertheless, after they had finished their collection in the
town, they decided that they would not omit Ben Boion. He
told them to go to his wife and say that she was to give them
a measure of dinars.
When they brought this message to her, she asked, "Did he
say an even measure or a heaped up measure?"
"Neither," they replied.
"In that case, I will give you a heaped up measure."
When they returned to thank Ben Boion, they could not
132 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
help asking him why he was so niggardly with his food, and
so generous to them.
"I have a right to deny myself any superfluity," he an-
swered, "but how can I refuse to fulfill the commands of my
Maker?"
One of Akiba's oratorical devices was to illustrate the morals
he was trying to inculcate by anecdotes which he told < of
himself. These are essentially parables in the first person, and
Akiba would doubtless have been surprised to hear that future
generations would gravely accept them as records of miracles.
"While I was at sea I saw a vessel founder, and I was
especially distressed over a young disciple who I knew was
on it. But when our ship arrived in Cappadocia, I found him
sitting before the congregation, answering questions of the
Law. I said to him, 'My son, how did you escape from the
sea?' He answered, 'As I was about to enter the boat, a poor
man came to me and begged for alms. I gave him a coin,
and he said to me, "As you have given me my life, so may
your life be spared to you." And when I sank to the bottom
of the sea, I heard the waves calling to one another, "Come
and let us save that man who has done good all his life." ' " 78
Like other effective raconteurs, Akiba had, it seems, woven
this strange tale out of factual experience, which he later
reported to the conclave without the embellishment of moral
and miracle. He had actually seen a ship founder off the coast
of Cappadocia and had been surprised to find that one of the
passengers, a young Palestinian student, had escaped, as 1 have
thousands of other shipwrecked people, by seizing a plank of
the ship and floating with it to the shore. 79 The incident
naturally left a deep impression on Akiba. He not only used
it, in fanciful elaboration, to move his hearers to deeds of
mercy, but in bald literalness he urged on his colleagues the
THE STEEP ASCENT 133
duty of instruction in swimming: "In addition to every other
obligation which a father owes his child, he must teach him
to swim." 80
Akiba made one of his children the subject of another fancy
which he used for exhortatory purpose. Taking his motif this
time not from experience, but from the apbchryphal book of
Tobit, he narrated that his daughter had been warned by
soothsayers that she would be bitten by a serpent on her wed-
ding night. When the time came, she completely forgot the
prediction. As she was removing her clothes after the festivi-
ties, she absent-mindedly thrust a pin into a hole in the wall.
The next morning, she withdrew the pin, and discovered that
she had killed a serpent with it. When Akiba asked her
whether she could explain the miracle, she told him that
while the wedding guests had sat at the feast, a poor man
had come to the gate. Seeing that no one was paying any
attention to him, she had given him one of the costly wedding
gifts she had received from her father. "Does not this prove,"
Akiba was wont to conclude, "the truth of the verse, 'Charity
delivereth from death' " (Prov. io:2). 81
In another tale, frankly a parable, Akiba said: "To whom
may possessors of wealth be compared ? To a group of people
who were indebted to a king, and who had been granted an
extension of time for payment. Most of them, not recognizing
this favor, failed to send him any gift or show him any
gratitude. But there was one in their midst who sent greetings
and a gift to the king each day, saying, 'It is proper to honor
the physician before the need arises.' When the final time
for payment of the debts came, the king sent his officers
with an execution against all the debtors. When these were
arrayed before the king, he immediately singled out the
courteous one and offered him his hand. The others won-
dered, saying, 'This man is in debt to the king, yet he is given
134 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
such honor.' But the officer said to them, 'This man paid
homage to the king, greeted him and sent him gifts.' "
"Now," Akiba concluded, "just as this man's gifts to the
king won him honor, though he was a debtor, so shall we be
singled out by the King of kings for our gifts to him. And
what are the gifts we can make to God? Charity to the
poor." 82 . ^
In another address which has been preserved in part, he
said, "If a man be the creditor of a petty official, he takes pride
in that fact. The creditor of a ranking officer is even happier.
And happiest of all is he who is creditor to the king himself.
Yet God, who is the King of kings, says to us, 'Give to the
poor, and ye shall become my creditors,' as it is written, 'He
that is gracious unto the poor lendeth unto the Lord' " (Prov.
19: i7). 83
He who is kind to the poor may be certain, Akiba further
taught, that his prayer will be heard. 84 On the other hand,
Akiba was very severe against those who asked for charity
when they did not need it. "He who accepts a penny as alms
when he does not need it will live to be in true want"; "he
who covers his eyes or his thighs with rags and cries, 'Give
to the blind!' 'Give to the crippled!' is predicting his fate"; 85
"Better a Sabbath without celebration than with alms," he
said. 86
Anxious as Akiba was to obtain all possible gifts for the
charity funds which he supervised, he would not permit any-
one to make contributions beyond his means. When the pious
Yeshebab offered to give everything to the poor, Akiba dis-
suaded him. The rabbinical rule, he maintained, permits one
to distribute only one-fifth of one's possessions, the rest are
to be kept for one's old age and one's family. 87
About fifteen years had passed since Akiba had come to
the academy a humble shepherd, with little hope. He had
THE STEEP ASCENT 135
risen past colleagues and masters and stood, at last, on a high
pinnacle, a dominant figure in Jewish life. Later sages, in
their efforts to explain his intellectual greatness to the simple,
had recourse to the usual oriental device of hyperbole. One
record puts the number of Akiba's disciples at twelve thou-
hand, another at twenty-four thousand. 88 The time of his
separation from his wife, which in reality could hardly have
exceeded three years, is extended over the full thirteen years
from his coming to the academy until his victorious debate
with Eliezer ben Hyrkanos.
Incredible as this is, the Babylonian teachers thought it
insufficient, and they created a legend, according to which,
when Akiba came home at the end of twelve years, he heard
a neighbor berating Rachel for her self-imposed widowhood.
"Were he to take my advice," Rachel is described as replyingj
"he would remain away another twelve years!" Hearing this,
Akiba turned back without even entering his house, and thus
remained separate from his wife for no less than twenty-four
years. When he finally returned, Rachel could not make her
way to him through the welcoming throngs. But he, recog-
nizing her from a distance, rushed to her past everyone.
"You put us to shame," his pupils remonstrated with him.
But he replied, "She suffered much while I was engaged in
the study of the Law."
These apocryphal and semi-apocryphal stories are a measure
of the admiration Akiba aroused in the minds of succeeding
generations. His actual greatness is established by the bare
record. At the age of fifty-five, still in the fullness of bodily
vigor and mental alertness after an unparalleled struggle with
adversity and opposition, he set out on his lifework the
reconstruction of the Law and the establishment of a perma-
nent school.
V. ON THE HEIGHTS
AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL
THE twenty years which followed the successful revolt
against Gamaliel were probably the happiest in Akiba's
life. His children were growing up, two sons and two daugh-
ters, all of them showing high promise. His wife, Rachel,
was sharing with him the fruits of their common sacrifices
the friendship of their intimate co-workers and the approba-
tion of the general public.
And yet the period began under a cloud. The Roman gov-
ernment, which for fifteen years had steadily pursued a policy
of friendship and conciliation, suddenly reversed itself and
enacted a series of restrictive regulations against the Jews.
Our meager records afford no certain explanation of this
change of policy, but it was probably associated with a num-
ber of notable conversions to Judaism which occured at Rome,
The most distinguished of the converts to the despised,
"atheistic" faith was Flavius Clemens, a kinsman of the Em-
peror. The intrusion of Judaism into the imperial family
threw the government into a temporary hysteria. In the
autumn of the year 95, news reached Palestine of new dis-
asters pending against the Jews at Rome. No time could be
lost, and a few days before the Sukkot festival the four leading
scholars, Gamaliel, Joshua, Eleazar ben Azariah and Akiba
set out for the capital of the Empire. 1
Before they sailed, the scholars paid a last visit to the ruined
Temple, doubtless to pray for safety and success on their
136
ON THE HEIGHTS I AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 137
perilous journey. As they approached the Temple hill, they
observed a fox running out. Three of them, Gamaliel, Joshua
and Eleazar, burst into tears at this sight.
"Alas," they cried, "that we have lived to see the literal
fulfillment of the verse, 'The mountain of Zion which is deso-
late, the foxes walk upon it' " (Lam. 5:18).
But Akiba did not weep. "We should rather rejoice," he
said. "For the Scriptures foretell both the utter desolation of
the Temple and its reconstruction. How can we hope for
the fulfillment of the good promises, until the worst has come
to pass."
This commission was not the first which the Palestinian
Jews had sent to Rome since the destruction of the Temple.
About a decade earlier, Gamaliel, Eliezer ben Hyrkanos and
Joshua had gone on a similar journey, perhaps to obtain the
right to appoint a Nasi. But for Eleazar ben Azariah and
Akiba the visit to the Imperial City was a new experience. 2
The festival of Sukkot occurred while the commission was
still at sea, and the members had much difficulty in the observ-
ance of its ceremonies. Gamaliel alone possessed the Lulab,
that cluster of palm branch, myrtle, willows and the citron,
which is used at the prayers of the festival. When Gamaliel
had said his prayers, he handed the Lulab, in turn, to Joshua,
Eleazar and Akiba. A more serious difficulty arose, however,
with regard to the booth. Gamaliel, representing the patrician
view, held that a ceremonial booth had to be a commodious,
reasonably stable structure; since this was impossible on the
ship, he preferred to do without it. Akiba, the plebeian, con-
sidered it quite proper to erect one on the ship. Gamaliel,
softened and mellowed, permitted Akiba to have his way.
But after the booth had been built, a wind blew it off the
138 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
deck and into the water. "Now, where is your Sukkah?"
Gamaliel asked in triumph.
While they were aboard, Gamaliel remembered that in his
haste to sail he had neglected to set aside the necessary tithes
of his harvest. Fortunately, it was possible to make arrange-
ments on board ship, for Eleazar ben Azariah was a priest,
Joshua was a Levite, and Akiba was overseer of the^poor.
So Gamaliel called them all together and said, "The tithe
which I will separate from the produce of my field is hereby
given to Joshua, and the place it occupies is leased to him.
Another tithe, which I will separate, is given to Akiba ben
Joseph, so that he may acquire it on behalf of the poor, and
its place is leased to him."
Joshua then said, "One tenth of my tithe, which I will
separate when we reach home, is given to Eleazar ben
Azariah, and the place it occupies is leased to him." For the
Levite must give one tenth of his tithe to the priest, in accord-
ance with Numbers 18:26.
Arriving in Italy, the ship stopped first at Brundisium, the
modern Brindisi. Unfortunately, it left that port on the Sab-
bath, putting the scholars in a serious quandary regarding a
difficult question of ceremonial observance. As is well known,
rabbinic tradition forbids journeys, even on foot, beyond two
thousand cubits from the city limits. The plebeians considered
the range of their Sabbath movement fixed by the port which
they left. Since they were soon well beyond the prescribed
limits, they had to remain practically motionless lest they add
to the involuntary transgression. The patricians, on the other
hand, held that if a person was accidentally removed from his
city, he carried his Sabbath range with him, as it were, and
could travel two thousand cubits from any place where he
found himself. Gamaliel and Eleazar ben Azariah therefore
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 139
felt free to walk about all over the ship, while Joshua and
Akiba were practically fastened to their places.
"All day long," Hananiah, Joshua's nephew, reports, "they
carried on the discussion with regard to the Law. In the end,
Joshua was won over to Gamaliel's view so far as the ship
was concerned, but he refused to extend the principle to other
contingencies." 3
On another occasion, they came into port on the Sabbath,
and the question arose whether they might disembark. They
all agreed to ask Gamaliel's opinion this time, and he per-
mitted it. "I have been watching since dusk," he said, "and
we have not moved a Sabbath limit." But there was another
difficulty; the improvised ladder by which they had to descend
had been made on the Sabbath, and a Jew must not benefit
by any work done on the holy day, even if it be performed
by a Gentile. Again Gamaliel set their minds at rest. "Since
it was not made in our presence (and therefore was not spe-
cially intended for us), we may use it."
When the sages finally reached Puteoli the magnificent
seaport of Rome where Paul had landed half a century earlier
and heard the great bustle of the traffic, three of them burst
into tears. Once more, as at the Temple ruins, Akiba stood by,
dry-eyed, even smiling.
"Why are you smiling?" they said to Akiba.
"And why do you weep ?" he asked in turn.
"How can we help weeping," they answered, "when Jerusa-
lem, the footstool of God, lies in ruins and this city of idolatry
flourishes so mightily ?"
"And for that very reason do I laugh," said Akiba. "If this
is what God gives to those who transgress his will, how great
is the glory destined for those who obey him."
"Akiba," they all cried, "you have consoled us, you have
I4O AKIB A: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
consoled us. May you be consoled by the Comforting
Messiah!"
Apparently the commission remained at Rome for the
whole winter, but no record has been preserved of its activi-
ties. There was a powerful and prosperous Jewish community
at the capital, and doubtless some of the leaders were of great
assistance to the sages, introducing them to important officials
and other persons of influence. We may conjecture, too, that
the sages tried to strengthen the ties between his distant com-
munity and the conclave at Yabneh.
In later times, various stories concerning the commission
circulated in Palestine. There is one anecdote of an encounter
between Joshua and Caesar's daughter. Admiring Joshua's
wit and commiserating with his plain features, the Roman
maiden is said to save asked, "How does so much wisdom
happen to be put in no ungainly a body?"
"In what kind of jars does your father keep his wine?"
Joshua asked in turn.
"Earthenware," she answered.
"Has he not gold or silver vessels ?"
"Aye," she said, "but they would spoil the wine."
"Well, then," he said, "that answers your question." 4
A more serious conundrum was propounded to the whole
group of sages by some "philosophers." "If your God is all-
powerful, as you say, and the other gods have no existence,
why does he not destroy their visible images ?"
The Jewish sages replied: "If the only idols worshiped were
those which are unessential to the world, He might do so. But
the sun, the moon, the planets and the stars are all among the
gods. Shall God destroy his world because of a few fools?" 5
More interest attaches to a curious encounter between the
visiting sages and a member of the primitive Roman Church
ON THE HEIGHTS : AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 141
who had come to the synagogue to hear them. One of them
had taken as the subject of his discourse the contrast between
the wilfullness of earthly despots and God's adherence to Law.
"A human ruler," he said, hinting at the notorious licentious-
ness of the emperors, "makes laws for others, but he himself
fails to observe them; God, however, obeys the Law which
he has set before men."
Hearing this, the antinomian Christian asked how the sages
could justify the restrictions they placed on activity during
the Sabbath. "God does not refrain from work on that day;
he raises clouds, sends forth winds and makes the rain de-
scend," he said.
The speaker, replying with calculated simplicity, said: "May
not a man carry in his own house? And is not the whole
universe the possession of the Holy One, blessed be He?" 6
They were especially impressed, apparently, with the treat-
ment they received from a Jewish philosopher who has been
identified with Josephus. The life of the renegade since he
had come to Rome was almost as tempestuous as it had been
in Palestine. Envy and mistrust, hairbreadth escapes, startling
changes of fortune and, withal, inner vacillation and hesita-
tion, continued to be his lot. It probably did not occur to him
that this curious fate, which pursued him in the new land as
in the old, was largely of his own making. No one had ever
been given better opportunities for self-development than he.
At the age of thirty-three, in the fullness of his strength, he
had come to the imperial capital, the favorite of the new
rulers of the Roman world. He had good reason to believe
that life was just beginning for him. To be the intimate friend
of the Caesars what an elevation for the humble priest of a
distant province, what a change of fortune for the man who
had had to struggle for the governorship of tiny Galilee!
142 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Indeed, it then seemed that he had played his cards well.
He had outwitted not only his fellow officers and soldiers,
but even their God.
When Vespasian and Titus commissioned him to write a
history of the Jewish war to deter others from similar insur-
rections, he threw himself into the task with fiery zeal. He
drew up the Aramaic edition with remarkable rapidity^vand
as soon as it was completed set about preparing a Greek edi-
tion for the Roman world. 7 He spared no words of praise for
the Roman conquerors or their Jewish partisans; nor of de-
nunciation for his former comrades-in-arms, the revolution-
aries. He selected only one of the rebel leaders for a panegyric:
Hanan, the Sadducean high priest, whose name was anathema
among the Pharisees. 8 He extolled the House of Herod, whom
his compatriots rightly condemned, managing to surround
even its decadence with the tragic beauty of a Greek drama. 9
So little was he then concerned about the opinions of the
Palestinians that he made no effort to conceal his perfidy
against his fellow-soldiers. He actually boasted of the juggling
of the lots which were to decide the order of precedence in
death, and told with utter frankness how he had "counted
the numbers with cunning" 10 so as to escape the death which
they had all agreed to share. He apologized for such praise
as he had to bestow on the Jewish warriors, explaining that it
was necessary in order to show the true magnitude of their
conquerors. He could even laugh over the mourning which
the men of Jerusalem observed when they believed he had
been killed at Jotapata:
"Whereas in each household and family there was mourning
of the relatives for their own lost ones, the lamentation for the
commander was national. While some mourned for a host,
others for a relative, some for a friend, others for a brother,
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 143
all alike wept for Josephus. . . . But when time revealed the
truth and all that had really happened at Jotapata, when the
death of Josephus was found to be a fiction and it became
known that he was alive and in Roman hands and being
treated by the commanding officers with a respect beyond the
common lot of a prisoner, the demonstrations of wrath at his
being still alive were as loud as the former expressions of
affection when he was believed to be dead." 1J>
He was awakened out of this pleasant dream in the year 79
when his patron, Titus, died, and Domitian, the second son of
Vespasian, became Emperor. The new ruler disliked men of
letters; he drove even the greatest masters, like Juvenal, Taci-
tus and Pliny, into silent obscurity. There was no possibility
that Josephus could win his friendship. 12 The delicate flattery
and the quaint tales of Jewish life with which he had enter-
tained the two earlier Flavians were entirely without interest
for their grim successor. And alas, even the youthful charm
which had helped Josephus so much in his conquest of his
masters had begun to fail him now; he was in his forties.
To make matters worse, jealous enemies were busy spread-
ing calumnies about him. He was accused of treason to the
empire, and of being implicated in a riot of some Jews in
Cyrene. 13 The accusations were easily refuted and quickly dis-
missed; yet the fact that they had been made at all deeply
wounded Josephus. His sense of security was gone.
Naturally, the man who had escaped the snares of John of
Gishcala and had emerged alive from the cave at Jotapata,
was not one to surrender without a struggle to apparent mis-
fortune. Throughout his life he had used difficulties as step-
ping stones for his ambition. He would do so again. His
position at court was lost; but he would secure for himself
a higher distinction, immortality in Greek letters. His account
144 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
of the Jewish war had received high praise; he would produce
an even greater work, of truly monumental proportions a
history of the Jews. That the Aramaic-speaking provincial
should win laurels for historical and literary composition in
the Hellenic world would be an even more magnificent
tribute to his power than his rise to imperial favor under
Vespasian. The good will of rulers might be won through
accident; literary recognition could be attained only through
merit.
He could not doubt that such a work would command a
considerable reading public. There was widespread curiosity
about this people, whose symbols had been engraved
on the Arch of Titus, and who were distinguished by their
faith, their courage and their peculiar customs. The most
incredible stories were told about them. They were described
by their friends as the greatest, and by their enemies as the
meanest, of nations. They were said to worship an unseen
God, more pure and exalted than any of those known to
Greece and Rome; but they were also accused of having
placed the head of an ass in the most sacred chamber of their
Temple. They were described as most tender and merciful,
avoiding any act of cruelty as a sin, and forbidding the use
of blood for food; yet some writers charged them with
ferocity and love of battle. All the world knew that they had
dared challenge the might of imperial Rome and for four
years had withstood her best legions. Even in defeat they
seemed to prosper. They still continued to live according to
their ancestral rites, and were winning proselytes to their faith
in the highest circles. What was the truth about them ?
Josephus was determined that the tone of his book should
be far different from that of The Jewish War. It was to be
more than a masterpiece, giving evidence of his own powers.
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 145
His first book had been a celebration of the triumph of Rome;
his new work was to describe the greatness of the Jew. He
knew at last that his connection with his people was unbreak-
able. He might eat forbidden food, enter into prohibited mar-
riages, violate the Sabbath and the festivals; but he could not
tear himself from the associations in which the world placed
him. He may even have attributed some of his misfortunes to
his Judaism; and the thought may well have occurred to him
that had he striven to exalt his faith and his nation in the
eyes of the world, he would not have fallen so low from his
high estate. When he had written the Jewish War, he had
felt that there was no need for a further description of the
earlier Jewish history. Now he realized that it was essential.
The Roman world must be taught that the Jewish people,
weak in war, had an ancient lineage and a proud tradition,
that it was at least as important in the development of civiliza-
tion as the Greeks. A century before him, Dionysius of
Halicarnassus had written a monumental Roman Archaeol-
ogy, in twenty books; Josephus decided to write a ]eurish
Archaeology of exactly the same length. This similarity was
striking enough. To emphasize it, Josephus noted a contrast.
He would not, he said, include in his work any admixture
of "the unseemly mythology current among others."
For fourteen years Josephus devoted himself indefatigably
to his task. He paraphrased the whole of the Pentateuch,
chapter by chapter, from the story of the Creation until the
entrance of the Jews into Canaan. He then took up the
prophetic books, using both the Scriptures and other records,
and traced his people's history until his own time. He omitted
the story of the Golden Calf and the Broken Tablets, which
were so little to the credit of the Jews; he discussed at length
the excellence, of the Mosaic Law; noted the Legislator's
146 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
e
candid acknowledgment of his indebtedness to the alien Jethro
for the establishment of the Jewish judicial system; took pains
to describe the Pharisees in far more favorable colors than he
had used in The Jewish War, and now gave them, instead
of the Essenes, the first place among the Jewish sects; 14
disparaged rather than praised the House of Herod; and actu-
ally denounced the high priest, Hanan, to whom he had-de-
voted a panegyric in the earlier work. 15
The book was thus primarily intended to be a defense of
official, contemporary, Pharisaic Judaism against the attack of
anti-semites. But there is evidence that the author was con-
cerned not only with the defense of his people against their
enemies, but with justification of himself before God. Anxiety
for the Future Life as well as fear of persecutors was filling
his heart. He was merely at the beginning of middle age, but
the hand of Time was weighing heavily upon him. The
shadow of death, which was to come to him in his early
sixties, already tormented him. Before he completed his work
he became so weary that he was compelled to hand over his
notes to assistants who wrote four books, one-fifth of the
whole, for him. 16 Long before he had reached that point,
however, he had introduced into the book what seems to be
a confession of his sin in forsaking his people. Describing
King Saul's waywardness after his exaltation to the throne, he
says:
"Now this king . . . gives all to understand and consider the
disposition of men, that while they are private persons, and in low
condition, because it is not in their power to indulge nature, nor
to venture upon what they wish for, they are equitable and mod-
erate, and pursue nothing but what is just, and bend their whole
minds and labors that way; then it is that they have this belief about
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 147
God, that He is present to all actions of their lives, and that He
not only sees their actions that are done, but clearly knows their
thoughts also, whence these actions do arise. But when they are
once advanced into power and authority they put off all such
notions, and as if they were no other than actors upon a theater,
they disguise parts and manners, and take up boldness, insolence
and a contempt of both human and divine laws, and this at a time
when they stand especially in need of piety and righteousness,
because they are then most of all exposed to envy, and all they
think and all they say are in view of all men; then it is that they
become so insolent in all their actions as though God saw them no
longer, or were overawed by their power, their fear of rumors, their
willful hates, their irrational loves these seem to them to be au-
thentic, and firm, and true, and pleasing both to men and God;
but as to what will come hereafter, they have not the least regard
for it." 17
What could this passionate outburst connote? Was he de-
nouncing the men of power who now ignored him, or was he
crying out against his earlier self, for his treatment of his
inferiors? Perhaps it was both. The bauble of literary fame,
like that of political advancement, was proving itself absurdly
childish and contemptible. The Future Life was rising to
mock all his vaunted achievements. The former disciple of
the sages had dared face Vespasian and Titus; but could he
appear before God? He firmly believed in the hereafter, and
in the messianic prophecies of Daniel. 18 What was he to do
when God would arise? What answer would he make for a
life of self-indulgence and hopeless apostasy? The very riches
and luxury with which he was surrounded would testify
against him in the Day of Judgment. Of what account were
his vaunted achievements ? Of what use would be recognition
among the pagans? If his book were to make its way into
148 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
every library in the world, how would that avail him, if he
lost his immortality? He was a Faust who dared not keep
his agreement. He had rushed from the camp of rebellion
to the very presence of Vespasian; but he could not come
from apostasy into the presence of God. He could not claim
ignorance; he could not claim misunderstanding; he could
not claim undue temptation. And yet, surrounding him on
all sides, was the evidence of his guilt. His wealth came from
the rents of robbed estates which he had accepted from the
despoiling Roman. Its rightful owners were where? It was
frightful to think. In the grave, in hopeless bondage, in houses
of infamy.
Reason dictated the surrender of his affluence. But he had
never been able to follow Reason, so long as an alternative
presented itself. The curious hesitancy, weakness of will and
doubt of his own judgment, which had made him join the
rebellion when he knew it was doomed to failure, which had
prevented him from surrendering to Vespasian before the
siege of Jotapata and had kept him in that ill-fated fortress
until it was too late to escape, was still a fundamental part of
his character. He was incapable of sacrifice of present goods
even for permanent happiness.
There was one thing he could do: he could indulge in
passionate self-pity; he could weep. Others might envy him;
they could not measure the depth of his inner unhappiness.
He almost persuaded himself that he had always striven to
do right, that he had acted unselfishly and that he had sought
nothing but the good of his people. Rightly considered, his
state was unenviable. He was spending his days in a gilded
cage, in an imposing mausoleum. Better by far had it been
for him to have remained with his fellow-students in
Palestine. He would have dwelt in a miserable hovel, rather
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 149
than in a magnificent palace; he would have worn a scholar's
gulf a rather than a Roman toga; he would have spoken cor-
rect Aramaic rather than faulty Latin. But he would have
consorted with people he loved rather than those he feared;
he would have used his unquestioned talents to build the
Divine Law rather than to fawn on a mortal prince. He had
given up more than anyone could realize; everything, in fact,
that could make life worthwhile. Not, however, to serve his
own purpose, but through the will of God. 19 Perhaps it was
to defend his people against their calumniators that he had
been sent to Rome. No one was better fitted for the task;
there were hardly three men in the world who combined in
themselves such thorough knowledge of Judaism and such
complete mastery of the Greek tongue. 20 Philo had written in
defense of the Jews, but he was ignorant of the Palestinian
traditions. Josephus had demonstrated his capability as a Jew-
ish advocate in his Archaeology; he would be even more
thorough and comprehensive in other words. He projected
books on Jewish laws and customs, and on Jewish philosophy;
and he actually completed a work, usually called Against
Apion, in which he demolished the arguments of the anti-
semites, demonstrating both the antiquity of the Jews and
the beauty of their faith.
He had at last completed the full circle of his development.
He was no longer a Hellenist but, in spirit at least, a true
Palestinian. He was not ashamed to confess publicly his ina-
bility to master the correct pronunciation of Greek, or his
need for assistants in his literary efforts. 21 He proudly declares
that he and the other Jews have nothing but contempt for
these arts, which are "common not only to all sorts of free-
men, but to as many of the servants as please to learn
them." 22 The Jews, on the contrary, "gave him testimony
150 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our laws,
and is able to interpret their meaning." The man who had
fled from his people and had helped to hand them over into
the hands of their conquerors, could now write, "Robbed
(Gk. Sterethomen) though we be of wealth, of cities, of all
good things, our Law at least remains immortal; and there is
not a Jew so distant from his country, so much in awe o a
cruel despot, but has more fear of the Law than of him." 23
The opinions held about him by the Greeks now worried
him as little as had the opinions of the Jews when he first
came to Rome. Now he was deeply wounded when he was
attacked by his own people. When, a few years after the visit
of the rabbinical commission to Rome, some Palestinians pub-
lished a history reflecting discredit on him, he felt bound to
reply in his vigorous, but unfortunately far from clear or
cogent, Autobiography. Here he tried to present himself as
the persecuted lover of his people, whom self-seeking egotists
tried to destroy. He could not entirely suppress his pride in
the skillful maneuvers through which he had frustrated their
designs; in some tactless moments he included facts which
hurt his argument. He contradicted much that he had written
in the Jewish War; and produced a literary work inferior
both in style and in power. But he felt that he had vindicated
himself; and that was sufficient for him.
Josephus was, doubtless, already in this final state of mind
in the year 95 when the sages came to Rome. A year or two
had passed since his completion of his Jewish Archaeology,
but the Palestinian authorities could hardly have been ac-
quainted with its contents. They could have remembered him
only as the author of the Aramaic draft of The Jewish War.
Yet members of the Roman community must have informed
them of the change which had come over him since the death
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIB A AND HIS SCHOOL 151
of Titus. Perhaps he had intimated to friends his desire to
meet the sages. Joshua, at any rate, felt that they ought to
call on him.
"Shall we visit our comrade, the philosopher?" he asked
Gamaliel one evening.
"No," answered Gamaliel, unwilling, doubtless, to accept
any kindness from his father's old enemy, the man whom the
nationalists considered an arch-traitor.
It was characteristic of the changed relations between the
two scholars that when the next morning Joshua repeated the
request, saying, "Let us go and visit our comrade, the philos-
opher," Gamaliel agreed. Thereupon they all called on him,
Gamaliel walking in the middle, Joshua and Eleazar ben
Azariah on his right, and Akiba on his left. When they arrived
at his door, they rapped thrice before any reply came. Then
the door was opened. To their astonishment, he knew them.
"Peace on you, sages of Israel," he said, "and to Rabban Gama-
liel, above all."
For generations scholars in Palestine repeated this story,
marveling at the skillful courtesy of the simple greeting. "Had
he said, Teace on you, Rabban Gamaliel,' he would have
offended the others; had he said, Teace on you, sages of
Israel,' he would have offended Gamaliel." 24
Perhaps it was in gratitude for this visit that Josephus, a
few years later, made his laudatory mention of Gamaliel's
father in the Autobiography. What transpired at the meeting
remains unknown; the citizen of Rome could not be quoted
in the academy, and so his remarks were lost to the rabbinic
tradition. Yet there is one curious passage in the Sifre, 25 which
seems to contain a cautiously worded allusion to Josephus's
condition. As usual, the sages utilized their observation of
their contemporary's experience to illumine a passage in
152 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Scripture, the final verses in the Book of Kings, which
describe the liberation of King Jehoiachin from the prison
into which Nebuchadnezzar had thrown him. We are told
that Nebuchadnezzar's successor, Evil-merodach, "spake
kindly" to Jehoiachin and "set his throne above the thrones
of the kings that were with him in Babylon. And he
changed his prison garments, and did eat bread before him
continually all the days of his life. And for his allowance,
there was a continual allowance given him of the King, every
day a portion, all the days of his life" (II Kings 25: 27). As
they read this passage, the sages inevitably thought of their
contemporary, Josephus, who, like the ancient king, had been
elevated by the conqueror, and dwelt in an imperial palace.
And from him their minds turned to his comrades, whose
bodies still lay unburied on the battlefields of Palestine. They,
too, had a biblical prototype, in King Jehoiakim, who died
during Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem, and could there-
fore not be given proper burial. Yet the prophet had declared
that there was less occasion to weep for the unburied Jehoia-
kim than for the fortunate Jehoiachin. "We are thus taught,"
the Sifre remarks, "that the dead Jehoiakim, who lay exposed
to the heat of the day and the cold of the night, was yet in
better case than the living Jehoiachin, whose throne was above
that of the other kings, and who ate and dran\ in a royal
palace!"
During the Passover festival, a violent quarrel broke out
between Gamaliel and Akiba, reminiscent of the struggles
which had led to the overturn at Yabneh. As usual, the trou-
ble arose from a difference regarding a trivial question of
ceremonial. Gamaliel's custom forbade him to set up the
candelabrum on festival nights; it had to be prepared before
dark. The other sages agreed that this was the rule for the
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 153
Sabbath, but they denied that it applied to other holidays.
On one of the festival nights, Akiba, finding the room dark
and the candelabrum in parts, proceeded to set it up, without
regard to Gamaliel's convictions on the subject. Gamaliel re-
garded this as a grave personal offense, for it was the first
time that Akiba had transgressed a custom which Gamaliel
considered sacred. On the earlier occasions when Akiba had
defied Gamaliel, he had taken the severer view, and was to
that extent justified. But in this instance, his view was the
more lenient. Moreover, the prohibition against setting up
the candelabrum had not originated with Gamaliel; he had
received it from his father. It seemed incredible that this
upstart from the Judean countryside should dare to violate
such a custom in the presence of the Nasi.
"Why do you always put your head into quarrels?"
Gamaliel cried.
"You have taught us," Akiba answered, as on a former occa-
sion, "that the decision of the majority is binding, and the
majority agrees with me in this." 26
The sages would probably have returned empty-handed,
had not Domitian died during their stay in Rome. He was
succeeded in September, 96, by Nerva, the first of the five good
Emperors, who ruled only sixteen months, yet in this short
time managed to bring new hope to the Jews, both at Rome
and in distant Palestine. A medal was struck in honor of the
occasion bearing the likeness of the Emperor on one side, and
on the other, the words: Fisci Judaici Cdumnia Sublata.
The visit to Rome marks a turning point in Akiba's life.
The talmudic sages indicate this when they remark, with
that special delight which they find in the discovery of any
similarity between Akiba and Moses, that both men were in
recognized positions of authority for the same duration of
154 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
time, forty years. 27 To arrive at this calculation, Akiba's activ-
ity must be computed from the year 97, when he returned from
Rome. Had Akiba died before he undertook this diplomatic
task, he would be remembered as the most brilliant mem-
ber of the illustrious academy at Yabneh. But from that point
on, his achievement as a leader competes with, and eventually
overshadows, his reputation as a scholar. To what extent ^the
commission owed its success to his adroitness and personal
charm we are not told. Probably as one of the younger mem-
bers he was kept in the background during the conversations
with the more distinguished officials. But in such missions
the formal meeting with the final authority is frequently of
less permanent importance than the preliminary work done
in conference with secretaries and other subordinates. The
story of his encounter with the Roman general, and the
friendship which later developed between him and Rufus, as
well as the significant fact that from the time of his return he
was held in increasing reverence by both his colleagues and
the masses, all point to distinguished services by him during
this difficult time.
For the thirteen years after his return, from 97 to no, while
the Jewish community enjoyed unusual prosperity and peace,
Akiba devoted himself to the formulation of his juristic prin-
ciples, the clarification of his theological ideas and the estab-
lishment of his school.
"To what may Akiba be compared ?" asked one of his
pupils, describing the activities in which he engaged at this
time. "To a peddler who goes about from farm to farm. Here
he obtains wheat, there barley, and in a third place, spelt.
When he comes home he arranges them all in their respective
bins. So Akiba went about from scholar to scholar, getting
all the traditions he could; and then he proceeded to arrange
ON THE HEIGHTS : AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 155
them in an orderly granary." 28 It is probable that the division
of the Mishna into six orders, and even the subdivision into
treatises, go back to him.
Except for a few treatises describing the ancient Temple
and its service, the earlier compilations were not arranged by
subject-matter at all. They were strings of legal norms put
together according to the similarity of their literary formula-
tion. 29 There was, for instance, one collection which began:
"The First Adar and the Second Adar are alike except that
the reading of the scroll of Esther and the gifts to the poor
are observed only in the Second Adar; festivals and the Sab-
bath are alike, except that on the festivals food may be pre-
pared; the Day of Atonement and the Sabbath are alike,
except that one who willfully violates the Sabbath may be
punished by a human court, while the violation of the Day
of Atonement is punishable only by God." A number of
other statements of the same kind are given, having no inner
connection whatever, put together merely because their simi-
larity of formulation made a kind of mnemonic. Akiba real-
ized that while such a method was satisfactory for fragments
of the Law, it was altogether inadequate for a complete code.
A code of Jewish Law required logical division and sub-
division, and must sacrifice rhythm to reason.
Having decided on the method which he would follow in
the arrangement of his material, Akiba even more boldly re-
placed ancient norms with others which represented his own
opinions. Such, however, was the authority he came to enjoy
that within a generation the rejected material was almost un-
known. 30 Indeed, much of it has been irrevocably lost, but a
few fragments were preserved and handed down by anti-
quarians like Akiba's disciple, Jose ben Halafta. 31 In many
other instances, the views of the Hillelites, while known and
156 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
recognized, had not yet been reduced to standard norms.
Akiba supplied this need. 32
The trenchant, epigrammatic style which he had developed
for his apothegms and decisions proved invaluable to him in
his new activity. The effective combination of brevity and
precision was a boon to the student, who had to memorize
the text, and it set a good example for all future codifiers.
His Mishna became so popular in his own lifetime that even
those parts which he rejected in his older years continued to
be studied. 33 Being oral texts, they could not be issued in new
editions; once memorized, they could not be withdrawn from
circulation, as it were. 34 The original statements were repeated
in the academies, with the qualifying remark that Akiba had
changed his mind about them, in part.
The later talmudists rated these achievements so high that
they declared Akiba had saved the Torah from oblivion.
They ranked his work with the discovery of the Law in the
days of Josiah and Ezra. "Had not Shaphan arisen in his time,
and Ezra in his time, and Akiba in his time," a homilist of
the next century remarks, "would not the Law have been
forgotten in Israel?" 35 Some of the more imaginative sages
saw in Akiba a second Moses. In fact, one of them describes
Moses as praying that God might choose Akiba to give the
Law to Israel.
When Moses ascended into the heavens, he found God
binding small coronets about the letters of the Law.
"Why these coronets?" Moses asked.
"Because," God replied, "at the end of many generations there
will arise a scholar by the name of Akiba ben Joseph, who will
interpret each one of these letters."
"Show him to me," asked Moses. But when Akiba arose in the
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 157
vision of the future, and Moses heard him discussing the Law,
the great prophet called out, "Master of the Universe, dost Thou
have such a man before Thee and yet givest the Torah to Thy
people through me?"
"Be silent," God replied, "such is My thought." 36
Indeed, one of the greatest scholars of the following cen-
tury, Simeon ben Lakish, insists that God revealed Akiba's
activity to Adam. The ancestor of the human race was per-
mitted to see each generation with its leaders, its sages and its
teachers. But apparently Adam remained unmoved with the
achievements and distinction of his posterity until Akiba
appeared. "He rejoiced in Akiba's learning and was saddened
by his death," says Simeon ben Lakish. 37
For centuries the Mishna of Akiba was recalled as an out-
standing achievement of rabbinic learning. Not only Jewish
scholars but Christian Church Fathers referred to it. 38 One
of the best-informed authorities of the third century tells us
that it became the core of the Mishna of Meir, which in turn
was incorporated into the final redaction of Judah the Patri-
arch still the basic codification of rabbinic Law. 39
"The truths which were not revealed to Moses," says a
later teacher in his enthusiasm, "were uncovered to Akiba" ! 40
When he left Palestine on his various journeys, "there re-
mained not his equal in all the land," asserted his younger
contemporaries. 41 When he died, "the arms of the Law were
broken, and the fountains of wisdom were stopped up." 42
No wonder that legend describes him as being buried by
none other than Elijah. 43
Akiba's influence in the academy gradually became para-
mount. The principle, accepted by later talmudists and codi-
fiers, that Akiba's opinion must be given preference to that
158 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
of any of his colleagues doubtless originated in the attitude
taken toward him in his own lifetime. 44 Sometimes his oppo-
nents, losing patience with his mode of inference, would cry
out bitterly against him. His insistence that words which were
not essential to the meaning of a passage must have some
special significance. His new rules of hermeneutics, and his
utter independence of tradition were freely attacked. "Akiba,"
Eleazar ben Azariah once shouted at him, "even if you con-
tinue to repeat for a whole day that the superfluous word
proves your point, we will not listen to you!" 45 In his argu-
ments Akiba drew on every source of experience. Sometimes
he would even fall back upon his knowledge of animal
anatomy, acquired during his shepherd days. Thus in a
controversy with Johanan ben Nuri regarding the ritual status
of an animal, Akiba maintained that it was "fit," and that
when it was slaughtered its organs would demonstrate this.
Although his prediction was only partly fulfilled, Akiba
would not yield. "How long will you continue to feed our
people forbidden food?" Johanan, exasperated at this in-
transigeancy, cried to Akiba.
"And how long will you continue to waste our people's
money ?" retorted Akiba. 46
Johanan was more successful in his protest against Akiba's
rigorous rule recommending the divorce of a wife who is the
subject of evil gossip, though there be no proof of her in-
fidelity. "If we accept your opinion," Johanan ben Nuri said,
"not a single daughter of Abraham will be safe with her
husband. Yet the Torah says that a woman shall be divorced
only if the husband find some unseemly thing in her (Deut.
24:1). And again we read, 'At the mouth of two witnesses,
or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be estab-
lished'" (Deut. I9:i5). 47
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 159
Another scholar, Yeshebab, also objected vehemently to
Akiba's stringency in regard to questions of chastity and mar-
riage. "Come and let us cry out against Akiba ben Joseph," he
said, "for his rule unduly extends the taint of illegitimacy in
Israel." 48
It was only occasionally that Akiba was outvoted in the
academy. Johanan ben Nuri sorrowfully admitted this to his
fellow-Galilean, Halafta, whom he visited. Twice in the course
of their discussions of various legal matters, he remarked, "I
agree with you on this point, but what can be done, since
Akiba opposes us?" 49
Akiba's dialectic genius could not of itself have given him
this complete control; he had, in addition, the devotion of a
group of younger colleagues. The most important of these
was Ben Azzai, a remarkable sage, whose character and his-
tory are hardly inferior in interest to those of Akiba himself.
He was apparently a provincial from Galilee, and he retained
throughout his life some of the intellectual and emotional
prejudices of that district. It was perhaps to his origin in the
semi-pagan North that he owed his knowledge of Greek.
Even more important, he inherited from the country a deep
respect for the memory of Akabiah ben Mahalalel, that
famous patrician sage, the contemporary of Gamaliel I, who
had been expelled from the Pharisaic order for intransigeancy.
Most of the scholars at Yabneh paid no attention to the tradi-
tions which were preserved from Akabiah, but Ben Azzai
went so far as to quote verbatim with slight additions and
interpolations a heterodox maxim he had composed: "He
who considers four things will never commit a transgression:
Whence he comes, whither he goes, what he is destined to
become, and who is his Judge. Whence does he come? Out
of darkness. Whither does he go? To the deepest darkness.
160 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
What is he destined to become ? Dust and worms. Who is his
Judge ? The King of Kings." 50 This unequivocal denial of
personal immortality was doubtless partly responsible for the
severe punishment meted out to Akabiah; and only a bold
man would repeat it in the academy after half a century.
True, Ben Azzai embellished the statement with additions
which demonstrated his own orthodoxy, yet the citation
proved him an adherent and admirer of the ousted scholar. 51
With such a background we should naturally have expected
Ben Azzai to join the patricians. But his poverty during the
early days in Yabneh drove him into the ranks of the plebe-
ians. He did not earn enough to supply his personal wants
and, of course, could not even think of marriage. When he
was urged to marry a wife who would support him, or to find
one who would be content with his modest income, he said:
"There are three people whose life cannot be called life at
all: he who must rely on the table of another, he who lives in
another man's garret, and he who is ruled by his wife." 52
Pride and independence were characteristic of Galilee. Akiba
had acknowledged his poverty and borne its consequences
cheerfully; Ben Azzai did neither. It was inevitable that such
a person should suffer much at the hands of his colleagues.
When he once remarked, innocently, that "a person who has
no children limits, as it were, the image of God," Eleazar ben
Azariah turned upon him with the ruthless retort, "There are
those who are fair in precept, and fair in deed. Ben Azzai is
fair in precept, but not in deed."
Deeply humiliated, poor Ben Azzai could only stammer,
"What shall I do ? My spirit desires the Law. The world must
be preserved by others." 53
Ultimately he married one of Akiba's daughters who, emu-
lating her mother's romantic example, undertook to provide
ON THE HEIGHTS I AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL l6l
for him. 54 Perhaps Ben Azzai was ready to accept from
Akiba's child the support which he would have spurned at
the hands of another, because he knew that the family tradi-
tion would enable him to retain his self-respect and sense of
independence in spite of the arrangement.
This new tie, naturally, brought Ben Azzai even closer to
Akiba, of whom he spoke with unsurpassed admiration.
"Compared with this baldhead," he once said of his father-in-
law, "all the sages of Israel are as inconsequential as the dried
skin of garlic." 55 When compelled to disagree with Akiba,
he would begin with an apology. "I speak not as one who
disagrees with his master, but rather as one who supplements
his words." 56 And indeed, his disagreement arose most fre-
quently from an excess of plebeian zeal, natural to a recent
convert.
Having studied under Joshua ben Hananya longer than
Akiba, Ben Azzai was frequently able to correct his master's
traditions. "So did Joshua teach," Ben Azzai would remark. 57
On a few rare occasions, Ben Azzai opposed Akiba's views
without the support of an older tradition. One such contro-
versy arose from the difference in the early training of the
two men, for Akiba believed in the dignity of labor, while
Ben Azzai could not free himself from the Galilean prejudice
against it. This disagreement led to a controversy regarding
the right of the Temple to pay artisans out of gifts which it
received.
"If a man give his estate to the Temple, and include in it
animals which may be offered as sacrifice, they may be given
as wages to workers," Akiba said.
"This is improper," said Ben Azzai. "Temple property can
be exchanged only for money, not for labor." 58
Closely associated with Akiba and Ben Azzai, was Simeon
1 62 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
ben Zoma, who, too, remained unmarried because of his
poverty. He was more famous as a homilist than as a scholar,
and even in his own field, he achieved glory rather for em-
phatic assertion than for artistic and skillful presentation.
The foundation of his preachment was the ethical principle
of contentment, which had been traditional with the plebeians
for more than half a millennium. Indeed it was inevitable that
it should arise and be sponsored by men who met frustration
at every turn. Unless they could convince themselves that
"everything which occurred was for the best," they could
hardly have continued to live. When Ben Zoma, who earned
little more than was essential to keep body and soul together,
saw a crowd assembled anywhere, he would say, without any
attempt at sarcasm or concealed bitterness, "Blessed be God,
who created all these people to wait upon me. How much
work did Adam perform before he could taste a bit of food?
He had to plough and sow and reap and gather and thresh
and winnow and select and grind and sift and knead and
bake, and only then could he eat his bread, while I awake in
the morning and find everything prepared for me. How many
diligent workers must arise at dawn so that my needs may be
satisfied when I awake!"
"A generous guest," he remarked, explaining the attitude
which man should take to God, "says, 'Blessed may my host
be. What good meat he put before me, what good bread he
brought to me.' A bad guest says, rather, 'What did I enjoy
of his viands ? I ate one piece of meat and drank one cup of
wine. The preparations he made were only for his wife and
children.' " 59
Among his most famous maxims are: "Who is a true sage?
He who learns from every man. Who is truly strong? He
who controls his passions. Who is truly wealthy? He who is
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 163
content with his portion. Who is truly honored? He who
honors his fellow-creatures." 60
It is in these teachings of Ben Zoma that we must seek the
interpretation of Akiba's principle, "It is forbidden to partake
of any enjoyment in the world without pronouncing a bene-
diction." 61
Even Elisha ben Abuyah, Akiba's old opponent, now be-
came reconciled to him, and joined him, Ben Azzai, and Ben
Zoma in the organization of what we should call a philo-
sophical society. 62 Akiba was the recognized leader of the
group, and it was doubtless considered no mean achievement
that he had made the patrician, who had formerly expressed
such contempt for him, one of his followers.
Later legend tells how the four scholars, during one of their
mystical reveries, entered Paradise. Before they undertook the
perilous journey, Akiba said to them, "When you come to the
pillars of pure marble, do not say, 'Water, water,' for it is
written, 'He that speaketh falsehood shall not be established
before mine eyes.' " (Ps. 101: 7). 63 What this peculiar cipher
can mean, and from what context it was transferred to
its present mythological setting, is a problem which modern
scholarship has tried in vain to solve. The one fact which
emerges out of the obscurity is the close association of the four
scholars with mystical speculation.
How Akiba overcame Elisha's deep seated antagonism is
not recorded; presumably the younger man finally fell victim,
as had so many others before him, to the irresistible charm of
that mighty personality. If so, this must be recorded as one of
the most significant triumphs of Akiba's whole life. But from
the beginning a tragic denouement might have been foreseen.
For Akiba alone among the four members of the society had
a sufficiently powerful intellect to cope with the abstruse prob-
164 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
lems in the solution of which they were engaged. His phe-
nomenal mind, which had discovered such an easy path
through the intricate labyrinth of the Law, and had, in addi-
tion, so successfully mastered the various arts of aggadic
oratory, diplomatic statesmanship and institutional adminis-
tration, could also adjust itself to the abstractions of theology
and metaphysics. Ben Azzai, though far inferior to Akiba, was
yet gifted with unusual assiduity, if not with extraordinary in-
tellect. 64 Ben Zoma was eloquent but not profound. Elisha
ben Abuyah lacked even these endowments. He was intended
by nature for neither study nor abstract thought. He was, in
fact, a dilettante. His father, a wealthy landowner, had dedi-
cated him to Jewish learning because he realized that, after
the destruction of the Temple, this course was the only road to
honor and influence. 65 But, though he had come to the acad-
emy at approximately the same time as Akiba, he had attained
to nothing like the proficiency of the former shepherd. He
had, it appears, a reasonably retentive memory, but the
few maxims which have been preserved from him indicate
neither originality nor depth. While his legal sayings and
decisions have disappeared, we can hardly believe that they
were either many or important, since the only later scholar
who is described as having studied under him at all was Meir.
Akiba's attempt to re-orientate the minds of these men after
they had reached maturity, could end only in disaster. Elisha
lost his faith, Ben Zoma his reason and Ben Azzai his life. 66
But this tragic sequel was still far off in the unknown
future. For at least a decade Akiba continued to associate with
his three younger colleagues. Strong in his convictions, sup-
ported by numerous friends and disciples, he formulated his
doctrine and perfected his method.
Perhaps, however, the most distinguished person Akiba
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 165
drew into his circle was the famous proselyte, Aquila of
Pontus. This Roman citizen, possessed of great wealth and
considerable learning, had first become converted to Chris-
tianity, but had ultimately become a Jew and a faithful dis-
ciple of the rabbinical sages. In his love for the new faith and
its literature, he decided to undertake a translation of the
Scripture which would represent it more accurately than did
the Septuagint. His work, of which only a few fragments sur-
vive, is a monument of industry, cleverness and deep-seated
devotion. Akiba's influence is obvious throughout. Every He-
brew particle is rendered by a characteristic Greek word
whether that makes sense or not. This naturally interferes
with the flow of the Greek sentences and makes the transla-
tion almost unreadable. Yet the author was a gifted stylist.
Where he drops these self-imposed bonds, his writing is far
more fluent and beautiful than that of the Septuagint. It was
certainly a happy day for Akiba and his colleagues when they
discovered Aquila in their midst.
To offset these gains, Akiba had to deal with two oppo-
nents, who had entered the academy after him, but had now
reached maturity and were providing leadership for the de-
clining patrician cause Jose the Galilean and Ishmael ben
Elisha.
Jose's appearance in the conclave, years before the over-
throw of Gamaliel, was almost as dramatic as Akiba's had
been. The young man, who had come down from the north
to complete his studies, sat quietly by, day after day, until on
one occasion he suddenly joined forces with Tarfon in opposi-
tion to Ben Nannos and Akiba. "Ben Nannos had refuted
Tarfon, when Jose the Galilean came to Tarfon's assistance
and refuted Ben Nannos. Akiba then refuted Jose the Gali-
lean. After some time, Jose the Galilean thought of an answer
1 66 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
to Akiba, and he moved to reopen the discussion. 'Will you
permit me to reply now?' Jose asked Akiba." Akiba agreed,
and Jose presented an argument to which Akiba could offer
no adequate answer. Thereupon the thirty-two sages who
composed the conclave voted to support the views of Tarfon
and Jose! 67
Jose fulfilled the early promise to which the story "testifies
and became one of the leading teachers of the conclave's
patrician wing. He revived the defense of the ancient Sham-
matic doctrines and proposed new rules in their spirit. 68 His
brilliant mind would probably have brought him greater
achievements had he not been burdened with a shrewish wife,
who wondered, doubtless, that he should waste time with
scholars when he could be working for his family. 69
Ishmael ben Elisha was a younger and far more forceful
man. Descended from a patrician, priestly family, he had all
the virtues, and also all the failings, of his class. He was
morose, narrow, chauvinistic and reactionary, but also gener-
ous, tender, candid, direct and determined. Joshua ben Ha-
nanya, who had been his main teacher, had struggled in vain
to transform him into a Hillelite; he accepted the plebeian
teachings so far as they had been formulated, but he refused
to apply their underlying conceptions to changing conditions.
One of his foremost principles from the beginning of his
studies had been that the Torah must be interpreted like any
other literary document, and he had therefore opposed the
new and ingenious rules of hermeneutics introduced by
Nahum of Gimzo and Akiba. When Eliezer ben Hyrkanos,
who in general agreed with him in this, used these weapons
in defense of a patrician teaching, Ishmael, although much
younger, and hardly more than a pupil, protested. "You say
to the verse, 'Be silent, until I interpret you!' " he remon-
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 167
strated. To which Eliezer retorted with his usual brusqueness,
"You are as unproductive as a highland palm!" 70 In time,
however, this particular palm did bear fruit, and of a kind
which would have appealed to Eliezer's palate. But that was
long after the latter had been expelled from the conclave and
after Ishmael had already become Akiba's foremost antag-
onist, the leader of the reconstructed patrician opposition.
The issues between Ishmael and Akiba were in principle
identical with those which had divided the Shammaites and
the Hillelites and had led to the ousting of Eliezer ben Hyr-
kanos and the temporary removal of Gamaliel II. Ishmael
defended the rights and traditions of the patricians, the farm-
ers and the priests, while Akiba opposed them. So obviously
did Ishmael represent ecclesiastical opinion in his decisions
that his colleagues coined the saying: "Ishmael, the priest,
favors the priests." 71
The fact is, however, Ishmael was not merely pro-priestly;
he was also pro-agrarian, pro-patrician, and pro-property. He
upheld the views of his class not out of conscious bias, but
because he could not free himself from its point of view.
For more than twenty years, he and Akiba were engaged in
an almost continual debate regarding every conceivable aspect
of Jewish life: law, ceremonial, history, future, and policy
toward Rome. Each of the two teachers gathered about him
a school of followers who in turn became the teachers of the
subsequent generation and thus exercised a determining influ-
ence on the development of talmudic thought. The later sages
grouped them together as the "fathers of the rabbinic
world." 72
The seat of the private academy, which Akiba founded
while. still attending the sessions of the conclave, was the
1 68 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
little village of Bene Berak, a short distance from Yabneh. 73
The conclave at Yabneh had assembled in a vineyard; Eliezer
ben Hyrkanos had given his decision from a rock; Akiba pre-
ferred to lecture in the shade of a broad-leaved fig tree. Stu-
dents flocked to him from all parts of the country and were
drawn from the most diversified groups. There were among
them Simeon, the son of that wealthy Galilean, Yohai, who
remained on terms of intimate friendship with the Roman
governors even during the Bar Kokba rebellion and the
Hadrianic persecution; 74 Meir, the enigmatic scholar, who
earned a livelihood as a scribe, but, married to the daughter
of the aristocratic Haninah ben Teradyon, disdained the com-
panionship of the ordinary proletariat and continually tried
to identify himself with the patricians, both in thought and
in action; 75 Jose ben Halafta, the humble tanner, whose
asceticism and self-control are described in terms which
would be incredible were they not so well authenticated; 76
Judah ben Ilai, whose poverty was such that at one time he
and his wife possessed but a single over-garment which they
used in turn, and who was, nevertheless, one of the happiest
men in the whole rabbinic tradition; 7T Eleazar ben Shammua,
the priest; Nehemiah, the potter; Johanan, the cobbler; Ben-
jamin, the Egyptian proselyte; Hanina ben Hakinai, the
mystic; 78 and others of whom we know nothing more than
their names. The disciples of Ishmael, who also had a private
academy, were naturally drawn from a narrower circle. Most
of them were rich men; for example, Josiah, Isaac, and Na-
than the Babylonian, who was related to the exilarch. Jona-
than, who alone among IshmaeFs pupils upheld plebeian
views, was a priest, and it was perhaps for that reason that he
was admitted into the aristocratic academy. 79
In his relations with his students, Akiba displayed the same
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 169
charm and courtesy which had won him the affection of his
masters and his colleagues. When any of the young men fell
ill the Master was sure to visit him. He did not consider it
beneath his dignity on such a visit to arrange his pupil's room,
to sweep the floor or perform any other service. "Whosoever
neglects the duty of visiting the sick," he taught, "is guilty of
shedding blood." 80
If any especially sensitive student felt aggrieved by some
untoward incident, such as frequently occurs in academic life,
Akiba was quick to appease him. Perhaps he had the greatest
difficulty with Simeon ben Yohai, a provincial who had not
the wit or impulse to conceal his vanity, bordering on
megalomania. "I have looked about for those destined to
Paradise," Simeon once said, "and they are few indeed. If
there be three, my son Eleazar and I are of them; if there be
two, they are my son and I; if there be one, it is I." 81 "My
merit is sufficient to free the world from punishment for sin
from the day of my birth until now; and if my son Eleazar
should join me, we might free it from all the sins which have
accumulated from the day of Creation." 82 "My master, Akiba,
gave four interpretations with which I disagree, and my opin-
ion appears to be the more correct," 83 he said, in an age when
even Ben Azzai apologized for being compelled to differ with
the great sage. But even more amazingly almost blasphe-
mously Simeon remarks, "There are four things which the
Holy One, blessed be He, hates, and I too dislike." 84 What the
four things were is perhaps of less interest than the naive
temerity of the remark. No wonder this extraordinary young
man was hurt when Akiba showed a preference for Meir.
But the master, understanding something of the suppres-
sions which sought such fantastic compensation, said to him,
"My child, it is enough for thee that thy Creator and I recog-
170 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
nize thy powers!" 85 So much did Simeon appreciate this
kindness that he became more deeply attached to Akiba than
to any other person, and he had his moments of humility too.
"My children," he said many years later to his disciples, "study
my principles, for I have gleaned them carefully from those
handed to me by my master, Akiba." 86
Akiba's power over his disciples arose not merelyjfrom his
tenderness to them, but from his pedagogic ability. If, as
Fenelon says, "L'ordre est ce qu'il y a de plus rare dans Ics
operations de V esprit" Afiba's contribution to the spirit of
rabbinic Judaism cannot be overestimated.
His part in the making of the Mishna has already been
described. But the codification of the law was only part of his
contribution. He also arranged the laws and traditions as
comments on the biblical verses from which they were de-
rived. Two of his pupils, Judah and Simeon, preferred this
method, which they developed even further, while two others,
Meir and Jose, made Akiba's codes the foundation of their
compilations. 87
Ishmael did not, so far as we know, undertake the formula-
tion of any codes, but he did compile commentaries on the
Pentateuch, which, like those of Akiba, became a framework
for the additions of his disciples and their successors.
These works were not put into writing, for it was a cardinal
principle of Pharisaism at the time that rabbinic traditions
must be preserved orally. 88 They were handed down from
generation to generation by a special class of professional
memorizers. Only in the fifth century, perhaps even later,
when it became obvious that any further attempt to retain the
old tradition would result in the disappearance of the whole
Law, was permission granted to intrust this material to parch-
ment. During the three centuries in which the books had
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 171
remained an oral tradition, they had naturally changed con-
siderably in form. Yet even now the stamp of the opposing
schools is still clear, and permits us to reconstruct with rea-
sonable accuracy the methods of teaching and inference which
were current in the days of Akiba and Ishmael, seventeen
centuries ago. 89
Akiba's mode of interpretation of Scripture is, as we would
expect, a development of that which he derived from his
master, Nahum of Gimzo. Superfluous letters, words and
verses are the meat whereon he thrives. By the use of them
he is able to read his whole juristic program into the Scrip-
tures. But what he calls superfluous words would hardly seem
such to us. Thus he maintains that wherever the Scriptures
insert the word lemor (which in biblical Hebrew always
introduces direct discourse) special significance attaches to
that fact. 90 The juxtaposition of the various chapters has a
meaning which must be discovered. 91 He rejected the old
Hillelite principle of inference by generalization from par-
ticulars, and replaced it with a curious and complicated rule
of his own invention which he called "Inclusion and Limita-
tion." Neither rhetoric nor grammar offered a bar to his
imaginative argument. Indeed, were we to accept at their face
value the technical reasons he gives for his decisions, we
should be forced to the conclusion that, far from being the
greatest of the talmudists, he was simply a brilliant example
of extraordinary but wasted ingenuity. 92 But the rules
which he derives through his curious and intricate logic are
so reasonable that when we examine them we are even more
impressed with his judgment as jurist, than with his skill as
debater. It is obvious that he considered the interpretation of
the written law merely a form which had to be followed in
the derivation of desirable rules from the scriptural text.
172 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Ishmael opposed this whole system of interpretation. "The
Scriptures speak in human language," he maintained. 83
Hebrew has its grammar and its rhetoric with rules which
bind even divine utterance. The only arguments Ishmael
recognized were those based on the traditional rules of Hillel
which, however they might have been extended in actual
academic and juristic usage, had roots at least in ordinary
logic. These included such modes of argument as a fortiori,
analogy and simple generalization; and such further rules as,
"When two verses seem to contradict each other, you cannot
solve the difficulty by a compromise until you discover a third
verse substantiating your opinion." 94
The difference between Akiba and Ishmael in the technique
of demonstration was quite distinct from their equally com-
prehensive and vastly more significant opposition with regard
to the content of the rules which were established. The argu-
mentative use of superfluous letters which, since Akiba, had
become identified with the plebeian faction, was already
known to Eliezer, Akiba's patrician teacher. Indeed, he had
been rebuked for this by Ishmael himself. On the other hand,
the rules of interpretation to which the patrician-provincial,
Ishmael, adhered were derived from the system established by
Hillel, the founder of the plebeian school. These seeming con-
tradictions have confused and misled the historians of the
period, who have struggled hard to interpret Ishmael as a
Hillelite, and have been altogether at a loss regarding Akiba.
It was a purely fortuitous circumstance, quite unconnected
with their respective philosophies, which made Ishmael, the
future spokesman of the patrician faction, a disciple of Joshua,
the foremost plebeian of his age. Inevitably, when Ishmael
became a recognized scholar, he reverted to the teachings
which were suited to his class and his temperament. With
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 173
equal inevitability, he continued throughout his life to use
the intellectual tools which he had received in his master's
schoolhouse. Hence, the patrician came to be the protagonist
of Hillel's technique of interpretation. To use a talmudic
metaphor, he accepted the husk of his master's teachings but
rejected the kernel.
Akiba's situation was different from Ishmael's. He was
driven to seek a new method of interpretation by the neces-
sity of basing his revolutionary doctrines on a recognized
foundation. He was trying to change the complexion of the
inherited Law. To accomplish this he had to find an authority
superior to that of his predecessors and accepted by everyone.
Only one instrument could fulfil these requirements Scrip-
ture itself. Had Joshua ben Hananya and the older plebeians
opposed Akiba in his rejection of the technique of interpreta-
tion which had become traditional among them, it might have
gone hard with the young man. But these teachers were far
more concerned with the substance of the Law than with the
mode of its demonstration, and gladly accepted Akiba's
proffer of assistance, whatever the weapons he chose. When
Joshua praised Akiba for having discovered proof of a plebe-
ian rule which Johanan ben Zakkai had declared un-
demonstrable, plebeian opposition to Akiba's technique of
exegesis vanished. 95 Thereafter Akiba's arguments were heard
in the conclave with the same respect as was accorded to those
of his opponents; his methods had supplemented, if they had
not supplanted, those of Hillel.
One of Akiba's rules was destined to become especially
famous; indeed it has, with slightly changed significance,
passed into a proverb. He used to say "Between a wide and a
limited interpretation, choose the limited." 96 It would be easy
to show that he himself violated this rule frequently; but its
174 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
formulation brings a breath of wholesome logic into the
stuffy atmosphere of academic technicalities. It shows that
Akiba's mind was logical; when he departed from scientific
ratiocination it was not because he had become confused in
the web of his own words but because he was seeking to serve
a higher cause than literal exegesis the cause of human
happiness.
When his colleagues mocked his arbitrary interpretations,
Akiba simply replied by citing the verse, "For it is no empty
thing for you" (Deut. 32:47). "And," he continued, "if you
think it empty, it is because of your inability to interpret it!" 9T
No part of the Torah is devoid of meaning for the scholar.
Brilliant as Akiba's mind was, he valued erudition above
acumen. Diligence he considered the most important part of
a scholar's equipment. Having in mind the oriental habit of
chanting one's studies, he would exhort his pupils: "Sing
continuously, sing!" 98 The duty of the teacher was to repeat
his instruction until the student understood it completely and
clearly, and mastered it entirely. He must literally put the
Torah "into his pupils' mouths" " as Moses was commanded
to do (Deut. 31:19).
He had little respect for scholars who in their desire to be
original made sure that they were not burdened with too
much information. The preparation of the ideal teacher is
described, he said, in the verse of Proverbs (5:15): "Drink
water from thy cistern, and running water from thy foun-
tain." The metaphor of the cistern, which only collects water,
applied to one's student days, which should be spent in the
mastery of old traditions. The disciple who has obeyed this
rule, he assures us, will find that in his maturity fresh, living
waters of original thought will come to him, and that disciples
will gather about him to drink from them. 100
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL 175
While he considered erudition of primary importance, he
endeavored in his discussions to sharpen his pupils' dialectic.
The lecture generally began with a call for information. "Any-
one having any information on the question before us today
is requested to give it," he would say. If a student volunteered
a tradition he had heard from some other master, Akiba
would ask him to defend it. "Not he who answers quickly is
worthy of praise, but he who can support his views," was his
maxim. 101
Never, either as student or as master, did he call for the
adjournment of a lecture, except, characteristically, on the eves
of the Passover and of the Day of Atonement. 102 On both
occasions he would hurry home for the sake of the children.
On the eve of the Passover, he wanted to begin the pictur-
esque ceremony before they went to bed; on the eve of the
Day of Atonement, he wanted to be sure that they got their
meals before the Fast Day set in. Even when his son Simeon
lay ill with a fatal disease, Akiba would not disrupt his class.
One messenger came from home, saying "He has taken a
turn for the worse." But Akiba did not stir. Another messen-
ger came, and yet Akiba continued. Finally, word came that
the young man had died. Thereupon Akiba arose, removed
his phylacteries and tore his clothes, saying, "Until this mo-
ment, it was our duty to study; now we must pay honor to
the dead"! 103
Yet Akiba was always mindful of the duty of his disciples
to their families. Two of the young men who sat before him,
Simeon ben Yohai and Hanina ben Hakinai, had left their
homes to devote themselves entirely to their studies. One day
Akiba said to Hanina, "Your daughter must be of marriage-
able age; go home and get her married." Hanina, who had
not even written home during the years he had been at the
176 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
academy, so frightened his wife by his sudden appearance that
she fell in a swoon. "Never enter your house suddenly," Akiba
remarked, with obvious reference to this accident. 104
The duty of teaching seemed to him paramount. "Though
you have given instruction to some disciples in your youth,
you must continue to teach in old age," he said. "This is the
meaning of Ecclesiastes 11:6, which reads, 'In the morning
sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thy hand; for
thou knowest not which shall prosper, this or that, or whether
both shall be alike good.'" Ishmael, on the contrary, laid less
stress on instruction and more on learning. "The verse means
that even though you have studied much in your youth, you
must continue to study in old age," he said. 105
Akiba describes the value of a teacher to his pupils in three
beautiful similes. The occasion of his remarks is itself inter-
esting. According to a report, Eliezer ben Hyrkanos had
boasted that "If all the seas were ink, and all the reeds pens,
and the heavens and earth rolls of parchment and all men
scribes, they would not suffice for the writing of the. Torah
which I have studied; yet have I not achieved more of the
totality of the Torah than can be drawn up by inserting a
finger into the sea; nor have my pupils taken from me more
than a brush dipped into a bottle"!
When Akiba heard this he said, "I cannot even say that I
have taken from my teacher even so much as he admits. What
I received amounts to the fragrance given off by the citron,
and the light taken from one candle to another, and the water
drawn from a brook. The beneficiary enjoys the odor, in-
creases the light, and is refreshed by the water; but the giver
has lost nothing!" 106
VI. ON THE HEIGHTS
AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY
A KIBA'S various utterances regarding ethics, law, religion,
/\ theology and politics, form a complete, coherent and
unified system, which we may rightly call a philosophy. His
various decisions and apothegms were applications of general
principles which were clear in his own mind, although he
did not organize them for posterity in the form of abstract
propositions. This was due first, to the nature of his judicial
office, which required decisions in concrete cases rather than
philosophic statements of general policy; and secondly to the
Semitic tradition which, unlike the Hellenic, has never given
up the primitive preference for the concrete and the indi-
vidual. Perhaps we may summarize in the following principles
his fundamental approach to the juristic problems he faced.
1. Whatever be the inequalities which we find in the world,
we must not permit them to intrude on the worship of God.
Hence, ceremonial law must be interpreted so as not to ex-
clude the weaker social groups from participation, or to de-
mand too heavy sacrifices from them. This implies that no
opportunity may be given to the more fortunate to invent
ceremonies or refinements of ritual which the poorer cannot
imitate. Nor, on the other hand, may expensive devices be
utilized as evasions of burdensome laws.
2. So far as the civil law is still fluid and open to interpreta-
tion, it is just to use this as a means for the rectification of
social inequalities. Hence the rules of law should favor the
177
178 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
*
oppressed groups: the plebeian, the artisan-merchant, the
shepherd, the slave, the women and children.
3. It is especially important that the prerogatives of the
priests be limited, and that the gross inequality between them
and the Levites be minimized.
4. The possibility that the emancipation of women may lead
to the disruption of family life should be met by the imposi-
tion of severe penalties for faithlessness.
5. In the attempt to ameliorate the conditions of slaves, care
must be taken to protect the status and rights of free labor.
6. Pious merchants must be protected from the handicaps
resulting from their observance of the Law.
7. There is no room for superstition in Judaism.
8. The ideals of peace and human equality are fundamental
principles of religion.
Akiba was convinced that his decisions introduced nothing
new into Judaism. He was merely the mouthpiece of the
Torah, applying its principles to new cases as they arose.
"Know before whom ye are standing," he said to the litigants
at the opening of each trial. "Not before Akiba ben Joseph,
but before the Holy One, blessed be He." 1
The manner in which Akiba applied these principles to
specific cases is discussed in the appendix to this volume. Some
aspects of his juristic ideas can, however, be presented here.
They cover (a) his attack on provincial superstition, (b) his
respect for urbanity, (c) his leniency in punishment, (d) his
attitude toward women, (e) his attitude toward slaves and
his principle of human equality.
ATTACK ON PROVINCIAL SUPERSTITION
Akiba recoiled with especial disgust from the superstitions
which filled the contemporary rural mind. He held, rightly,
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 179
that the biblical law forbidding contact with the dead had as
one of its purposes the suppression of the use of bones as
charms, a custom which was still prevalent among the pro-
vincials of his day. In fact, one of his disciples who was in-
clined to tolerate rustic aberrations declares that the use of
animal bones for this purpose is not "an Amoritic habit" and
is therefore not forbidden. 2 A century after Akiba, Johanan
ben Napaha, one of the foremost teachers of his day, used to
carry about with him a bone from his son's skeleton! 3 To
evade the law which declared such relics defiling, the pro-
vincials would collect small pieces of bone from various bodies,
each piece being too small in itself to contaminate the holder.
Akiba denounced the subterfuge, but Dosa ben Arkenas, the
great Shammaitic scholar, defended it. 4
He had scant respect even for superstitions which had an
aura of religious sanctity. The most important of these con-
cerned the high priest's ritual on the Day of Atonement.
Among the various ceremonies in which the high priest par-
ticipated, one of the most picturesque was the casting of lots
between two he-goats, one of which was offered as sacrifice,
the other sent to Azazel. Current belief considered it a good
omen if the he-goat which stood on the right was chosen as
sacrifice to God. When the matter was discussed in the
academy, someone suggested that when the left one was
chosen it might be brought to the right, to weaken the power
of the evil spell. "Do not give the heretics an opportunity to
control," Akiba said when he heard this. 5
He even found it difficult to pray for those who were hope-
lessly ill. "When the words of prayer come easily to me," he
said, "I know that the patient will recover; but when I
stumble over my words, I know that the hope is gone." 6
In Akiba's opinion, anyone who believed in days of good
i8o AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
or bad omen transgressed the biblical law against witchcraft; 7
and those who used magical formulas to cure disease were
unfit for immortal life. 8 The tales of miracles which various
\
sectaries told of their founders he considered pure fiction.
When Jose the Galilean, in whose native province such stories
were especially current, tried to show that they were not in-
consistent with Judaism, Akiba cut him short with the words :
"Heaven forbid that God should stop the sun, the moon and
the stars in their course for the sake of those who disobey His
will!" 9
His opponents were astonished to discover, by accident, that
there was one reason for which he would relax his purist
opposition to pagan customs good form. At the wedding of
his son, he opened jar after jar with the toast, inherited doubt-
less from early wine producers, "Wine for the life of scholars
and for the life of their disciples!" 10 The provincial and patri-
cian scholars, like Gamaliel and Eleazar ben Zadok, who
would not say "Good health," when someone sneezed, be-
cause they considered that superstitious, 11 must have found
Akiba's tolerance strange. But his respect for good manners
overcame even his objection to the expression.
HIS RESPECT FOR URBANITY
Perhaps it was because Akiba had become acquainted with
urban amenities only late in life that he attached to them
greater significance than did any other of the sages. Ishmael,
his antagonist, who could trace his ancestry back through
generations of priests and patricians, had so identified himself
with the provincial attitude of mind that he elevated uncouth-
ness into a philosophy. "The Scriptures command us," he said,
"merely to do what is right in the eyes of God."
Akiba, replying, pointed to the verse: "And thou shalt do
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 181
what is good and what is upright in the eyes of the Lord, thy
God" (Deut. 6:18). And, applying his theory of economy of
divine expression, he asserted that the parallel phrases "good"
and "upright" must each have its special meaning, that is,
"what is good in the eyes of God, and what is upright in the
eyes of man." 12 He elaborated the thought further in his
famous maxim: "He who gives delight to his fellow-creatures,
also gives delight to God; but whosoever gives no delight to
his fellow-creatures, gives no delight to God." 13
So anxious was Akiba, in his early days, to master what-
must then have seemed to him the recondite rules of proper
behavior that he followed every action of his teachers with
the closest scrutiny and recorded their slightest habits in his
tenacious memory. On one occasion he actually followed
Joshua into a privy, "and I learned from him three good
habits," he said many years afterward. 14
"How could you be so disrespectful to your teacher?" asked
the astonished Ben Azzai.
"I considered everything part of the Torah, and I needed to
learn," Akiba replied.
In later years he was wont to record even the most trivial
customs which he met in the lands he visited. "I like the
Eastern peoples for three of their habits," her said; "they put
meat on the table to be cut; they kiss one another only on the
hand; and they discuss private affairs only in the field" (where
others cannot be offended at the secrecy). 15
He took advantage of every opportunity to inculcate good
manners, among strangers as well as among his disciples.
Some vegetable having been served up ill-cooked, one of the
students, unable to bite it through, took it in both hands to
tear it apart. "Not so, my child," Akiba said, "put your heel
on it, to hold it down while you tear it!" 16
1 82 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Once he noticed that a provincial, whose guest he was, used
a piece of bread to support the plate from which he was eat-
ing. Such use of food was especially painful to Akiba, who,
therefore, took that particular slice of bread and ate it.
"Is there no other bread on the table?" inquired the simple
host, who had altogether failed to take the hint.
"I was afraid," said Akiba, quoting a current proverb, "that
lukewarm water [i.e., a hint] would pain you; but you insist
on being scalded." 1T
Akiba disliked the unsanitary habit of passing the wine-cup
from mouth to mouth. When a man whom he and Ben Azzai
were visiting, offered him a cup of wine after he had taken a
sip, Akiba said, "You had better drink it all." The host did
so, and then filled another cup for Akiba, but again followed
his own conception of good manners by taking a little for
himself.
Akiba was in a dilemma; wishing neither to offend his host
nor to break his custom; but Ben Azzai saved him by saying,
"How long will you continue to give Akiba cups which have
been tasted!" 18
The intemperate outbursts of anger to which provincials of
the day were given seemed to him as wicked as idolatry. "A
person who tears his clothes or breaks dishes in anger will end
by worshiping idols," he said. "For such is the nature of
temptation; today it demands expression of anger; tomorrow
it bids one serve foreign gods." 19 "One who throws bread on
the ground or scatters money when one is angry," Akiba
taught on another occasion, "will live to be in need of
charity." 20
He held it to be part of good breeding to eat only food
which agreed with one. "A person who eats food which is
unsuitable for his constitution violates three commandments,"
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 183
he taught. "He disgraces himself, he disgraces his food and he
recites a blessing without reason." 21
In his respect for the proprieties, Akiba was prepared to
waive the biblical rule requiring a widow to expectorate as
part of the ceremony of Hdizah. Eliezer ben Hyrkanos and
Ishmael insisted that if the expectoration was omitted the
ceremony was without validity; but Akiba said, "If she re-
moved the shoe and recited the prescribed verses, she is
free." 22
He could not brook ostentation, even perhaps especially
in prayer. When he prayed in private, his disciple, Judah ben
Ilai, tells us, "one would leave him in one corner and find him
in another, to which he had wandered through the multitude
of his kneelings and prostrations." But when he prayed in
public, he "would finish quickly, lest he keep others waiting
for him." 23
Yet urban as Akiba had become in his habits and outlook,
he was sensible of the fine, simple virtues of village life: its
cordial friendship, its sense of mutual obligation, its com-
munity of interests. A burial in a small settlement brings out
the entire population; in a large city, where relations between
people are more impersonal, the catastrophe of death attracts
little attention. Hence Akiba's warning: "Help others that
you may be helped; bury the dead, that you, too, may find
proper burial." 24
There was one occasion when he considered civility for-
bidden as a recognition of a monetary favor. "A person must
not offer greetings to another just because he borrowed money
from him. To do so is almost equivalent to the payment of
usury," 25 he said. Defender of trade as he was, he would not
even in this light matter tolerate any deviation from the
ancient agricultural standard which forbade the acceptance
of benefits from loans of money.
184 AKIB A: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
While Akiba was thus concerned with good manners, we
must not suppose that the humility which was one of his most
distinguishing characteristics was affected or even deliberate.
When he had appeased Eliezer's wrath at the success which
greeted his prayer for rain, he had not been acting with
calculated tact, but had expressed the deep convictions of his
own soul, in which there was no trace of pride or vanity. "He
who glories in his knowledge of the Law," Akiba would say,
"is like to the carcass of an animal which lies in the road." It
attracts the attention of all, it is true, "but whosoever passes by
puts his hand on his nose and turns away from it" ! 26
LENIENCY IN PUNISHMENT
The influence of the city goes deeper, however, than con-
ventional politeness; it affects the whole mentality. Habits of
kindness, designed originally to attract custom, gradually
soften the soul of the trader. Penal leniency was characteristic
of the urban groups from the very beginning. The Hasideans,
the Pharisees and the Hillelites were all known for their
tenderness even to transgressors. 27 Akiba, following the prec-
edent set by earlier teachers of his class, tended to become
extreme in his aversion to penal severity, maintaining, for ex-
ample, that the false witness could not be punished in either
civil or criminal procedure if he confessed his guilt. 28
When the Sanhedrin had to judge a capital case, its mem-
bers were forbidden to taste food or drink during the whole
day, he says. 29 If the members of a court are witnesses to a
crime, they cannot be judges; they can appear only as wit-
nesses and prosecutors before another court. 30
He declined, however, to accept the ruling of Simeon the
Temanite, which would have reduced the whole of Jewish
criminal procedure to a mockery. Simeon insisted that when a
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 185
man was on trial for murder the weapon used must be pro-
duced in court. Suppose, Akiba argued, the murdered person
was not struck with a weapon at all, but was thrown from a
building, must the building be brought into court? 31
Only in one instance do we find Akiba inflicting a punish-
ment which seems unduly severe; he fined a man four hun-
dred zuz (twice the normal dower of a virgin), because he
insulted a woman by uncovering her head in the market
place. The man brought witnesses to prove that the woman
had herself gone about with uncovered head on other occa-
sions. "That is no defense," said Akiba. "The fact that a man
injures himself cannot be cited to justify injuries inflicted on
him by another person." 32
Akiba's tenderness to the sinful and the criminal was not
limited to the duration of life; it extended beyond the grave.
Ishmael maintained, for instance, that a suicide should be
buried with the words, "Alas for the fool, alas for the fool."
"Let him rather remain undescribed," said Akiba. "Do not
praise him and do not blame him." 33
He could not bear to ascribe to God a hardness which he
found objectionable in man. Hence he denies that the wicked
are subject to endless torment in hell. "The punishment of the
sinful in Gehenna is limited to twelve months," he says. He
proves this by recalling that the Deluge, which came as a
retribution on the most sinful of generations, lasted only a
year. 34 Those whose sins cannot be overcome through the
prescribed time simply lose their share in the FutureLif e. They
are annihilated at death. 35 Though this reduction to nothing-
ness seemed to him the worst evil which can befall man, its
negative and painless nature made it less objectionable to him
than any other form of punishment. In fact, taking a position
somewhat akin to that developed a millennium later by Mai-
1 86 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
monides, he seemed to hold that the future life is a privilege
to be gained through positive upright living rather than an
inherent right which can only be forfeited as a penalty. Some-
times he asserted God's mercy to be such that a single meri-
torious act will win a man admission to the future world.
He found support for this view in a fanciful interpretation of
Isaiah 5:14, which he rendered, "Therefore hath the nether-
world enlarged her desire and opened her mouth for the
lacT^ of an observance!' "It does not say for the lack of observ-
ances" he remarked, "but of an observance; only those who
possess no good deeds at all will descend into the nether-
world." 36
He repeated this doctrine to Gamaliel when they were dis-
cussing the beautiful Psalm 15 which describes the qualities
of him "who will sojourn in Thy tabernacle, who will dwell
upon Thy holy mountain." The holy mountain and tabernacle
meant for the sages, of course, immortal life in Paradise.
Gamaliel wept when he considered the prerequisites for ad-
mission to the company of the blessed. "He that walketh
uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh truth in
his heart; that hath no slander upon his tongue, nor doeth
evil to his fellow, nor taketh up reproach against his neigh-
bor; in whose eyes a vile person is despised, but he honoreth
them that fear the Lord; he that putteth not out his money
on interest nor taketh a bribe against the innocent. He that
doeth these things shall never be moved" "Who can fulfill all
these commandments?" the Nasi cried. "Are we then all
doomed ?"
Akiba replied, "Will you not admit that good is more
powerful than evil? With regard to evil, we read in Scripture,
'Defile not yourselves in any of these things' (Lev. 18:24),
meaning that any source of impurity can contaminate a per-
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 187
son. May we not therefore rightly infer that any single source
of merit will save him? The Psalm must not be interpreted
to mean 'he who does all these things will not be moved,' but,
'he who does any one of them.' " 3T
The anti-Manichaean argument regarding the relative
power of good and evil appears frequently in Akiba's hom-
ilies. On another occasion he said, "He who eats forbidden fat
must bring a sin offering in the value of a silver piece. If he
is not certain whether or not he ate it, he must bring a guilt
offering in the value of two silver pieces. If that is the penalty
which Scripture exacts from one who puts himself into the
possibility of sin, how great will be the reward for those who
observe the commandments!" 38
Nevertheless, at other times, he insisted that certain sins
would lead to the loss of the Future Life. Among those whom
he assigns to this perdition are they who read uncanonical
books at the public service; they who treat the Song of Solo-
mon with levity; and they who fail to associate with scholars. 39
HIS ATTITUDE TOWARD WOMAN
His attitude toward woman and marriage was, naturally,
deeply influenced by his own romantic experience. When the
usual question, "What is true wealth?" was raised among
the sages, Tarfon, the great landowner, replied readily, "The
possession of a hundred vineyards and a hundred slaves to
work them."
Young Meir, Akiba's disciple, said more modestly, "Con-
tentment and satisfaction with one's riches."
But Akiba said, "A wife who is comely in her deeds." 40
He objected to the ancient tradition which forbade women
to adorn themselves during their menstrual periods. "Such a
rule," he said, "can only lead to loss of marital love, and
AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
divorce." 41 It is hard for a modern to realize the full signifi-
cance of the revolution implied in these words. The permis-
sion to use cosmetics and fine clothes when marital intercourse
was forbidden implied a new conception of the whole rela-
tion between husband and wife. The wife was no longer a
convenient instrument for the gratification of desire; her
beauty and companionship could be appreciated without
thought of sexual congress. We may observe that Akiba had
no authority whatever for this change in what was, at the
time, a fundamental principle of ceremonial law.
Not satisfied with having removed this taboo against
attractiveness during "impurity," Akiba sought to limit the
period itself. Earlier sages, in their fierce zeal for the Law,
had declared that any fleck which might possibly be caused by
menstrual fluids makes a woman defiled and forbidden to
her husband. To Akiba this rule seemed unnecessarily harsh,
and in his efforts to change it he amazed both colleagues and
disciples. 42
The emphasis on marital love had, however, also other,
perhaps more debatable, implications: it meant that the dis-
appearance of mutual affection justified the disruption of the
marriage. 43 This doctrine seemed outrageous to the patricians
and the provincials. In their eyes, divorce remained a punish-
ment to be meted out to faithless wives. This had necessarily
been so in the earlier rural economy of Palestine where a
woman could hardly live without relation to a family and a
homestead. To send one's wife away meant to expose her to
the utmost rigors of degradation and destitution. No husband
would resort to such penalties except for the most flagrant
abuse of his confidence. If he had ceased to care for his wife,
he could get himself another; but he would not deny the
rejected one basic needs of food, clothing and shelter. In the
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 189
city, however, a woman could support herself respectably, and
divorce was not the tragedy it was in the country.
On the other hand, a plebeian husband who had taken a
dislike to his wife could not afford the luxury of a second
marriage unless the first was dissolved. Hence we find that
long before Akiba, the Hillelites had protested against the
Shammaitic rule which forbade divorce except for adultery.
"A wife may be divorced by her husband if he have nothing
else against her than that she spoiled his dinner," the plebeians
said. Akiba, accepting the Hillelite principle, rejected their
evasiveness; he said, "A husband may divorce his wife for the
sole- reason that he has found someone more comely than
she." But the view of the Shammaites was upheld by Eliezer
ben Hyrkanos and Eleazar of Modin; even Ishmael added
only that conversion to idolatry also justifies divorce. 44
Akiba's whole conception of marriage was summed up in
his saying, "When a husband and wife have merit, God's
presence may be found in their midst; when they lack merit,
a fire consumes them." 45 From this proposition, he naturally
inferred that man could commit no more heinous sin than to
marry a woman whom he did not love. "He who marries a
wife who is unsuited to him inevitably transgresses five com-
mandments," he said, "namely: (a) Thou shalt not take ven-
geance; (b) Nor bear any grudge against the children of thy
people (Lev. 19:18); (c) Thou shalt not hate thy brother in
they heart (ibid. 19:17); (d) Thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself; and (e) That thy brother may live with thee (ibid.
25:36) for since he hates her, he comes to wish her dead." 46
Another saying attributed to him in this connection is:
"Whosoever hopes for the death of his wife, that he may
marry her sister, and whosoever hopes for the death of his
brother, that he may marry the widow, will surely be sur-
190 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
vived by them, as it is written, 'He who diggeth a pit shall
fall therein.' " (Eccles. 9 :8). 47
Suitability in marriage meant for him, however, not merely
mutual compatibility and love; it also implied the absence of
any legal or moral hindrance to the union. Hence, he was
more severe than any of the other sages with regard to in-
cestuous or forbidden unions, declaring them, .all void, and
maintaining that the children born of them were illegitimate.
In this, he differed not only from the patricians, who allowed
the validity of at least some of these prohibited marriages, but
even more sharply from Joshua ben Hananya who, rep-
resenting the dominant plebeian view, limited the taint of
illegitimacy to the offspring of the most heinous incests. 48
His conception of marriage as based on love made him
object to the Levirate system, according to which a childless
widow was bound to marry her brother-in-law. Like other
plebeian scholars he felt that the ceremony of halizah which
released the woman from this obligation was preferable to the
40
marriage.
His defense of the rights of women brought him into con-
tinual conflict with the patrician-provincial scholars, who
objected to his violent reversal of the tradition of feminine
inferiority. He conceded that a married working woman
should turn over her wages to her husband. But he ruled that
if she earned more than he spent on her maintenance, the dif-
ference belonged to her. To this revolutionary opinion,
Johanan ben Nuri took strenuous exception. 50
Akiba rejected the traditional rule which, for purposes of
legal evidence, recognized relationship only on the father's
side. According to this conception no one could testify for
or against one who was a possible heir, as for example, a
brother by the same father, or a paternal uncle. Akiba estab-
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 191
lished the rule that no relative, on either the maternal or the
paternal line, can testify. 51
He recognized that the emancipation of woman might
place new strains on the family relationship. These, however,
he thought might be met by the education of women to their
responsibilities. Hence he was very severe in his insistence
that women should keep themselves free from all suspicion
of unfaithfulness, and was ready to impose rigorous dis-
advantages on women who married a second time without
being certain that the first marriage was dissolved. 52
The spiritual significance which he attached to romantic
love, led him to appreciate the Song of Solomon more than
any of his colleagues or predecessors. He could not bear to
hear its beautiful verses sung in a spirit of ribaldry. 53 The
poem, he said, was nothing less than an allegory describing
the love between Israel and God, in which the love between
wife and husband is raised to infinite beauty. "Eternity is not
worth more than the day on which this great poem was given
to Israel," he said. "For all the books in Scripture are holy,
but the Song of Solomon is the holy of holies." 54
His abhorrence of vulgarity in the interpretation of the
Song of Solomon arose not merely out of respect for the book,
but out of his hatred of any levity in connection with sex life.
Although he loved humor and was himself a ready wit, he
could not brook obscenity. "Laughter and levity accustom men
to immorality," he taught. 55
THE LAW OF SLAVES AND AKIBA's PRINCIPLE OF HUMAN EQUALITY
Akiba's attitude toward slavery was a resultant of two in-
congruous forces. There was, first, the traditional plebeian
antipathy to human bondage in any form. Hebrew slavery
had been abolished by the Levitical Code (Lev. 25:42); but
192 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
this was not enough. The plebeians demanded the recogni-
tion of the human rights of the "Canaanite slave." The writer
of Job puts this thought in a passage, unexcelled for beauty
or force in the whole of the Scripture:
"If I did despise the cause of my man-servant,
Or of my maid-servant, when they contended with me
What then shall I do when God riseth up?
And when He remembereth what shall I answer Him?
Did not He that made me in the womb make him?
And did not One fashion us in the womb?" (31:13-15)
The Pharisees had incorporated the spirit of this and similar
passages in their legal and theological programs. 56 The
Hillelites had further emphasized it. 57
But the destruction of the Temple and the consequent dis-
tribution of the former artisans and traders among the peasants
had created new problems. The landless plebeian, deprived
of his shop in the market of Jerusalem, sought his livelihood
as the competitor of the slave in the farmland of the Shefelah
and the coastal plain. This could not be helped. But while
Akiba saw no possibility of the emancipation of the slaves,
he recognized that there was grave danger of degrading the
formerly independent plebeians to a status not far removed
from serfdom. The only way in which this could be effectively
prevented was to retain a clear distinction between bondsman
and freeman. It is interesting to see how Akiba met this prob-
lem without adding any real burdens to the slave.
He first of all carried the Levitical law regarding Hebrew
slaves to its logical conclusion. A Hebrew, he held, could not
sell himself into slavery for more than six years, the time
prescribed in the twenty-first chapter of Exodus. This the
patricians denied, holding that the biblical term applied only
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA s JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 193
to those sold into bondage by the court in punishment for
crime. 58 He then abolished the whole institution of the female
Hebrew slave who was both bondswoman and concubine. A
girl sold as a slave became her master's wife in the full sense
of the word. 59 If a captive Jew was redeemed by anyone other
than his relatives he could not be enslaved. His relatives
might, indeed, hold him to labor, since they probably went to
extraordinary sacrifices to free him, and in any event would
doubtless treat him as one of their family. Jose the Galilean
objected to both parts of Akiba's ruling. Among the patricians
and provincials where family ties were strong, the redemption
of a relative was taken as a matter of course. On the other
hand, if the community at large had redeemed a man from
among the idolaters, Jose believed that they were entitled to
keep him as slave. They were obligated to make the outlay,
but not to lose it. 60
With regard to the Canaanite slave, Akiba insisted that a
woman half slave and half free might marry a free man. 61
This revolutionary doctrine was intended to break down the
social stigma attaching to bondage. But Akiba hesitated to
extend this same principle of social equality to male slaves.
He insisted that it was illegal to set slaves free. 62 He also
maintained that the slaves whom Scripture declares free be-
cause their owner has infringed on their rights require a writ
of manumission. The owner is compelled to give this to them;
but the requirement makes their liberation a ceremonial act,
separating bondage from freedom. 63
No such reservations interfered with Akiba's determination
to grant equality to all the free people. When the patricians
proposed a rule varying the sum to be assessed for personal
injuries according to the social status of the plaintiff, Akiba
said, "The poorest man in Israel must be considered as a
194 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
patrician who has lost his property; for they are all descend-
ants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." 64 "Only two classes of
Israelites can properly be considered poor," he said on another
occasion: "swindlers, and those who fail to marry off their
daughters." 65 He objected especially to laws bestowing special
privileges on royalty. An ancient rule permitted the removal
of graves when the public convenience demanded it, "except
the graves of a king or a prophet." "Even those graves may
be removed," said Akiba. 66 When Jose the Galilean declared
that a king was not obligated to bring the usual sin offerings
under certain conditions, Akiba protested. 67 "All Israel are
the children of kings," he insisted. 68
But his doctrine of equality was. not limited to the Israelites;
it included the proselytes, the Samaritans and even, in some
respects, the idolaters. This aspect of his teaching is, however,
associated with his theology and his political ideals, both of
which must be discussed in the next chapter.
VII. ON THE HEIGHTS
AKIBA'S THEOLOGICAL AND
POLITICAL IDEALS
WITH the passing of the years Akiba's theology under-
went an interesting metamorphosis. In his student
days he retained the simple anthropomorphic conception of
God which as a shepherd he had shared with the other un-
tutored peasants. When the curious verse of Daniel (7:9),
"I beheld till thrones were placed and one that was ancient
of days did sit," was discussed in the academy, Akiba ex-
plained that the thrones were intended for God and David.
Hearing this almost blasphemous remark, Jose Ha-Kohen
cried out, "Akiba, how long wilt thou describe God pro-
fanely? The thrones are intended one for Justice, and the
other for Mercy." 1 Akiba, in his youthful innocence, accepted
this interpretation as authoritative, and one day repeated it in
the presence of Eleazar ben Azariah, who in his turn scolded
him.
"Akiba, what have you to do with homilies ?" Eleazar said,
"Your field is rather the difficult law of Plagues and Tents.
The two thrones are intended, one as a chair, the other as a
footstool."
To this early period we must ascribe such remarks as, "God
bent down the highest heavens to Mount Sinai so that he
might speak to Israel from heaven"; 2 and "Three laws were
unintelligible to Moses until God pointed out the objects in-
volved with his finger: the first was the new moon, the
195
196 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
second, the candelabrum of the Temple; the third was the
list of prohibited animals." 3
But in his later years, Akiba not only abandoned, but op-
posed, such interpretations. Dosa ben Arkenas, who adhered
to the simple provincial belief in an anthropomorphistic God,
said that the verse, "For a man cannot see Me and live,"
(Exod. 33:20) implies that "men do not see God during their
life, but they see him at the moment of death."
To this Akiba responded: "The passage must be explained
thus: 'Neither man nor any other living creature can see Me.'
This means that even the Holy Beings who bear the Throne
of Glory do not see the Glory itself."
Ben Azzai said, "I am not challenging the words of my
master, but rather paraphrasing them. Even the angels, who
live forever, do not see the Glory." 4
This new conception of God led Akiba into a series of con-
flicts with the provincial scholar, Pappias, whose ideas were
as naive and primitive as Dosa's. For instance, the verse: "I
have compared thee, O my love, to a steed in Pharaoh's
chariot" (Song of Sol. 1:9), seemed to Pappias a suitable text
for the following fancy: "When Pharaoh rode a male horse,
God appeared against him on a male horse; when Pharaoh ex-
changed the horse for a mare, God too appeared on a mare."
Again, Pappias explained that the words, "Behold, man is
become as one of us," (Gen. 3:22) meant that Adam had
become like an angel. Akiba decried both of these interpreta-
tions. The first passage has nothing to do, according to Akiba,
with any appearance of God as horseman; the second merely
implies that man had obtained free will: "God put before him
two ways, the way of death and the way of life, and he chose
the way of death." 5
The very fact that the provincids and the patricians who
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 197
were psychologically so much akin to them could not fully
comprehend the plebeian idea of a spiritual God who had
neither form nor human appearance, prevented them from
accepting the belief in angels. Their God was so little more
than man that to surround Him with angels would have been
a perilous approximation of polytheism. This apprehension,
no doubt, accounts for the omission of any reference to angels
in most of the prophets. Isaiah speaks of "seraphim" and
Ezekiel of "Beasts" and "Men," who perform in functions of
angels, but from the time of Hosea until that of Zechariah
a matter of two centuries the word Mcdal^, "angel," does not
occur in literary prophecy. Even afterward a definite group
of biblical writers apparently opposed the doctrine. The con-
trast is dramatized in the Book of Job, where the pious friends
frequently mention angels while the sufferer himself never
does. The earliest sections of Enoch 6 enumerate the denial of
angels as one of the gross sins of Sodom; and according to the
Acts of the Apostles, 7 the negation of angels was a funda-
mental principle of the Sadducees. It is obvious that while
the plebeians, with their highly spiritual conception of God,
felt free to re-introduce angels, the provincials retained the
older prejudice against them.
The issue had become vague in Akiba's time, for the doc-
trine of angels had too long been an integral part of Pharisaic
belief to be rejected by the patrician sages. Yet we notice that
some of them speak of these semi-divine beings with reserve
and hesitancy. Perhaps the difficulty arose out of the special
anxiety of the plebeians to impute human characteristics to
the angels, so as to make them quite different in nature from
God. Thus Akiba interpreted the verse, "Beside them dwell
the fowl of heaven," (Ps. 104:12) to refer to the ministering
angels. 8 He also held, more plausibly, that the expression,
198 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
"Man did eat the bread of the mighty" (Ps. 78:25), means,
"They ate bread which the ministering angels eat." When
these comments were reported to Ishmael, he said: "Go and
tell Akiba that he is mistaken. Does he really think that
angels eat bread?" 9
These controversies only touched the periphery of Akiba's
theological speculations; the inner substance has-been irrev-.
ocably lost. We know, however, that like Johanan ben
Zakkai and Joshua ben Hananya before him, Akiba brooded
much over the elemental problems of the world. 10 With no
training in Greek metaphysics, and with little knowledge of
the philosophies of other peoples, these Palestinian sages
attempted to project the logic which was so helpful in their
own talinudic world to that of the wider universe. Perhaps
it is just as well that we do not know too much about the
results at which they arrived. The Gnostic literature which
has come down to us from similar, though perhaps less gifted
and less well trained, thinkers is singularly unedifying; and
not much more can be said of scraps of metaphysics which
the midrashim have preserved from the discussions of Eliezer
and Joshua. 11 When the sages discuss ethics and law, which
are their primary concern, they speak with profundity and
clarity; when they turn the same powerful minds to questions
of ultimate reality, their observations are barren and confused.
Yet their interest in these speculations betokens a breadth
of imagination and intellect which, regardless of achievement,
is itself noteworthy. Perhaps the speculations would have led
to more permanent results had not Akiba's first attempt at
organized metaphysical research ended in the tragedy which
has been mentioned. It was perhaps the recollection of what
had happened to Elisha ben Abuyah and Ben Zoma which
impelled Akiba to suppress public lectures on theology and
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 199
other special problems. "It is forbidden," he taught, "to dis-
cuss the laws of forbidden marriages with so many as three
disciples, or the Creation with so many as two, or the Heavenly
Chariot even with one, unless he be particularly gifted so
that he will follow without too much interpretation." 12 Such
a rule was especially necessary in the plebeian schools whose
doors were always open to any pupil; the patricians, who
selected their students with great care, had no need to limit
the curriculum. The result of this difference between the
second century teachers is still noticeable in the talmudic works
which have come down to us. The Mishna, which is derived
primarily from the School of Akiba, has no treatise devoted
to forbidden marriages, although some of them are discussed
in connection with other matters. The midrash on Leviticus,
from the same school, omits all comment on the eighteenth
and twenty-first chapters, which deal with incest and
adultery. The more restricted School of Ishmael provided a
midrash for these chapters, which later copyists and printers
used to fill the lacuna in the parallel work.
Illuminating as are Akiba's controversies with Ishmael
regarding law, custom, ethics, manners, theology and peda-
gogics, and important as they were in their time, they yield in
dramatic interest to the long conflict between the sages regard-
ing the policy of the Jews toward Imperial Rome.
For almost a millennium the plebeians of Jerusalem had
been advocating a policy of peace and internationalism. They
were opposed to aggressive wars against weaker neighbors,
and favored submission to the powerful imperialist states
which from time to time arose about Judea. But the farmer-
landowners were continually fomenting strife; and when the
nobility of the capital, largely drawn from these landowning
groups, sided with them, they brought Judea into armed con-
20O AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
flict with surrounding states. The history of this tripartite
struggle between the pacifist plebeians, the warlike pro-
vincials and the opportunist patricians, has not yet been writ-
ten, but it forms one of the most interesting and revealing
sociological studies in all Jewish history.
The militarist policy, advocated by the opponents of the
prophets during the First Commonwealth, byjhe Sadducees
under John Hyrkan, and by the Shammaites during the last
century of the Second Commonwealth, had repeatedly led to
disaster. The catastrophes, however, while they exacerbated
the conditions which led to rebellion, had not crushed the
spirit of the rebels. The provincials could not forget that once
in their history the militaristic policy had proved successful,
when the handful of Maccabees had won independence from
the Syrian Empire. They refused to remember that Syria had
had to face two hostile powers of the first magnitude at the
time Egypt in the West and Parthia in the East, whereas,
in spite of the survival of the Parthians, Rome was the un-
disputed master of the world.
Ishmael became the leader of these patriots. His attachment
to his people was violent and demonstrative. "The people of
Israel, may I be accepted as an atoning sacrifice for them!" 13
was his usual manner of referring to the Jews. Disagreeing
with Akiba's contention that God's favor depends on loyalty
to the Torah, he used to teach: "Beloved is Israel, for God has
made the nations his ransom!" 14 He would have forbidden
commercial transactions with pagans for the three days pre-
ceding, and for the three days following, an idolatrous
festival. 15 He shocked the plebeian judges by saying that if a
pagan and an Israelite were to come before him for trial,
he would give the Israelite the benefit of both Roman and
Jewish law.
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 201
Akiba remonstrated against this perversion of justice with
especial anger: "If they ask for Jewish law, you must decide
according to Jewish law; if they ask for Roman law, you must
decide according to Roman law." 16
But his legal partiality was not enough for Ishmael; with
the help of like-minded colleagues he preached discontent,
and organized rebellion against Rome. In the universal
chauvinist fashion, Ishmael claimed that the Romans had
attained their recent victories only through treachery in the
camp of the Jews. "When the people of Israel obey their
judges," he said, "God gives them victory over their enemies;
but when [as in the late war against the Romans] they dis-
regard their judges, God gives them no victory over their
enemies." 17
Ishmael remembered vividly the civil war which had raged
in Jerusalem while the Roman army was at its gates, and in
the usual homiletic-historical manner of the sages, he pro-
jected it back into the wilderness. The catastrophe of the spies
whom Moses had sent into Palestine was due, he said, to the
disorder and lack of discipline in the ranks of the people.
When the people had approached Moses with the request that
he appoint judges over them, they had come in proper form,
the young respecting the old, the old respecting the officials;
but when they came to discuss the spies, "the young pressed
on the old, and the old pressed on the officials." 18 No one who
is at all familiar with the history of Jerusalem during the last
years of its existence, before 70, can fail to see in this word
picture the clear reference to the mob-violence which dis-
tracted the Jewish capital during that period.
Alone among the sages of his day, Ishmael never mentioned
the Messiah. He did not expect the salvation of Israel to
come from heaven; he hoped that he and his friends would,
2O2 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
like the Maccabees of earlier times, bring it about in a purely
natural manner.
In IshmaeFs early days he was kept in some restraint by
his master, Joshua ben Hananya, the famous plebeian
pacifist. 19 Later, his main opponent was Akiba, whose views
on the subject of nationalism and pacifism were far more
mature than those of either the earlier plebeians or the con-
temporary patricians and provincials.
The basis of Akiba's policy was the conviction that the
individual has little say concerning the course either of his
own life or that of his people. Neither piety nor prudence
can really change man's destiny on earth as it is foreordained
by Providence, working through the immutable forces of
heredity and the laws of reward and punishment. This applies
first and foremost to the individual. "The merit of a father
determines," Akiba taught, "the beauty, the strength, the
wealth, the wisdom, and the life-span of the son; and it also
fixes the number of generations which will arise from him,
which implies the End." 20
The theological mold in which the thought is cast must not
conceal from us its inherently human character. Akiba him-
self indicated this, in a discussion with his colleagues.
They said to him, "The father determines the son's affairs
only while he is a minor; after that his life depends on his
own merit."
Akiba replied, "Have you ever seen anyone who was lame,
or deaf, or blind, until the time of puberty, become normal
thereafter ?" 21 Obviously, then, the forces which are determin-
ing in childhood continue to operate afterward.
Akiba's statement that a son's wealth depends on his father's
merit, must not be interpreted cynically. He was not referring
merely to the fact that children inherit their ancestral estates.
ON THE HEIGHTS I AKIBA S IDEALS 203
He meant, primarily, that the son's prosperity will depend on
his father's piety. He made this clear when he said: "Whoso-
ever does not engage in the study of the Law brings poverty
on his children." 22
He admitted that a person's derelictions might shorten the
life-span to which his father's merit entitled him; but noth-
ing could lengthen it. His colleagues, however, held that the
duration of individual life was not fixed at all. They cited
in support of their view the case of King Hezekiah, who had
been warned by the prophet Isaiah of imminent death, and
yet, after he had prayed, was granted a respite of fifteen years.
"But," Akiba replied, "the years were his own"; that is to say,
his well-timed repentance had only gained him restoration of
the years which were his through his ancestors' grace.
It was by this principle that Akiba explained to a friend,
Zonen, the undeniable therapeutic efficacy of idolatrous
shrines. "You and I know," Zonen said to Akiba, "that idols
are nothing. Yet we see people going into their houses of
worship halt and returning well."
Akiba replied: "I will explain this with a parable. There
was in a certain city a man whom everybody trusted so com-
pletely that they would leave their valuables with him for
safe-keeping, without taking the precaution of having wit-
nesses present. Only one especially suspicious individual in-
sisted on witnesses when he brought his property. One day,
when this man neglected his usual precautions, the wife of
the pious depositary said to her husband, 'Let us repay him
in kind, and keep his packet.' 'What,' replied her honest
husband, 'shall I destroy my character because he played the
fool!'
"So, also," continued Akiba, "pains are sent to a person
under strict orders, as it were, fixing their duration, the physi-
204 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
cian and the means of their cure. When their time is over,
the man sometimes happens to be in an idolatrous temple
and the pains are naturally tempted to refuse to leave. But
they consider, 'Shall we transgress our orders because he acts
the fool?" 523
In this parable, as in others, Akiba implied far more than
is apparent on the surface. Zonen may have been satisfied with
the superficial aspects of the answer; he probably did not
take the trouble to analyze the metaphysics and the theology
implied in the parable. Akiba, obviously, held that the events
of human life are irrevocably determined in all their phases
and details. A sick person does well to call a physician, he
indicates, for the instrument of healing is itself fixed by God.
But actually the cure is automatic.
Akiba's belief was challenged, as we have observed, by
anonymous "colleagues." Who these opponents were becomes
clear from a study of the midrashim which have come down
to us from the rival schools of Ishmael and Akiba. These
works show that Ishmael and his pupils denied the doctrine
of ZeJ(ut Abot, "the merit of the fathers," and held that the
course of a man's life is fixed by his own acts; while the
School of Akiba adhered to the deterministic teachings of
its founder. 24 But, as we know from Josephus, 25 the issue was
new only in formulation; fundamentally, it was identical with
that which had been debated decades before between the
Pharisees and the Sadducees. The former, with their plebeian
outlook on life, had held that "everything is determined";
while, the latter, representing patrician opinion, believed that
much depends on the individual.
Akiba summarized his views on this subject in his famous
four-word apothegm, "All (is) foreseen, (and) choice (is)
granted." 26 Man is free to do what he will, but his decisions,
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 205
and the results which must flow from them, are predeter-
mined. The paradox, basic to the theology of the Pharisees
and of all religions which derive from them not to mention
many systems of materialist philosophy cannot be resolved;
but it has never been stated more tersely and emphatically
than by Akiba.
It is interesting to remark that just as the Essenes who
were simply the extremist Pharisees of their days denied
Free Will altogether, so Ben Azzai took issue with the second
half of Akiba's statement. He was a thorough-going deter-
minist, allowing of no compromises and paradoxes. "By thy
name shalt thou be called; in thy place shalt thou be seated;
and thine own shall be given, thee. No man can touch what
is prepared for his comrade, and no kingdom can take a
hairsbreadth of what is destined for its neighbor," Ben Azzai
taught. 27 "Freedom is granted," he says, "only in the sense
of the verse, 'So far as concerneth the scorners, He addeth
to their scorn; but unto the righteous, He giveth grace' (Prov.
3:34). From this we may infer that if a man desires to study
the Torah a little, he will be given the opportunity to study
it much; if he desires to forget even a little of it, he will be
made to forget much more." 28 In other words, man may take
the initiative either in self-improvement or self-debasement.
Putting the same thought more succinctly, he said: "The re-
ward of observance is that it leads to further observance; the
punishment of sin, that it leads to further transgression." 29
Akiba admitted the force of habit. He too held that "the
attraction of sin is at first as feeble as a spider's thread, but
ultimately it becomes as strong as a ship's cable." 30 Yet he
derided those who inferred from this statement a philosophy
of determinism in the moral sphere. 31 He saw no contradic-
206 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
tion between his views and the general doctrine of reward
and punishment. "The verse, 'Wherefore doth the wicked
contemn God, and say in his heart, Thou wilt not require,'
(Ps. 10:13) must be paraphrased," Akiba holds: "The wicked
maintains that there is no Judge and there is no judgment;
but he is in error, there is both Judge and judgment." 32 When
Pappias interpreted one of Job's outcries to mean, "He alone
judgeth all creatures; and none can object to His decisions,"
Akiba protested. "The verse means rather, 'No complaint may
be raised against the decisions rendered by Him, but all is
done in accordance with truth and justice.' " 33
But the Divine Judgment differs from man's in this, that
it is Mercy. 34 In his usual manner, Akiba seized on a trivial
incident as text for a beautiful homily on this doctrine. He
noticed that when the figs ripened on the tree which served
as his academy, the owner arose at dawn to pluck them. It
occurred to him that this agility might be due to a suspicion
that the disciples were stealing the fruit; and he moved to
another tree.
When the owner of the tree observed this, he came to him
in tears: "I have had this one good deed to my credit, that
my tree gave shelter to learning, and now you rob me of it!"
"Why then did you rise so early to pick your figs ?" Akiba
asked.
"Because the figs are spoiled if they remain on the tree after
they ripen," the peasant said.
"Ah!" cried Akiba, when he heard these words. "Just as
the owner of this fig tree watches each of his many fruits,
and whenever one becomes ripe, he removes it lest it decay,
so also, the Holy One, blessed be He, knows his righteous
children and watches them; and when they are ripe enough
for His treasury, he garners them." 35
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 207
"How manifold are Thy works, O Lord," lie once said,
quoting Psalm 104, verse 24; and then he continued: "Thou
hast creatures which flourish in the sea, and others which
flourish on land. If the sea-animals were compelled to live on
land, they would perish; if the land-animals were compelled
to live in the water, they would perish. What is life for one
beast is death for the other. Yet thou hast chosen for each the
place which suits it most admirably. 'In wisdom hast thou
made them all, the earth is full of thy creatures.' " 36
His sympathy for all who suffered led him to believe that
"the world is judged with mercy"; yet "everything depends
on the majority of one's actions." In a fine image drawn from
the market place he describes his conception of man's rela-
tions to God. "The shop is open; the hand writes. Whosoever
desires may come and borrow, but the collectors make their
daily rounds, and the payments cannot be evaded. The war-
rant is there, the judgment is correct and everything is pre-
pared for the feast." 37
Seen from this point of view, human suffering is a gift
from God to man. When it occurs as a retribution for sin, it
averts greater evils after the final judgment. "God inflicts
slight pain on the righteous in this world to save them from
severer punishment in the future world." 38 If the suffering
is unmerited, there are special divine reasons which transcend
human understanding. Since in any event it is a good, it must
be accepted with gratitude. Sullen resignation is not sufficient;
submission to the inevitable must be cheerful. Complaint is
unjustified even as protest is futile.
The idea was not altogether new; in fact, it had been put
into imperishable verses by the author of the third .chapter of
Lamentations (w. 26-30):
208 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
"It is good that a man should quietly wait
For the salvation of the Lord.
It is good for a man that he bear
The yoke in his youth.
Let him sit alone and keep silence,
Because He hath laid it upon him.
Let him put his mouth in the dust,
If so there may be hope.
Let him give his cheek to him that smiteth him,
Let him be filled full with reproach."
Akiba merely carried the ancient Pharisaic philosophy to
its logical conclusions, expressing it in terms of talmudic
norms. "The verse, 'Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with
all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might
(Deut. 6:5) means that thou must love him whatever be the
measure which he mete out to thee." "Do not act toward me,"
Akiba pictures God as saying to Israel, "as the pagans act
toward their gods, thanking them when good comes, and
cursing them when evil comes. Israel is unlike them; when I
bring good on them, they give thanks; and when I bring
evil, they give thanks." 39
"Suffering is good," Akiba once said to his master,
Eliezer, when he found him sick. "We may infer this from
the story of Manasseh. Though his father, King Hezekiah,
had carefully instructed him in the Torah, and given him
all possible protection, that did not avail to make him pious.
Yet suffering led him to repentance, for it is recorded in
Chronicles that when he was in distress he turned to the
Lord" (II Chron. 3 2:i2). 40
From these premises Akiba inferred that poverty is better
than riches. "Poverty is as becoming to the daughter of Israel
as a red strap on the neck of a white horse." 41 He believed
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 209
that all the evils into which Israel had been led were the result
of wealth. "All the prophets complained of the silver and
gold which Israel brought out of Egypt. Isaiah (1:22) says,
Thy silver has become dross'; Hosea (2.10), The silver
which I multiplied for her and the gold have they used for
the Baal.' " 42
Except for the somewhat ambiguous expression used in one
of the passages already cited, "the number of generations
before him, which is the End," Akiba never applied the prin-
ciple of determinism to the life of the nation. Yet both his
predecessor, Joshua ben Hananya, and his disciple, Jose ben
Halafta, are particularly insistent that Israel's fate is unalter-
ably fixed. 43 Whether Akiba accepted this teaching is uncer-
tain, but there can be no doubt that he did adhere to the
pacifist and universalist policy which the other plebeians based
upon it. For, contrary to the general impression, Akiba was
not at all a militarist. This will become evident from our
study of his activities during the last twenty years of his life;
it is implied, also, in some of his utterances during the period
now under discussion. He opposed the Shammaitic conten-
tion that pagans may not send sacrifices to the altar; it was,
in fact, the open refusal to offer Temple sacrifice for the
Roman Emperor, which, as both the Talmud and Josephus
record, precipitated the Rebellion of the year 66. 44 The ultra-
nationalist view was still held by many; indeed it was de-
fended in the following generation by Simeon ben Yohai.
Jose the Galilean, Akiba's contemporary, who agreed that
pagans might send animal sacrifices, denied that they could
contribute money offerings for the Temple. 45 Akiba, however,
insisted that so far as the gifts to the sanctuary are concerned,
the pagan has the same status as the Jew. 46
He ruled that documents drawn up by the Roman courts,
2io AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
and witnessed by pagans, were valid; 47 and he applied this
principle even to such instruments as writs of divorce and
manumission which have ceremonial as well as civil signifi-
cance. Elihu, the young sage who arose to refute the heresies
of Job, was none other than the pagan Balaam, he said;
Eleazar ben Azariah, unable to impute such eloquence and
piety to the heathen prophet, identifies Elihu with Isaac. 48
The Samaritans, he insisted, were righteous proselytes; and
their bread may be eaten by Jews. 49 He extended the principle
laid down by Joshua ben Hananya that the various limita-
tions prescribed in Scripture against proselytes from Ammon,
Moab, Egypt and Edom no longer applied. "Sennacherib,"
he said, "came up and confused all the races. None of these
peoples are any longer in their own land." 50
Summarizing his whole doctrine of the relation of Jew to
Gentile, he said: "The fundamental principle of the Torah
is the commandment, 'Love thy neighbor as thyself " (Lev.
14:18).
Ben Azzai, hearing this, went further, and reminded Akiba
that the expression thy neighbor is open to nationalist inter-
pretation, as meaning only a fellow-Israelite. He preferred a
more generous text. "The verse, 'This is the book of the
generations of Adam,' implies a greater principle," he insisted,
"for it concludes with the words, 'In the day that God created
man, in the likeness of God he made him; male and female
created he them' " (Gen. 6:i). 51
Akiba apparently accepted his colleague's correction, for
on another occasion he said: "Whosoever sheds human blood
may be described as having diminished the image of God." 52
Again he remarks : "Beloved is man that he has been created
in the image of God. A special love was shown him when he
was told that he had been created in the image of God." 53
ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S IDEALS 211
This does not prevent him from adding however, "Beloved
are Israel that they are called children of God and that they
have been given the precious instrument with which the world
was created."
This opinion necessarily led to the doctrine that the greatest
day in Jewish history was not the Exodus; but rather the
anniversary of the Revelation. 54 The birth of Israel as a people
was secondary to its rebirth as the people of God and the
Torah.
Like Johanan ben Zakkai, before him, and peace-lovers,
generally, he opposed conscription in time of war. The verse
which demands that the "fearful and faint-hearted" be ex-
cused from military service was taken by him in its full
literalness. Jose the Galilean said it referred only to the
crippled. 55
Impatience with the long delayed redemption of Israel
seemed to Akiba a grave sin. "God became angry at Moses,"
he remarked, "only when he said, 'Neither ,hast Thou deliv-
ered Thy people at all' " (Exod. 5:23>. 56
When the redemption would come, it would be limited in
its scope. Disagreeing with nationalists like Eliezer ben
Hyrkanos, he said that the Ten Tribes would never be re-
stored. "Just as the day goes, never to return, so they have
gone, never to return."
But Eliezer said, "On the contrary, just as the day becomes
dark and then light, so they also having been reduced to
darkness, will come back into light." 57
The Kingdom of God was for him of international sig-
nificance. He disagreed altogether with the conception de-
veloped by some nationalist Galileans that it implied a political
kingdom in which Israel would again become dominant. He
maintained that his conception of the kingdom was em-
212 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
phasized in each of the psalms which the Levites intoned at
the daily services of the Temple. 58 But he believed that Rosh
Ha-Shanah, being the anniversary of the Creation, was an
especially appropriate season for celebrating the Kingship of
God.
Akiba denied further, the nationalist significance which
tradition attached to the ceremony of sounding the Shofar or
ram's horn, on Rosh Ha-Shanah. For centuries the Shofar
had been used to call the tribes together for war, and in the
popular mind this martial origin overbore the religious pur-
pose. But Akiba reminded the patriots who supported this
view that the same notes had been used when the people
had suffered natural catastrophes: drought, locust and bad
harvests, "for every trouble which comes upon you." 59
In what sense, then, could God be described as being in a
singularly intimate relation with Israel? Only in so far as
He has chosen to give them "the precious Instrument by which
the world was created." "Happy are you, people of Israel,"
He says, "when you consider before Whom you are being
cleansed, and Who it is that cleanses you; your Father Who
is in heaven." 60 Israel must expect neither power, nor riches,
nor prestige, as the select of God; it has been given nothing
but the opportunity to 'serve Him. It is Israel's mission to
glorify Him before the nations, but even in the end when all
will accept God, Israel will continue to understand Him more
completely than the others.
This seemed to Akiba the profounder significance of the
poetical dialogue in the Song of Solomon (5:9:6:). "The
peoples of the world say to Israel, 'What is thy Beloved more
than another beloved? Why do ye permit yourselves to be
slain for Him ? Ye are comely, ye are strong, come and mingle
with us.' But Israel replies: 'Do ye know Him? We shall
ON THE HEIGHTS : AKIBA's IDEALS 213
sing for you some of His praises. My Beloved is white and
ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand. His head is the most
fine gold, His locks are curled, and blac\ as a raven. His eyes
are life doves beside the water-broods, washed with milf^, and
fitly set' When the nations hear this praise of God, they say,
'Whither is thy Beloved gone, thou fairest among women?
Whither is thy Beloved turned aside that we may see\ Him
with thee?' But Israel answers, 'Ye have no share in Him,
I am my Beloved's and my Beloved is mine! " 61
The peculiar dependence of God on Israel for the spread
of his doctrine through the world justified for Akiba the
bold words which he put in the mouth of Israel, "When Thou
didst redeem us from Egypt, Thou didst redeem Thyself, as
it is written, 'Thy people which Thou didst redeem out of
Egypt, the people and its God' " (II Sam. 23 .7). 62
The conception was even more fully and daringly expressed
by Akiba's disciple, Simeon ben Yohai, who said, "The Scrip-
tures declare, 'Ye are My witnesses, and I am God.' This
means, 'So long as ye testify to Me, I am God; but if ye cease
to testify to Me, I am no longer God.' " 63
The divine revelation came to the prophets, therefore, not
as a reward -for their individual piety, but "for the sake of
Israel." "Go out and say to them," God commands Moses in
Akiba's interpretation of the Scripture, "that for their sake
am I speaking to thee." 64 Indeed, Israel's leaders have no
significance except as instruments for their people's safety.
"Just as the bird cannot fly without wings, so Israel cannot
continue without its sages," he says. 65
His love for the land of Israel had the same religious over-
tones. "Do not leave the Holy Land, lest you come to worship
idols," he warned his disciples, "for does not David say, 'For
they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave to
214 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
the inheritance of the Lord, saying, Go, serve other gods'
(I Sam. 26:19) ?" 66 And again: "Whoever is buried in Pales-
tine is as though he were buried underneath the altar, for all
Palestine is fit for the altar."
The conflict between Ishmael and Akiba thus covered every
aspect of Judaism, from the simplest questions of ceremonial
to the most recondite problems of theology and the most
perplexing issues of diplomacy. The following chapters will
show with what ultimate success Akiba applied his princi-
ples in political life during one of the most turbulent and
calamitous eras in Jewish history, and how, in his second
metamorphosis, the scholar who had once been a shepherd
became one of the supreme statesmen of his people.
VIII. A PERILOUS SUMMIT
THE years 110-12 were epochal both in the life of Akiba
and in the history of his people. 1 In his seventieth year
the great sage was still at the flood tide of his strength. His
health was perfect, he had retained all the physical and mental
vigor of his youth, and his native genius was now supple-
mented by the skill born of thirteen years of intellectual
leadership. If the discovery and development of unsuspected
faculties within one's self, the conquest of adverse circum-
stances and the achievement of universal applause can give
happiness to man, Akiba must certainly have been happy.
In addition to the other blessings which had come to him,
Akiba at last attained economic independence. He was not
wealthy; he could not afford any slaves, like Tarfon, Eliezer
and Gamaliel; nor did he possess the golden tables and the
beds with golden ladders which some imaginative aggadists
ascribed to him. 2 When his son, Joshua, married, it was still
necessary to stipulate that the bride support the husband
while he pursued his studies. 3 But Akiba no longer had to
engage in gainful occupation, and had sufficient income to
supply all of Rachel's modest needs and, at least on one occa-
sion, to give her a costly present. 4
Various accounts are given concerning the manner in which
he obtained this competence. According to the most reliable
record, he received a considerable bequest from a Roman
proselyte with whom he became acquainted during his mis-
sion at the capital in the year 95. 5 The later scholars who
215
216 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
described Rachel as the daughter of Ben Kalba Sabua, ex-
plained that Akiba's father-in-law ultimately became recon-
ciled to him and left him half of his enormous estates. Ac-
cording to another fable, Akiba obtained his money through
a miracle. Needing funds for his disciples, and unable to
obtain them from friends, he asked a pagan lady for a loan.
She agreed to make it, but stipulated that God and the Sea
be guarantors. How the agreement of these guarantors was
obtained, the story does not take the trouble to tell. It con-
tinues that when the time for payment came, Akiba happened
to be ill, and could not meet the obligation. Whereupon the
generous lady went to the shore of the sea, and said: "Master
of the Universe, Thou knowest that Akiba cannot repay his
debt. I look to Thee to fulfill Thy pledge." Hardly had she
uttered these words, when a box of jewels which an insane
princess had cast into the sea, was washed up at her feet.
When Akiba recovered and came to pay his debt, she said to
him, "Thy guarantor has more than reimbursed me; here is
the surplus."
The situation of the community was equally happy. Never
since the destruction of Jerusalem had Judea been economically
more prosperous, or politically more tranquil. The aftermath
of the war had passed; the ruined population had once more
settled to normal habits of work and trade; the city of Ludd in
the lowland had partly replaced Jerusalem as the metropolis
of Judea and absorbed some of the destitute artisans and
merchants. A new generation had grown up accustomed to
the Roman yoke and apparently willing to bear it. In distant
Rome, the affairs of the Empire had for a dozen years been
in the capable hands of Nerva and Trajan, the first and second
of the "five good emperors." It was natural that the thought
of the people should turn to the possibility of the restoration
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 21 7
of the Temple. During the years which had elapsed since
the burning of the sanctuary, the Jews had continually prayed
for its reestablishment. They had never ceased to study the
intricate sacrificial system, and many of them were more
expert in it than had been the priests of Temple times. The
daily synagogue services, which had originated quite inde-
pendently of the Temple, probably without the consent of the
priesthood, had been transformed into substitutes for the abol-
ished sacrifices. Nor had the people forgotten Jerusalem, the
Crown of Beauty. Much of Akiba's jurisprudence and phi-
losophy, as we have observed, centered about the problems of
Jerusalem's market place. The habits of the patricians of
Jerusalem, too, had been carefully recorded and were being
handed down from master to disciple. Above all the scholars
had continued to maintain the rigid discipline of Levitical
purity, though it had no significance except in connection
with the Temple and Jerusalem. During the confusion of the
last days of Jerusalem, someone had had the presence of mind
to escape from the city with the ashes of the last red heifer
and the water of purification, which, in accordance with the
nineteenth chapter of Numbers, were required to purify any-
one who had become defiled. The precious relics were kept
in the "Treasury of Yabneh," throughout the troublesome days
of the reconstruction, and were still to be found in Galilee a
century after the events which we are now recounting. 6
These measures indicate how deep and how obstinate was
the desire for the Temple and a restored Jerusalem. The re-
laxed severity of Roman rule led many Jews first to hope,
and then to believe, that the Temple was about to be restored.
They were encouraged, perhaps, by a popular legend which
held that the Temple would be in ruins for a jubilee. Since
the destruction had taken place in 70, the restoration was due
2i 8 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
in 119. This belief, like others in human history, set in mo-
tion the forces needed for its own fulfillment. A certain de-
gree of provincial autonomy was not considered incompatible
with complete imperial authority, and it was the general
policy of the Romans to grant their subject people every
concession which cost nothing and involved no danger.
It was therefore a reasonable expectation that the government
would reward the tractability of the Jews with permission to
return to Jerusalem.
The political situation made the moment especially auspi-
cious for action. Trajan, the last emperor who extended the
Roman domains, was about to undertake his expedition
against the Parthians, that stubborn people which more than
once resisted the might of imperial arms. On the eve of this
campaign Trajan needed the full support and devotion of
the various provinces, but especially of those near the scene
of activities. In addition, there was a considerable settlement
of Jews living under the Parthians in Babylonia, and their
good will was not without importance.
The meager records of the time give us only a tantalizing
glimpse of the course of events, and tell us nothing of the
negotiations which accompanied them. The Jewish com-
munity in Rome may have exerted some influence favorable
to their Palestinian brethren, but it seems more likely that the
imperial officials relied in most of their subsequent decisions
on the local administrators. Hence, we hear of no commission
to Rome asking for the reconstruction of the Temple. It is a
fair presumption, however, that there were conversations on
this subject between the leaders of the Jews and the Roman
governor, and we cannot be wrong in the assumption that
among the chief representatives of the Jews were their peace-
loving teachers Joshua and Akiba. The result was that one day
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 2Ip
the Jewish world was startled by an imperial pronouncement
permitting the restoration of the sacrificial service in Jerusa-
lem and placing the proselyte Aquila, the friend and disciple
of Akiba, in charge of the reconstruction of the Temple. 7
As usual in such pronouncements, the terms were inten-
tionally made ambiguous; but it was obvious from the outset
that what was planned was not a replica of the Herodian
structure, which was really a fortress, but a more modest
edifice, sufficient only for the purposes of sacrifice.
It can hardly be a mere accident that the announcement
was made on the twelfth of Adar, 8 immediately before the
festivals celebrating the great victory of the Maccabees over
the Syrian general, Nicanor, and the miraculous deliverance
of the Jews from the hands of Haman. The selection of the
date betrays the hand of the scholars who carried on the
negotiations with the Romans, and who obviously intended
that the anniversary be joined to Nicanor's Day and Purim
in a perpetual three-day festival. And this was indeed effected
when the conclave voted to make the twelfth of Adar a per-
manent half-holiday, to be known as Trajan's Day.
The willingness of the Romans to restore the Temple led
Akiba to believe that more energetic representations on its
behalf might have saved it in the first place. He blamed
Johanan ben Zakkai for not exerting his influence to this
end. "The verse, 'He turneth wise men backward and maketh
their knowledge foolish' (Isa. 44:25) applies," he said, "to
Johanan ben Zakkai, as he stood before the Roman general
begging for the academy at Yabneh, when he might have
saved the Temple at Jerusalem." 9 Such depreciation of the
savior of the Torah would be incredible in the mouth of any-
one who had not himself conducted successful negotiations
220 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
with the conquerors, and thus felt that he might justly voice
an opinion regarding their pliability.
To Akiba and many others it seemed that the Messianic
era was at hand, but it was taking a form different from
what had been expected. There was no miraculous appear-
ance of the son of David or of Elijah the Prophet, there was
no resurrection of the dead or day of divine judgment. The
obvious explanation was that the Messianic era had been
wrongly confused with the Future World, the Olam Habba,
which was in reality quite distinct from it. The two were to
be carefully distinguished hereafter; the Messiah would usher
in the freedom of Jerusalem and the Jews, the world cata-
clysm would be brought about by no human agency, but by
God Himself. Estimates regarding the probable length of the
Messianic era now became a popular preoccupation. Eliezer
ben Hyrkanos, in his retirement, gave his opinion that it
would last three generations. 10 Akiba, however, would not
give up the hope that his own generation would see the reve-
lation of the Divine glory. "The Messianic age will last," he
said, "forty years, as it is written in the Prayer of Moses, 'Make
us glad according to the years wherein Thou hast afflicted
us, according to the years wherein we have seen evil' "
(Ps. 90II5). 11 The statement as it stands is a childish fancy, of
a type foreign to Akiba's mind. Seen in the context of the
times it assumes serious meaning. It was a cryptic reference to
a hope which Akiba, now a responsible statesman, dared not
voice openly. Forty years had in fact passed since the destruc-
tion of the Temple. The next forty years were to be a happy
Messianic prelude to the Future World.
The general reception accorded to the Trajan Declaration
was one of extravagant enthusiasm. A new prayer was added
to the Grace after Meat, thanking God "Who is good and does
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 221
good," for this favor of the Romans. 12 At the Passover service,
Akiba, with the acquiescence of most of his colleagues, added
to the benediction thanking God for having "redeemed us
and our ancestors from Egypt," the following prayer: "So
may the Lord, our God, cause us to reach new festivals and
pilgrimages, rejoicing in the building of our city, and happy
in His worship; and may we eat there of the offerings and
paschal sacrifices, the blood of which will be poured out on
the wall of His altar for His acceptance." And then he ended
with the doubly significant benediction, "Blessed art Thou, O
Lord, Who hast redeemed Israel." 13 The same conclusion
was 'added to a benediction inserted after the reading of the
While the majority unaffectedly rejoiced in the happy turn
of events, two groups among the Jews were dissatisfied: the
nationalists and the primitive Christians. The former received
the Roman promise with derision; the latter with apprehen-
sion. What cause was there for this wild acclaim, the nation-
alists asked. The promise was small, its fulfillment doubtful.
At best the proposed Temple was to be less imposing than
that which had been destroyed; nothing had been said about
Jewish autonomy; the question of reestablishing the walls of
Jerusalem had not even been raised. When Tarfon heard of
the extended benediction which Akiba proposed to insert in
the Passover service, he opposed it. We could only thank
God for the exodus from Egypt, he held; there had as yet
been no other equally important redemption. Jose the Galilean
objected to the use in a house of mourning of the benediction
which had been added to the Grace. 15 He could not, of course,
generally oppose a supplementary blessing of gratitude to God
as the one who is good and does good; he indicated his oppo-
sition to the whole innovation by the limitations he put on
222 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
the use of the new benediction. He went further and declared
that it was illegal to accept the gift of a Temple structure
from pagans.
"But," Akiba urged, "you admit that we may accept sacri-
fices from them; why not other offerings?"
"Even if you argue all day," retorted the intrasigeant Jose,
"I insist that only whole burnt offerings and peace offerings
can be accepted from them." 16
When some human bones were discovered in the course of
excavations in the Temple grounds, the nationalists moved
that the holy site be declared impure, so as to make the
restoration quite impossible except through the intervention
of a miracle. Joshua, the peace-maker, who was struggling to
obtain the full consent of Rome to the reestablishment of the
Temple, cried out bitterly against this excess of patriotism.
"It is a shame and a disgrace for us that we should condemn
our Temple as defiled. Where are the dead of the Deluge?
Where are the dead of Nebuchadnezzar ? Where are all those
who were slain in the last war, and until the present? The
principle laid down by the sages is that only a known im-
purity is defiling; an unknown impurity is not defiling!" 17
At first, Ishmael, who was primarily the priest, joined
Akiba in his joy over the prospect of a restored Temple
service. The fourth benediction of the Grace, which had just
been composed, was, according to him, adumbrated in Scrip-
ture itself. 18 Having accidentally mended the wick while read-
ing on the Sabbath eve, he later entered the transgression in
his note book: "I, Ishmael ben Elisha, have through error
mended the wick on the Sabbath; when the Temple is rebuilt,
I will bring a fat sin offering." 19
The members of the infant Judeo-Christian Church were
dismayed by the Trajan Declaration. They had considered the
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 223
destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple an inevitable and
appropriate punishment visited on the Jews for their rejection
of Jesus. But now the Roman government was apparently
taking steps to restore the metropolis and the sanctuary to the
sinful and still recalcitrant people! One of the writers of the
period is at great pains to reassure the members of the Church
that the reconstruction of the Temple does not imply the
restoration of the Jews to divine favor. God has no need for
any Temple, he says, pointing for corroboration to the proph-
ecy of Isaiah, chapter 66, "Thus saith the Lord, the heaven is
my throne and the earth is my footstool. Where is the house
that ye may build unto me ? And where is the place that may
be my resting place?" What was happening before their eyes
was the fulfillment of another verse of Isaiah, "Behold they
that destroyed this Temple shall themselves build it." "So it
cometh to pass," he says, "for because they went to war was
it destroyed by their enemies. Now also the subjects of their
enemies shall build it up." But the reconstruction will be only
temporary: "For the Scripture saith, 'And it shall be in the
last days that the Lord shall deliver up the sheep of the
pasture and the fold and the tower thereof to destruction.' " 20
This open and vociferous opposition to the imperial policy
suddenly forced on the Roman governors a realization of the
fact which had long escaped them that Judaism and Chris-
tianity were distinct religions. For many years Christianity had
been tolerated under Roman dominion as a variety of Judaism,
which was a recognized and permitted form of worship. Indi-
vidual emperors like Nero and Domitian had undertaken to
persecute the Church for personal and transient reasons, just
as Tiberius had expelled the Jews from Rome at one time.
But no edict had been issued outlawing Christianity or author-
izing its persecution. When Flavius Clemens became con-
224 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
verted to monotheistic religion, the doctrines which he ac-
cepted were so vague that both the Jews and the Christians
could claim him as their own. Probably he made no effort to
comprehend the nice distinctions between the two religions,
which, though they loomed so large in the eyes of the Pales-
tinians, were really insignificant to the outsider. The Trajan
Declaration was the wedge which finally cleaved the two
groups asunder. Its enthusiastic reception by the Jews, and its
equally enthusiastic rejection by the Christians, ended all
possibility of reconciliation between the Jews and the Judeo-
Christians.
In the persecution which ensued, Symeon, a near relative
of Jesus, who had attained advanced age, and was the recog-
nized head of the Church of Jerusalem, was crucified by the
Romans; and Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, was sentenced
to die in the Roman arena. 21
So little, however, did the Romans yet understand the new
sect or its tenets, that they arrested Eliezer ben Hyrkanos on
the charge of belonging to it. Driven from the Sanhedrin, the
old sage had apparently sought the companionship of sec-
tarian teachers. This fact, and his failure to attend the sessions
of the conclave, was sufficient for the Roman gendarmes.
Eliezer was seized and brought to trial on the charge of
being a Christian. 22
As he was being led to prison, a woman, taking advantage
of his helplessness, bespattered him, it is said, with the house-
hold refuse. The changed and chastened Eliezer, who had been
driven into a rage when someone ventured to contradict him,
now merely remarked, "I think that my colleagues will take
me back into their midst today, for it is written, 'He lif teth
up the needy out of the dunghill'" (Ps. ii3:7). 23
This prophecy was not to be fulfilled; but there can be no
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 225
doubt that Eliezer's former colleagues, Gamaliel, his brother-
in-law, as well as Joshua and Akiba, rallied to his defense. The
failure of the Talmud to mention them in its brief resume
of the trial must be because it records only public proceedings,
while the sages interceded for Eliezer in private interviews
with the judges and officials. When the matter came before
the court, we are told, the judge asked Eliezer how so re-
spected and venerable a sage could waste his time on "vanity"
such as that of which he stood accused. "May the Judge be
accepted as my witness," Eliezer replied, meaning that God
could testify to the purity of his faith. But the Roman inter-
preted the words to mean that Eliezer was calling on him as
witness to the absurdity of the charge. Deeply flattered, he
immediately dismissed the complaint.
The form in which the question was put to Eliezer, as well
as the quick decision in his favor, amply support the conjec-
ture that his colleagues had prepared the way for his acquittal.
What happened in court was a mere formality; the judge was
convinced of Eliezer's innocence before the trial began.
As soon as Eliezer was free, Akiba rushed to see him and
comfort him. The old man was still disconsolate; he could
not understand why God had chosen to place him in such
peril. "Perhaps," Akiba suggested, "it is because you enjoyed
what one of the sectarians taught you."
"Indeed, it must be so," Eliezer replied, and he told Akiba
of an interpretation which a certain Jacob, of the new Church,
had given him.
The opposition of the Christians to the Trajan Declaration
led to difficulties not only in the Holy Land, but throughout
the Empire. A few years later, Pliny the Younger, the Gover-
nor of Bithynia, inquired of Trajan concerning the status of
the new faith, and was told that its members were subject to
226 AKIB AI SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
punishment. Pliny was indeed not to "seek them out," but
when they were brought before him for trial, they were to be
treated severely. 24 In the light of the more severe persecutions
of later times, this famous rescript of Trajan seemed to the
Church historians extraordinarily lenient; but in its own time
it was a definite step toward the legal degradation of the
Christians.
While the opposition of the Christians to the Trajan Decla-
ration could bring harm only to themselves, there was another
group, the Samaritans, whose antagonism finally frustrated
the whole plan. Those ancient enemies of the Jews, who had
almost prevented the construction of the Second Temple in
the sixth century B.C.E., had heard the announcement of Tra-
jan's offer with a consternation which was exactly propor-
tionate to the joy of the Jews. They resorted to the tactics
used by their ancestors under Darius and Xerxes, and ap-
pealed to the capital of the empke. The government, embar-
rassed by the unexpected development, sought a graceful
retreat, first in delay, and then in a process of attrition, reduc-
ing the grant to the smallest possible proportions. 25
The Roman governor, apparently acting under orders from
his superiors, proposed various interpretations of the plighted
imperial word. He seems to have suggested that the recon-
struction of the Temple be delayed until Trajan would him-
self arrive in the East, and that in the meantime sacrifices be
resumed in the vacant Temple area. Joshua, who trusted the
Romans completely, and saw clearly the governmental diffi-
culty with which they were faced, was in favor of this
procedure. "I have a tradition," he said, "that sacrifices may
be offered though there be no gates separating the Temple
courts; they may be eaten though there be no Temple walls;
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 227
and the tithes and lighter sacrifices may be eaten in Jerusalem
though it be unwalled." 26
In their anxiety to win over the nationalists, Joshua and
his colleagues turned to Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, whom they
had ousted from the conclave decades earlier, and asked him
to intercede. The old nationalist remembered enough from
the last war against the Romans to desire peace above every-
thing; and perhaps he was flattered by the anxiety of his
former opponents to be reconciled. He offered a compromise
suggestion, that curtains be set up in the sanctuary to divide
the various courts from one another. That must have been
done, he said, when the Second Temple was being con-
structed, and sacrifices were being offered on the altar. 27
But neither of these suggestions were acceptable to the
nationalists. Having first sought to prevent the rebuilding of
the Temple, they now opposed any offerings until the Temple
building was restored.
The division among the Jews soon reached such propor-
tions that it could not be concealed from the Romans, who, al-
ready taken aback by the Samaritan outcry, were surprised by
the enthusiasm of the pacifists and alarmed by the opposition
of the nationalists. Akiba's interpretation of their gesture as
the first step to Jewish national independence seemed to cor-
roborate all the charges of the Samaritans, and was almost as
seditious from the Roman point of view as IshmaeFs con-
temptuous rejection.
Five years passed in these futile negotiations. The Romans
became continually more convinced that they had committed
an error; the Jews remained determined to obtain their Tem-
ple. In the meantime Trajan arrived in the East to reduce
Armenia and vanquish the Parthians. Faced with these diffi-
cult tasks, he had little time for the Jewish question; and
228 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
when the noisy demands of this little people were placed
before him, he settled them hastily on paper. The Jews
might have Jerusalem as their city, but the reestablishment
of the Temple was indefinitely postponed. The offhand deci-
sion of the Emperor, for it could hardly have been given after
due deliberation and consultation, was catastrophic. The hopes
of the Jews were shattered; the Samaritans were victorious.
On that day the bloody war which was to end in the complete
annihilation of Judaea became inevitable.
Akiba was thunderstruck. The worst predictions of the na-
tionalists had come true; the Roman word had proved alto-
gether unreliable. Ishmael did not for a moment hesitate;
the new offer was to be rejected summarily. Arguing with
cold legal formality, he said: "We might suppose that a Jew
is permitted to take his second tithe to Jerusalem and eat it
there, now that the Temple is destroyed, but this cannot be.
The Law requires two kinds of offerings to be consumed in
Jerusalem, the firstlings of animals and the second tithe. Like
the first, the second can be brought to Jerusalem only while
the Temple is in existence." To Akiba's amazement, Ben
Zoma, his close friend and colleague, seconded IshmaeFs view,
and demonstrated the legal point by an argument based on
Akiba's own dialectical rules.
But it was the nationalists' turn to be jubilant. There could
be no doubt, they maintained, that the Temple would soon
be rebuilt. They expected this to be achieved, however, not
through the Romans, but through the Parthians. Encouraged
rather than mollified by Trajan's offers and attempts at con-
ciliation, they felt certain that they could achieve a victory as
memorable as that of the Hasmoneans, provided they avoided
the errors which, they believed, had brought defeat in 66-70.
The leaders of the nationalist movement were Ishmael, who
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 229
had completely broken with Joshua and Akiba and a certain
Simeon, probably Simeon ben Nethanel, brother-in-law of the
Nasi, Gamaliel. 28
In vain did such patriots as Gamaliel and Eliezer, and such
pacifists as Joshua and Samuel the Little, warn leaders and
followers of the folly of the enterprise. The days of the Mes-
siah, even were they at hand, would be among the most
difficult in all history, Gamaliel told them. The redemption of
Israel could come about only through widespread war and
suffering, such as no generation would of its own accord
seek. "In the generation when the son of David will come,"
he said, "the House of Assembly will be turned into a brothel,
Galilee will be devastated, the men of Galilee will wander
about from city to city and will receive no kindness, the wis-
dom of the scribes will decay, the pious will be despised, and
the face of the whole generation will be like the face of a dog.
Truth will be lacking, and he who withdraws from evil will
be considered a madman!" 29
Apparently Gamaliel expected the new rebellion, like that
of the year 66, to break out in Galilee, and he was therefore
led to think that this district would suffer the brunt of the
war and bear the heaviest burdens of defeat. Little did even he
realize the full consequences of the insane struggle which was
about to be precipitated.
Samuel the Little, that gentle pacifist who could not brook
to pray for the downfall of Rome, also exhorted his colleagues
to desist from the dangerous venture. About to die, he sent
for them, and uttered the prediction which was soon to be
fulfilled: "Simeon and Ishmael will die by the sword; the
rest of the people will be pillaged; and great suffering will
come on the land." 30
Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, the old nationalist, was equally pessi-
230 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
mistic. The leadership of the people was, in his opinion,
beneath contempt. There was no hope anywhere in the visible
world. "Since the day when the Temple was destroyed," he
said, "the sages have become mere scribes, the scribes mere
teachers, the teachers have become like the peasantry, and the
peasantry is daily becoming poorer and humbler. On whom
then shall we rely? Only on our Father who is in heaven!" 31
This was the burden of his teaching. Direct action, which he
might have urged in earlier times, was useless. The Jews could
be redeemed, but only "through repentance and good
deeds." 32 If only they would observe the Sabbath properly,
he said, they might escape the three evils which awaited them:
the tribulations of the Messianic age, the eschatological wars
of Gog and Magog, and the Day of the Final Judgment. 33
But Eliezer had little hope that his advice would prevail.
When the scholars visited him during his illness, he predicted
the dark days which were soon to come upon them. "I see
fierce anger in the world." 34
"I should be surprised," he said, looking at them, "if you
die a natural death."
Akiba, the peace-lover, could not help asking, "What will
my end be?"
"Worse than theirs!" cried the master, brusque as ever.
In his efforts to calm the nationalists, Joshua paid Ishmael
a visit in the little village of Azziz, on the Edomite border,
whither the latter had retired. 35 The influence of the aged
scholar was still great; apparently Ishmael agreed to hold the
nationalists in check. But the efforts of the experienced leaders
to keep the peace were frustrated by the ill-timed daring of
the more intransigeant leaders abroad. As frequently happens,
these expatriates were more extreme in their objectives and
unreflecting in their methods than the most ardent patriots in
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 23!
the homeland. Seeing that the Roman garrisons in Africa had
been weakened to supply soldiers for the Parthian campaign,
the Egyptian Jews raised the banner of revolt against the
Empire. Perhaps they were stimulated to this by what they
regarded as a heaven-sent portent a great earthquake which
destroyed Antioch while Trajan and his army lay encamped
there. Many delegations which had come with petitions for
the Emperor perished in the upheaval. Trajan himself escaped
through a window from the room in which he lay trapped.
"As the shocks continued for several days," Dio Cassius re-
ports, "he lived out of doors in the hippodrome." 36
It had always been predicted that natural catastrophes, and
especially earthquakes, would herald the advent of the Mes-
siah; and it was altogether natural that so widespread a dis-
aster, happening in the particular city where the Emperor
was wintering, should have been interpreted by the excited
Jews as a signal from heaven. The riots which ensued covered
the provinces of Egypt, Libya and Gyrene and the Island of
Cyprus. Two leaders of the insurrection, Julianus and Pappus,
appeared in Syria and threatened the Roman power in Pales-
tine at closer range. The unrest spread to Palestine itself,
where the nationalist leaders tried to cooperate with the rebel
leaders of the Diaspora. An interesting discussion between
Tarfon, who seems to have taken an active part in this move-
ment, and some younger scholars, has been preserved. 37
Tarfon said to them, "By what merit did the tribe of Judah
attain to royalty in Israel?"
"Because," they answered in orthodox fashion, "its ancestor,
Judah, confessed his sin with Tamar."
"But does not this interpretation put a premium on wrong-
doing?" Tarfon objected.
"Because, then," another said, "he saved Joseph from death."
232 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
"That reply, too, is inadequate," Tarfon countered. "The
merit of saving Joseph from death merely offset the sin of
selling him as a slave." When they confessed their inability
to reply, he said: "Because Judah was the tribe which sanctified
the name of God at the sea. For when the various tribes of
Israel came to the Red Sea, at the Exodus, each said, 'I will
descend first.' The tribe of Judah, however, sprang into the
sea. Hence it is written, 'When Israel came forth out of Egypt,
the house of Jacob from a people of strange language, Judah
became sanctified to Him, obtaining dominion over Israel' "
(Ps. 114:1).
The Roman historian, Dio Cassius, followed by some later
writers, has circulated incredible stories of the number and
ferocity of the rebels. There was never any reasonable possi-
bility of their success. But they did alarm Trajan, whose
affairs were not prospering in the East and who was facing
a real revolt in Mesopotamia. Even the contemporary writer,
Appian, speaks of war between Trajan and the Egyptian
Jews; and this may be taken to indicate that the disturbances
were more than mere riots. Trajan acted with characteristic
speed and decisiveness. He dispatched Marcius Turbo to sup-
press the insurrection in Africa, and appointed as governor of
Palestine Lusius Quietus, an able Moorish general who might
be relied upon to deal mercilessly with any resistance. And,
indeed, within a short time peace was restored everywhere.
The Jews of Egypt and Gyrene paid heavily for the irresponsi-
bility of their leaders. The Cypriotes, in their vengeful fury,
massacred the whole Jewish population and enacted a law
which survived for centuries against Jewish immigration.
The Palestinians, who had hardly had an opportunity to help
the insurrectionists, were suppressed with an iron hand. The
"war of Quietus" a battle of armed legions against a disarmed,
A PERILOUS SUMMIT 233
though restless, community was long remembered with ter-
ror. It is even said that the lascivious Moor introduced into
Judea the fearful lus primae noctis, permitting his soldiers to
seize newly married brides and carry them off before they
were taken to their bridal chamber. The terrified Jews tried
to escape the decree by celebrating their marriages in secret,
or changing the customary wedding night from Wednesday
to Tuesday. In some places, it even became customary for
betrothed couples to live together without a marriage cele-
bration, so as to evade the danger. 38
Julianus and Pappus, who had been captured in Laodicea,
were given a public trial, intended, doubtless, to impress the
people with the futility of resistance.
"If your God can perform the miracles which you ex-
pected," the general taunted them, "why does He not save you
from our hands, as He saved Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah
from Nebuchadnezzar?"
"Because," they answered staunchly, "Nebuchadnezzar had
merit enough to be the occasion for a miracle, but you are
not worthy of such an honor." 39
The trial and execution of Julianus and Pappus had, how-
ever, the very opposite effect of what the Romans intended;
it did not terrorize the nationalists, it infuriated them, and
their fury infected even the saner elements among the people.
Trajan's Day was abolished, 40 as if to serve warning on the
Romans that the Jews no longer wished the restoration of
the Temple at their hands. The two heroes were declared
martyrs whose place in heaven was above that of all the
saints. 41
A generation later, when the rebellion initiated by Julianus
and Pappus could be seen clearly as the beginning of the in-
credible disaster which had befallen Judea, Meir, the fiery
234 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
patriot, still said, "The verse, 'and I shall break down the
pride of your strength' (Lev. 26:19), applied best to Julianus
and Pappus, the men of might and courage." 42
But Joshua, and Eliezer who now fully cooperated with
him, were far from converted to the cause of rebellion. When
the people of Ludd declared a fast on Hanukkah to bespeak
God's mercy for the seditious leaders, both Eliezer and Joshua
publicly showed their disapproval of the action. "Go out and
fast to obtain forgiveness for having fasted on the holy day,"
they said to the people. 43
The Romans, whether unaware of the views expressed by
the authoritative leaders, or indifferent to them, were as bitter
as the nationalists themselves. Kindness having failed, they
reverted to repression. They accepted the gauntlet thrown
down by the Jews in the abolition of Trajan's Day and dis-
carded the plans for the restoration of the Temple. 44
For a time, Gamaliel, although he had been opposed to the
rebellion, was sought for imprisonment, but a friendly Roman
had warned him of the government's intention and he was in
hiding. 45 The conclave, however, which the Romans mis-
takenly considered the center of the seditious propaganda, was
suppressed.
Just at this time Trajan suddenly fell ill and decided to
return to Italy, leaving the army under the command of
Publius Aelius Hadrian, who had married his niece. When
Trajan died en route, the army at Antioch declared Hadrian
his successor, and the latter immediately demanded that the
Senate confirm the choice. Established as the ruler of the
world, Hadrian, who in spite of his literary tastes and general
humanitarianism was sometimes petty and revengeful, at once
removed Lusius Quietus (who had opposed his accession)
from the governorship of Palestine and ordered him executed.
IX. APPROACHING THE
PRECIPICE
THE sudden death of Trajan and the consequent fall and
execution of Quietus, following so quickly on the death
of Julianus and Pappus, made a deep and lasting impression
on the minds of the people. They could not but see in these
events the finger of God, avenging the suffering of his beloved
ones on their persecutors. The later sages who repeated the
tales apparently considered it incredible that both the Em-
peror and his general should have met such deaths, and
merged the two miracles into one. They told how Trajan,
after executing the two heroes, was visited by a pair of officials
from Rome who killed him. For once, legend was compelled
to minimize, rather than to exaggerate, reality.
Hadrian was, of course, hailed as a deliverer. An Egyptian-
Jewish writer, posing as the Sibyl, speaks of him in most
glowing terms: "A silver-helmed man, he shall have the name
of a sea; he shall be a most excellent man and shall under-
stand everything. And in thy time, most excellent, most noble
dark-haired prince, and in the time of thy scions, all these
days shall come" (Sibylline Oracles, Book V, verses 46-48).
The new governor of Palestine permitted the conclave to
reassemble, but fearing that Yabneh might become a second
Jerusalem and center of nationalist ferment, he changed the
seat of the legislature to Ludd. The question immediately
arose whether the conclave, in its new home, could claim all
the authority which had been vested in that of Yabneh. Most
235
236 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
of the scholars felt that it might; but Eliezer ben Hyrkanos,
still in retirement, denied this. He admitted that Johanan
ben Zakkai, his teacher, had claimed for the gathering at
Yabneh practically the full authority of a Sanhedrin.
"But," Eliezer maintained, "Johanan made his ordinance
only regarding Yabneh, not for any other place."
His colleagues, however, retorted: "The ordinance applied
both to Yabneh and to any other locality where a conclave is
established." 1
While the scholars thus endowed the gathering at Ludd
with full rabbinic authority, its prerogatives were definitely
limited by the government. It was especially forbidden to
exercise the one function which had made the conclave a
legislature for all Jewry, namely the regulation of the calendar.
The confusion which this interdict threatened in Jewish
religious life is obvious. The Jewish calendar, as we have
already noted, had not yet been reduced to an automatic
system. The beginnings of the months and the years were
still announced by the court, whose duty it was to add an
intercalary month about once in three years, so as to harmon-
ize the Jewish year, based on the revolutions of the moon,
with the solar year which is about eleven days longer. This
essential arrangement might be omitted for a little time with-
out grave confusion, but neglect for more than five or six
years would bring Passover, the spring festival, into early
February, the middle of the rainy season, and Sukkot, the
festival of ingathering, into the beginning of August, mid-
summer.
The scholars were at a loss. It might be supposed that a few
of them could have gathered in secret and arranged the
calendar. But such a secret gathering would have involved
the omission of ceremonies held sacred by all Jewry which
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 237
were impressive symbols of Jewish unity. The alternative was
to send someone beyond the Roman borders where, under the
shelter of another government, the traditional ritual could be
carried out. To this, however, grave objection was raised.
Even when it was suggested that application be made to
Rufus for permission to perform the ceremonies in Galilee, or
to attempt to carry them out in the northern province without
the knowledge of the Romans, Haninah of Ono protested.
The calendar had been fixed in Judea from time immemorial;
the scholars could not transfer the ceremony elsewhere. Ha-
ninah admitted, at last, that a decision on the subject of the
intercalary month reached by scholars meeting in Galilee
would be valid; but as for going to any country outside of
Palestine, that was not to be considered. 2 Finally, unable to
get permission to add the intercalary month anywhere in
Palestine, and pressed by the impending dislocation of the
festivals from their proper seasons, the scholars dispatched
Akiba to Nahardea, which was under the Parthian dominion,
with authority to perform the necessary ceremonies there.
That Akiba, then almost seventy, should have undertaken
such a long and hazardous journey may seem strange. But
the ceremony was considered one of the most important in
Judaism, and it was doubtless felt that it ought to be per-
formed by a distinguished scholar. Perhaps Akiba's known
pacifism and his friendship with Rufus were expected to
protect Him from the imputation of any treasonable motive
in making the trip across the border.
While he was in Nahardea, Akiba had the opportunity of
speaking to some of the Jewish emigres who, as young men,
had fled thither after the fateful war of 66-jo. 3 From them he
received several important traditions which he transmitted to
Gamaliel. The most important was the rule, which had been
238 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
established by Gamaliel I but apparently forgotten in the
Palestinian academies, accepting the testimony of a single
witness as sufficient evidence to the death of a man, so as to
permit his wife to remarry. In the unrest which filled the
country with the consequent disappearance of husbands,
both by murder and in battle this was an important reform.
It was destined to become even more important in the later
centuries when the Jews, scattered through the various coun-
tries of Europe, were perpetually on the move, and it was
frequently impossible to find two eye-witnesses to a death by
violence.
It is characteristic of the manner in which traditions were
handed down in those troubled days that when Akiba re-
ported this conversation in the academy, Gamaliel suddenly
recalled that he had, himself, in his boyhood, heard such a
decision rendered. Thus defended by both Gamaliel and
Akiba and supported by a few others, the new principle was
accepted. This was probably Gamaliel's last important public
act. Exhausted by a lifetime of public service, worn out by the
continual necessity of appeasing both the Roman masters and
the Jewish subjects, sickened by the new anxieties arising out
of the rebellion, he broke down before his time. He was.
younger than either Joshua or Eliezer, and the fact that they
survived him, as well as the manner of his death, made a deep
impression on the people, who supposed that he had suffered
for the sin of agreeing to Eliezer's expulsion from the
academy! It was said that Eliezer's wife, Imma Shalom, who
was Gamaliel's sister, had never permitted her husband to
recite the special individual petitions, customary after daily
prayer, fearing that such an appeal to God might bring dire
punishment on her brother. She had neglected that caution
once, and while Eliezer was at his prayers, Gamaliel died. 4
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 239
The presidency, which was left vacant with Gamaliel's
death, could not be filled. The Romans, who did not permit
the announcement of the calendar, would certainly forbid any
effort to appoint a new president. Joshua naturally became
the leader of the people, . retaining his former office as Ab Bet
Din. But when he tried to obtain the consent of the conclave
to set aside some of Gamaliel's rulings, he was effectively
opposed. Johanan ben Nuri, Gamaliel's friend, cried, "I see
that the body follows the head. As long as Rabban Gamaliel
lived, we accepted his views; and now that he is dead do you
wish to set his words aside? Joshua, we will not listen to
you!" And strangely, the conclave which had once voted to
depose the living Gamaliel because he had offended Joshua,
agreed with Johanan ben Nuri in defense of the dead Nasi. 5
This reversal of sentiment cannot be explained simply in
terms of reverence for the departed; Johanan's intemperate
defiance of Joshua, who was by far the older man, and indeed
had been instrumental many years earlier in obtaining the
post of overseer for him, is evidence that the quarrel was not
personal but partisan. What had happened becomes clear in
the light of the historical situation which has been described.
Between 90 and 95, when the struggle between the ple-
beians, Joshua and Akiba, and the patricians, Gamaliel and
Eliezer, was being fought out for the first time, the plebeians
had been in the majority. They had retained their power in
the conclave for almost two decades. But, as had happened
before, the wave of nationalism which was sweeping over the
country toward the end of Trajan's rule made itself felt in
the acceptance not merely of patrician-provincial politics, but
also of the corresponding juristic point of view. 6 This explains
the curious statement of Johanan ben Nuri that in late years
the law had always been decided in accordance with the
240 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
views of Gamaliel, the patrician Nasi. It also explains Joshua's
hope that the death of Gamaliel would enable him and his
fellow plebeians to reassert their views. He discovered, when
Johanan ben Nuri, the Galilean, opposed him, that the in-
creasing loyalty which had been shown Gamaliel of late had
been more than personal; it arose out of the strength with
which nationalism had endowed the patrician wing.
Hardly any of Akiba's partisans remained loyal to him; his
most intimate friends became adherents of the rising, mili-
tant, nationalist group. Ben Zoma, who had been the first to
show signs of disagreement with the Master, namely when he
seconded Ishmael's opposition to Trajan's last offer, openly
joined the nationalists. Together with other partisans, he
insisted that the prayers be reedited so as to emphasize their
patriotic aspirations more clearly. In particular, he demanded
that a biblical passage recalling to the people the miracles
which had once been performed on their behalf during the
Exodus from Egypt, be recited in the evening, as well as at
the morning services. This had long been advocated by the
nationalists. "I am almost seventy years old," Eleazar ben
Azariah said, "and I could never persuade my colleagues to
have the Exodus mentioned in the evening service until Ben
Zoma proved from Scripture that it ought to be done." 7
But it was too late for Ben Zoma to seek new laurels among
the nationalists. In the effort to adjust itself to the new con-
ceptions, his mind, already wearied with the years of concen-
trated speculation about theology and philosophy to which he
had been subjected, at last gave way. The first one to notice
his derangement was Joshua ben Hananya. Joshua had been
walking along a road with some disciples when Ben Zoma
passed them and failed to greet them. Not at all offended by
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 24!
this, Joshua called after him, "Ben Zoma, whence and
whither?"
"I was considering the Creation," the poor scholar replied,
"and the distance between the Upper Waters and the Lower
Waters is no more than a handbreadth."
Perhaps it was the manner in which these strange words
were spoken, as well as their content, which convinced Joshua
that his colleague was no longer sane. "I am afraid," he said
to his disciples, as they went on, "that Ben Zoma is without";
and so indeed the event proved. 8
Ben Zoma's estrangement and his illness must have been
heavy blows to Akiba; but worse was to follow. Elisha ben
Abuyah, foreseeing the growing tension between the Jews
and their governors, decided to throw in his lot with the
Romans. He had become convinced that he could never
attain distinction in Jewish scholarship and, indeed, the time
had come when this no longer disturbed him. So far as he
could see, Judaism, having set itself against Rome, was
doomed to extinction; within a generation the pedantic pre-
occupations of the scholars would all be forgotten. The present
and the future belonged to the pagans. The desire for social
preferment, as well as anxiety about his huge estates, pointed
to one policy friendship with the powerful. His wealth won
him easy admission to their palaces and thither he turned,
beginning as apostate and ending as traitor. 9
Ben Azzai, contrasting these two men, remarked: "He who
loses his wits through learning is still in happier case than
he who forsakes his learning because of his wits." 10
But Ben Azzai, himself, was no longer faithful to Akiba's
teachings. He could not help admiring Ishmael's boldness
and activity, which contrasted so sharply with his father-in-
law's resignation. The crisis destroyed the thin plebeian-
242 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
pacifist veneer which Ben Azzai had put on to please Akiba.
He was once more the hot-tempered Galilean enthusiast. If
the scholars were not ready to fight for Judaism, at least they
should be ready to die for it, he thought. The ease with which
they yielded to Rome, the sending of Akiba to Babylonia to
fix the calendar, the supine surrender of their religious rites,
seemed to him worse than cowardice. "God must be loved,"
he insisted, "with all one's soul"; ia> and this be interpreted,
"even if He demands one's soul." So deeply was Akiba im-
pressed with this, that in his last moments he recalled Ben
Azzai's remarks and quoted them. 12
Simeon ben Nannos, the third plebeian who had stood by
Akiba in his many struggles, and who was especially remem-
bered for his valiant defense of the master in his first con-
troversy with Jose the Galilean, also went with the stream. 13
Simeon ben Yohai, whose father was almost as Romanophile
as Elisha ben Abuyah, was a secret revolutionary. 14 Meir, who
had studied under Ishmael before he came to Akiba, asserted
his adherence to Shammaitic teachings in several im-
portant controversies, and defended the cause of the priests,
whom Akiba had opposed. 15 To the astonishment of col-
leagues, teachers and the general public, this favorite pupil of
Akiba publicly renounced his allegiance to the master and de-
clared himself the disciple of Ishmael, under whom he had
studied for a short time early in his career. 16 So impressed
were the hearers with the gravity of this statement, that the
place where it was made was pointed out with wonder for
more than a century.
Even Jose and Judah, who were destined to lead the pacifist
plebeian groups in the next generation, after the confusion
had subsided, were for the moment carried away by the gen-
eral excitement. They refused to accept Akiba's correct inter-
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 243
pretation of Deuteronomy, exempting from military service
those who were faint-hearted. "The verse must be taken liter-
ally," the Master said. But Jose answered, "The weak and the
faint-hearted are those who have entered into an illegitimate
marriage"; while Judah, without taking issue on the specific
question, denied that the Law applied to the war which they
were anticipating. "In a war of duty, a bridegroom must leave
his room, and a bride her bridal canopy," and give their
services to their people. The extreme nationalists said that this
was true, even in a war to reconquer the ideal boundaries of
Palestine; but Judah hesitated to go as far as that. 17
To these young and ardent scholars, who felt certain that
the Messiah was awaiting their call, Akiba's patience seemed
strangely weak and pusillanimous. The prudence which was
born of experience and the pacifism which had its roots in the
historical plebeian outlook on life could not, in their perspec-
tive, be distinguished from the cynicism of the coward. Akiba
regarded the principle that "there is no distress save that
which affects individuals," 18 as a truism; they denounced it
as selfishness. He asked how a people could be described as
suffering when its members were prospering; to them the
Nation had a reality of its own, which transcended the lives
and needs of its members. With all their respect and reverence
for Akiba's genius and his years, they considered him, as he
himself had in his earlier years considered Joshua, a flaccid
compromiser.
Just about this time occurred an event which must have
seemed to Akiba pregnant with mighty possibilities for the
people. Tineius Rufus was appointed governor of the prov-
ince, and from the first he showed himself friendly and gen-
erous to the people. He apparently came under the spell of
Akiba and opened the doors of the governorate wide for him.
244 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Of course, he must have recognized in the Jewish sage a man
who could be of the greatest use to him in his new charge.
Yet it would be uncharitable to assume that his friendship
was nothing more than hypocrisy and that the bluff Roman
was entirely without genuine appreciation of the Jewish
scholar's genius.
The friendship which developed between the two men led
to various discussions on religion and politics, some of which
have been preserved.
"If your God loves the poor," Rufus once asked Akiba,
"why does He not supply their needs?"
"So that we may supply them ourselves, and thus be saved
from the punishment of Gehenna," was Akiba's strange
reply. 19
The unphilosophical Roman did not think of asking why a
large part of the world should suffer merely that another part
might use it as an instrument of salvation. But he knew
enough of court life to make another response. "On the con-
trary, it seems to me," he said, "that your charity will bring
severe penalties on you. Suppose a king ordered a servant
imprisoned and kept without food or drink, and someone fed
him, would not that person incur the sovereign's anger?"
"We are the children of God, not His slaves/' Akiba coun-
tered. "Will not even a human king who ordered his child
arrested and starved, be grateful to the minister who disobeys
him?" 20
"Why should your God, if He is as great as you say, be
envious of non-existent rivals ?" Rufus asked Akiba on another
occasion.
Instead of replying to the question, Akiba said, "I dreamed
last night of two dogs; the name of one was Rufus, the name
of the other, Rufina."
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 245
"What," cried the enraged Roman, "could you not call the
dogs by any other names than mine and my wife's ?"
"What difference is there between us and the dumb beasts ?"
Akiba said. "We eat and they eat; we multiply and they multi-
ply; we die and they die. And yet, because I called two non-
existent animals, which I happened to see in a dream, by the 1
names you and your wife bear, you are offended. How then
shall the Holy One, blessed be He, not be offended when a
piece of inert wood is called by His name?" 21
It was perhaps in later years, when the government under-
took to suppress Jewish ceremonial, that the debates concern-
ing the Sabbath and circumcision occurred between the two
men.
"Why should one day be honored more than another?"
asked Rufus.
"And why should one person be honored more than an-
other?" Akiba replied, with obvious reference to Rufus's own
exalted position.
"I hold my office," Rufus replied, "because my master ap-
pointed me."
"So the Sabbath, too, was appointed by the Master of the
Universe," Akiba said.
"What do you consider superior, divine creation or human
art?" asked Rufus.
Akiba, realizing immediately what the general had in mind,
replied, "Human art."
"How can you say that?" Rufus continued. "Can man
bring into being anything which approaches the beauty and
dignity of heaven and earth ?"
"I am not speaking of the creations which man cannot
imitate, but only of those things where his art is effective,"
Akiba said.
246 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
"Why, then," asked Rufus, "do you, Jews, insist on attempt-
ing to improve God's creation through circumcision ?"
"I knew that it was the circumcision which you had in
mind," Akiba stated candidly, "and that is why I gave you
my reply before. But to answer your question, consider ears
of grain and loaves of bread. The ears of grain are the creation
of God, the loaves of bread are manufactured by men. Which
are more useful ?" 22
In the course of Akiba's visits to Rufus at the governorate
in Caesarea, he doubtless became acquainted with the gen-
eral's wife. It is probable that she was as much attracted as was
her husband to the interesting and witty old sage. An in-
credible legend tells that she was attracted a great deal more,
for, it continues, she became converted to Judaism out of love
for Akiba and ultimately married him! 23
Rufus's friendship may have flattered Akiba, but it could
not make him happy. The more he saw of the governor, the
more he must have realized the futility of the hope for any
real amelioration of the conditions of the Jews. There was no
possibility at all of the reconstruction of Jerusalem, and the
temper of the ruling people was such that repressive edicts
might be expected at any time. The burden of these public
anxieties and disappointments was made heavier for Akiba by
private sorrows. His son, Simeon, who had achieved distinc-
tion as a scholar, and his son-in-law, Ben Azzai, who in spite
of their late differences had continued to be his closest asso-
ciate, both died.
The words which Akiba spoke at his son's funeral are
characteristic of his deep humility. "My brethren of the house
of Israel, hear me! It cannot be that you have assembled
because I am a sage, for there are among you many who are
far wiser; nor because I am wealthy, for there are among you
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 247
many far wealthier. The men of the South know Akiba, but
how do the men of Galilee know me? The men may know
me, but whence come the women and the children? But I
am certain that your reward will be great because you have
come for the honor of the Torah and to fulfill the command-
ments. I should be comforted though I had seven children
and had buried them all when my son died." 24
The aged Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, too, whom Akiba had
loved throughout his life in spite of their violent differences,
died about this time. During the past few years he had become
reconciled to his former colleagues and had heartily cooper-
ated with Joshua in preventing or at least postponing the
disastrous war. Akiba was at Caesarea, doubtless importuning
Rufus for some leniency to the Jews, when the aged patrician
breathed his last. The sage, who had stoically continued his
lectures while his son lay sick and dying, broke down with
grief when the news of this blow to the cause of peace
reached him. "My father, my father!" he wailed again and
again, in the words which Elisha used of Elijah, "the chariots
of Israel and its horsemen!" And then, as he thought of the
grave problems which rested on the shoulders of the sages and
the mighty assistance which Eliezer's prestige had given to
the peace party, he cried, "I have many coins, but where shall
I now go to have them exchanged?" 25
Joshua, too, was deeply moved. He and some colleagues
had sat by Eliezer's bedside during the last hours of his illness,
when the end was obviously approaching. The sage's mind
had been lucid until the last. They discussed various ques-
tions of ritual, and the sick man responded to each question,
saying, "This is pure," "This is impure." Those who were
standing by regarded it as a good omen that his last spoken
word was "pure."
248 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
"His body was pure," cried one of them, "and his soul
left him as he said 'pure.'"
"The vow is released," said Joshua, referring to the pro-
nouncement of excommunication which the conclave had
issued against Eliezer decades earlier. 26
Within the house he could control his grief, but when he
passed the stone from which Eliezer had for so many years
taught, and which had stood unused these decades, Joshua's
heart melted at the thought of the needless sorrow they had
caused the great teacher. He forgot Eliezer's earlier antago-
nism and remembered only the cooperation of the later years.
He had come to understand his old opponent, and he also
perceived what had eluded him throughout the years that
in spite of their small differences, he and Eliezer were essen-
tially at one in their outlook on life. The real enemies of his
ideals were more numerous, more powerful, and less subject
to attack. Suddenly he bent down over the rock and began to
kiss it, crying, "This stone is like unto Mount Sinai, and he
who sat here may be compared to the Ark of the Cov-
enant." 27
This was not a mere outburst of passion or an expression of
formal grief. When, some time after Eliezer's death, the sages
gathered to review his decisions, and criticized some of them
harshly, Joshua said, "The Lion cannot be refuted when he
is dead!" 28 In fact, Joshua persuaded the conclave to accept
several of Eliezer's opinions which had previously been re-
jected in favor of his own. "So long as Eliezer lived," we
are told, "Joshua's decision was followed; but when Eliezer
died, Joshua insisted that his opponent's views be accepted." 29
Joshua was left alone of the older scholars. He continued
to exert some restraint on Ishmael. Akiba's relations with
Ishmael remained what they had always been, friendly but
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 249
formal. Akiba always spoke of Ishmael with respect; and only
once or twice did Ishmael allow himself such an expression as,
"Go and tell Akiba that he is mistaken." 30 Sometimes the
two scholars would walk together, but then they avoided any
questions which might lead to sharp controversy. Once they
discussed different demonstrations of the rule which all
accepted, that the preservation of life sets aside the Sabbath.
In another conversation Akiba explained to Ishmael how he
interpreted the first verse in Genesis. 31
When IshmaeFs sons died how is not recorded Akiba
and the other sages, Tarfon, Jose the Galilean and Eleazar ben
Azariah, visited him in accordance with the usual custom.
"You know," said Tarfon, "that he is a great scholar, and
an expert aggadist; do not let any of us interrupt the other
when we console him."
Akiba thereupon remarked, "I will speak last." But Akiba's
muse forsook him, for his remarks can hardly be described as
either moving or comforting. "If Ahab, King of Israel, who
had only one good deed to his credit was mourned so widely,"
he said, "how great must be the public grief for the sons of
Rabbi Ishmael." 32
While the general community was bewailing its losses in
leadership, the nationalists were solidifying their forces. They
announced that none of them would eat meat or drink wine
until the Temple was restored. The peace party sent Joshua to
reason with them.
"My children," cried the aged pacifist, "why do you abstain
from meat and wine?"
"Because they were offered on the altar, which is now de-
stroyed," Ishmael and his colleagues answered.
"Then how can you eat bread, for that was used in the meal
offerings? How can you drink water, which was poured out
250 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
in the Sukkot libations?" 33 "You remind me," he said to
them on another occasion, "of the fable of the crane and the
lion. The lion had swallowed a bone, and in his fear of immi-
nent death offered the most tantalizing gifts to anyone who
would save him. The crane, thrusting its long beak into the
lion's throat, drew out the bone. But when the bird demanded
its reward, the King of Beasts replied: 'It is quite sufficient for
you to have had your head in the lion's mouth and to have
escaped unscathed.' So, too," said Joshua, "let us be grateful
that no harm has come upon us, rather than insist on the
literal fulfillment of the promises which were made to us." 34
The tension continued through the reign of Hadrian. Ter-
rorism could not smother the popular movement; indeed the
nationalists gained strength from the harshness of the oppres-
sive measures enacted by the government. In vain did Akiba
continue to resort to Rufus; the time for personal intercession
had passed. The suppression of the Jews had become a definite
Roman policy.
Just at this time, Ishmael removed from Azziz, in southern
Judea, where he had resided for many years, to Usha, in
Galilee. The reasons for this transfer are obscure. It is possible
that he considered Galilee a better field for revolutionary
activity, but it is equally possible that the Roman government
banished him from Judea. The Ishmael of these days re-
sembled in few respects the young man who had carried on
the series of legalistic controversies with Akiba. In his thirst
for rebellion, and in his expectation of victory, his enthusiasm
for everything else had become dampened. A curious story
illustrates both his ignorance of Galilean geography and of
his new attitude toward ceremonial. A man had brought
before him a bill of divorcement which had been written in
the village of Sasai, in the district of Acre. Now, according to
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 25!
rabbinic law, such a bill, drawn up outside of Palestine, may
be validated by the court if the person bringing it testifies
that it was written and signed in his presence. Documents
originating in Palestine require two witnesses for validation.
Ishmael, hearing that the village from which the writ came
was in the district of Acre, assumed that it was outside the
borders of Palestine, and said to the man, "Testify that it was
drawn up in your presence, so that we will not need witnesses
to validate it."
After the man had made his statement and left, Ilai, a
native Galilean scholar who was present, said to Ishmael, "My
master, the village of Sasai belongs to Palestine, and is nearer
to Sepphoris than to Acre."
Whereupon Ishmael replied, with the utmost coolness, "Be
silent, my son. Since the permission has been granted, let it
stand." 35
About the year 125, the relations between the Jews and the
Romans took a definite turn for the worse. Whether the in-
creasing rigor was due to the suspicion of nationalist activity
on the part of Ishmael and Simeon is unknown. It is certain,
however, that edicts were promulgated forbidding the prac-
tice of circumcision, the pretext being the Roman law against
mutilation of the body, and it is probable that the recitation
of the Shema at public services, the reading of the Book of
Esther on Purim, and the sounding of the Shojar on New
Year's Day, were also prohibited, as being ceremonies with
specifically nationalist implications. In addition, Jewish courts
were enjoined from issuing divorces or performing the cere-
mony of halizak, through which the widow of a man who
died without issue is released. 36
The Jews resorted to various devices to observe the inter-
dicted ceremonies. Meir, a disciple of Akiba, records, for
252 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
instance, that they would recite the Shema under their breath
as they sat in the academy, so that the soldier who stood guard
at the door might not overhear them. In some communities, it
became customary to utter the response to Shema (Blessed be
the name of His glorious kingdom forever and aye) which
was especially nationalistic, in an undertone. Other groups
included the Shema in the midst of the prayers, where the
Roman spies would not recognize it. 37 The blasts of the
Shofar, which had punctuated the regular prayers of the New
Year's Day, were postponed to the end of the service, where it
was less offensive to the rulers. Johanan ben Nuri, and doubt-
less others, read the Scroll of Esther on the evening of Purim,
instead of in the morning. Courts became accustomed to tear
the writ of divorce as soon as it was handed by the husband
to the wife in accordance with the prescribed ceremonial, thus
destroying any evidence of the violation of the Roman inter-
dict.
A whole generation was to pass before these various edicts
were rescinded. In the meantime, the practices adopted out of
cruel necessity, became integral parts of Jewish tradition, so
that even to this day Jewish ritual bears the marks of the
ancient persecution. The response to the Shema is still recited
in a whisper, except, significantly, on the Day of Atone-
ment. 38 Apparently, even in those darkest days, the Jews, who
had made this compromise with their consciences during the
year, could not bear to suppress the affirmation of their faith
on their holiest day, and shouted the interdicted words, no
matter how dangerous that might be. The new generation
which grew up under the Marrano conditions, knowing noth-
ing of the origin of this difference, adopted it and handed it
down as a permanent custom. Throughout the Jewish world
the Scroll of Esther is still read at night as well as in the
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 253
morning; the trumpet is sounded on Rosh Ha-Shanah both
during the prayers and aside from them; and every writ of
divorcement is cut as soon as the man hands it to the woman.
Ishmael and his party offered no more resistance to these
decrees than did Akiba. This is the more remarkable because
when Ishmael was younger he had held that the least com-
mandment of the Law justifies martyrdom. He had let his
nephew Ben Dama die rather than permit a heretical physi-
cian to heal him.
"Call him," poor Ben Dama had cried in his agony, "and
when I am well I will prove to you from Scripture that it is
permitted."
But Ishmael had not yielded, and when Ben Dama died,
he said, "Happy art thou, Ben Dama, that thou didst not
transgress the words of thy colleagues!" 39
The fanatical pietist had, however, become a revolutionary
general, and we have already observed that his ardor for the
ceremonial had cooled as his hopes for victory grew. To
violate the Roman law was to court death, at a time when
Judaism, in his opinion, needed not martyrs but soldiers. He
therefore announced the amazing principle that "faced with
the threat of death a Jew may violate any commandment,
even that against idol-worship." 40 In accordance with this
policy, he permitted the halizah ceremony, which tradition-
ally had to be performed publicly, by day, and in the presence
of at least five judges, to be carried out secretly, at night, and
with no other witness than himself present. 41
The first and most disastrous effect of the restrictions was
the further division of the Jewish community into bitterly
hostile factions, reminiscent of the last century of the Second
Commonwealth. The nationalists now fast becoming a ma-
254 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
jority, corresponded, of course, to the Zealots of former times.
Opposed to them were the Romanophiles, who may be com-
pared to the earlier Herodians, for they not only opposed the
war with the Romans, but cooperated with the latter in every
way. This party adopted the stand taken by Elisha ben Abu-
yah when he left the academy. It numbered in its midst those
of the patricians who felt that in a measure of strength with
Rome Judea was certain to be crushed. In addition, many of
the common people wanted peace.
The natural leader of the Romanophiles was, of course,
Elisha ben Abuyah. He used his knowledge of the Law to
discover to the oppressors any stratagems which the Jews em-
ployed to evade the hateful decrees. Some Jewish laborers
who were compelled to work on the Sabbath, arranged, for
instance, to carry their burdens in pairs, since technically that
involves a lesser violation of the Law. Elisha, noticing this,
immediately informed the appropriate officer of this "derelic-
tion." He entered the elementary schools where the children
were studying their scriptural lessons, and with the help of
soldiers dispersed them. "Let this child be apprenticed to a
tailor; that one to a cobbler," he would say, and his orders
were carried out. 42
Some of the less affluent apostates became Roman soldiers.
At a later time, when the persecution of students was intensi-
fied, one of these, himself a former student, is said to have
encountered two disciples of Joshua who had exchanged their
scholars' tunics for workers' clothes, to escape molestation.
Recognizing them in spite of this disguise, the renegade said*,
"If you are the children of the Torah, why do you disguise
yourselves? And if you are not her children, why do you
continue to be loyal to her?"
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 255
"We are her children," they answered, "and are ready to
die for her."
Stricken, perhaps, with momentary remorse, the soldier
said to them, "If you explain three difficulties in Scripture to
me, I will save your lives," and he asked them for the inter-
pretation of one verse each from the Pentateuch, the Prophets,
and the Hagiographa. When they had given their replies, the
soldiers said: "I prefer the exegesis of your master, Joshua,"
and he told them how the difficulties had been explained in
his time. 43
In their desire to dissociate themselves from Judaism, some
of the assimilationists adopted the methods which had been
used by the Hellenists three centuries earlier. They did not
hesitate to undergo the painful and even dangerous opera-
tion necessary to conceal the evidence of circumcision. 44
Naturally, there were many who sympathized with the gen-
eral purposes of this group but would not go to such extremes.
Among these moderate Romanophiles we may count Jose ben
Kisma, who tried to persuade Haninah ben Teradyon against
martyrdom, and Pappias ben Judah who performed the same
office for Akiba. 45
Perhaps it should be recorded here that these efforts to
escape the common fate failed completely. Some time after
Akiba was imprisoned, he was surprised to see Pappias ben
Judah brought in by the soldiers. "Happy are you, Akiba,"
Pappias said to him, "that you are suffering for the Law; I,
too, am suffering, but for things of vanity."
Jose ben Kisma, who died in the midst of the confusion
incident to the collapse of the Bar Kokba rebellion, showed
in his last remarks that the persecution had destroyed the last
vestige of his affection and respect for the Empire. In the
privacy of the room where he lay dying, he predicted the
256 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
victory of the Parthians over the Romans. "Bury me deep in
the ground," he said to his family, "for there will be no coffin
in all Palestine which will not be used by the Parthians as a
trough for their horses." "When will the Messiah come?" his
disciples asked. Expecting a long conflict between the empires,
with varying fortunes, Jose replied, "When that gate will have
been destroyed and rebuilt twice, it will fall for the third time,
and then the Messiah will soon be at hand." 46
Elisha ben Abuyah, too, obviously repented before his death.
The Romans, having made full use of him, ignored him,
while the Jews treated him with undisguised hatred and con-
tempt. The only one of the scholars who continued to asso-
ciate with him was Meir, who suffered much at the hands of
his colleagues on that account.
"Repent," Meir said to him one day.
"It is too late," Elisha replied, "I have heard from 'behind
the partition' that everyone will be admitted to repentance,
except Elisha ben Abuyah."
His services to the government apparently did not even
save his property for his family, for his daughter came beg-
ging to the door of Judah the Patriarch. "Think of my
father's learning," she pleaded, "forget his wicked deeds." 47
Corresponding to the milder Romanophiles were the non-
violent nationalists who were ready to die, but not to kill, for
the Torah. The precursdr of this group had been Simeon ben
Azzai, but in later times it numbered among its adherents
such men as Tarfon, Jose the Galilean, Judah the Baker,
Yeshebab the Scribe, Huzpit the Announcer, and many others
who were martyrs for Judaism. There are some points of
resemblance between the otherworldiness which the members
of this group developed in the crisis, and the doctrines of the
Essenes of Josephus's day. They did not adopt the rules of the
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 257
famous order; they were not celibates and did not live in
communes. But their devotion to the Law, their extreme piety
and their willingness to endure martyrdom for an iota of the
Law, marks them as heirs to those great ascetics.
Some of the moderate nationalists were tempted to seek in
exile both safety and the opportunity to observe the Law. But
their consciences would not let them find so easy an escape.
To dwell in Palestine was itself a commandment and, in the
eyes of many, one which outweighed all others.
Pathetic incidents are recorded to illustrate the inner
struggles of many of these scholars. Two scholars, Eleazar ben
Shammua and Johanan the Cobbler, had actually reached
Zidon when, "remembering Palestine, they burst into tears,
and returned to their native places." Another group, including
Judah ben Bathyra, Matthew ben Harash, Hananiah the
nephew of Joshua, and Jonathan, had a similar experience.
As they left the Palestinian border behind them, "they tore
their clothes" in grief; but they continued on their journey. 48
Judah ben Bathyra settled in Nesibis, on the borders of Meso-
potamia; Hananiah and Jonathan went to Babylonia; and
Matthew sought safety from persecution in the imperial capi-
tal, Rome.
Finally, there were the rationalist-pacifists, represented in
the time of the last war by Johanan ben Zakkai, and now by
Akiba. They held that the most important element in Judaism
was study, and all they asked of the world was the oppor-
tunity to pursue it. They would even yield to restrictions on
the observance of the Law, provided their schools were not
closed. They were the leaders of the party which Josephus
called the Pharisees, but which was in reality the Hillelite
wing of that sect.
These various groups were not, however, sharply defined
258 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR .
organizations, as had been the parties of the Second Com-
monwealth. They merged gradually into one another, and
there were many people whom it was difficult to allocate
among them. Yet the fundamental divisions were clear, and
comprised all the possible responses which a subject people
can make to repression: submission, armed resistance, non-
violent resistance and philosophic adjustment. Although
under the circumstances the division could not be as distinct
for the contemporary as for the historian, Akiba seems to have
recognized it. Being, however, a rabbi rather than a sociologist,
he recorded not the fact, but a theological idea which it
suggested. The attitudes taken by the various parties reminded
him of the responses of men to divine punishment. "Some,
like Abraham, ordered to sacrifice his son, submit in silence;
others, like Job in his pains, make violent protests; still others,
like Hezekiah in his illness, plead for mercy; and a fourth
group, like David punished for the sin of Bath Sheba, kiss
the rod." 49
While the scholars, like the people at large, were finding
themselves in the various factions, the conclave assembled
once more in Ludd to determine on a national policy. Appar-
ently Ishmael did not attend; either because the Romans
would not permit it, or because he was preoccupied with his
revolutionary preparations. But he had already given his opin-
ion, which was unquestionably accepted by his nationalist
followers. There was no purpose in resisting the Roman de-
crees for the moment; the edicts which they issued had to be
obeyed, no matter what Jewish law they contravened. The
moderate Nationalists, who hoped for rescue by God rather
than by force, were aghast at this doctrine. Did not the Book
of Daniel record that its hero had courted martyrdom by the
recitation of prayers when that had been made a capital
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 259
offense? Was not the history of Israel filled with the names
of illustrious men and women who had given their lives for
an iota of the Law ? Standing between the two groups, Akiba
insisted that the practical problem could not be solved before
the scholars agreed on the basic theory of the place of observ-
ance in Judaism. The militant nationalists had denied the
obligation of martyrdom; but how could they justify this
position? Surely they did not intend to imply that in the
choice between God's Law and Caesar's the Jew had a real
alternative. It was obvious that insistence on the ceremonies
would lead to the annihilation of the Jews, for the Romans
were apparently serious in their determination to destroy
Judaism. Yet even if it involved national suicide, could obedi-
ence to God be refused? From his own point of view, no such
drastic ultimatum was presented. The plebeians had always
held that study was more important than observance; and it
was entirely logical for them to maintain that should observ-
ance lead to the destruction of the Torah it would defeat its
own purpose. The patricians had, however, always opposed
this view. We have already seen how their leaders, Shammai
and Simeon ben Gamaliel I, took the view that intellectual
debate was a waste of time. 50 Elisha ben Abuya had re-
peated the principle in his pious youth; and Eleazar of Modin
had objected when Joshua found references to study in
Scripture. 51
Perhaps Akiba admitted that he had himself not fully com-
prehended the significance of the controversy between the
older teachers until the crisis had made it clear. Only now did
he realize why Johanan ben Zakkai could prefer the founda-
tion of the academy at Yabneh to the preservation of the
Temple at Jerusalem. The decision had been a corollary of the
proposition that Judaism was first and foremost a system of
knowledge, and only incidentally a series of ceremonies.
260 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
Akiba insisted that a vote be taken on the principle in-
volved, before the practical question of resistance or non-
resistance be decided. This put the militant nationalists in a
quandary; for they dared not repudiate their older teachers;
and yet to follow Tarfon and Jose the Galilean, who drew the
logical conclusions from the statements of Shammai and
Simeon ben Gamaliel, was equally impossible. Finally the
members of the conclave developed a formula which saved
their tradition and yet adjusted it to the momentary need.
"Study," they said, "is important, for it alone can lead to
observance." 52 In other words, it was well to forego the ob-
servance of the Law for the moment, in order to preserve the
academies which were needed to guide future generations.
With the theoretical question settled, the conclave ap-
proached the much more awkward practical problem: what
was to be done about the Roman edicts, were they to be
obeyed or resisted ? The decision which had just been reached
implied that it was not necessary to risk martyrdom for the
sake of observance. Yet, Akiba urged, there were obviously
some religious practices which were so basic to life that sur-
vival without them was a self-contradiction. Judaism was, it is
true, a system of knowledge but knowledge of what? Of
God and His law. If, then, the Jew was ordered to worship
idols, how could his desire to perpetuate the Law justify him
in yielding, as Ishmael had maintained he might do? The
fundamental purpose of the Law was that "man should live
by it." How could anyone propose that a Jew, commanded by
a tyrant to commit murder, should obey because of his love
for the Law! And equally important with the recognition of
God and the sanctity of life, Akiba considered the purity of
the home. Could a Jew submit to unchastity, even at the threat
of death? Akiba therefore proposed this rule: "While most of
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 26 1
the commandments may be violated to save one's life, three
groups of laws must be preserved at all costs and at all times.
They are those which forbid idol-worship, murder and the
infringement of chastity." 53
His disciple, Meir, who took part in these crucial delibera-
tions and already showed his future patrician sympathies,
insisted that the protection of property was as important as
the protection of life and home. "A man must be prepared to
accept martyrdom rather than rob his neighbor," 54 he said.
But Akiba's view, which put life and home and the worship
of God in a class by themselves, prevailed. This famous de-
cision of Ludd was destined to become the fundamental policy
of the Jews in all the centuries that have followed. At various
times, parts of the Law had to be abandoned; but never the
Study of the Law, and never the three cardinal principles of
the existence of the one God, the sanctity of life and the
purity of the home.
It is highly probable that the severity of the recent enact-
ment against the Jews was related to the Emperor's expected
return to the East. Rufus may well have feared that the revo-
lutionary activity of the nationalists, of which he was aware,
but which he could not suppress, would reach his master's
ear. Unable to deal directly with the seditious propaganda, he
sought to abolish the ceremonies which in his opinion were
its principal support. To the Jews, on the other hand, the
arrival of the Emperor, which occurred in the year 130, seemed
a most opportune occasion to present their petitions and their
grievances in person. They could not forget that at his acces-
sion Hadrian had removed their arch-oppressor, Quietus; they
conveniently overlooked the fact that that was done for per-
sonal reasons, and not out of respect for their feelings. They
may even have hoped that the Emperor on receiving their
262 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
submission might grant them their heart's desire, the rebuild-
ing of the sanctuary. Wherever he had come on his journey
through the East he had been greeted as Savior, Benefactor,
Rebuilder. It was natural that the people should expect him
to be as kind to Judea as he had been to Achaea, Libya,
Bithynia and a dozen other places.
While the scholars and teachers who saw the world from
the perspective of Judea were giving free rein to these opti-
mistic dreams, the Emperor was leisurely making his way
through other larger provinces. He visited Antioch, the capital
of Syria, and Palmyra, the ancient Arabic kingdom in the
midst of the desert; but finally he turned back and arrived at
Philadelphia, the capital of Ammon, in Transjordan. Thence
apparently he went directly to the ruined city of Jerusalem. 55
It must have been obvious to Hadrian that the Romans had
committed an act of unjustified waste in razing Jerusalem to
the ground. The interests of the empire demanded the re-
establishment of the great wealth-producing metropolis which
was the center of the country's commerce, industry and re-
ligion. He could see clearly that Caesarea, the seat of the
Roman governorate, could never become a second Jerusalem.
The traditions which made the ancient city so holy were an
integral part of its being, and could be transferred to no other
center. Hadrian decided to grant the request of the Jews and
to rebuild their city.
He also granted them a temple. But and in this he dis-
played the same blindness that had been the cause of so many
tragedies in the history of this people the temple, like so
many others he had founded, was to be dedicated to the wor-
ship of himself, as identified with the Capitoline Jupiter! 56
Perhaps he anticipated a little dissatisfaction or disappoint-
ment among the people that their full request for the restora-
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 263
tion of their own special faith had not been granted. But after
all, in his own eyes, his gift outweighed by far the insignifi-
cant details of ritual and theology. He was granting them
their city, which was their economic and spiritual life, and a
temple which would ultimately dim the glory of both Solo-
mon's and Herod's structures. That this peculiar people,
whom he now met, were more concerned about their theology
than about their bread, and that the Temple ritual meant
more to them than the finest structure, the pagan militarist
could not realize. He did not know that when the Emperor
Caligula had ordered the erection of his statue in the Temple,
thousands of Jews had presented themselves in a delegation to
Petronius, the Governor of Syria, asking that they be slain in
cold blood before the edict was carried out. Centuries before,
the Jews, who had tamely submitted to every other form of
oppression, had broken out into open revolt when their Sanc-
tuary was defiled by Antiochus. It was to this people that the
Roman Emperor was now offering the poisoned gift of a
pagan temple, where the heathen Jupiter would be worshiped
in the form of Hadrian's statue!
The Jews understood the Roman as little as he understood
them. He regarded their devotion to their traditional cult as
mere obstinacy; they considered his desire for a temple dedi-
cated to himself as megalomania. Both were in error. The
Emperor's policy was based on principles of prudence and
statesmanship as fundamental as the Jews' ideals of faith and
piety. It was to the interests of the Empire that Jerusalem be
reestablished as a commercial, religious and educational cen-
ter; but it was equally important that the ideas which pre-
vented its complete spiritual integration with the Empire be
forgotten. The Empire needed a city on Mount Zion; but it
could not be Jerusalem. It had to be Aelia Capitolina, indicat-
264 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
ing in its very name (taken from that of the Emperor) its
new function as an outpost of Rome.
Thrown into consternation by the Emperor's decision, and
misunderstanding his motives, the Jews, it is reported, decided
to send a representative to intercede with him. The record
which tells of this interview, a letter purported to have been
sent by Hadrian to his brother-in-law, is not altogether clear,
and there are even grounds for suspicion of its authenticity.
But the incident it relates is, in itself, altogether probable. The
Jews sent Akiba, then in his ninetieth year, to interview the
mighty potentate, who had already left their country and was
now in Egypt.
Hadrian was not at all impressed with Akiba's pleas and
arguments. Aside from the diversity of interest, the ideological
gulf between the two men was impassable. Vespasian had
been won over by the flatteries of Josephus; Caligula, by the
cleverness of Agrippa; Antony and Augustus, by the cunning
of Herod; but what incense could the deeply pacifist mono-
theist, Akiba, bring to the altar of the great soldier who
believed that the Empire's safety demanded his recognition
as a god? From the sage's imperfect Greek, and his inter-
preter's confused ideas, the Emperor gathered that Judaism
was a variant of the Egyptian faith, and he could not see why
the perverse Palestinians should cling so tenaciously to their
especial brand of the worship of Serapis.
The effect of this pronouncement on Akiba was crushing.
The last hope for improved relations with Rome had dis-
appeared; the teachings of his whole lifetime, that a pacific
attitude toward the Empire would call forth reasonable treat-
ment from it, were refuted by the event. Suddenly he felt the
burden of his four score and ten years. The heavy disasters
which he had borne with fortitude and resignation the death
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 265
of his son and his son-in-law, the loss of his masters, the deser-
tion of his colleagues and the disciples fell upon him with
renewed weight. He must have asked himself why he had
undertaken the heavy responsibility of a conference with the
master of the world. Would it not have been better to send a
younger man, perhaps a patrician, who could impress the
Emperor with his own wealth and position ?
For the first time in his life he began to be uncertain of his
views. Endowed with extraordinary powers of introspection
and self-examination, the old sage must have wondered
whether his intellectual powers, which had so long resisted
the years, had not failed him at last. His memory, once so
retentive, was of recent years clearly weakening. He could
recall that when he had rendered a decision a little time be-
fore, his colleague, Yeshebab, said to him: "Do you not
remember that both of us were sitting at the feet of Joshua
when he decided otherwise?" 57 Akiba had paid little atten-
tion to the incident at the time, merely reversing himself, and
accepting Yeshebab's tradition. But as he looked back at the
event he could see in it a graver portent. He noticed that for
some time his dialectical powers, too, had been impaired. The
arguments which in his prime (which he reached at the un-
usual age of sixty) had come to him with such rapidity and
ease, had to be formulated with slower and more painful
deliberation of late. Surrounded by younger and more vigor-
ous minds, who were almost unanimous in their opposition
to him, the teacher felt, perhaps, the same doubt of his pre-
science that any less gifted man might feel about a vivid
recollection challenged by numerous other observers.
If these were indeed his reflections, they did him wrong.
But decades were to pass before his pacifist policy was vindi-
cated. Meanwhile, uncertain of his political abilities, Akiba
266 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
also lost faith, and perhaps interest, in the juristic struggle
which had occupied so much of his life. Of him who had so
courageously led the war on the patricians, with the formi-
dable Gamaliel and Eliezer at their head, it could now be said
with truth that "Akiba respected wealth." 58 More than once
when those who remembered his youthful ardor expected a
clear and definite exposition of the plebeian view, he offered
compromises between the opposing views of the Shammaites
and the Hillelites. 59 In one memorable instance, he accepted
Eliezer's opinion and rejected that of Joshua, although the
latter represented the interests of the trading groups of Jeru-
salem. 60 Once he amazed his disciples when he declared a
chair which they thought he would consider pure, defiled. 61
On three occasions he declined to give any reply to students
who asked for guidance in the Law. 62 Finally, at a meeting
of the conclave, he publicly renounced certain plebeian views
which had for decades been repeated in his name. Judah ben
Ilai, his faithful disciple, records the strange scene. A number
of human bones had been discovered and they were brought
into the academy to determine whether they were defiling.
Several physicians, including one especially famous Theo-
dorus, who had been consulted by the sages, stated that the
bones were derived from several bodies, and that neither the
skull nor the spine of any one skeleton had been preserved.
A vote was then taken and Akiba, who was asked to give his
opinion first, said, "I consider them pure." Whereupon all the
other sages cried out, "Since you, who were the one who
always insisted that such bones, from several bodies, were
impure, have changed your mind, there is no need for any
further discussion," and the bones were declared pure. 63
Simeon ben Yohai, who was with Akiba in his last days
when, before their final extinction, his spiritual and intellec-
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 267
tual energies burst into brief and dazzling activity, challenged
the truth of this story. "Until the day of his death," Simeon
said, "Akiba considered such bones impure; whether he
changed his mind after he died," he added, with his usual
asperity, "I do not know." Nevertheless, the detailed descrip-
tion of the meeting which is given by Judah leaves no doubt
that Akiba did publicly vote against the convictions which he
had defended throughout his life, and that only afterward, in
prison, did he revert to his earlier opinions.
In his wretchedness and perplexity, Akiba lost the mellow-
ness which had characterized him throughout his mature life-
time, and treated his students, whom he dearly loved, with a
harshness that amazed them. When one of them offered an
argument of which he disapproved, he cried, "You have dived
into deep waters seeking for pearls, but you brought up a
potsherd." 64 When the nationalists asked him for Eliezer's
opinions on certain questions, he shouted, "Be silent! I will
not tell you what he said regarding this !" 65 Once a young
man, Judah ben Nehemiah, defeated Tarfon in an argument,
and openly showed his exultation. Akiba, seeing the happy
glow on the victor's cheek, said to him in words which might
rather have suited Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, "Your face glows
because you have refuted the old sage. I doubt whether you
will live long!" Judah ben Ilai records the incident and adds:
"This happened at the Passover season. When I returned for
the Pentecost and asked for Judah ben Nehemiah I was told
that he had died." 66
He was equally impatient with his colleagues. Once he,
Tarfon and Eleazar ben Azariah were discussing the tragic
situation of their people. The pious Tarfon remarked that
the trouble with the Jews was their irreligion and their lack
of anyone who was in a position to reprove the others. Eleazar
268 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
ben Azariah, the famous preacher, gave it as his opinion that
"there was no one in this generation who is able to accept
reproof." Akiba, hearing the remarks, said sharply, "The real
difficulty is that there is no one alive who knows how to offer
reproof!" 67
But the blow which had all but prostrated the old scholar
stimulated the masses of the people to furious action. A decree
of wholesale extermination could hardly have aroused them
more than the news of the Emperor's decision to establish
his pagan sanctuary on Mount Moriah. The fanaticism which
had been held in check for decades broke loose. A new
Antiochus ruled the world, ready to stretch forth his thrice
defiled hand against the sacred shrine itself. Surely now God
would awaken to the needs of His people, and reveal Himself
through them as He had through the Maccabees three
centuries earlier.
As the excitement grew, Ishmael and Simeon cast off the
secrecy under which they had heretofore carried on their
activities. The Romans arrested them and condemned them
to death, even before the revolution had broken out. Their
faith endured to the last. While they were being led to the
execution, they merely commiserated with each other on the
fate which prevented them from sharing in the glory awaiting
their people. Akiba, speaking over their graves, warned his
hearers to expect no miracles. "Prepare yourselves for suffer-
ing," he cried to the weeping multitude. "If happiness were
destined to come in our time, none deserved better to share
in it than Rabbi Simeon and Rabbi Ishmael. But God, know-
ing what distress is in store for us, removed them from our
midst, as it is written, 'The righteous is taken away from the
evil to come' " (Isa. 57 :i). 68
The discouraging words were without effect. The leader-
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 269
ship of the rebellion passed from the intellectual sages, Ishmael
and Simeon, to Simeon bar Kokba, a soldier and strategist,
who at once set out to organize the straggling bands of
patriotic peasants into a regular army. His first few victories
aroused wild enthusiasm among the people, who saw in him
not only a second Maccabee, but the Messiah. The private
and public fortunes of a nation were staked on the personal
prowess and military genius of the unproved leader.
Akiba himself did not long resist the contagion of Messian-
ism. When he saw Roman legions yield to untrained Judean
youths, new hope blossomed in his heart. "Yet once, it will be
a little while," he quoted from Haggai (2:6), "and I will
shake the heavens and the earth, and the sea, and the dry
land." 69 He went so far as to encourage the popular delusion
concerning the miraculous role to be played by the new leader
and applied to him the verse (Num. 24:17), "The star hath
trodden forth out of Jacob." T0 Once he even said outright,
"This is the Messianic King."
The dismal response of one of his friends, "Akiba, grass
will grow out of your jaw and the Messiah will not yet have
come!" shows that some of the sages were still sane enough
to realize the hopeless inequality of the struggle. 71
The story of the denouement is well known; how in a little
more than three years the Romans destroyed the last vestige
of Jewish resistance, how in their .fury they drenched the
land with blood, slaughtering hundreds of thousands of
people, how they sold tens of thousands into slavery, for-
bade the few remaining Jews to observe any of their ancestral
customs and took the children forcibly out of their religious
schools and put them to manual labor. Hundreds of scholars
fled to Babylonia, but many still felt that their duty was in
Palestine.
270 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
A contemporary sage, Nathan the Babylonian, describes
the conditions in Palestine in these words: "The expression in
the Decalogue, 'Those who love Me and observe My com-
mandments,' applies to the people who live in Palestine and
offer their lives for the Law. 'Why art thou being taken to
execution?' 'Because I circumcised my son.' 'Why art thou
being taken to crucifixion?' 'Because I read the Torah or ate
the Mazzot! 'Why art thou being beaten a hundred stripes?'
'Because I took the Lulab! " 72
The practical annihilation of the Jewish community in
Judea left the Romans free to proceed with their plans for
the paganization of the Holy City. The temple where Hadrian
was to be worshiped as the personification of Jupiter was
erected on Mount Moriah, and the statue of the Emperor
placed within it. 73 At a short distance, on the spot which the
Christians consecrated as the grave of Jesus, another temple,
dedicated to Venus, was established. 74 The city was called
Aelia Capitolina, and only Gentiles were permitted to live in
it or even to approach it. 75 The province, too, was renamed.
It was no longer Judea; it had become Philistinian Syria, or,
more briefly, Palestine.
The prohibition against the settlement of the Jews in Aelia
did not extend to Gentile Christians. One of the most per-
manent results of Hadrian's edict therefore was the trans-
formation of the character of the Christian community in
Jerusalem. The leaders as well as the main body of the Church
until the time of Bar Kokba had been Jews. From that time
onward, they were Gentiles. 76 But Aelia could hardly exercise
the influence or authority which had belonged to Jerusalem.
In spite of all the efforts of the Romans, it remained a small
village of no consequence either politically or religiously.
Once a year, on the ninth of Ab, the anniversary of the
APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE 271
destruction of their Temple, the Jews would gather there,
apparently by special permission, to bewail the loss of their
ancient glory. Otherwise, as Tertullian says, "they might look
on the city, but with their eyes afar off." 77
The name Aelia persisted for many centuries. So completely
had the former name been obliterated that one of the gov-
ernors of the province in the fourth century no longer could
identify Jerusalem; and even in the early Arabic centuries the
town was called Iliya. The country's new name, Palestine, has
survived until our own day.
The fact that Akiba was not imprisoned shows that he had
not implicated himself actively in the rebellion. Like other
Jews, he could observe the Law only in secret; but he was
permitted to move about, and apparently even to give instruc-
tion. Clearly, the Roman generals who were trying to destroy
Judaism root and branch did not at this time share the opinion
of some modern historians that Akiba himself was the secret
instigator of the whole rebellion and that his wide travels,
ostensibly for the Sanhedrin and the Law, were really made
to foment sedition. But his personal safety gave the old sage
little comfort. "The verse, 'And I will break the pride of your
power' (Lev. 26:19), applies to the heroes of Israel who were
like unto Joab ben Zeruiah," he said. 78 "Isaac's words, The
voice is the voice of Jacob, and the hands are the hands of
Esau' (Gen. 27:22), describe our generation, when the voice
of Jacob cries out because of what the hands of Esau (Rome)
have done to him." 79 Bereft of pupils and colleagues, he
looked over the fearful ruins of Israel's glory. Eliezer's
prophecy had been fulfilled with regard to his colleagues;
what was to be his own destiny ?
X. THE APOTHEOSIS
IT was not long before the loyalty of Akiba and his col-
leagues to the principle of study was to be put to the
ultimate test. The savagery of the repressions grew from
month to month. It was probably in the year 134, just before
the capitulation of Betar, that the Romans issued their drastic
decree, forbidding not only the practice, but also the study of
the Torah. Now Akiba knew that he had reached the end of
compromise. He had counseled the people to accept the Roman
gift of a Temple when that had been offered; he had warned
them not to be disappointed when the offer was withdrawn;
he had asked them to sacrifice the right to observe the Law,
in order that its study might be perpetuated. But the last
stronghold, the innermost shrine of all was to be defended
at all costs. If the study of the Torah was abolished, there
was no further purpose in living. And so, at the age of ninety-
five, the compromising pacifist once more took up the
weapons of non-resistant war. Calmly he gathered his stu-
dents, gave his decisions, delivered his lectures. Gatherings in
secret, he both disdained and feared. They were unworthy of
the dignity of the Torah; and were certain to raise the sus-
picion of political activity. He had always taught in the open,
in the shade of a tree; and he would continue to do so. He
made only one compromise with necessity. He invited his
disciples to dine with him; and they discussed the Law during
their meal. 1
A casual remark which he made at one of these gatherings
272
THE APOTHEOSIS 273
reveals his serenity, his intellectual youthfulness and his
enduring faith, in this last period of his life. He disregarded
the havoc of the moment, and thought only of the future.
The Romans were a passing phenomenon, about which he
could do nothing. Palestine's farms, her trees and her children,
were his primary concern. "Those who raise crop-destroying
cattle, those who chop down good trees, and those who teach
children dishonestly, will never see a blessing," he said.
When his old antagonist, Pappias, warned him that he was
courting death by continuing to teach so publicly, Akiba re-
plied with the parable of the fishes and the fox. The fox,
coming to the river's bank, suggested to the fishes that they
might find safety from the fishermen by coming on the dry
land. But the fishes replied, "If in the water which is our
element, we are in danger, what will happen to us on the dry
land which is not our element?"
"So, too," continued Akiba, "If there is no safety for us in
the Torah which is our home, how can we find safety
elsewhere?" 2
Akiba could not have expected to continue teaching for
long. Soon he was seized by the soldiers and carried off to
prison. The Romans, still respecting his learning, his reputa-
tion and his distinguished personality, perhaps also remember-
ing his pacifist and conciliatory teachings, hesitated to put
him to death. They kept him in confinement for three years,
treating him with consideration, even with courtesy. He was
allowed the attendance of his disciple, Joshua ha-Garsi, who
waited on him; and was permitted to enjoy the visits of
Simeon ben Yohai, who had returned from Zidon to be near
the Master in his affliction. "Continue to instruct me," Simeon
begged of him.
At first reluctant, out of fear that he might endanger his
274 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
pupil's freedom and even his life, Akiba finally yielded to
his importunities, "My son," he said, "more than the calf
wants to suck, the cow wants to suckle!" And he taught him. 3
Convinced at last that there was no point in trying to con-
ciliate the oppressor, Akiba decided to bring the calendar,
which had been neglected for a decade, into order. He added
an intercalary month to each of three successive years an
unprecedented procedure until Passover, which had been
thrown back into January, once more occurred in its appro-
priate season. 4 He gave his visitors secret instructions, intended
to mitigate the rigors of the Law for the harassed survivors
of the persecution. In one decision, he rejected a tradition
which had developed naturally in plebeian Jerusalem but was
entirely unsuited to the new conditions of Jewish life. This
tradition required persons who had been authorized by a hus-
band to arrange his divorce to write the necessary document
in person. It was not sufficient for them to supervise the writ-
ing. The provincial sages, living in communities where the
ability to write was far from universal, had always objected
to this rule. Now, when the government had declared the
practice of Jewish ceremonies a state offense, it was fre-
quently necessary to obtain the sanction of the husband for
divorce and to postpone the writing for some more con-
venient time. Hence, Akiba felt compelled to accept, perhaps
as an emergency measure, the provincial view to which he
had always objected. 5
Although he pursued these audacious activities secretly,
Akiba must have known that the Romans would soon learn
of them. When this happened, he was merely transferred to
a prison in distant Caesarea, where no one but his servant-
pupil, Joshua ha-Garsi, was permitted to attend him.
And still he carried on. The impoverished and leaderless
THE APOTHEOSIS 275
community made unheard-of sacrifices to obtain decisions
from Akiba during these days. When one difficult question
arose, they hired a man at a cost of four hundred zuz to make
his way into the prison and get Akiba's opinion. 6 On another
occasion stratagem had to be used. Since the Romans had for-
bidden the Jews to observe any of their ceremonies, the rite of
hcdizah had been carried out in private, and the scholars won-
dered whether under those circumstances it was valid. One
of them took a peddler's basket and daringly went up and
down before the jail, crying, "Needles for sale! Needles for
sale! What is the Law regarding a private hdizah? Needles
for sale; needles for sale!"
Akiba, hearing the noise, replied from his jail, "Have you
any spindles ? It is permitted." 7
Even in his new prison, Akiba continued to observe every
detail of the Law. His pupil-servant, Joshua ha-Garsi, brought
him daily a small quantity of water, half of which he would
drink, keeping the remainder for his ritual washing. One day
the guard, meeting Joshua, inspected his pitcher, and cried:
"You have too much water. Are you trying to wash away the
walls of the jail ?" With these words, he seized the vessel and
poured out half of its contents.
When Joshua at last came to his master and presented what
was left of the precious liquid, Akiba's face fell. "Joshua," he
said, "you know that I am an old man, and my life depends
on you!" Joshua then told him what had happened. "Let me
have the water, so that I may wash," said Akiba.
"There is not enough left for your drink," Joshua cried,
"and how can any be spared for washing?"
"What can be done?" Akiba said. "The Law requires that
we wash when we awake and before we eat. It is better that
I should die than that I should transgress the words of my
276 AKIBA: SCHOLAR, SAINT AND MARTYR
colleagues." And he declined to taste a morsel until he was
given sufficient water to wash his hands. 8
Finally Akiba was brought to trial; his judge was to be his
former friend, Rufus. There was no possible defense against
the charges; Akiba had violated the Law by offering instruc-
tion to his disciples. Yet Joshua ha-Garsi, standing in the open
Court, at a little distance from the prisoner, and in front of
the grim Roman general, prayed that somehow the aged
scholar might be saved. But even as the half-smothered words
came from his mouth, he noticed a cloud covering the sun and
the sky. "I knew then that our prayer was useless," he said,
"for it is written, 'Thou hast covered Thyself with a cloud,
so that no prayer can pass through'" (Lam. 3:44). 9
Akiba was found guilty and condemned to death. Still
attended by his faithful Joshua, he retained his courage and his
strength of mind until the very end. The popular story tells
that the Romans killed him by tearing his flesh from his
living body. As he lay in unspeakable agony, he suddenly
noticed the first streaks of dawn breaking over the eastern
hills. It was the hour when the Law requires each Jew to
pronounce the Shema* Oblivious to his surroundings, Akiba
intoned in a loud, steady voice, the forbidden words of his
faith, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One.
And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart,
and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." 10
Rufus, the Roman general, who superintended the horrible
execution, cried out: "Are you a wizard or are you utterly
insensible to pain?"
"I am neither," replied the martyr, "but all my life I have
been waiting for the moment when I might truly fulfill this
commandment. I have always loved the Lord with all my
might, and with all my heart; now I know that I love him
THE APOTHEOSIS 277
with all my life." And, repeating the verse again, he died as
he reached the words, "The Lord is One."
The scene, indelibly impressed on the eyes of Joshua ha-
Garsi, became part of Jewish tradition. The association of the
Shema with the great martyr's death made its recitation a
death-bed affirmation of the faith, instead of a repetition of
select verses; and to this day the pious Jew hopes that when
his time comes he may be sufficiently conscious to declare the
Unity of his God, echoing with his last breath the words which
found their supreme illustration in Akiba's martyrdom.
APPENDIX
I. AKIBA'S PRINCIPLES
IN RELATION TO CLASS DIFFERENCES
A. AKIBA'S PLEBEIAN STANDARDS
In most of the controversies which arose out of Akiba's applica-
tion of his juristic principles, his opponent was Ishmael; though in
some instances, the patricians were led by Tarfon, Eleazar ben
Azariah or Jose the Galilean. 1 Some of his disagreements with
these teachers arose simply out of their different experiences and
surroundings. Akiba, for instance, maintained that the lot for a
house, unless otherwise specified in the deed of sale, must be not
less than four cubits by six (about seven feet by ten and one-half).
Ishmael, hearing this opinion, exclaimed: "That is not a house, but
a stable. If one undertakes to build a stable, it may be four cubits by
six; a small house is six cubits by eight; a large house eight cubits by
ten; a triclinium ten by ten. The height in each case being half the
sum of length and width." 2
Akiba applied the same modest standards of his class to other
questions of law, such as the division of property among the heirs.
The patrician sages held that no garden could be profitably oper-
ated if it were less than half a Kab (about 1500 square feet) in area;
therefore, they refused to sanction the division of an estate unless
each heir received at least this minimum. Akiba, accepting the
lower standards of the poorer, more individualistic plebeians, said
that the minimum was a quarter of a Kab?
On the other hand, the fact that the plebeian estates were as a
rule barely large enough to support their owners, made Akiba, and
other scholars of his class, averse to the compromise principle of
equal division which were favored by the patricians.
Thus, if a man and wife died in an accident and there was no
279
280 APPENDIX
way of ascertaining which of them died first, the Shammaites held
that the wife's property as well as her dower, should be divided
equally between her heirs and those of her husband. 4 For, if she
died first, her property had been inherited legally by the husband
in the few seconds by which he survived her, and from him right-
fully it descended to his family; whereas if he died first, it be-
longed to her and her family. Since the truth could not be ascer-
tained, equal division seemed appropriate. But the Hillelites, whose
tiny estates could not readily bear division even according to their
lower standards of living, developed the principle of the status quo.
So far as concerns the property of the wife, the legal presumption
favors her relatives, they said; but the dower right, being un-
collected, remains in the hands of the husband and his heirs. The
Hillelites, however, agreed that if a man and his mother were
killed in such an accident the properties should be divided between
his children and her heirs; Akiba, alone, taking an extreme
plebeian position, said that even then the principle of presumption
must be followed.
In one special case, Tarfon had introduced an interesting, char-
acteristically humanitarian variation in the Shammaitic position.
If a man dies leaving behind him a small estate, which becomes
the subject of litigation between his heir, his wife and his creditor,
Tarfon would solve the problem by "giving it to the poorest among
them." Akiba, hearing this view, said: "The law is not charity;
the property must be given to the heir, for both the wife and the
creditors can collect only if they take an oath that they were not
paid during the lifetime of the deceased, while the heir need take
no such oath." 5
Akiba transferred the doctrine from law to ethics when he chal-
lenged the reasonableness of the extreme humanitarian position
adopted by his colleague, Ben Petira. The question which divided
the scholars was purely academic, but the answers are for that
reason especially illuminating. "If two men, traveling in the wilder-
ness, lose their way, and are left with only a single cup of water,
APPENDIX 28l
which is owned by one o them; and the cup is so small that if
divided between the two of them both must die of thirst, but if
one takes all, he may survive until he can reach safety, what is
to be done?" Ben Petira said: "Let them both drink and die, and
let not the owner of the cup stand by while his neighbor is
perishing." But Akiba said, "The Scriptures command, 'That thy
brother may live with thee' (Lev. 25:36); from this we infer,
that thy life has precedence over thy brother's life." 6
His plebeian point of view probably also accounts for an interest-
ing controversy between him and Tarfon regarding the disposal
of lost-and-found articles. The Law demands that the finder of
an article which is identifiable keep it until the owner claims it.
However, an animal which must be fed but gives no return
may be sold. The question arises, May the money obtained from
this sale be used by the finder pending the discovery of the
owner? Tarfon, thinking of the wealthy who could always lay
their hands on money, says, "The finder may use the funds; but
if they are lost he is responsible." Akiba, with his poor plebeians
in mind, maintains, "He must not use the money; and if he loses
it by accident, he is not responsible." 7
In the matter of purely ceremonial law, he ruled, as we have
noticed, that a poor man whose meal consists only of some cooked
vegetables must recite the full Grace. The patrician sages main-
tained that a meal without bread called only for the shorter bene-
diction. 8 It is permitted, he taught in opposition to Ishmael, to
spend the money of the second tithe on such plebeian dishes as
locusts and mushrooms. 9 Like the poorest artisans in .the market
place of Jerusalem who, living in a rich vine country, were
strangers to the juice of the grape, he considered wine a luxury,
and ruled that the tiniest amounts fell within the ceremonial
law. 10 On the other hand, he objected to IshmaeFs exhortation
"to beautify the commandments, by the purchase of a fine lulab,
fine fringes, or a fine suJ&ah."^ The first fruits which were
brought to Jerusalem must not be bedecked with any costly
282 APPENDIX
products from foreign countries. 12 Nor would he agree that vessels
of bone or precious glass are free from the law of impurity. 13
In an attempt to make the ceremonial law easier for small
landowners, Akiba practically abolished the biblical prohibition
against mixed planting. In a series of far-reaching decisions, he
surrounded the prohibition with mitigations which limited it
to the largest fields. But, characteristically, he insisted that where
the law did apply it must be carried out in its full rigor: "Not
only must mixed species not be planted; but he who permits them
to grow of themselves transgresses the law." 14
His sympathy for the small farmer went so far that he exempted
him from part of his obligations to charity; but he would not
grant total exemption to the poorest landowner. And so, strangely
enough, whereas Joshua had limited the rule of "borders" (peak)
to large farms, while Eliezer and Tarfqn had included smaller
farms, Akiba said, "Any land, no matter how small, must have
some part set aside for the poor." 15
Since the Temple was destroyed and the Levites no longer had
any official function, Akiba felt that their tithe should cease to be
binding on small farmers. While therefore earlier teachers urged
the people to gather in their harvest early so as to have the tithe
ready betimes, Akiba ruled that grain which has not been garnered
in time is free from the tithe. 16 He went further and maintained
that the grain is free from tithes unless it is stored in a protected
barn. If it is stored in a court to which two people have keys, it
is unprotected and free from tithes. 17 These interpretations effect-
ually abolished the whole system of tithes. Even such famous
scholars as Judah the Patriarch and Jose the son of Judah ben Ilai
adopted Akiba's devices and interpretations to free themselves from
this obligation. In vain did Judah ben Ilai, who was Akiba's pupil,
chide them, pointing out that Akiba himself had never taken ad-
vantage of his own rules. "He used to purchase herbs and grain
in order to give tithes from every species," Judah said. 18 But his
APPENDIX 283
was a futile cry; Akiba's innovations answered the new conditions
and could not be argued away.
The sin o the sons of Samuel (I Sam. 8:3), he said, consisted
in their use of force to collect more than was due them as their
tithe. 19 Such an interpretation could only have been an indirect
protest against contemporary abuses.
B. THE DEFENSE OF TRADERS
We have already observed that the articulate plebeians of ancient
Palestine were largely traders and artisans; and we must therefore
be prepared to find Akiba's philosophy tinged with ideas especially
suitable to the needs of these classes.
One of the principles which he voiced bears a strange resemblance
to the modern commercial opposition to "putting the government
into business." Akiba objected vigorously to the commercial use
of sanctuary funds. The cost of the daily sacrifice in the Temple
was defrayed from the voluntary annual tax of half a shekel paid
by each adult male Jew. Toward the end of the Second Common-
wealth there was generally an annual surplus which Temple offi-
cials invested in oil, wine and flour to be sold, at a profit, to
pilgrims. These enterprises were a grievous infringement on the
rights of private traders; for Temple commodities, besides being,
in all probability, cheaper, had the advantage of convenience and
prestige. Ishmael defends the practice on the grounds of prec-
edent; Akiba opposes it. "Temple funds and charity funds," he
said, "must not be used commercially." 20
In the same spirit are both of Akiba's rulings on the tithes.
There were two tithes in ancient Palestine. The first was handed
over to the Levites. The second had to be carried by the farmer
to Jerusalem, to be eaten there by himself and his family, or
else given away. In a sense, then, the second tithe was not really
a tithe, but a device to bring the population to Jerusalem at least
once a year. Farmers living at a distance from Jerusalem were,
however, permitted to commute the second tithe into cash, which
284 APPENDIX
they had to spend in Jerusalem. Akiba ruled that only regularly
minted currency could be used for this commutation. Ishmael,
thinking only o the farmers, maintained that any coins were
satisfactory. 21
Ishmael had also permitted provincial tenant-farmers, renting
their land from owners resident in Jerusalem, to substitute the
second tithe for their annual payments. Thus they evaded both
the tithe and the journey to Jerusalem. 22 The landowner lost
nothing through this arrangement; the only sufferer was the mer-
chant of Jerusalem, who had one customer instead of many. Akiba
refused to accept this ruling.
C. THE TRADITIONS OF JERUSALEM
Much of Akiba's polemic against his master, Eliezer ben
Hyrkanos, had originated in the special interests and traditions of
the plebeians of Jerusalem. This metropolitan point of view
dominated also in his controversies with the younger scholars.
Jerusalem differed from rural Judea, not only in its social organi-
zation as a large city, but in its climatic conditions. Situated on
a high plateau, it is definitely colder than the lowlands, where
most of the prosperous provincials had their farms. During the
Passover week, many Jerusalemites would still be using fire to warm
their houses, while the farmers of the coastal plain no longer
needed it. Hence it came about that when the city people de-
stroyed their leaven before the Passover in accordance with the
rule set down in Exodus 12:15 they burned it, while the country
people, who usually had no fire available, buried it, or tossed it
into the sea, or ground it to dust. A series of patrician scholars
beginning with Judah ben Bathyra and ending with Simeon ben
Yohai, who derive their traditions from provincial life, insist on
the admissibility of the rural custom, while Akiba and his urban
followers deny this. 23
Lack of water has played a greater part than climate in the
history of Jerusalem. Only in our own day, has the problem of
APPENDIX 285
the city's water supply been solved. There are few important
springs in the neighborhood, and the rainfall is definitely below
the average of the remainder of the country. To make matters
worse, the rainy reason begins in Jerusalem some weeks later than
in the lowlands. 24 The result of this combination of circum-
stances is that August and September, which were months of
great rejoicing in the vine producing lowlands, because of the
harvest and the ingathering, were periods of concern in the capital,
where the water had to be measured by drops. The wealthy, of
course, were always provided for, somehow; but in the poorer
sections of Jerusalem, the last months of the summer brought
considerable privation.
It was natural, therefore, that while Sukkot, which falls in
September, was primarily observed in the country as a feast of
thanksgiving, the poorer artisans and traders of Jerusalem used it
to emphasize their dependence on the rains. Centuries before
Akiba, the Hasideans and the Pharisees had instituted special rain
ceremonies for the Sukkot week, which the Sadducees opposed so
furiously that on one occasion a civil war ensued. 25 In the second
century C.E. this controversy, like all the others, had been conven-
iendy setded in favor of the Pharisees by the death of the Sadducee
party; but while provincials and patricians accepted the Phari-
saic teaching as a matter of practice, they continued to deny its
theological basis. As represented by the School of Ishmael, they
still held that the "world is judged" for rain, as for everything
else, on Rosh Ha-Shanah. 26 Akiba, however, energetically de-
fended the view of the earlier Jerusalem plebeians. "The Law says,
bring barley on Passover, because it is the time of barley, so that
the grain may be blessed; bring the first wheat on Shabuot which
is the wheat season, so that the fruits may be blessed; pour libations
of water on the festival of Sukkot, which is the season of rains,
so that the rains may be blessed for you, as it is written, 'And it
shall come to pass that everyone that is left of all the nations
that came against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to wor-
286 APPENDIX
ship the King, the Lord o Hosts, and to keep the feast of taber-
nacles. And it shall be that whoso of the families of the earth
goeth not up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of Hosts,
upon them there shall be no rain'" (Zech. I4:i6). 27
The point of Akiba's remark lies in the last phrase. Everybody
agreed that it was appropriate to pray for the barley harvest on
Passover and for the fruits on Shabuot. Sukkot, the third of the
pilgrimage holidays, must also look forward and not backward;
it is not only a time of thanksgiving for the ingathering which
is completed, but of petition for the rains which are to come later.
This logical argument is reinforced by the citation from Zechariah
in which Sukkot is definitely associated with rain.
While the plebeians of Jerusalem thus disagreed with both
patricians and provincials in regard to the essential meaning of
Sukkot, they were as anxious as any other Jews to observe the
customs which Scripture prescribed for the festival. Their almost
pathetic efforts to carry out in their crowded slums the law re-
quiring booths for the festival have already been described. They
were put to similar straits in their observance of another rustic
ceremony connected with the festival.
It was customary for the Sukkot pilgrims, marching in proces-
sion round the Temple altar, to carry a cluster of vegetable prod-
ucts, consisting of a citron, a palm branch and some myrtle and
willow twigs. This custom, like many others, had spread from
the Temple to the Synagogue, and was universally observed in
Palestine. But while citrons or palm branches were expensive,
willows could be had for the gathering in the country, and the
villagers made a display of them. The same was done by the
richer townspeople. But the urban plebeians, grateful if they could
fulfill the barest letter of the Law, usually had to be satisfied with
the single twig of myrtle and another of willow. Ishmael and
Tarfon, representing the country tradition, declared this modest
bouquet inadequate, while Akiba defended it. 28
The scarcity of wells in the neighborhood of Jerusalem explains
APPENDIX 287
Akiba's view that water which has become turgid, either with
clay or mud, is still fit for ritual immersion. 29 Ishmael denied this.
Similarly, Akiba permitted the use of melted snow for purifica-
tion, but Ishmael, representing the practice natural to inhabitants
of the warmer lowland where snow was almost unknown, and
water quite plentiful, opposed him. Akiba reports, however, that
after Ishmael had settled in the village of Azziz, in the vicinity of
Hebron, the highest point in Judea, where snow was as plentiful
as in Jerusalem, he changed his mind on the subject. "All his
life he used to argue against me," Akiba remarked with relish,
"but the people of Medeba (in Transjordan) testified that when
they asked his advice about the construction of a pool for purifica-
tion, he said to them, 'Go out and collect snow and construct
your pool.' " 30
A most illuminating controversy between the sages concerned
"machine" labor on the Sabbath day. All Jews agreed that house-
hold work was forbidden on the Sabbath even if no human or
animal labor was involved. Thus a housewife could not leave
her bread in the oven at sunset on Friday if it was insufficiently
baked, nor could she permit her pot to remain on the fire to
complete its cooking. 31 There was considerable disagreement how-
ever, regarding occupational work which was automatic; the
plebeian Hillelites permitted a dyer to let his materials soak in the
cauldron during the Sabbath if he did not touch them, and to
set a trap for animals or a net for fish on Friday, even though the
capture would ensue automatically on the Sabbath day. The rural
Shammaites, to whom such work was also part of household
activity, forbade this. 32 The extraction of fruit juices, on the other
hand, which was ordinary household work in the city, was done
on an industrial scale in the country. The urban plebeian con-
ceded the principle for wine and oil, but demurred in the case of
garlic, unripe fruits and certain oleaginous grains. Hence we find
Akiba, usually lenient in such matters, declaring that it is for-
bidden to let the juice of fruits and vegetables continue to flow
288 APPENDIX
on the Sabbath; while Ishmael, his opponent, maintains that it
is permitted. 33 The rabbinic record significantly adds that the
"custom of the priests was in accordance with Ishmael's views." 34
In the litigation which was constantly arising between the
ancient patrician families and the new class of de-urbanized
traders and artisans who, driven from Jerusalem by the Romans,
sought to settle on the land, Akiba's sympathies naturally were
altogether with the latter. When they bought a house, they fre-
quently neglected to specify, for instance, that the well, which
supplied the water, went with it. The provincial judges, guided
by fixed precedents, and taking no account of the helpless in-
expertness of a townsman buying rural properties, held that only
what was mentioned in the deed was bought. Akiba could not
deny that the weight of precedent favored the seller; but he raised
a new question. The well, being unmentioned in the deed, might
remain the property of the original seller, but how was he to reach
it? The patricians said that the reservation of the well implied a
right of way to it; but this Akiba denied. Nothing had been said
about the well explicidy, and it was quite sufficient that it should
not be transferred with the rest of the field. To claim with it a
passage across the property was preposterous. Thus the craftiness
of the seller overshot its mark, and at best he could only exact an
additional payment for the well he could not use. 35
On the other hand, Akiba said, if a person buys a well, which is
situated in the middle of a field, and neglects to acquire at the
same time a right of passage to it, that must be attributed to over-
sight, and the use of the way is allowed him. The other sages said
that the purchase of a well does not carry with it any other rights.
In general, Akiba laid down the rule that "a vendor sells with
generosity," and must be presumed to have given away all the
necessary appurtenances to the property disposed of; his opponents
maintained the traditional view, inherited from a harsher age, of
caveat emptor. The controversy which began with the well spread
to the trees, pigeon houses and other rural properties.
APPENDIX 289
In a number o other controversies, Akiba's urban point of view
is recognizable, though not so obviously. He maintained, for
instance, that the Israelites in Egypt had collected the blood of
the paschal lamb into vessels, such as were doubtless used in
Jerusalem when an animal was slaughtered in one's house; Ishmael,
adhering to provincial tradition, said that "a hole was made in
the threshold into which the blood was poured." 36
In his defense of the urban population, Akiba opposed the rule,
upheld by Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, which would have freed im-
ported grain from the law of hallah. This law, enunciated in Num-
bers 15:19 ff, demands "the first of the dough" as a gift for the
priests. So small was the amount involved, and so pious were
the women who did the household baking, that this particular
perquisite of the Aaronids survived when all the others disappeared.
Even outside of Palestine where there was never any legal obliga-
tion to make the gift, Jewish women continue to separate a
portion of dough as their mothers have done for centuries. Since
the sacred portion may be eaten only in purity, and the Diaspora
contains no undefiled priests, the offering is thrown into the fire.
Akiba was deeply conscious of the reverence and affection which
attached to this institution. His colleagues had taught that a person
who was unable to prepare his dough "in purity" would do better
to knead it in small measures which were free from the obliga-
tion of hallah. "No," said Akiba, "it is better to separate it in
impurity than to avoid it; for just as the portion separated in
purity is called hallah, so is that separated in impurity; but if a
person prepares the dough in small quantities, he will have no
share in the commandment." 37
He took issue with the majority who denied that the priestly
portion could be offered from a small quantity of dough. The
minimum he said, had been fixed so as to free smaller quantities
from any obligation; but if the poor housewife who has only a
single \ab (two quarts) of dough wants to fulfill the command-
APPENDIX
ments, she may do so. The other sages denied that a portion sepa-
rated from bob could properly be called hallah.
Realizing how deeply rooted the custom was among the, Pales-
tinian masses, Akiba refused to free imported grain from this
obligation. Besides, to have done so would have placed a definite
taint on the foreign product, thus increasing the demand for
Palestinian wheat and barley which was insufficient to meet the
country's needs. The resulting rise in price would have been wel-
comed by the farmer, but the plebeians of the city would have
been the sufferers.
The problem also had a reverse side. The Palestinian farmers
not only tried to monopolize the home market, they also wanted
to establish a preference for their wares among the Jews of the
neighboring countries and provinces. Hence they insisted that their
grain was subject to the laws of hallah even when it was taken
out of the country; its sanctity was inherent and remained with
it wherever it went. This too Akiba denied. 38
D. THE DEFENSE OF THE SHEPHERDS AND CATTLE DEALERS
The shepherd class, Akiba's own, also benefited from his legis-
lative efforts, as is evident from the instances which follow.
The Bible demands that the owner of an ox which has strayed
into a neighbor's field recompense the farmer "of the best of his
field and of the best of his vineyard" (Exod. 22:4). Traditionally,
this was taken to mean that the damaged section of the field was
to be considered not inferior to the best of the remainder. The
burden of proof to the contrary lay with the owner of the ox.
But this interpretation, obvious to those who established it, was
absurd in the eyes of Akiba. In his opinion, this was an unjustified
reversal of the rule which places the onus of proof on the plain-
tiff. Hence Akiba rejected the traditional interpretation, saying,
"The passage only commands that the damages be paid out of the
defendant's best lands." 39
It was in accord with this view that Akiba demanded a trial
APPENDIX 291
by twenty-three judges, before an ox which had killed a man
could be stoned. 40 But his defense of the plebeian interest over-
shot the mark when he ruled that a man injured by an ox could
not collect damages in excess of the value of the animal. 41
Perhaps it was his shepherd origin, too, that accounted for
Akiba's peculiar leniency with regard to the law of meat and milk.
Urban scholars generally were very severe on this point. 42 Akiba
maintained that the biblical prohibition against the uniting of
meat and milk is limited to the meat of cattle. But even such a
mixture might be sold to Gentiles, he said; it was prohibited only
for Jews. In both of these views, he was opposed by the majority
of his own faction, as well as by Ishmael; and tradition has not
followed him on this point. 43
E. THE ATTACK ON THE PRIESTS
Akiba's friendship for the shepherds, combined with his hostility
to the priests, inspired a series of lenient decisions with regard to
the firstlings of cattle. If a sheep gives birth to twins, Jose the
Galilean insists that both belong to the priest. Tarfon maintains
that only one need be given to the priest; but, he says, the Aaronid
may have his choice of either one. Akiba says that the priest, like
anyone else who tries to collect a claim against another, must
prove his case. Since he cannot produce any evidence that either
is the true firstling, he must be satisfied with the inferior animal. 44
If the firstling has had to be removed through an operation,
it must be considered of doubtful status, according to Tarfon and
the same rule applies to any natural born lamb which follows it.
Akiba, however, says that they both unquestionably belong to the
shepherd and not to the priest. 45
The Shammaites had held that only priests may eat the flesh
of the firstling; and the earlier Hillelites, who disagreed with
them, had insisted that any Israelite might partake of it. But
Akiba said that there was no limitation in the matter at all. Even
a pagan might eat of the firstling. 46
APPENDIX
But what shocked the priests even more than his halakic opinions
with regard to their privileges were his aggadic imputations against
the character and position of their eponym. He held, for instance,
that not only Miriam, but also Aaron, had been stricken with
leprosy because they had slandered Moses. "Whether you be right
or wrong," Judah ben Bathyra retorted when he heard this, "y u
are destined to give account before God for such an interpretation.
If you are right, the Torah has concealed his shame, and you have
revealed it; and if you are wrong, you are simply slandering a
saint." 47
A similar controversy arose from the custom which required the
priests to bless the people after the sacrifices in the Temple.
Ishmael remarked, "The priests bless the people, but who blesses
the priests? To answer this the Scriptures say, 'And I shall bless
them' (Num. 6:27), meaning that while the priests bless their
fellow-Israelites, God Himself blesses the priests." Akiba could not
brook this ascription of a special privilege to the priests, nor was he
willing to agree that the blessing of the people is entirely dependent
on the ecclesiastics. "No," he said, "the verse means rather that
priests bless the Israelites, and God confirms their blessing." 48
Ishmael probably believed he was conferring an honor on
Abraham, the father of the Hebrew people, by making him a high
priest; Akiba, believing that this posthumous promotion did more
honor to the priesthood than to Abraham, denied it to the
patriarch. 49
II. AKIBA IN THE PHARISAIC TRADITION
A. THE ADMISSION OF THE PLEBEIANS INTO THE GEROUSIA
It can hardly be doubted that the Great Assembly convoked by
Simeon the Righteous was intended to take the place of the
general meetings of the whole community which were customary
in older times (cf. Menes, Die V orexilischen Gesetze Israels,
pp. 88 ft), and which the Book of Deuteronomy makes mandatory
once in seven years (Deut. 31 :io) . These gatherings were intended
to serve as a check on the "heads of the families." The rabbinic
tradition which associates the Great Synagogue 1 with Ezra and
Nehemiah has this much historical value, that that gathering, too,
is described as one in which Levites or plebeians took part (see
Neh. 10:9); and it may have served as precedent for Simeon's
Assembly. The historical reasons for Simeon's establishing the new
departure cannot be discussed here. But it is sufficient to note that
in the letter of Antiochus III, the Great, which is generally accepted
as authentic (cf. Ed. Meyer, Ursprung u. Anjaenge d. Christen-
turns II, 126), and is cited in Josephus Ant. XII, 3:3 the "scribes
of the Temple and the singers of the sanctuary" are expressly
mentioned as being free from certain taxes. This can only mean
that the scribes were already recognized members of the Sanhedrin.
A second Great Assembly of all classes of the people was convoked
about a century later, to establish the authority of Simeon the
Hasmonean. The First Book of Maccabees (14:28) explicitly states
that "in a Great Assembly (Gk. efflesia megale; original Hebrew,
doubtless, \eneset gedolah) of priests and people and princes of
the nation and of the elders of the country," Simeon was declared
the leader and high priest, "forever until a faithful prophet should
arise."
The expulsion of the Pharisees from the Sanhedrin under John
Hyrkan, and their restoration under Queen Salome, are well
293
294 APPENDIX
attested and generally recognized. But seen in the perspective o
general history, both events were more than sectarian victories;
they were parts of the continuous struggle of the scholars for a
voice in the government of the people. From the time of Queen
Salome, the place of the plebeians in the Sanhedrin was secure.
(For the whole discussion, cf. S. Zeitlin, The Second Jewish Com-
monwealth, pp. 38 ff.)
B. THE PRINCIPLE OF BI-PARTISAN LEADERSHIP AMONG
THE PHARISEES
In his Meqomah shel ha-hala\a behofynat yisrael, a small pamph-
let of incalculable importance for the study of Jewish history,
Professor Louis Ginzberg has shown (pp. 14 E.) that the division
of the Pharisees into two opposing schools antedated the time of
Hillel and Shammai, and in fact originated at the very beginning
of the Pharisaic movement. He also proved that it was this division
which lay at the basis of the leadership of the Pharisaic movement
by "pairs" of scholars for more than one hundred and fifty years.
Each member of the "pair" represented a faction. (See Mishna
Abot, chap, i, and Mishna Hagiga, chap. 2).
It can be demonstrated, however, that this system of dual leader-
ship did not come to an end with the last of the "pairs," Hillel
and Shammai, but continued until the end of the tannaitic period.
HilleFs immediate successor was apparently Gamaliel I, a ple-
beian, like Hillel himself. For reasons given above (p. 7) Gama-
liel had no associate. But it is instructive to note that when the
proposal was made to appoint an associate to him, the person to
whom the position was offered was Akabiah ben Mahalalel, a
patrician. The factional affiliations of Akabiah have been recog-
nized by I. H. Weiss (Dor Dor ve-Dorshav I, 176). Perhaps,
however, it will be well to examine the evidence more fully.
(i) In two recorded norms, he insisted on severities with regard
to the ritual purity of women which are similar to those elsewhere
APPENDIX 295
defended by the Shammaites (Cf . Mishna Eduyot 5 :6, with Mishna
Niddah 2:7). Quite aside from this textual evidence, it is clear that
the severities he imposed would hardly have concerned the patrician
women or their polygamous husbands, but would have involved
great hardships for the plebeian women, who were engaged in
trade and work from which they had to desist in a state of
impurity, and would also have required restraint for their husbands.
(2) A third norm ascribed to him (Mishna Eduyot, ibid?) concerns
special priestly privileges with regard to the firstlings. Like other
patricians, Akabiah defends the rights of the priest.
(3) A fourth norm concerns the equality of status between prose-
lytes, former bondswomen and natural born Israelite women. The
majority of the sages insist that they be treated alike; Akabiah
makes a distinction between them, at least so far as the Ordeal
described in Numbers 5:11 F. is concerned.
(4) In a fifth rule, he limited the law of Scripture which permits
any passerby to eat "to his satisfaction" of the grapes or the grain
of his neighbor's field (Deut. 23:25-26) to workers in the field or
vineyard (Midrash Tannaim 23:25, p. 153). The generous, original
rule allowed of no such limitation (see commentaries on Deute-
ronomy, ad loc.). In fact, we are explicitly informed that the
disciples of Jesus "plucked ears of corn" of the fields through
which they passed when they were hungry (Matt. 12:1; Mark
2:23; Luke 6:1). And to this day the custom prevails in Palestine
(Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine I, 493, 499; for similar
Arab hospitality, cf. Doughty, Arabia Deserta I, 520; II, 152).
Yet there must have been attempts to limit it even before the
time of Akabiah, for the Sect of Damascus takes account of the
rule permitting only workers to eat the food. In view of the record
in the Gospels, it seems probable that the more niggardly custom
prevailed among the landowners near large urban centers, whose
visitors would have denuded field and vineyard, like so many
locusts, if they were permitted to eat their fill. It remained for
Akabiah, representing this group of landowners, to formulate a
universal rule.
296 APPENDIX
(5) The final evidence of his patrician sympathies is to be found
in his almost Sadducean theology (see above, p. 159).
The plebeians, who controlled the Sanhedrin, were prepared to
recognize Akabiah as associate to Gamaliel if he would renounce
some of his extreme views. He declined to do this; and Gamaliel
remained the sole leader of his day.
We have observed in the text that both Simeon ben Gamaliel I,
and Gamaliel II, were Shammaites, and that in their time the
Hillelites were led by Johanan ben Zakkai, and Joshua ben
Hananya.
With Simeon ben Gamaliel, the House of Hillel reverted to its
original plebeian attitude. He had all the humor, the humility
and the character of his famous ancestor. When his son, Judah,
destined later to become the Nasi, complained of the preferment
given at school to the son of Simeon ben Yohai, the patient father
consoled him with these words, "My child be not wroth. He is a
lion, and the son of a lion; you are a lion, but the son of a fox
(B. Baba Mezia Sqb). In part this humility was doubtless a result
of his reduced circumstances. The Romans, who had massacred
all the household of Gamaliel II during the war of Bar Kokba
and the Hadrianic persecution (B. Sotah 49b), had doubtless also
confiscated the Nasi's estates. Simeon ben Gamaliel possessed no
slaves, as his father did; nor, so far as can be seen from the record,
did he own large fields or vineyards. On the contrary, his mode
of life gives every evidence of simplicity, and even of poverty.
His closest friends in the academy were not Simeon ben Yohai
and Meir, the patricians, but Judah ben Ilai and Jose ben Halafta,
the plebeians (Tosefta Demai 3:14, p. 50; B. SuJfah 26a; B.
Pesahim looa). In fact, Meir once joined in a conspiracy to remove
Simeon ben Gamaliel from his office (B. Horayot isb).
His decisions, like these external facts of his life, give evidence
of plebeian leanings. He held, for instance, that a dyer or a baker
could not be ejected from his shop by the owner before he had
lived there for three years (Mishna Baba Mezia 8:5); he declined
APPENDIX 297
to insist with his colleagues that a merchant remove the sediment
from his scales every thirty days (Mishna Baba Batra 5:10); he
freed mechanics from any claim for injury resulting from their
work on highways, not only while they were engaged at their
tasks, but during the thirty days when they were preparing their
materials (Mishna Baba Mezia 10:5); he was lenient in his deci-
sions regarding the Samaritans, saying that "with regard to those
laws which they accept, the Samaritans are more rigorous than
the Jews" (B. Gittin loa) ; he maintained that a slave can say to his
master, "either support me or free me" (ibid. i2a); and further
that "it was as commendable an act to redeem slaves as to free
Israelites from pagan captivity" (ibid. 37b). All of these decisions
are essentially in the spirit of Akiba and the plebeian faction.
His contemporaries were, of course, aware of his plebeian lean-
ings, and appointed a patrician, Nathan the Babylonian, as his
associate. Nathan's patricianship is obvious first from his family
connections, for he was the son of the Babylonian Head of the
Exile (Horayot i3b). But in addition, it is clear that Nathan be-
longed to the School of Ishmael. This can be seen from the fact
that he reports an incident in IshmaeFs life as though he had been
an eye witness to it (B. Shabbat i2b) ; but more especially from
the frequency with which his name occurs in the tannaitic mid-
rashim of the School of Ishmael, although he is hardly mentioned
in the similar works from the School of Akiba (see Hoffmann,
Einleitung in d. halach. Midrashim, pp. 39, 88). He further actually
cites Ishmael in B. Pesahim 6jb-, also the patricians, Eliezer ben
Hyrkanos, in Pesahim 483; Jose, the Galilean, in Menahot 38b;
and Tarfon, in Zebahim 973.
Nathan, who survived Simeon, continued to hold office with
Judah the Patriarch I, who was. also classed as a plebeian.
This analysis of the factional tendencies of the various scholars
may be summarized in the following table of Pharisaic leaders
from the year 170 B.C.E. to 220 C.E. (The patrician member of each
pair is indicated by an asterisk).
298
APPENDIX
TABLE I
NASI
AB BET DIN
170-162 B.C.E.
Jose ben Joezer*
Jose ben Johanan
i62-ca. 149 B.C.E.
Interruption because of the persecutions and
wars
149-109 B.C.E.
Joshua ben Perahya*
Nittai of Arbel
109-76 B.C.E.
Interruption due to persecution of Pharisees
76-60 B.C.E.
Simeon ben Shatah
Judah ben Tabbai*
60-39 B.C.E.
Shemayah
Abtalyon*
39-ca. 20 B.C.E.
Interruption due to Herod's persecution
20 B.C.E.-20 C.E.
Hillel
Menahem*
Shammai*
20-50 C.E.
Gamaliel
(Associateship offered to
Akabiah ben Mahalalel*)
50-70 C.E.
Simeon ben Gamaliel*
Johanan ben Zakkai
70-80 C.E.
Interruption due to Roman Conquest
80-116 C.E.
Gamaliel*
(Eleazar ben Azariah*
appointed ad interim
during Gamaliel's re-
moval)
Joshua ben Hananya
n6-ca. 145 C.E.
Interruption due to disordered times
i45-ca. 170 C.E.
Simeon ben Gamaliel
Nathan*
170-217 C.E.
Judah I
Nathan*
(while he lived; position
left vacant thereafter)
The evidence of bi-partisan leadership which this table offers
us, is supplemented by other records. It can be shown that it was a
definite policy of the Pharisees to have plebeians and patricians
represented, equally so far as was possible, on the various commis-
sions which were appointed by the Sanhedrin. Thus Josephus
APPENDIX 299
expressly tells us that the commission sent to investigate his activi-
ties in Galilee consisted of two patricians and two plebeians. "The
scheme agreed upon," he tells us, "was to send a deputation
comprising persons of different classes of society but of equal
standing in education. Two of them, Jonathan and Ananias, were
from the lower ranks and adherents of the Pharisees; the third,
Joazar, also a Pharisee, came from a priestly family; the youngest,
Simeon, was descended from high priests." (Life, 39).
Of the recorded rabbinical commissions sent to Rome, we know
that one consisted of Eliezer, the patrician, and Joshua, the plebeian
(Yer. Sanhedrin 7:19, 253; Gamaliel did not count, since his ap-
pointment to the office of Nasi was the subject of the mission); the
second, of Gamaliel and Eleazar ben Azariah as patricians, and
Joshua and Akiba as plebeians (see above p. 136); the third, of
Simeon ben Yohai, the patrician, and Eleazar ben Jose, the plebeian
(Meilah i7a).
When, during the period of Gamaliel's removal from office, a
commission was appointed to negotiate with Dosa ben Arkenas,
the leader of the Shammaites, for an agreement on certain rules,
it consisted of Tarfon and Eleazar ben Azariah of the patricians,
and Joshua and Akiba of the plebeians (Yer. Yebamot 1:6, 3b,
line 2; Tarfon's name is omitted in B. Yebamot 153).
Apparently the same principle applied in the last days of the
Commonwealth to the judges of Jerusalem, for the Mishna records
that "there were two judges of decision in Jerusalem: Admon and
Hanan ben Abishalom." (Mishna Ketubot 13:1). A study of their
decisions shows that Admon was a patrician and Hanan a plebeian.
In fact, this is evident from a mere perusal of the record which
gives two decisions of Hanan and informs us that he was supported
in both by Johanan ben Zakkai, and opposed by the high priestly
families and Dosa ben Arkenas, the Shammaite. On the other
hand, two of Admon's decisions are explicitly supported by Gama-
liel II.
An analysis of the issues involved, however, offers more con-
30O APPENDIX
elusive evidence for their class associations. The cases are all listed
in Mishna Ketubot i3:irT. and may be summarized as follows:
1. A woman whose husband had left for distant parts came to
court to ask for maintenance from his estate. According to the law,
she was entitled to this remedy, provided the court was assured
that the husband had made no provision for her. As she could
offer no evidence to this negative fact, the court was urged to
impose an oath upon her, stating that she was without means. But
Hanan, loyal to the plebeian principles which were opposed to
unnecessary oaths, particularly by women, gave her the income
without adjuration.
2. In a similar case, the woman had been supported by another
man during her husband's absence from home. When the husband
returned, the generous friend demanded that he be reimbursed.
Hanan would not grant the claim, although the facts were ad-
mitted. The decision which may seem, at first, a patent perversion
of justice, was in reality based on far-reaching social considerations.
Just because plebeian women were emancipated, the sages who
represented that group were particularly fearful of any dangerous
friendships between the sexes. We have observed above (p. 191)
what steps Akiba took to prevent emancipation from leading to
sexual irregularities. The same principles were followed by the
School of Hillel generally (cf. Mishna Yebamot 15:1 ff.) and in a
series of four important decisions by Joshua ben Hananya in par-
ticular (Mishna Ketubot i:6ff.). Hanan felt that the judge who
desired to maintain the traditional standards of chastity could not
encourage close relations between the wife of an absent husband
and male "friends." The man who helped a woman under the
circumstances acted irregularly; the appropriate remedy would have
been an appeal to the court for provision from her husband's
property. To permit him to be repaid would encourage others to
take similar care of women whose husbands had left, and this
might lead to forbidden intimacy.
APPENDIX 3OI
3. The issue of feminine chastity reappeared in another case,
which came before Admon. A man died leaving insufficient prop-
erty to support both his sons and his daughters, and Admon was
called upon to arrange the division. The ordinary rule which gave
the inheritance to the sons but charged them with the support
of their sisters, was of course inapplicable, since the necessity of
maintaining the daughters would leave the sons without any in-
come for themselves. The plebeians, fearing that the girls would
be driven to a life of infamy, insisted that they be given preference;
but Admon, adhering to the aristocratic, landowning psychology
of the son's priority, said: "Shall he be deprived of his rights
because he is a male?" and gave the property to the sons uncon-
ditionally.
4. The fourth problem involved again the plebeian aversion to
oaths. A man was brought to court on a claim for certain barrels
of oil. He admitted receiving the barrels, but denied that they had
contained oil. Since no witnesses or documentary evidence were
available, the decision had to depend, in Jewish law, on the credi-
bility of the litigants. Now the law requires a defendant who
admits part of a claim and denies the rest, to confirm his statements
under oath, whereupon the decision is issued in his favor. But in
this instance, the plebeian sages denied that the defendant should
be obliged to take an oath, for, they said, his admission has nothing
to do with the claim. The suit is for barrels of oil; the admission
concerns barrels, but is an absolute denial of the claim for oil.
The casuistic quibble, for it is nothing more, could only have been
raised by judges who would go any length to avoid the imposition
of an oath. But Admon, as a landowning aristocrat, did not share
their prejudices, and insisted on the usual oath.
.5. A man of small means, anxious to improve himself socially
and financially, had won the hand of the daughter of a wealthy
patrician, and had been promised a large dowry. When the time
for the wedding came, the bride's father refused to keep his
promise. The husband, unable to secure the property, also declined
302 APPENDIX
to accept the wife. But since in ancient Palestinian custom betrothal
bound the woman to the husband, she was prevented from marry-
ing anyone else. The poor girl thus found herself ground between
two opposing wills; her husband would not accept her without
the property, the father would not give her any dowry. She ap-
pealed to Admon for redress, asking that the husband either release
her or marry her. In those days, before the advent of modern
romanticism, plebeian sympathies were all with the husband who,
his comrades held, had simply been made the victim of a fraudu-
lent contract. But Admon, agreeing as usual with the men of
property, decided for the girl.
In other important civil decisions, Admon showed himself sym-
pathetic to the rural landowning classes against the rising city
merchants. One of the litigations gives us, incidentally, a striking
picture of the unruly, chaotic times, when physical force was
rapidly supplanting the normal jurisdiction of the community.
6. A man's farm had been seized by a brigand who was suffi-
ciently influential with the governor to prevent his being driven
away through ordinary legal process. Later a purchaser appeared,
wanting to buy the field but apprehensive about the robber's title
to it. To allay his suspicions, the powerful bandit had the effrontery
to compel the original owner, his victim, to witness the deed of
sale which he issued for the field. Nevertheless, the original owner
afterward brought suit against the purchaser to recover his prop-
erty. The plebeians, taking the view of the defrauded innocent
purchaser, held that in acting as witness to the sale, the original
owner had waved his rights. But Admon, knowing that once such
a precedent were established any number of bandits would use
it to confirm their wrongful titles, said, "The original owner may
say, I was willing to witness the sale, because I knew I could
recover the land from the purchaser, but was unable to do anything
against the robber."
APPENDIX 303
7. Like so many others under suspicion, the owner o an estate
had had to flee to a distant country, and had had no time to make
provisions for his property. During his long absence, the path
which led from the main road to his farm had been absorbed
by the neighbors and was no longer recognizable. The plebeians,
having little sympathy for these returning revolutionaries, said the
owner must buy a road from one of the neighboring farmers or
"let him fly in the air." Admon said he may claim from his
neighbors the shortest possible right of way from the road.
Finally, two other decisions show that Admon's approach to
commercial matters was that of a typical rural judge, unaccustomed
to the intricate business relations of the city.
8. A man borrowed money from another and later bought a
field from him. When the lender brought suit for the loan, the
borrower claimed that it had been paid; and as evidence, said:
"If I had owed you the money, would you have sold me the
property without demanding payment at once?" Admon, accus-
tomed to regard a loan as purely a matter of personal kindness,
upheld the claim. But the plebeian scholars held that it was
invalid. The lender might have tried to collect his money, they
said, unsuccessfully, and welcomed the opportunity to sell the
borrower real estate which he would afterward be able to seize
for debt.
9. A sued B for a debt and presented in evidence a duly executed
note. B admitted the validity of the note, but claimed he had paid
it of! and had simply failed to obtain the document from A. As
proof of his statement, he brought forward a note showing that A
had recently borrowed money from him. "Why should A have
asked me for a loan," he said, "if I was in debt to him? Would
it not have been more natural for him to demand repayment of
the loan I owed him?" A did not deny his indebtedness to B, but
he insisted that B was also indebted to him. Admon sustained B's
304 APPENDIX
claim, feeling certain that no one would borrow money from his
debtor, and that therefore ^4's note must have been paid off before
he received the loan from B. But the plebeian sages, knowing the
ways of the city market, held that each note was valid and should
be enforced.
A consideration of all the evidence adduced seems to me to
establish the fact that the Pharisees recognized the two factions
in their midst, and also that they consciously chose their leaders
with an eye to the equal representation of the opposing groups.
C. THE USUAL AGE FOR MARRIAGE AMONG THE PLEBEIANS
Any doubt regarding the custom of late marriage among the
plebeians is removed by a consideration of the remarks in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Testament of Issachar 3.5 ff.,
where the author obviously tries to comfort the wifeless husband-
man. "Therefore," the author says, "when I was thirty-five years
old, I took to myself a wife, for my labor wore away my strength
and I never thought upon pleasure with women; but owing to my
toil, sleep overcame me." (R. H. Charles, tr.). This corresponds
very closely to Hesiod's advice to the Boeotian peasant, given half
a millennium earlier, but doubtless applicable throughout antiquity :
"Bring home a wife to your house when you are of the right age,
while you are not far short of thirty years, nor much above; this
is the right age for marriage" (Works and Days, lines 695-97;
Evelyn White, tr.).
D. THE SHAMMAITIC INCLINATIONS OF GAMALIEL II
Gamaliel's descent from Hillel, and the fact that after his removal
from office he somewhat changed his policy, have helped to con-
ceal both from talmudic scholars and modern historians his defi-
nitely Shammaitic inclinations. But the records leave no room for
doubt on the subject.
APPENDIX 305
(1) He married the widow of his brother, who had died without
children, although another wife of the same brother was his
daughter. This is a Shammaitic practice 'which was most severely
denounced by the Hillelites (B. Yeframot 153). The explanation
offered by the Babylonian Talmud that his daughter was sterile
and, therefore, her marriage to his brother was really void, cannot
possibly be accepted.
(2) Simeon ben Gamaliel reports that his father would not per-
mit laundry to be sent to a pagan for wash after Wednesday,
which is precisely in accordance with Shammaitic opinion (Mishna
Shabbat 1:9; cf. Stfre Deuteronomy 203).
(3) The Mishna itself records that Gamaliel followed Sham-
maitic practice in three matters (Bezah 2:6). But the enumeration
given there is not exhaustive, as can be seen from examples i and 2,
which are not included in the Mishna.
(4) In a series of momentous decisions regarding the rights of
married women, Gamaliel sided with Eliezer against Joshua
(Mishna Ketubot i :6-p) . The fact that Gamaliel and Eliezer accept
the woman's claim and Joshua rejects it must not blind us to the
essentially Shammaitic nature of their view. It was characteristic
of the plebeians that they distrusted women in such matters (cf.
Mishna Yebamot i5:2ff).
(5) In Mishna Ketubot 8:1 ff, Gamaliel indicates his sympathy
with the Shammaitic tendency to augment the wife's authority
over her property rather than to limit it in accordance with
Hillelite principles. With regard to Examples 4 and 5 it is impor-
tant to bear in mind that among the plebeian city groups for whom
the Hillelites and Joshua legislated the laxity of sexual morals and
family ties was more pronounced than among the upper middle
classes of the city and the provincial groups whom the Shammaites
and Eliezer considered. It was because of the "freedom" of the
plebeian woman when she was the possessor of property that the
Hillelites made every effort to limit her rights.
(6) Shammaitic custom attached great importance to the
ma'amar or formal betrothal of the widow who was bound to
306 APPENDIX
Levirate marriage (B. Yebamot 5ib). The reason for this is
obvious. Among the patricians and rich prbvincials, it frequently
happened that a man died leaving more than one wife. No one
could predict which of them the Levir would choose as his wife
until he had indicated his selection through some ceremonial.
Hence it became customary for him to offer the wife whom he
intended to espouse some token of tyddushin or betrothal. When
he did this, she was as much his wife as any other betrothed
woman might be. The Talmud points out (B. Yebamot, loc cit.)
that Gamaliel occupied exactly the same position. The fact that
some plebeian teachers expressed moderate sympathy with this
view (ibid.) cannot be offered as evidence, of course, against its
definitely Shammaitic nature.
(7) Like the Shammaites, Gamaliel opposed the admission of
the poor into the academy. The statement cited in the text about
the poor student being compared to the unclean fish is ascribed in
Abot of R. Nathan to Gamaliel the Elder, but this name is fre-
quently used for Gamaliel II (c, e.g., Tosefta Shabbat 7(8) :i8,
p. 119; see reference to parallel passage in Yet:, ibid). But quite
aside from this, Gamaliel's refusal to admit all those "who were- not
within as without" (see p. 128) indicates his opposition to the usual
Hillelite liberality of instruction. This has already been noticed by
Jacob Reifmann, in Bet Talmud IV, 47 ff.
(8) In Appendix II,B, we have indicated that Gamaliel sided
with the patrician Admon in several important recorded decisions.
(9) Finally, there is the evidence adduced in II,B to show
that in the selection of representatives of the two groups, Gamaliel
was always classified as a patrician.
E. COMPARATIVE MONTHLY RAINFALL IN VARIOUS PARTS
OF PALESTINE
My learned friend, Dr. A. Baruch, the government meteorologist
at Tel Aviv, Palestine, has furnished me the following tables of
average monthly rainfall in various parts of Palestine (the amounts
are in millimeters) :
APPENDIX
TABLE II
37
MONTH
COAST
VALLEY OF JEZREEL
Haifa
Tel Aviv
Nazareth
Jerusalem
September
2
26
9 6
l6 3
168
99
61
30
8
3
28
67
162
131
81
47
20
3
o
19
86
180
161
116
94
26
6
0.7
ii
60
146
169
128
104
43
7
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May*
Total for tlS
vear
655
542
688
669
*The amounts in June, July and August arc insignificant.
Jerusalem is thus better watered than the coastal plain and has
almost as much rainfall as Nazareth. Its total of 669 mm. com-
pares very favorably with 420 mm. at Gaza, 615 at Hebron, 487 at
Tiberias, and 440 at Menahmiah.
The tables make it abundantly clear that in October the rainfall
for the Judean lowlands is twice as much as that for Jerusalem.
Hence we find that Eliezer, the scholar of Ludd, holds that on
the first day of Sukkot, i.e., about the fifth of October, one should
begin to insert in the prayer the words: "He who causeth the wind
to blow and the rain to descend." Joshua, living at Jerusalem,
where Sukkot normally should occur. in the dry season, says that
the words are inserted only on the last day of the festival (Mishna
Ta'anit 1:1). While the men of Jerusalem wished for rain as the
winter was about to set in, and made special prayers and cere-
monies for it, since they needed it for drink, they did not want
it to come down till the festival had passed. Its early descent would
not only destroy then* festival booths but would drive all the
visitors back home to complete their farm-labor before the rainy
season started in earnest.
308 APPENDIX
Similarly at Passover, which occurs in Jerusalem before the rainy
season is over, the metropolitan Jews were no longer anxious for
its descent. Their cisterns full, they were fearful that continued
rains would make the pilgrims anxious to hurry away from the
city. They ceased the insertion of the words, "He who causeth
the wind to blow and the rain to descend," on the first day of
Passover, and ceased praying for rain on the last day. But Meir,
representing the rural farmers, who still needed the late rains,
to prevent the burning of their crops under the semi-tropical
sun, says, "One prays for rain until the end of Nisan," fully nine
days after the close of the Passover festival. (Ibid. 1:2). Meir in
this follows the principle laid down by an earlier rural teacher,
Judah ben Bathyra (Yer., ad. loc.,
F. AKIBA'S AND ISHMAEL'S RULES OF INTERPRETATION AND
THEIR DOCTRINES OF THE REVELATION
In his own school, Akiba endeavored to prove the superiority
of his method of interpretation through experiment, as it were.
He would take up various known and recognized decisions, and
ask how they could be derived from Scripture. He would first
indicate possible demonstrations through the traditional rules, and
would refute each of them. He would then triumphantly conclude
by what he considered a convincing and irrefutable argument
according to his own methods. But in the conclave, he preferred
wherever possible to use his opponents' dialectic, so as to beat them
on their own ground. One such argument with Johanan ben Nuri
has been preserved. After Akiba had unsuccessfully tried to prove
his point by methods which Johanan would have accepted, he
suddenly cried out, "You have refuted the logical argument; but
what can you say in reply to the verse itself?" (Sijra Eehu\otai,
pere]( 9:11, 113). Unfortunately, however, what Akiba called the
verse, was his interpretation of it.
One of the greatest tributes to Akiba's brilliance and pedagogic
effectiveness was the curious intrusion of his terminology into the
APPENDIX 309
vocabulary of his opponents. Parallels to this phenomenon can be
cited from other fields of science and learning; but it is extraordi-
nary to find Ishmael speaking of "inclusions" instead of "general-
izations," and several times citing a rule which was invented by
Akiba as support for his argument. For instance, the principle,
en ribui ahar ribui ela lemaet, "two generalizations must be taken
as a limitation," is ascribed to Akiba in Sifra Zav, pere\ 11:4, 34d;
but to Ishmael in Sifre Numbers 124, p. 155, Midrash Tannaim
16:9, p. 93, and 25:3, p. 163. In fact during one argument, Akiba
took advantage of Ishmael's use of his terminology to further his
own side of the debate. "If the verse includes what you admit it
does, it includes also what I find in it," he said (Mishna Shebuot
3 : 5>-
Akiba's use of superfluous letters and words as bases for new
laws necessarily implied that everything found in the Five Books
of Moses was literally dictated by God. This theological doctrine
did not at all surprise the ancients; indeed it was so widely held
that it formed the strongest foundation for Akiba's system. But
Ishmael tried to fortify his position with the assertion that gen-
erally Moses, like the other prophets, received from God only the
substance or idea, which he put. into words. This view was sup-
ported, Ishmael believed, by the fact that sometimes Scripture says,
"This is the word (ha-dabar} which the Lord hath commanded"
(Num. 30:2; Lev. 17:2). These verses indicated that elsewhere
Moses received from God not words, but ideas.
This amazing disagreement between the schools has left unmis-
takable traces in tHe extant tannaitic midrashim. See, e.g., Metylta
of R. Simeon 12:1, p. 6 (and note of Hoffmann, ibid.)i 19:3, p. 94;
20:22, p. 114; Sifra, Ahare, par. 6:2, 83c; Sifre, Numbers 153, p. 198;
Sifre, Deut. 83; Midrash Tannaim 13:2, p. 63; Ibid. 18:15, P JII
From these sources we may infer that the School of Ishmael held
that the revelation of Moses was not essentially different from that
of prophets, except in so far as in specified cases he repeats the
word which came from him, and in those cases he uses the expres-
3IO APPENDIX
sion, "This is the word"; while the School of Akiba held that the
expression, "Thus saith the Lord," whea used by Moses implied
a verbatim quotation, but when used by the prophets had no such
significance.
This difference between the schools is clearly reflected in their
disagreement in the interpretation of Exodus 20:22. Mefylta of
R. Ishmael (Jethro, Bahodesh, chap. 9, Horowitz-Rabin p. 238,
Lauterbach II, p. 274) explains the verse as follows: "Thus
shalt thou say to the children of Israel in the language in which
I speak to thee, in the Holy Language." It is obvious from this
statement that the School of Ishmael believed that the only limi-
tation which God imposed on Moses' words was that they should
be in Hebrew. The School of Akiba, however, as represented in
the Me^ilta of R. Simeon (20:22, p. 114) maintains that the verses
required Moses to speak to the Children of Israel in the precise
words which he received from God. According to this Metylta, he
was required to speak "in the holy language, and in this sense,
and in this order, and with these divisions, and in these sections,
'according to everything which the Lord commanded,' neither
omitting nor adding."
It is true that the Mekilta of R. Ishmael, Jethro, Bahodesh chap. 2,
(Horowitz-Rabin p. 207, Lauterbach II, p. 201, quotes the baraita
in almost exactly the form in which the Metylta of R. Simeon
has it, both here, and in the commentary on 19:3, p. 94. But
there can hardly be a doubt that the correct version of the
baraita of the School of Ishmael is that found in the Metylta of
R. Ishmael, chapter 9, and that the form in chapter 2 has been
changed under the influence of the School of R. Akiba or its texts.
Akiba's insistence that all tradition was implicit in the Holy Writ
led to a fundamental modification of the Pharisaic position regard-
ing the Oral Law. For centuries plebeian scholars had insisted that
their traditions, derived from their teachers through successive gen-
erations leading up to Moses on Mount Sinai, had equal validity
with the Written Law. When they were asked how they justified
APPENDIX 311
the water libations on the Feast of Tabernacles, or whence they
knew that Shabuot occurred on the fiftieth day after the first day
of Passover, or why glass and metal ware should come under the
ordinary rules of Levitical impurity, they said that this was their
tradition; and that ended the discussion. After Hillel had spent a
whole day trying unsuccessfully to prove to the Bene Bathyra that
the Passover sacrifice must be offered even if the fourteenth day of
Nisan occurs on a Sabbath, he scored a victory when he uttered
the words, "This is my tradition from my masters, Shemaya and
Abtalyon!" (Yer. Pesahim 6:1, 333; cf. Tosefta, ibid., 4:1 (n),
p. 162; and B. ibid., 66a.) There could be no further argument.
The Sadducees and the later Pharisaic patricians might ask how it
came about that their teachings had told them nothing of such
unwritten traditions. They might ask themselves inwardly why
these unwritten traditions always took forms which were adapted
to the needs of plebeian Jerusalem, and opposed to the interests
or desires of patricians and provincials, but they could not disprove
what the plebeians asserted to be a fact. What Hillel said to the
Bene Bathyra, "Alas that you have not studied under Shemaya
and Abtalyon!" had doubtless been anticipated by many others
of his sect and faction before him. As one of the sages remarked,
"We do not say to a person who has no evidence, 'Come and
testify,' but to him who has evidence." It became an accepted part
of the Pharisaic theology that their traditions formed an Oral Law,
as authoritative and revealed as the Written Law itself.
But Akiba's efforts to democratize the Law were not at all
helped by this doctrine of the Oral Law, for his rules had no foun-
dation in tradition. It was, as we have observed, this necessity which
had made his methods of interpretation so vital and indispensable a
part of his whole program. But having invented his method to dis-
cover new rules, he also used it to justify the old ones. Hence he no
longer needed the traditional distinction between Written and Oral
Law; everything was either expressed or implied in the script. His
colleagues interpreted the words, "These are the statutes and ordi-
312 APPENDIX
nances and laws (torot) which the Lord made between him and
the children of Israel on Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses" (Lev.
26:46) to mean that "two laws (torot) were given to Israel, the
one in writing, the other orally." But Akiba could not accept this.
"Have we only two torot?" he asked. "There are many torot.
There is the torah of the whole burnt offering, and of the meal
offering, and of the guilt offering, and of the peace offering, and
of impurity." (Sifra Behu\otai, per. 8:12, ii2c.)
G. AKIBA AND THE PRAYER FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD
A number of years ago, I pointed out in the Jewish Quarterly
Review, N.S. XVI (1925), p. 17, that the prayer for the Kingdom
of God in the service of the New Year's Day must have been
added late in the first or early in the second century C.E. The
evidence I then adduced for this was the fact that in Mishna Rosh
Ha-Shanah 4:5, the order of the benedictions on Rosh Ha-Shanah
is given in two variant forms, the one ascribed to Akiba, the other
to Johanan ben Nuri. The two statements are, however, identical,
except in so far as relates to the prayer for the Kingdom of God.
By a critical analysis of the text, I came to the conclusion that
both Akiba and Johanan ben Nuri are citing an older norm,
which knew nothing of any prayer for the Kingdom of God; and
that each of them inserted the mention of that prayer where he
considered it proper. I am now able to offer further evidence in
support of the theory then propounded.
In a baraita cited in B. Rosh Ha-Shanah 323, and found also in
Sifra Emor, par. 11:3, 101 d, Eliezer, describing the prayers of Rosh
Ha-Shanah, makes no mention of Mal\uyot, the prayer for the
Kingdom of God. Akiba, who disagrees with him in some details,
also mentions the prayers but omits any reference to Malfyuyot.
The only conclusion to be drawn from the fact that Akiba fails to
mention the Malfayot in this baraita, while he does mention it in
the statement quoted in the Mishna, is that the Malfyuyot came into
existence sometime during Akiba's lifetime.
APPENDIX 313
H. THE TRAJAN DECLARATION
The singular difficulty which modern historians have experienced
in their attempt to reconstruct the relation of the Emperors Trajan
and Hadrian to the Jews is due to the confused and colored tradi-
tions which have been preserved by both Jewish and Christian
writers. The rabbinic sources of our information about the matter
are as follows:
1. Megillat Ta'anit, ed. Hans Lichtenstein, in Hebrew Union
College Annual VIII-IX 346: "On the twelfth day in it (the month
of Adar) is Tiryon Day."
2. Yer. Ta'anit 2:13, 66a; Megillah 1:6, 7oc: "The day on which
Julianus and Pappus were executed abolished the Tiryon Day."
3. Genesis R. 64:7, p. 710: "In the time of Rabbi Joshua ben
Hananya the Government ordered the Temple to be rebuilt.
Thereupon Julianus and Pappus set up tables from Acre unto
Antioch to supply the needs of those who would return from
exile. The Samaritans, however, said to the Government: 'Let it
be known now unto the king that, if this city is builded and the
walls are finished, they will not pay tribute, impost or toll/ [Ezra
4:13]. . . . He said to them, 'What then shall we do?' They said,
'Send them an order to change the sanctuary from its place, or
to make it five cubits larger, or five cubits smaller, and then they
will of their own accord withdraw.' Thereupon the whole com-
munity gathered into the valley of Rimmon. When they came
together they began to weep, and wished to rebel against the
government. They [the leaders] said, 'Let some wise man arise
and quiet the community. Let Joshua ben Hananya arise, for he
is the sage of the Law.' He thereupon arose and said, 'A lion who
had captured some prey, and caught a bone in his throat, offered
reward to anyone who would remove the bone. An Egyptian crane,
which has a long beak, thereupon came and removed the bone.
When, however, the crane asked for its reward, the lion replied
that it might boast that it had entered the mouth of a lion and
314 APPENDIX
escaped in peace. So,' Joshua concluded, 'it is enough for us that
we came to this people in peace and have escaped in peace.' "
4. SifraEmor pere\ 9:5, ppd; Mefylta o R. Simeon 21:13, P- I2 5>
Semahot 8:15, p. 164; Scholion to Megillat Ta'anit loc. cit.: "When
Trajan seized Julianus and Pappus in Laodicea, he said to them,
'If you belong to the people of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah,
let your God come and save you from my power.' They replied,
however, 'Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were worthy, and
Nebuchadnezzar was fit to have a miracle performed through him.
But you are a wicked king and are unfit to be the instrument of a
miracle. We, too, are deserving of death, and if you fail to slay us
God has many executioners, lions, bears, serpents and scorpions
who will come upon us. But if you slay us, God will demand
our blood at your hands.' It is said that he had no opportunity
to leave the place before there came a pair of officers from Rome
and they broke his head with axes and hatchets."
These traditions, standing alone, would indicate that the promise
to undertake the building was made under Trajan. Nothing less
than such a promise could possibly justify the establishment of a
Trajan Day. The theory that this festival was established in honor
of Trajan's death is clearly contrary to the statement in Yerushalmi,
cited above, that it was abolished because of the execution of
Julianus and Pappus by Trajan. Graetz's theory that Julianus and
Pappus were not actually executed, but were saved by this miracu-
lous intervention from Rome, is clearly opposed to the text he uses.
B. Ta'anit i8b and Semahot 8:15 expressly state they were executed;
and the others imply the fact. It is true that in all the sources
Trajan and Quietus, who was his tool, are confused. Trajan died
with remarkable suddenness, Quietus was executed. The later sages
simply telescoped the two events into one.
Of the Greek and Roman sources, the most important is, of
course, Epiphanius (De Mensuris et Ponderibus 14) who, ad-
mittedly confused in his tradition, yet apparently drew on reliable
records, which he simply failed to interpret correctly. (Cf. W.
APPENDIX 315
Weber, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte d. Kaisers Hadrianus,
p. 205, note 732). He maintains that Hadrian, having arrived in
Jerusalem, planned "to rebuild the city but not the Temple." He
adds a detail, which could hardly have been invented, and yet is
recorded in no other source, that the project was entrusted to
Aquila, the proselyte. All this happened, he says, in the forty-
seventh year after the destruction of the Temple, i.e., in 116-117.
It was then that Hadrian, having reestablished the city, called it
Aelia after himself.
Since we know from Dio Cassius that the rebuilding of Jerusa-
lem and its renaming occurred as a result of Hadrian's visit in
130, it is obvious that we cannot accept Epiphanius's statement as
it stands. It is clear that he has confused the promise to rebuild
the Temple made by Trajan, and the actual rebuilding under
Hadrian. He had a tradition regarding the former, and the latter
was well attested by historians. What more natural than that he
should combine the two, and seek to reconcile the difficulties in
some manner.
The references to the rebuilding of the Temple hi Chrysostom
(Or at. adv. Judaeos, V. 10, Migne, P. G. col. 897), Georg. Cedrenus
(Historiarum Compendium, ed. Bekker, p. 437), and Nicephorus
Callistus (Eccl. Hist. III. 24, Migne, P. G. 145, 944) speak only
of the attempt of the Jews to rebuild the Temple and do not there-
fore come under consideration.
It is doubtful whether the statement in Chronicon Paschale (ed.
Dindorf I, p. 474) that Hadrian, before founding the new city
called after him, destroyed the Temple of the Jews implying that
some progress toward its reconstruction had been made deserves
credence. But if it has any authority at all, it corroborates the
suggestion that an offer had been made to the Jews to rebuild their
sanctuary.
Further evidence that it was Trajan who made the offer is given
in the development of the story in the text. See, however, Graetz,
Geschichte IV, 126, 411 fl; J. Juster, Les Jteifs dans I'Empire
3l6 APPENDIX
Romaine II, 189 ff; Schuerer, 4 Geschichte des jiidischen Voltes I,
671 ff; S. Krauss, Revue d. Etudes Juives 30:211; Lagrange, Le
Messianisme chez les Juifs, p. 309; Derenbourg, Histoire de la Pales-
tine, p. 408 fr.; Volkmar, Einleitung in die Apotyyphen, I, Judith,
p. 83 ff ; B. Bokser, Pharisaic Judaism in Transition, p. 25, note 60.
I. THE IDENTITY OF ISHMAEL's COLLEAGUE, SIMEON
Some mediaeval copyists have identified this Simeon with Simeon
ben Gamaliel, whom they accordingly substituted for him in the
list of the Ten Martyrs (see Metylta, ed. Horowitz-Rabin, p. 313,
variant reading from Yalfat ha-Matyri; cf. also Mahzor Vitry,
p. 544; also the reading of three mss. of Semahot in ed. Higger,
p. 153; Midrash Psalms, ed. Buber, 9:13, 45a; Lament. R. chap. 2,
verse 2). This identification was easily refuted by modern scholar-
ship, but those substituted can hardly be called superior. Simeon
ben Azzai, who is I. H. Weiss's choice, (Dor Dor ve-Dorshav II,
132) is expressly described as having died a natural death (Tosefta
Hagiga 2:3, p. 234, and parallel passages). None of the writers on
the subject have taken notice of the fact that the Simeon mentioned
precedes Ishmael in every list. We must therefore look for a Simeon
who is older than Ishmael. Now, while there were many Simeons
who were younger than Ishmael, or at least inferior to him in
rank, like Ben Zoma, Ben Nannos and Simeon ha-Temani, there
was, so far as our records go, only one in that generation who was
his senior, Simeon ben Nethanel, the disciple of Johanan ben
Zakkai, and the colleague of Eliezer and Joshua.
While this Simeon did not play any very important role in the
history of the hda\a, he did contribute more than is usually
credited to him. For whenever we find the expression "R. Eliezer
and R. Simeon say" we may be certain that the Simeon referred
to is none other than Simeon ben Nethanel. The expression occurs
in Mishna Shefyilim 3:1 and-Bekorot 9:5; Yoma 5:7; Rosh ha-
Shanah 1:1; Yebamot 6:3, 4; Tosejta Yoma 4(3)7, 8, p. 187;
ibid. Menahot 5:14, p. 518.
APPENDIX 317
It is usually assumed that the Simeon referred to in these passages
is Simeon ben Yohai, but obviously he could not be cited so fre-
quently as a colleague of Eliezer, who was his master's master. To
escape this difficulty copyists resorted to the device of writing
Eleazar instead of Eliezer and supposing that Eleazar ben Sham-
mua, Simeon ben Yohai's colleague, is the person intended. But
Eleazar ben Shammua would obviously be mentioned after Simeon
ben Yohai, who was both older and more famous, and not before
him. Other copyists have made the emendation of Eleazar ben R.
Simeon, which is easily proven to be unacceptable.
But we know that Simeon ben Nethanel's views were close to
those of Eliezer, as can be seen from a comparison of Abot 2:13
with Mishna Berafot 3:4. They were related by marriage, and
both were originally am ha-arez. It is altogether natural to suppose
that they would agree on a number of points and would be men-
tioned together, in the order in which they occur. That Simeon
is cited without the appellative, ben Nethanel, need not surprise
us at all. It was doubtless assumed by the compilers of the early
traditions that everyone would understand that the colleague of
Eliezer was his brother-in-law and not some much younger Simeon.
Cf. also Mishna Abot 2:13, where Simeon ben Nethanel is obvi-
ously referred to, and yet cited merely as Simeon. It is probable
that Simeon ben Nethanel is also intended in Mishna Shebiit, 9:5,
where he disagrees with Eliezer, Joshua and Gamaliel II; Mishna
Horiot 1:2 where he disagrees with Eliezer. (There can be no
doubt this is Eliezer ben Hyrkanos since Akiba and Ben Azzai
disagree in the interpretation of his words; Simeon's view is given
before that of Eliezer in order to bring the latter in immediate"
conjunction with the commentaries of these later scholars). In
Mishna Negaim 14.9 = Sifra Mezora, per. 3:11, he again disagrees
with Eliezer.
FOOTNOTES
I. THE GRAVE ON THE HILLTOP
1. Jewish War, II.p.i; Antiquities XVIII.2.3; Yer. Shebiit 9.8.
2. Yer., ibid.
3. The older legend places Akiba's grave in Caesarea (Midrash Mishle,
chap. 9).
4. B. Sanhedrin 86a.
5. Numbers R., Naso, chap. 9; Befyrot 583.
II. IN THE DEPTHS
1. Quoted by Philo, Legatio ad Gaium 36(281), ed. Cohn et Reiter,
VI,2o6; cf. also ibid. 31(216), p. 196; and In Flaccum 7(46), p.
128, line 27 (same volume).
2. Mishna Shetydim 4.2 ff.
3. Mishna Yoma i.i.
4< B. Sanhedrin nb; Tosefta, ibid. 2.6, p. 416; cf. Midrash Tannaim
26.13, P- J 76-
5. B. Pesahim 88b.
6. Mishna Bi1$urim 3.4.
7. B. Ketubot 173.
8. Mishna Sota/j 7.8.
9. Acts 5.34.
10. B. Sanhedrin 2oa.
11. B. Ketubot 49b.
12. 5. 50 j&tfra 9ib. For the normal price of grain in Palestine see
Krauss, Talmud. Archaeologie p. 378, and note 449, on p. 700; cf.
also Mishna Peak 8.7; Erubin 8.2; Baba Mezia 5.1, all of which
imply that four seahs for a sela is the normal price. In B. Baba Batra
913, the price of two seahs for a sela is declared as that of a famine,
justifying emigration from Palestine. See also II Kings 7.7, and com-
mentaries.
13. B. Baba Batra 2ia.
14. Dalman, Arbeit u. Sitte in Palaestina, III, 154 ff .
319
32O FOOTNOTES
15. Olmstead, History of Palestine and Syria, p. 46 ff.; see also Nelson
Glueck, "Recent Archaeological Work in Palestine," Yearbook of
the Central Conference of American Rabbis, XXXIX, 3 f .
1 6. Some evidence to support this statement so far as the Rabbinical
period is concerned, is presented in Appendix I, A. Regarding the
earlier periods, Professor W. F. Albright writes me as follows:
"I cannot find any definite statement by myself or any other
scholar of competence to the effect that the hill-country of ancient
Palestine was poorer than the Coastal Plain and the Plain of
Jezreel. Yet there can be no doubt that this was true in nearly
all periods. In the fourth and the early third millennium B.C.E. we
find the hill-country very thinly occupied in comparison with the
plains; cf. my observations in the Journal of the Palestine Oriental
Society, VIII (1928), 251 and the references in notes 2 and 4. Sub-
sequent excavations and discoveries have fully confirmed this pic-
ture. The hill-country was, in fact, largely wooded down to the
beginning of the Iron Age, when the Israelites occupied it more
intensively. In the Iron Age, from 1200 to 600 B.C.E., we find the
same difference between the wealth and prosperity of the hill-
country and of the Coastal Plain. By this time, however, the pros-
perity of the latter is no longer dependent upon a comparatively
small maritime trade and sporadic caravan traffic, in addition to
the rich grain fields, but is supported largely by a vastly expanded
sea traffic. There continues to be a striking difference between the
wealth of towns in the Coastal Plain and in the hill-country, as
illustrated by excavations."
17. Cf. Kittel, Gesch. des Voltes Israel II, 56 ff; Olmstead, History of
Palestine and Syria, p. 127; Cambridge Ancient History, IV, 60 ff;
Weber, Religionssoziologie, III, pp. 27, 63.
1 8. See above, notes 15 and 16.
19. Krauss, Talmudische Archaeologie I, 19 ff.
20. Ibid. I, p. 122; for a further discussion, see Jeremias, Jerusalem II
A, p. 38.
21. Sifre Deut. 76; Tosefta Arafyn 4.27, p. 548; B. Huttin 843.
22. Tosefta and Hullin, ibid.
23. Mishna Berafot 6.8.
24. B. Nedarim
FOOTNOTES 321
25. This explains the controversy between the Schools of Shammai and
Hillel regarding the necessity of inserting fringes in a "sheet" which
is used as a garment. The Shammaites, being the wealthier class,
did not use linen garments for daily wear and considered them free
from the law of fringes; the Hillelites, among whom the use of a
linen sadin as a garment was usual, believed that it ought to be
treated like any other garment (see Mishna Eduyot 4.10).
2.6. B. Nedarim, ibid.
27. Mishna Hallah 2.3.
28. Yer. Sanhedrin 7.19, 52d. The games there described as being played
in Rome were obviously known in Palestine.
29. A legend widely repeated in medieval works (Mafteah of R. Nissim,
BeraJ^ot 2,jb; Menorat Ha-Maor III-5, 3b; Yohasin, s.v. Afybd) trac-
ing Akiba's ancestry to the Canaanite general, Sisera, is of course
without foundation.
30. Abot 5.2.1.
31. Cf. Mishna Baba Batra 6.4.
32. See Appendix II, C.
33. B. Pesahim 49b.
34. B. Ketubot 62b; Nedarim 503; Yer. Shabbat 6.1; Abot of R. Nathan,
chap. 6 (i4bff).
35. Mishna Yadaim 3.5.
36. B. Ketubot 633.
37. Yer. Shabbat 6.1, 7d; ibid. Sotah 9.16, 24c; B. Shabbat 59b; ibid.
Nedarim 503.
38. Leviticus R. 7.3.
39. See Guedemann, Erziehungswesen d. Juden I, pp. 50, 272; also
Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages *, p. 351.
40. Abot of R. Nathan, I, chap. 6; II, chap. 12; i4b, 153.
41. Tosefta Par ah 3.8, p. 632.
42. See Budde, "The Nomadic Ideal in the Old Testament," in New
World, December, 1895; published in German in an expanded form
in Preussiche Jahrbucher, 1896; and Flight, "The Nomadic Idea
and Ideal in the Old Testament," in Journal of Biblical Literature,
42 (1923), 158 ff. .
43. See above, notes 15 and 16.
44. Compare Dalman, Arbeit u. Sitte in Palaestina, I.i, p. 41.
322 FOOTNOTES
45. Max Weber, Religionssoziologie III, 37; M. Lurje, Studien zur
Gesch. d. Wirtschaftlichen u. sozialen Verhdltnisse im Israel.-jud.
Reiche, p. 16; and cf. Genesis 4.17,20-22; where the origin of cities is
ascribed to the landless nomads who were related to the itinerant
smiths and artisans. See also commentaries, ad loc.
46. Sifre Deut. 352, 1453.
47. Cf. Abot i.i.
48. For a thoroughgoing and convincing discussion of his date and
identity see G. F. Moore, in Jewish Studies in Memory of Israel
Abrahams, p. 348 ff .
49. Abot 1.2.
50. See Josephus, Antiquities XII.3.3. See also Appendix II, A.
51. The most curious instance of this preference for Greek names is
that of Alexander Jannaeus's wife, whose name in Hebrew was
Shelomit. This was Graecized into Salampsio. The poor Jews, unable
to pronounce this strange word, and yet apparently not daring to call
her Shelomit, corrupted the name still further into Shelemtzia, She-
lentzia, and similar forms. The name was apparently characteristic
of priestly families (Klein, Judisch-palaestinisches Corpus Inscrip-
tionum, p. 12).
52. For this, see further M. Katzenelson, in Monatsschrift f. Gesch.
u. Wisssenschaft d. Judentums, 1899, p. i; 1900, p. 433.
53. Mishna Yebamot 1.4.
54. B. Erubin i3b.
55. See Appendix II, B.
56. This Passover was remembered for generations as "the Passover
of crushing" because so many pilgrims were crushed to death on it
(B. Pesahim, 64b).
57. B. Shabbat IJSL.
58. Ibid. Another reference to Shammaitic ascendancy at this time may
be found in Tosefta Shebiit 3.10, p. 64.
59. Tosefta Hagiga 2.11, p. 236.
60. B. Sanhedrin na, bottom.
61. Mishna Erubin 6.1.
62. B. Baba Mezia 59b.
63. Tosefta Aboda Zara 3.10, p. 464. For Rabban Gamaliel, there, we
must read Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel; Simeon ben Nethanel
FOOTNOTES 323
could hardly have been old enough to marry while Gamaliel was
still living.
64. Tosefta Yoma 1.6, p. 180; Sifra Emor, par. 2.1, 940; Josephus, War
IV. 3 .8.
65. Compare Mishna Bezah 2.6.
66. Mishna Abot 1.15.
67. Ibid. 1.17.
68. Ibid.
69. Mishna Keritot 1.8.
70. Life 38.
71. War 11.20.3.
72. Mishna Shabbat chap, i, end; Babli and Yerushalmt, ad loc.; Graetz,
Geschichte der Juden III, 2, p. 802 ff; cf. also Menorah Journal,
1936, p. 143.
73. This is certainly implied in Josephus's Life 38. The omission of any
reference to Simeon in War 11.20.4, must be intentional.
74. The right of the priests to the tithes was open to some question;
., see below, p. 83.
75. Josephus's statement that John was "poor at the opening of his
career" (War II.2i.i) is contradicted by his own statement (Life 10)
which represents John as one of the leading citizens of Gishcala be-
fore the revolution, and an adherent of the upper-class peace party.
This has been noted by Simhoni, in his notes to the Hebrew trans-
lation of Josephus, p. 445.
76. War 111.5.8; see also Laqueur, Der jiid. Histori^er, p. 126 f., and
and Thackeray's masterful treatment of the whole subject in
Josephus, The Man and the Historian, p. 25 ff.; as well as his Intro-
duction to Josephus, War, Bks. I-III, in the "Loeb Classical Library,"
p. x.
77. Josephus, War 1. 1.2.
78. Sifre Deut. 357, 1503.
79. Mishna Sanhedrin 5.2.
80. Abot of R. Nathan II, chap. 31 (343).
81. Midrash Tannaim, p. 58.
82. Midrash Tannaim 20.8, p. 120; cf. Sifre Deut. 192, uoa.
83. See below, p. 257.
84. Abot 2.8.
324 FOOTNOTES
85. B. Rosh Ha-Shanah i8a.
86. Y<?r. Shabbat 16, end, 156.
87. Abot 2.8.
88. B. Pesahim 26a; cf. Lamentations R., Proemium 12.
89. Metylta Jethro, Bahodesh, chap, n, 743, Horowitz-Rabin p. 244,
Lauterbach II, p. 290.
90. According to tradition (Sifre Deut. 357, 1503), he must have
been more than one hundred years old at this time, for it is said
that he was 120 years old when he died, about fourteen years later.
But this is doubtless an extravagance, intended to emphasize the
resemblance between Johanan and Moses. The same is true regard-
ing the similar tradition about Akiba (ibid.) and that current in
the early Christian community about Symeon son of Clopas, the
second Bishop of Jerusalem (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 111.32).
91. See B. Gittin 563; Lamentations R. 1.31.
92. Josephus, War IV.6.3- The surrender of Johanan must be placed
in the spring or summer of the year 68, before the siege of
Jerusalem had actually begun, but after Vespasian had made all
preparations for the final attack. The tradition which makes Johanan
surrender to Vespasian rather than to Titus is thus verified. The
fact that the news of the revolt in the West reached Palestine
soon after Johanan's surrender naturally laid the basis for the
legend that it was Johanan rather than Josephus who prophesied
Vespasian's election as Emperor.
93. See Josephus, War 1.1.2; and 11.16.4; cf. also Thackeray, Josephus,
The Man and the Historian, p. 28. The same condition, of course,
encouraged the rebels a generation earlier; cf. Philo, Legatio ad
Gaium 31(216), ed. Cohn et Reiter, VI, p. 196.
94. Cf. ibid. VI.2.i; and VI.6-3. The statement of the fourth century
writer, Sulpicius, who maintains that Titus was in favor of the
conflagration, cannot be accepted in view of these statements of
Josephus, who would hardly dare misrepresent his patron's views.
See Wilhelm Weber, Josephus u. Vespasian 72 f; cf. however,
Thackeray, op. tit., p. 48; and introduction to his edition and
translation of the War, in "Loeb Classical Library," p. xxv.
95. Mishna Rosh Ha-Shanah 4.1; Babli, ad. loc.
96. Abot of R. Nathan, chap. 4, na.
FOOTNOTES 325
97. R. Berafot 28b.
98. Ibid.
III. AMONG THE FOOTHILLS
1. This is implied in the fact that neither Johanan ben Zakkai nor
Gamaliel II is mentioned in connection with Akiba's first appli-
cation for admission as student; see Ginzberg, art. Akiba, in Jewish
Encyclopedia.
2. Sifre Deut. 41.
3. Yer. Yebamot 4.12, 6a. B. Baba Mezia 853; Tosefta Ketubot 5.1,
p. 266.
4. Yer. Sotah, end; B. Sanhedrin na; Canticles R. on chap. 8.9.
5. Sifra Emor, par. 1.12; Semahot 4.6, p. 117; B. Zebahim looa.
6. B. Gittin 563; Yebamot i5b. This is implied in Zadok's observance
of the Hillelite severity though he was a Shammaite.
7. B. Ta'anit 2ia.
8. In the Babylonian Talmud he is called Papus; See Mefylta Beshallah,
Massenet Vayehi, chap. 6, Horowitz-Rabin p. 112, Lauterbach I,
p. 247; B. BeraJ^ot 6ib.
9. Yer. Sotah 9.10 (cf. also B. Baba Kamma Sob).
10. B. Bera\ot zjb', cf. also B. Yebamot i6b; Yer. ibid., chap, i, end;
B. Hagiga 33.
11. Yer. Hagiga 2.1, 77b.
12. Mishna Berafyt 1.3; Tosefta, ibid., 1.4, p. i.
13. Mishna Shabbat 19.1; From Mishna Pesahim 6.2 it is obvious that
Joshua, as well as Akiba, disagrees with Eliezer in his view.
14. Mishna Shabbat 1.9.
15. See Appendix I, C.
16. B. Shabbat 193.
17. Cf. Harvard Theological Review, XXII, p. 219. For similar Sham-
maitic views, cf. B. Kiddushin 433, where Shammai declares that
the agent's personality merged with that of the principal.
18. Cf. Genesis 1.27; 5.2; 9.6; Lev. 25.6,7,10,42,55; Deut. 29.9,10,11; Job
3.19; 31.13,14,15.
19. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 3, 7b.
20. Metylta of R. Simeon 16.4, p. 75.
21. This particular part of Akiba's life, his relation to Eliezer, Joshua,
and Tarfon has to be reconstructed from scattered references in the
326 FOOTNOTES
talmudic works, and from what we know of the general character
of the men.
22. Yer. Shabbat 6.1.
23. In B. Ketubot 62b, the time is given, in the usual exaggerated
form, as twelve years.
24. For a record of the institution during the Middle Ages, see
Guedemann, Erziehungsivesen d. Juden I, 267 ff.
25. B. Ketubot 620.
26. Sifre Num. 99, p. 98.
27. Abot of R. Nathan, chap. 6, 153.
28. Ibid.
29. Leviticus R. 34.16; Pesifya Rabbati 25, 1260; Massenet Kallah, end,
ed. Higger, pp. 156, 207.
30. Yer. Nazir, 7.1, 563; Semahot 4.19, p. 125; Dere^ Erez, in Higger,
Massetyot Dere\ Erez, 7.6, p. 131.
31. Semahot 9.3, p. 169.
32. Tosefta Shebiit 4.21, p. 67; y<?r. Bi^fytrim 2.5, 650; *&W. ifo^
Ha-Shanah 1.2, 57a; 5. jRo^A Ha-Shanah 143.
33. &"/*(? Numbers 75, p. 70; Yer. Yoma i.i 38d; jfoV. Megillah 1.12,
72b; */W. Horayot, chap. 3, 47d; cf. also Sifra Nedaba par. 4.5;
Tosefta Zebahim 1.8, p. 480; *&V. Mifyaot 1.19, p. 654; Yer.
Terumot 8.2, 45b; B. Kiddushin 66b; *&W. Zebahim 133.
34. ;4o2 o/ 7?. Nathan chap. 6, 153.
35. Nehemiah 10.393, which contradicts both 10.38, and 10.39^
36. Cf. Numbers i8.8ff; Sifre Num. 119, p. 142, where the twenty-four
priestly emoluments are enumerated.
37. Josephus, Life 12 (63); 15 (80); Against Apion 1.22 (188);
Antiquities ^.4.3. So also Jubilees 13.25; but contrast Tobit 1.6.
A complete list of references can be found in Strack-Billerbeck,
Kommentar z. N.T., IV, 656 F.; cf. also E. Kaufmann in Ziyyunim,
(memorial volume for Simhoni), p. 101.
38. See Leviticus 21.1 if.
39. B. Yebamot 86b; Yer. Ma'aser Sheni 5.5, 56b.
40. Cf. Yer. Shebiit 4.2, 35b; B. Yebamot 153; Mishns Berafot 1.3.
41. Mishna MaJ(J(ot i.io.
42. Mishna Menahot 12.5; Sifra Nedaba par. 8.7, 9b.
43. Cf. Loew, Die Flora der Juden, II, p. 289; Dalman, Arbeit u. Sitte
FOOTNOTES 327
in Palaestina IV, 177 ft; Krauss, Talmudische Archaeologie, II, 216;
Felix Goldmann, Der Olbau in Palaestina zur Zeit der Mishnah,.
p. 6; and see Gen. 49.20; Deut. 33.24; Sifre Deut. 355, 147!); 1483;
Midrash Tannaim, ad loc. p. 220-21; Mishna Menahot 8.3; Tosejta
ibid. 9.5, p. 526; B. ibid. 85b; Josephus, War II.2I.2.
44. B. Shabbat ija.
45. Ibid. 263.
46. Mishna Terumot 9.2.
47. Mishna Yebamot 15.7.
48. Mishna Keritot 5.2; Sifra Hobah, par. 12.1, 26b.
49. Cf., e.g., Mishna Shebiit 3.10.
50. Metylta Jethro Amale\, chap. 2, Horowitz-Rabin p. 198; Lauterbach
II, p. 183.
51. B. Sanhedrin 5ib.
52. B. Pesahim 22b; Tosejta Shebuot 1.7, p. 446; of Y<?r. BeraJ(ot 9.7;
Y\ Sata^ 5.7.
53. S/'/tt? Zutta 6.12, p. 243; Mishna Nazir 7.4.
IV. THE STEEP ASCENT
1. Mishna Pesahim 6.1; Babli and Yerushalmi, 6.4, 330; Tosejta ibid.
5.1, p. 163; &'/re Z##0 9.2, p. 257.
2. Cf., e.g., Tosejta She\alim 3.17, p. 179.
3. &'/rtf Zutta 19.16, p. 312.
4. Mishna Pesahim 9.2; Tosejta, ibid. 8.2, p. 168; &'/re Num. 69, p. 64;
&'/r<? Zutta 9.13, p. 260.
5. B. Sutyah zjb.
6. Mefylta Bo, Pisha, chap. 17, Horowitz-Rabin, p. 69; Lauterbach I,
p. 157; Mefylta of R. Simeon 13.10, p. 35; cf. the reading of
Yer. Erubin 10.1, where, as frequently happens, the name of Hillel
has been substituted for that of Shammai.
7. Mefylta of R. Simeon, loc. cit. In B. Menahot 36!), the opposite
view is ascribed to Akiba in another controversy with Jose the
Galilean; but the reading of the Palestinian Metylta of R. Simeon
must be given preference.
8. See above, p. 85.
9. Some such half observance of the law on the part of the am ha-arez
328 FOOTNOTES
is implied in Mishna Kelim 9.2; Okalot 5.1,2,3,4; see commentaries
there and the illustrating discussion in Toseffa Ohalot 5.11, p. 603.
10. Mishna Eduyot 4.6; cf. B. Yebamot i5b; and B. Shabbat iya.
11. Sifra She-mini, par. 8.5, 55b; B. Pesahim i6a.
12. B. Sulfath zjb.
13. Mishna Eduyot 8.4.
14. B. Baba Mezia 8ib.
15. Jubilees 49.10.
1 6. B. Berafot 9a; Metylta Bo, Pisha, chap. 6, Horowitz-Rabin p. 19,
Lauterbach I, p. 46; ibid. chap. 5, Horowitz-Rabin pp. 17-18,
Lauterbach I, p. 42; ibid. chap. 18, Horowitz-Rabin p. 74, Lauter-
bach I, p. 167; Metylta of R. Simeon 12.8, p. 11; Sifre Deut. 133;
Yer. Bera^ot 1.3; cf. also Mishna Pesahim 1.9 and Babli, ad loc.
i2oa; where the opinion of the patricians is assumed as basis for
an anonymous norm.
17. Cf. also Tosefta Pesahim 10.12, p. 173 where Gamaliel is reported
to have remained awake all the night of Passover. But obviously in
this he followed the Hillelite tradition; cf. also Mishna Berafot i.i.
1 8. Mishna Berafyt i.i. For Akiba's view, see B. Berafyt 7b. In
Tosefta, ibid, i.i, and Yer. ibid. 1.3, Simeon is cited as authority
for the statement, but Babli shows that he only transmitted Akiba's
opinion.
19. Mishna Peak 7.7; Sifra, Kedoshim, per. 3.1, 88a.
20. Sifre Deut. ad loc.; B. Yebamot 47b; Semahot 6.13, p. 141.
21. Mefylta of R. Simeon 13.5, p. 32.
22. Mefylta Bo, Pisha, chap. 14, Horowitz-Rabin, p. 48, Lauterbach I,
p. 108; Sifra, Emor, pere\ 17.11, io3b; the reading of which is
to be accepted in preference to that found in B. Su^ah nb.
23. Mishna Su^ah 1.6; 2.3; 2.7.
24. Mishna Sotah 9.3,4.
25. Sifra, Shemini, Miluim, 35, 45d.
26. Sifre 2,av, par. 8.1, 363; ibid. Shemini, per. 10.5,6, 55c; et al.
27. Yer. Yebamot 13.2, i4c; Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 16, 323;
compare Ginzberg, Eine Vnbe\annte Jiidische Sefye, p. 32.
28. B. Ta'anit 25b; Yer. ibid. 3.4, 66c.
29. Sifre Deut. 32, 73b; Metylta, Jethro, Bahodesh chap. 10, Horowitz-
Rabin p. 241, Lauterbach II, p. 281; B. Sanhedrin loia.
FOOTNOTES 329
30. Cf. Mishna Pesahim 9.6; Yebamot 8.4.
31. Mishna Sotah 5.2; Sifra Shemini par. 7.12, 54b.
32. Mishna Nedarim 10.6; B. ibid. 74b.
33. Yer. Horayot 3.7, 483; Leviticus R. 5.4; Deuteronomy R. 4.8.
34. Yer. Pesahim 2.7, 290.
35. Mishna Beforot 4.4.
36. Tosefta Mikyaot 1.17, p. 653; J5. Kiddushin 66b.
37. Tosefta Ma\shirin 2.14, p. 675; Y<?r. Sota# 6.1, 2ia.
38. ^4^o/ o/ J?. Nathan I, chap. 26, 4ib. Cf. the text in Abot of R.
Nathan II, chap. 33, 363, and Mishna Abot 3.13, which have been
used as a basis for emending the superior text of Abot R. Nathan I.
39. Mishna Abot 4.25; Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 24, 39a.
40. B. Baba Kamma 74b.
41. S//r<? Deut. 16, 68b.
42. 7zW.
43. Leviticus R. 23.4.
44. Sijra, Kedoshim, pereJ^ 4.9; Arafyn i6b; and cf. &'/re Deut. i,
where the story is softened.
45. See Appendix II, D.
46. Reifmann in Bet Talmud IV, p. 47, notices the contrast between
Gamaliel's actions and the teachings of the Hillelites in this matter.
47. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 40, 643.
48. Mishna Sotah 9.15. "Since the Temple has been destroyed, the
scholars have become as the scribes, the scribes as the court assistants,
and the court assistants like the peasants."
49. B. Berafyt i6b; Yer. Sutyah 2.1, 54d; Midrash Proverbs 9.21;
Metylta Bo Pisha, chap. 17, Horowitz-Rabin p. 68, Lauterbach I,
p. 154; Semahot i.n, p. 101; Yer. Niddah 1.5, 49b; Mishna Suf$ah
2.1.
50. B. Sanhedrin 10^0.
51. Tosefta Baba Kamma 9.30, p. 366; B. Shabbat i5ib; Yer. Baba
Kamma 8.10, 6c.
52. B. Sanhedrin na; Yer. ibid. 1.2, i8c; Semahot 8.7, p. 152.
53. Sifre Numbers 4, p. 7; Sifre Zutta 5.10, p. 237; B. Baba Kamma
1133; Tosefta, ibid. 10.17, p. 368; Yer. ibid. 9.15, 73; Yer. Aboda
Zara 2.4, 4ib. It is obvious that Akiba's removal to Zifron was not
simply a trip like that to Nahardea, since his views are said to
33O FOOTNOTES
have changed during that time, and since it is used as a special
date in his life. I believe that the whole situation justifies the
conjectures made in the text.
54. Cant. R. chap. i. This interpretation of the exclamation sounds
more reasonable than the supposition that Akiba was simply outside
the physical walls of the academy.
55. Mishna Rosh Ha-Shanah 2.8,9.
56. See Mishna Rosh Ha-Shanah 1.6, B. ibid. 22a; Yer. ibid. 57b.
57. Tosefta Berafot 4.15, p. 10; compare also Tosefta Demai 6.24, p. 56.
58. B. Baba Mezia 5pb; Yer. Moed Katan 3.1, 8id.
59. A similar controversy arose with regard to the purification of
metalware, which was also used by the wealthy but uncommon
among the poor; see Mishna Kelim 14.7. It is interesting that in
these instances Eliezer is lenient, although generally he, like his
brother Shammaites, inclined toward rigorous interpretations of
the Law.
60. Mishna Eduyot 5.6.
61. Be\orot 363.
62. B. Bcrafyt vfQ\ Yer. ibid. 4.1, 7c; Ta'anit 4.1, 67d.
63. Mishna Sotah 5.2; Yadaim 4.1 ff; and commentaries ad loc.; B.
Berafyot, loc. cit.
64. Yer. Yebamot chap, i, end, 3b; Ibid. Sotah 3.3, i9a (in the name
of R. Johanan) "the voice announcing that the decision was with
the Hillelites was uttered in Yabneh." The story of the visit of the
scholars to Dosa shows that this decision was not reached before
the removal of Gamaliel.
65. Mishna Eduyot 1.5.
66. B. Berafot 28a; Yer. ibid. 4.1, 7d.
67. For the number thirty-two, see Tosefta Mityaot, end, p. 661; Yer.
Yebamot i.i, 2c; Sotah 2.5, i8b; Kiddushin 3.5, 643. For the
increase to seventy-two at this time, see Mishna Yadaim 3.5.
68. Tosefta Kelim Baba Batra 2.4, p. 592. Eighty-five names are attached
to the pronouncement recorded in Nehemiah, chaps. 9 and 10.
69. The office of ha\am, later held by Meir, (B. Horayot i3b), may
originally have been created for Eleazar, or it may have existed
from still earlier times, and Eleazar now appointed to fill it.
70. B. Niddah
FOOTNOTES 331
71. Mishna Ma'aser Sheni 2.6; Keritot 3.7; Negaim 7.4; Sifra Hobah,
pereJ^ 1.8.
72. Yer. Pesahim, chap. 4, end, 3ib; B. Kiddushin 273; Mishna Ma'aser
Sheni 5.9.
73. Yef. P#zA 4.6, i8c; z&W. 8.6, 2ia; ibid. Ma'aser Sheni 5.6, 560.
74. See B. Yebamot p8a; 121 a; *&W. JRo/A Ha-Shanah 26a; Yer. Yebamot
chap. 1 6, i5<i. Whether he went to Media is doubtful; cf. Bera\ot
8a, but see Ginzberg, article "Akiba," in Jewish Encyclopedia.
75. Tanhumah, ed. Buber, Naso, par. 13, i6a.
76. B. Berafyt 6ob.
77. Yer. Pesahim chap. 4, end, 3ib; Esther R. 2.3.
78. ^4^o/ o/ R. Nathan I, chap. 3, 93; Ecclesiastes R. u.i.
79. B. Yebamot i2ia; Yer. Yebamot chap. 16, i5d.
80. Metylta Bo, Pisha chap. 18, Horowitz-Rabin p. 73, Lauterbach I,
p. 166; Yer. Kiddushin 1.7, 6ia; anonymously in Tosefta ibid, i.n,
p. 336 and B. 2&W. 293.
81. B. Shabbat i$6b. The biblical zeda\ah meaning righteousness came
to be interpreted as "charity" in rabbinic times, for the gifts of
the poor were considered their just due. The literal translation
of the verse is, "Righteousness delivereth from death."
82. Canticles Zutta 1.15, p. 19.
83. Ibid., p. 17.
84. Midrash Psalms 65.4, 1573.
85. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 3, 8a.
86. B. Pesahim 112.3..
87. B. Ketubot 5oa; Arafcn 283; compare Yer. Peah i.i, i$b.
88. Abot of R. Nathan II, chap. 12, 153; B. Yebamot 62b, and Ketubot
633.', Genesis R. 61.3, p. 660; Ecclesiastes R. to chap, n.6; but Tan-
humah, Hayye Sarah, par. 6, ed. Buber, par. 8, 6ib, give the number
as three hundred.
V. ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA AND HIS SCHOOL
i. There are numerous references to this voyage. Cf, Mishna Ma'aser
Sheni 5.9; Erubin 4.1; Tosefta Yom Tob 2.12, p. 204 (according
to reading of ed. pr. and Ms. Vienna); Sifra Emor, per. 16.1, 1023;
B. Su^ah 233; ibid. 4ib; B. Ma^ot 243; Sifre Deut. 43; Lament. R.
33 2 FOOTNOTES
chap. 5, on verse 18; Yer. Erubin chap, i, 19!); Sul&ah 2.4,
Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 14, 32a.
2. The two journeys must not be confused; for Eliezer ben Hyrkanos
who was a member of the first, being at the tune the foremost
scholar in the academy, did not accompany the second, which left
for Rome after his excommunication. See B. Horayot ica (the inci-
dent narrated there must have occurred before Johanan ben Nuri's
appointment as overseer, and hence before Akiba's earliest days
in the academy); Genesis R. 13.9, p. 118; Deut. R. 2.24; Yer.
Sanhedrin 7.19, 52d. It is especially noteworthy that in the records
of this voyage, Eliezer and Joshua are mentioned before Gamaliel,
who was not yet Nasi. It must have been on this first trip, too,
that Joshua discovered the young Jewish captive whom he redeemed
and who later became a prominent scholar. A child taken captive
in the year 70 would have been quite a mature man by the time
of Akiba's visit in 95; but in the year 80, he would be just about
the age implied in the story (Tosefta Horayot 2.5, p. 476; Yer. ibid.
3.7, 48b; B. Gittin 583; Lamentations R. chap. 4, on verse 2).
3. Mishna Erubin 4.1; B. ibid. 433; Yer. ibid. 4.1, 2id.
4. B. Ta'anit JSL.
5. Tosefta Aboda Zara 6(7). 7, p. 479; B. ibid. 54b.
6. Exodus R. 30.9.
7. See Thackeray, Josephus, The Man and the Historian, p. 35.
8. See War IV.5.2; contrast Pesahim 573, "Woe unto me for the
House of Hanan, woe unto me of their whisperings!" See also
Josephus's own description of Hanan in Antiquities XX.9.i; and
Life 39. See notes of Simhoni to the Hebrew translation of
Josephus, p. 442; and Thackeray, op. cit, p. 135.
9. Thackeray, op. cit. p. 65.
10. Ibid. p. 14.
11. War 111.9.5.
12. Thackeray, op. cit. p. 52.
13. Ibid. p. 16.
14. Contrast War II.8.2 ff. with Antiquities XVIII.i.3 fl.
15. See above, Note 8.
16. Thackeray, op. cit. p. 100 ff.
17. Antiquities 1.12.7.
FOOTNOTES 333
1 8. Ibid. X.n.7. .
19. Cf., e.g., his revised version of the events in the cave of Jotapata,
War III.8.7 "He, however, (should one say by fortune or by the
Providence of God?) was left alone with one other." See also An-
tiquities, X.i i. 7, end.
20. Peroration to the Antiquities.
21. Ibid, and Against Apion I.p.
22. Peroration to Antiquities.
23. Against Apion 11.38.
24. Dere\ Erez R. chap. 5, in Higger Massetyot Dere\ Erez, Pir\e
Ben Azzai, chap. 3, p. 183 ff. For the identification with Josephus,
see Revue des iLtudes Juives 23, p. 318; 36, p. 309; Monatsschrift
1877, p. 355; Bruell, Jahrbucher, 4, p. 41; Vogelstein-Rieger,
Geschichte d. Juden in Rom, I, p. 29 note 3.
25. Sifre Deut. 43.
26. Tosefta Yotn Tob 2.12 p. 204.
27. Sijre Deut. 357, 1503.
28. B. Gittin 673; Abot of R. Nathan chap. 18, 343.
29. Mishna Megittah i.4ff. Other such compilations occur in Mishna
Kiddushin i.jfi., Hullin 1.48.; Arafyn 2.1 F; Niddah 6.2 F. For
the demonstration that the form is of ancient origin, see Ginzberg
in Hoffmann Festschrift, p. 311 F.
30. Cf. J. Brill, Mebo Ha-Mishnah, p. 118.
31. Mishna Sanhedrin 3.4; Tosefta Ma'aser Sheni 2.1, p. 88; 2.12,
p. 89; (cf. Yer. ibid. 3.7, 54b); Tosefta Ara^in 5.15, p. 550.
32. Cf. e.g., Mishna Gittin 9.10; Kelim 2.0.6.
33. Thus, for example, Mishna Hullin 3.1, in which pesuJ(at ha-gargeret
(an animal whose trachea has been torn from its throat) is listed as
terefah, follows the view held by Akiba in Mishna Hullin 2.4, and
there opposed by Yeshebab. We know from that Mishna that
Akiba ultimately accepted Yeshebab's opinion, yet the form of
Mishna Hullin 3.1 retains his earlier view. It is obvious from
Tosefta Hullin 2.9, p. 502, that Yeshebab gave his opinion "in the
name of Joshua" after Joshua ben Hananya had died, i.e., when
Akiba was an old man. This is thus one of the instances where we
can actually date a Mishna; Mishna Hullin 3.1 was formulated
in Akiba's middle age.
334 FOOTNOTES
34. The same applied to the text of the prayers, which were likewise
memorized, as I have shown in Jewish Quarterly Review, N.S. XIX,
p. 211 f!.
35. Sifre Deut. 48.
36. B. Menahot zgb.
37. B. Aboda Zara 5a.
38. See Canticles R. chap. 8, on verse 2; Lament. R., Proemium 23;
Ecclesiastes R. chap. 6, on verse 2; and chap. 12, on verse 7; and
Epiphanius, Adversus Haereses xxxiii.p and xv, end.
39. R. Johanan; B. Sanhedrin 86a.
40. Pesitya of R. Kahana, Parah, 3pb; Pesitya Rabbati 14, ed. Fried-
mann 640.
41. B. Bera\ot 433.
42. B. Sotah end; Tosefta ibid. 15.3, p. 321; compare Mishna ibid. 9.15
and Y<?r. ibid, end, 24c; compare also Yer. She\alim 5.1, 48c.
43. Midrash Mishle, chap. 9, 3ib; Midrash Eleh Ez\erah in Yellinek,
Bet. Ha-Midrash II, 67 f., and Eisenstein, Ozar Ha-Midrashim, II,
44*-
44. B. Erubin 46b.
45. Sifra Zav pere\ n.6; B. Menahot 893; Niddah jzb; Zebahim 82a;
cf. also &'/ra Emor, far. 7.2, 983.
46. Mishna Beforot 6.6; B. #/</. 403; Tosefta ibid. 4.8, p. 539.
47. B. Gittin 903.
48. B. Ketubot 290.
49. B. Baba Batra 56b; Tosefta Ma'aser Sheni 1.13, p. 87; j^iW., Ohalot
5.8, p. 602.
50. /4o/ o/ J?. Nathan chap. 19, 353.
51. Ztere^ Er<?2r Rabbah, chap. 3; Higger, Massefyot Dere^ Erez, Pirfe
Ben Azzai chap, i, p. 155.
52. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 25, 410, and see editor's notes ad loc.
53. Tosefta Yebamot 8.4, p. 250; B. Yebamot 6$b; Genesis R. 34.14,
p. 326.
54. B. Ketubot 633.
55. B. BeJ(prot 583.
56. Cf., e.g., 5//y Nedaba per. 2.12, 43; MeJ(ilta, Bo, Pisha, Proemium,
Horowitz-Rabin p. 5, Lauterbach I, p. 13. Sifre Numbers 103, p. 101
FOOTNOTES 335
(where Ben Azzai should replace ha-Temani); Midrash Psalms
65.4, 1573.
57. Mishna Ta'anit 4.5; Tosefta Shebiit 2.13, p. 63; ibid. Yoma 1.13,
p. 182.
58. Tosefta Shefolim 2.8, p. 176.
59. Tosefta Berafot 7(6). 2, p. 14; B. */W. 583; Y^r. z'&iW. 9.2, 130.
60. Mishna Abot 4.1.
61. &'/ra Kedoshim par. 3.9, 9ob.
62. Tosefta Hagiga 2.3, p. 234; Y<?r. z&W. 2.1, 77b; B. ibid. i4b; Canti-
cles R. to chap, i, verse 4.
63. B. /o^. V.
64. Mishna SotaA end.
65. Yer. Hagiga, loc. cit.
66. Tosefta, Yer. and B., ibid. The catastrophe probably explains the
story in Genesis R. 61.3, p. 660, and parallel passages, of the destruc-
tion of Akiba's first pupils and the difference between them and
the second group.
67. Tosefta Mifaaot end, p. 660; Sifre Num. 124, p. 158.
68. Yer. Shebiit 4.5,
69. Yer. Ketubot 11.3,
70. Sifra Tazria per. 13.2, 68b.
71. Huttin 493.
72. Yer. She^alim 3.1, 47d; ibid. Rosh Ha-Shanah i.i, 56d.
73. B. Sanhedrin 32b; Tosefta Shabbat 3(4). 3, p. 113; Semahot 2.5,
p. 103.
74. B. Pesahim 1123.
75. Yer. Sotah 2.4, i8a; B. Erubin 133; B. Berafot ica.
76. B. 5A0&&I* Il8b.
77. B. Nedarim 49b; cf., for his inner happiness, B. Shabbat 2^0.
78. The first five are described as Akiba's disciples in the classic
passages: B. Sanhedrin na; ibid. 86a; Genesis R. 61.3, p. 660.
For Johanan, see Yer. Hagiga 3.1, 78d; for Benjamin, Tosefta
Kiddushin 5.4, p. 342; for Hanina, see Leviticus R. 21.8.
79. Cf. Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung in die halachischen Midraschim,
p. 38 ff; cf. Yer. Ma'aserot 5.4, 5id, where he is described also as a
disciple of Akiba.
80. B. Nedarim 403.
336 FOOTNOTES
81. B. Sutyah 45b; Yer. ~Bera\ot 9.3, i3d; Genesis R. 35.2, p. 300;
Pesitya of R. Kahana, Beshattah, 88a.
82. Ibid.
83. Sifre Deut. 31; Sifre Numbers 95, p. 95; S//re Z#tf0 11.21, p. 272;
Tosefta Sotah 6.7, p. 304; Yer. Ta'anit 4.8, 68c.
84. B. Niddah i6b; Leviticus R. 21.8; Pesifya of R. Kahana, Ahare i76b.
85. Yer. Sanhedrin 1.2.
86. B. Gittin 673.
87. For Simeon, Meir and Judah, see B. Sanhedrin 86a; Jose is gen-
erally credited with the editorship of the Mishna Kelim and it is
doubtless from his collection that Mishna Hullin chap. 8 is derived.
See ibid. par. 2, and B. ibid. io4b. Contrast also the opening phrases
of that chapter with those of the chaps. 5,6,7,10,11,12.
88. B. Gittin 6ob.
89. See Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung in die halachischen Midraschim,
p. 41 ff; compare Albeck, Untersuchungen iiber die halatyschen
Midraschim, p. 126 ff.; whose discoveries do not, however, set aside
the Hoffmann's theory, as he supposes.
90. Sifre Numbers 2, p. 5.
91. Ibid. 131, p. 169.
92. Compare Weiss, Dor Dor ve-Dorshav II, p. ii4ff.
93. Sifre Numbers 112, p. 121; B. Sanhedrin 9ob; cf. Yer. Yebamot
8.1, 8d; ibid. Nedarim i.i, 36c.
94. See Baraita of the Thirteen Hermeneutic Rules in introduction to
the Sifra; and compare Hillel's seven arguments with the Bene
Bathyra listed in Tosefta Sanhedrin 7.11, p. 427; Abot of R.
Nathan I, chap. 37, p. no.
95. See above, chap. IV, note 31.
96. Sifra Zabim, par. 5.5, 793; Yer. Yoma 2.5, 403.
97. Genesis R. 1.14, p. 12; 22.2, p. 206; cf. B. Hagiga 123.
98. B. Sanhedrin 993; Tosefta Ohalot 16.8, p. 614; Ibid. Parah 4.7,
P- 633-
99. B. Erubin 54b; Mefylta Mishpatim chap. i. Horowitz-Rabin p. 246,
Lauterbach III, p. i.
100. Sifre Deut. 48.
101. Tosefta Zabim 1.5, p. 476.
102. Tosefta Yoma 5(4). n, p. 189; B. Pesahim 1093.
FOOTNOTES 337
103. Semahot 8.13, p. 160.
104. Leviticus R. 21.8; Pesitya of R. Kahana, Ahare, i76b; B. Ketubot
62b.
105. Genesis R. 61.3, p. 659; Ecdesiastes R. chap, n, to verse 6; Abot
of R.Nathan I, chap. 3, II, chap. 4, 8a,b.
106. Canticles R. chap, i, to verse 3; c. B. Sanhedrin 68a; Abot of R.
Nathan I, chap. 25, 4ia.
VI. ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY
1. Yer. Sanhedrin i.i, i8a.
2. Mishna Shabbat 6.10.
3. B. Berafyt 50. Even if the usual interpretation be accepted, that he
carried about the bone to console others who had suffered, it is
altogether probable that the idea came to him from a custom, of less
altruistic origin. Cf. also Mishna Yadaim 4.6.
4. This seems to me the most natural interpretation of the curious
leniency of the Shammaites with regard to such bones "from two
bodies." See Mishna Ohalot 2.2,6,7; 3- I 5i Hullin 723; Sifra Emor
2.4, 94d; the identity of Dosa's views with those of Ishmael were
pointed out by as eminent and early an authority as R. Johanan
(Hullin I24b).
5. Tosefta Yoma 3(2).2, p. 185; cf. ibid. Parah 3(2)3, p. 631.
6. Tosefta Berafyt 3.3 (p. 5).
7. Sifre Deut. 171; Midrash Tannaim 18.10, p. no; Tosefta Shabbat
7(8).i4, p. 118.
8. Mishna Sanhedrin 10.1.
9. Sifre Deut. 84; for the interpretation of the passage see Proceedings
of the American Academy of Jewish Research, 1932-33, p. 43.
10. Tosefta Shabbat, loc. cit.; Yer. BeraJ(pt 6.8, zod.
n. Ibid., et B. Berafot 530. The explanation that the wish for good
health would involve an interruption of lecture is far-fetched and
an obvious afterthought.
12. Tosefta Shefydim 2.1-2 (p. 175); the reading of Sifre Deut. 79,
must be corrected in accordance with that of the Tosefta.
13. Tosefta BeraJ(ot 3.2, p. 5; in Mishna Abot 3.12 the maxim is ascribed
to Hanina ben Dosa.
FOOTNOTES
14. B. Berakpt 623; Yer. ibid. 9.8, 140; Dere\ Erez in ed. Higger, PirJ(e
Ben Azzai, chap. 5, p. 220.
15. B. Berafot 8b. The talmudic text has the "Medes" where I read
"the Easterners." In this I follow the text of Pestfya of R. Kahana,
Parah, 33b; and many of the Mss. of Genesis R. 74.2, p. 859; cf. also
Numbers R. 19.3. In these sources, however, the apothegm is
attributed to Simeon ben Gamaliel II. This does not, however, make
the ascription to Akiba improbable. Simeon ben Gamaliel is not
known as a traveler; and it is altogether probable that he repeated
this maxim of Akiba, as others of his generation were wont to
repeat other teachings of the great master. It is, however, improbable
that Akiba traveled as far as Media (see above chap. IV, note 74).
16. Dere\ Erez, Pir^e Ben Azzai, chap. 5, ed. Higger, p. 215.
17. DereJ^ Erez, ibid., chap. 7, p. 232.
1 8. Ibid. p. 231.
19. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 3, 8a; cf. Tosefta 9.31, p. 366, and
B. Shabbat io5b, where the maxim is ascribed to Johanan ben Nuri.
20. Abot of R. Nathan, loc. at.
21. Ibid. chap. 26, 42a.
22. Mishna. Yebamot 12.3.
23. Tosefta Berafot 3.5, p. 6.
24. Tosefta Megittah 4(3).i6, p. 226; Yer. Ketubot 7.5, 3ib.
25. Tosefta Baba Mezia 6.17, p. 385.
26. Abot of R. Nathan, chap, n (23b).
27. Josephus, Antiquities XIII.io.6; XX.9.I.
28. Tosefta Ma^ot i.i, p. 438; B. ibid. 2b.
29. Sifra Kedoshim, per. 6.1, 9ob; B. Sanhedrin 633.
30. B. Ma^ot i2a; Baba Kamma 9ob; cf. Tosefta ibid. 3 (2). 7, p. 441.
For a further leniency with regard to unintentional homicide see
Mishna Ma^pt 2.7. Cf. further Mishna Sanhedrin 10.6; Tosefta
Sanhedrin 14.3, p. 436; 14.6, p. 437; Sifre Deut. 94, 95, 96; Midrash
Tannaim 13.17, p. 68.
31. B. Baba Kamma 9ob; Tosefta Sanhedrin 12.3, p. 433.
32. Mishna Baba Kamma 8.6.
33. Semahot chap. 2, p. 102.
34. Mishna Eduyot 2.10. For Akiba's method of listing analogies as
FOOTNOTES 339
proofs of the point he wishes to make, cf. Tosefta Sutfah 3.18,
p. 197, and discussion regarding it given above.
35. This is doubtless the significance of the controversy between Akiba
and Ishmael in Sifre Numbers 112, p. 121, line u. Cf. also Mishna
Sanhedrin 10.3 ff ; Tosefta ibid. 13.9 if, p. 435.
36. Yer. Kiddushin 1.9, 6id.
37. B. Sanhedrin 8ia; ibid. Ma^ftpt 24a; Midrash Psalms 15.7, 6oa.
38. Sifra Hobah, far. 12.8, 26d.
39. Mishna Sanhedrin 10.1; Abot of R. Nathan chap. 36, end, 553.
40. B. Shabbat 253.
41. Sifra Mezora, end; B. Shabbat 6^b' t Yer. Gittin, end, 5od.
42. Mishna Niddah 8.3.
43. Mishna Gittin 8.10.
44. For Eliezer ben Hyrkanos's view see Tosefta Gittin 9(7).!, p. 333;
B. ibid. 833; Yer. ibid. 9.1. Eliezer's view that a writ of divorcement
which frees the wife to everyone except one special person is valid
is obviously a result of his Shammaitic doctrine that the natural
basis for divorce is adultery and the suspicious husband may there-
fore rightly deny his wife the freedom to marry the suspected man.
The view of Eleazar of Modin is implied in the statement that
Moses did not divorce his wife but merely sent her home, whereas
according to Joshua he actually divorced her (Metylta Jethro chap, i,
Horowitz-Rabin p. 190, Lauterbach, II, p. 167; the text of Metylfa
of R. Simeon must be corrected according to that of Metylta as is
obvious from the context). For the view of Ishmael see Midrash
Tannaim 23.15, p. 148, and Hoffmann's note explaining the passage.
45. B. Sotah iya.
46. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 26, 423.
47. Ibid. chap. 3 (8a).
48. Mishna Yebamot 4.12, 13; compare also Tosefta Yebamot 6.5, p. 247;
1 1.6, p. 253.
49. Abot of R. Nathan II, chap. 35, p. 85.
50. Mishna Nedarim 11.4; cf. also B. Ketubot 66a; Mishna Ketubot
3.3 and Sifre Zutta 5.24, p. 276; Tosefta Sotah 2.3, p. 294; B. Sotah
51. Mishna Sanhedrin 3.4.
52. B. Gittin 893; for his severities in case of unintended bigamy, see
34 FOOTNOTES
Tosefta Gittin 8(6) .6,7, p. 332-33; Yer, Yebamot 10.5, iia; 8.7, 490.
53. Tosefta Sanhedrin 12.10, p. 433.
54. Mishna Yadaim 3.5.
55. Abot 3.13.
56. See Harvard Theological Review XXII, p. 219 ff.
57. Mishna Gittin 4.5.
58. Cf. the Akibite Midrashim, Metylta of R. Simeon 21.2, p. 118;
Sifre Deut. 118 (see the reading of Midrash Ha-Gadol in Midrash
Tannaim p. 85); with the statement of Ishmael in Mefylta of R.
Simeon, loc. cit., p. 118, line 26, that the slave described in Exodus
is identical with the one spoken of in Deuteronomy 15.12, where the
"Hebrew who is sold into bondage by the court" is discussed. See
further the citation from the Metylta on Deuteronomy in Midrash
Tannaim p. 85; and compare the reading of Midrash Ha-Gadol to
Leviticus, p. 643, where a baraita from the School of R. Ishmael
(and therefore not found in the Sifra) is cited to the same effect.
Cf. further B. Kiddushin i4b.
59. Metylta Mishpatim chap. 3, Horowitz-Rabin pp. 257-58, Lauterbach
III, pp. 25-26.
60. Sifra Behar, per. 9.1, nob; Yer. Kiddushin 1.2, 59b; Abadim 2.8,
ed. Higger (Seven Small Treatises) p. 58.
61. Tosefta Keritot 1.17, p. 562; Compare Sifra Kedoshim, per. 5.1,- 89c;
B. Keritot na.
62. B. Sotah 3b.
63. B. Kiddushin 2$; Abadim, end, ed. Higger, p. 60; cf. Me\ilta
Mishpatim, chap. 9, Horowitz-Rabin p. 279, Lauterbach III, p. 71.
64. Mishna Baba Kamma 8.9.
65. B. Sanhedrin 763.
66. Yer. Nazir chap. 9, 57d; Semahot 14.10, p. 207; Tosefta Baba Batra
1. 1 1, p. 399; cf. Midrash Tannaim 19.14, p. 115.
67. Mishna Horayot 2.5.
68. B. Baba Mezia ii3b.
VII. ON THE HEIGHTS: AKIBA'S PHILOSOPHICAL AND
POLITICAL IDEALS
i. B. Sanhedrin 383. Jose is here cited without any further appellative.
For similar citations of other older sages, see below, Appendix II, I.
FOOTNOTES , 341
In B. Hagiga 143, the statement is ascribed to Jose the Galilean, but
it is hardly likely that he would be cited simply as Jose.
2. Metylta Jethro. Bahodesh chap. 9, Horowitz-Rabin p. 238, Lauter-
bach II, p. 275.
3. Mefylia Bo, Pisha, chap, i, Horowitz-Rabin p. 6, Lauterbach I, p. 15.
It must be noted that the correct reading in this passage would be
rendered "as though with a finger." (See notes of Horowitz,
ad loc.)
4. Sifra, Nedabah, pere\ 2.12; Sifre Numbers 103, p. 101.
5. Mefylta, Beshallah, Vayehi chap. 6, Horowitz-Rabin p. 112, Lauter-
bach I, p. 247; Genesis R. 21.5, p. 200; Canticles R. to chap, i,
verse 9. Cf. Job. 4.18; 5.1, 15.15; 25.3; and the speeches of Elihu
in 33.23.
6. Enoch 45.1.
7. Acts 23.8.
8. Midrash Psalms, ad loc. (22ib).
9. B. Yoma 750.
10. Tosefta Hagiga 2.2, p. 234; B. ibid. i^o.
11. Cf., e.g., B. Yoma 54b; Genesis R. 12.11, p. 109; 13.9, p. 118;
for older discussions of the same type see Genesis R. 1.15, p. 13.
12. "Mishna. Hagiga 2.1; but see especially Yer. ad. loc., 773, where this
rule is distinctly ascribed to Afyba.
13. Mishna Negaim 2.1.
14. Me\ilta Mishpatim chap. 10, Horowitz-Rabin, p. 286, Lauterbach,
III, p. 87.
15. Mishna Aboda Zara 1.2.
16. B. Baba Kamma 1133; comp. Sifre Deut. 16.
17. Midrash Tannaim 16.18, p. 97.
1 8. Ibid. 1.22, p. n; cf. Sifre Deut. 20, where the passage is cited
anonymously.
19. Compare Ishmael's pointed question to Joshua about the nationalist
boycott against the Romans during the Rebellion of 66-70, in
Mishna Aboda Zara 2.5, and Joshua's evasiveness.
20. Mishna Eduyot 2.9.
21. Tosefta, ibid. 1.14, p. 456.
22. Massenet Kallah, in Higger, Massefeot Kdlah, p. 156.
23. B. Aboda Zara 553. It was Akiba's strong feelings on this point
34 2 FOOTNOTES
which led him to identify Zelophehad with the "gatherer of sticks"
(Num. 15.33). The Scriptures remark that Zelophehad "died in
his own sin" (Num. 27.3). Since Akiba did not admit that a man
could die "for his own sin," but held that his life span was fixed
by his father, he was compelled to maintain that the sin for which
Zelophehad died was a capital offense and that he was executed
by the court (B. Shabbat 96a).
24. Cf. Schechter's note to his edition of the fragment ot^Metylta on
Deuteronomy in Jewish Quarterly Review, 1904, p. 452 ff ., and ac-
cepted by Hoffmann in Midrash Tannaim p. 62, note 9.
25. Josephus, War 11.8.4.
26. Mishna Abot 3.15.
27. Canticles R. to chap. 3, verse 5.
28. Mefylta Beshallah, Vayassa, chap. I, Horowitz-Rabin p. 158, Lauter-
bach I, p. 248.
29. Mishna Abot 4.2.
30. B. Su^ah 52a; Genesis R. 22.6, p. 210.
31. B. Kiddushin 8ia.
32. Genesis R. 26.6, p. 252.
33. Mefylta Beshallah, Vayehi, chap. 6, Horowitz-Rabin p. 112, Lauter-
bach I, p. 248, for other references see above p. 341, note 5.
34. Mishna Abot, loc. cit.
35. Genesis R. 62.2, p. 674; Canticles R. to chap. 6, verse 2; Ecclesiastes
R. to chap. 5, verse n.
36. Sifra Shemini, par. 8.7, 52b.
37. Mishna Abot 3.15.
38. Genesis R. 33.1, p. 298; Pesifya of R. Kahana, Shor, 733; Leviticus
R. 27.1.
39. Sifre, Deut. 32, Midrash Tannaim 6.5, p. 26; Merita Jethro,
Bahodesh chap. 10, Horowitz-Rabin, p. 239, Lauterbach II, p. 277.
40. Sifre, loc. cit.
41. Leviticus R. 13.4; 35.6; Pesifya of R. Kahana, Shimu 1173; Canticles
R. on chap, i, verse 4; cf. B. Hagiga 9b.
42. Genesis R. 28.7, p. 266.
43. B. Sanhedrin yfi> (Joshua); i02a (Jose); cf. also Tosefta Ta'anit
4(3^9, p. 220.
FOOTNOTES 343
44. B. Gittin 563; Lamentations R. chap. IV, to verse 2; see also Tosefta
Shabbat 16(17) .8, p. 135; Josephus, War II, 408 ff.
45. This seems to me to be the implication of Sifre Deut. 70.
46. Tosefta She^alim 1.7, p. 174.
47. Tosejta Gittin 1.4, p. 324.
48. Yer. Berafot 9.7, 140; ibid. Sotah 5.7, 2od.
49. Mishna Shebiit 8.10; Yer. Gittin 1.5, 43c; Cf. further B. Kiddushin
75*.
50. Tosejta Kiddushin 5.4, p. 342; cf. Mishna Yadaim 4.4.
51. &'/ra Kedoshim, pereJ^ 4.12; Y<?r. Nedarim 9.3, 4ic; Genesis R. 24.7,
p. 236; for the correct interpretation of the passage, cf. G. Kittel,
Probleme d. Palaestinischen Spaetjudentums u. d. Urchristentums,
p. 116; Bacher, Aggada d. Tannaiten I, p. 420; Oppenheim in
Bet Talmud IV, p. 256.
52. Genesis R. chap. 34, p. 326; Tosefta Yebamot 9.4, p. 250.
53. Mishna Abot 3.14.
54. Metylta Jethro, Bahodesh chap. 2, Horowitz-Rabin p. 207, Lauter-
bach II, p. 202.
55. Mishna Sotah 8.5; &'/?<? Deut. 197; Tosejta Sotah 7.22, p. 309.
Midrash Tannaim 20.8, p. 120. For Jose's opinion see Sifre Deut.
190. The words attributed to him in Sifre Deut. 197 must be
emended accordingly, as is indicated in Proceedings of the Ameri-
can Academy of Jewish Research 1931-32, p. 40.
56. Mefylta of R. Simeon 5.23, p. 170.
57. Mishna Sanhedrin 10.3; Sifra BehuJ(ptai, per. 8.1, H2b; Lament. R.
chap, i on verse i.
58. B. Rosh Ha-Shanah 313.
59. Sifre Numbers 76, p. 70.
60. Mishna Yoma, end.
61. Me\ilta Beshallah, Shirah, chap. 3, Horowitz-Rabin p. 127, Lauter-
bach II, p. 26.
62. Mefylta Bo, Pisha, chap. 14, Horowitz-Rabin p. 51, Lauterbach I,
p. 114; Sifre Numbers 84, p. 82; Yer. Sutyah 4.3, 54c.
63. Sifre Deut. 346.
64. Mefylta Bo, Proemium, Horowitz-Rabin p. 5, Lauterbach I, p. 13.
65. Me\ilta of R. Simeon 4.16, p. 169.
66. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 26, 4ib.
344 FOOTNOTES
VIII. A PERILOUS SUMMIT
1. The date is fixed by considerations which are presented below.
See also Appendix II, H.
2. Abot of R. Nathan, chap. 6, 153.
3. Tosefta Ketubot 4.6, p. 264.
4. See above p. 23.
5. B. Nedarim 5oa; ibid. Aboda Zara loa.
6. B. Hagiga 253. There may be a reference to these purifying ashes in
Tosefta Ma\shirin 3.15, p. 676.
7. In discussing Hadrian's plan for reconstructing Jerusalem, Mommsen
(Provinces of the Roman Empire, II, p. 243) remarks, "He cer-
tainly did not do them [the Jews] the honor of fearing them."
And yet clearer studies of the situation in the East shows that
that is just what Hadrian, and his predecessors, did. The whole
Roman policy toward the Jews was dictated by a realization of
the danger involved in any unrest in Palestine. See above, pp. 67 ff.
8. Megittat Ta'anit, ed. Lichtenstein, in H.U.C. Annual VIII-IX,
pp. 321, 346; cf. also p. 272. See Joel, BHcJ(e in die Religionsge-
schichte I, p. 15; also see Appendix II, H. Contrast the statement
in Monatsschrift f. Gesch. u. Wissenschaft d. Judentums, 1854,
P- 139-
9. B. Gittin 56b.
10. Metylta Beshallah, Amale\, chap. 2, end, Horowitz-Rabin p. 187,
Lauterbach II, p. 161. Pesifya of R. Kahana, Za\pr, 293.
11. Pestfya Rabbati i, 43; Midrash Psalms 90.17, 1973.
12. See Jewish Quarterly Review, N.S. XIX (1929) 221 ff. The words
"the early years of Hadrian" on p. 222, ibid., should be corrected,
as I now realize, to "the later years of Trajan." My conviction that
the benediction was established in connection with Trajan's promise
has grown as I came to realize that not only Eliezer, but also
Ishmael, died before the Bar Kokba revolt was at an end; yet
both of them mention the benediction. On the other hand, it
was unknown in Gamaliel's early days when he and Akiba in their
discussions speak only of "three benedictions" in the Grace (Mishna
Berafyt 6.8; Tosefta Bera^pt 4.15, p. 10). There was only one
event which occurred in the years between Akiba's admission to
FOOTNOTES 345
the Academy and Gamaliel's death which could justify such an
addition to the old formula of Grace, and that was Trajan's
announcement.
13. Mishna Pesahim 10.6.
14. Compare Revue des fitudes Juives 1932, p. 22; and Jewish Quarterly
Review, N. S. XVI (1925), p. 35, note 86; where evidence is
offered to show that the mention of this benediction in Mishna
Tamid 5.1 is an early gloss.
15. Semahot 14.15, p. 210.
16. Tosefta She\alim 1.7, p. 174.
17. Tosefta Eduyot 3.3, p. 459; cf. Mishna ibid. 8.5. The incident
could not have happened before the destruction of the Temple,
as is generally assumed, for at that time there were older sages
as well as a whole priesthood to defend the purity of the Temple.
Even if Joshua had given his opinion on such a subject before the
destruction of the Temple he would hardly have dared use the
vigorous words attributed to him by Ben Azzai in this connection.
Moreover, he explicitly mentions the "dead of the war," which
means, of course, the last war with the Romans. But after the
destruction of the Temple it was deserted, and the question of
the purity of the city could only arise when some effort was made
to rebuild it. The Mishna must be rendered, "Concerning bones
which were found in the wood chamber, Joshua testified that the
sages had taught, 'Each bone must be taken up, and the rest is
pure.' "
1 8. Yer. Berafot 7.1, na.
19. B. Shabbat i2b; Tosefta Shabbat 1.13, p. no.
20. Epistle of Barnabas, XVI.4. Those who assume that the promise
to rebuild the Temple was made by Hadrian naturally date this
Epistle between 119 and 130. Several writers interpret the words
of the Epistle to refer to Hadrian's construction of his pagan
sanctuary, an interpretation which cannot possibly be accepted.
No one could refer to the establishment of a heathen temple as the
fulfillment of a prophecy that "they that destroyed the Temple
will themselves rebuild it." See, however, The Apostolic Fathers,
by Bishop Lightfoot, edited by J. R. Harmer, 1891, p. 240 E;
and see Appendix II, H.
346 FOOTNOTES
21. Eusebius, Chronicon, translated from the Armenian, ed. Karst,
Leipzig 1911 (in Eusebius' Wer\e) t p. 218; also Historia Ecclesiae
111.32.
22. Aboda Zara i6b.
23. Yer. Moed Katan 3.1, 8id.
24. Pliny's Epistles, Nos. 96, 97.
25. Genesis R. 64.10, p. 710.
26. Mishna Eduyot 8.6.
27. &'/r<? Deut. 106; Tosefta Sanhedrin 3.5,6, pp. 418,9; Temurah 2ib.
28. See Appendix II, I.
29. DereJ^ Erez Zutta, chap. 10, Tosefta Dere\ Erez, Pere\ R. Simeon,
in Higger Massefyot Dere% Erez, p. 244. Cf. also B. Sanhedrin 973;
Canticles R. 2.15; Mishna Sotah, end. In Sanhedrin the statement
is ascribed to Judah; in Canticles R. to Simeon ben Lakish; in the
Mishna it is cited anonymously. But as Bacher (Die Aggada der
Tannaiten, I, p. 97) has pointed out, the tradition ascribing it to
Gamaliel seems most authoritative and acceptable.
30. Tosefta Sotah 13.4, p. 319; B. Sotah 48b; Yer. Sotah 9.14, 24b;
Canticles R. chap. 8, to verse 9.
31. Mishna Sotah, end.
32. B. Sanhedrin 97b.
33. Metylta Beshallah, Vayassa, chap. 4, Horowitz-Rabin, p. 169, Lauter-
bach II, p. 120.
34. B. Sanhedrin xoia.
35. Mishna Kilaim 6.5.
36. Dio Cassius 68.24.
37. Metylta Beshallah, Vayehi, chap. 5, Horowitz-Rabin p. 106, Lauter-
bach I, p. 232. Compare also Tosefta BeraJ(pt 4.14^15, p. 10, where
the account is somewhat confused by an interpolation extending
from line 22 to line 26, which attempts to offset the militaristic
moral of the main passage.
38. See Revue des Etudes Juives 30.30 ff, 220 ff.
39. For the various reports regarding Julianus and Pappus, see Sifra
Emor, per. 9.5, 99d; ibid. Behu\otai, per. 5.2, uid.; Genesis R.
64.10, p. 710; Yer. Ta'anit 2.13, 66a; B. Ta'anit i8b; Semahot 8.15,
p. 164.
FOOTNOTES 347
40. Cf. Joel, BlicJ(e in die Religions geschichte, I, p. 15; Yer. Ta'anit 2.13,
66a; ibid. Megittah 1.5, yoc.
41. B. Baba Batra lob, and compare Rashi, ad loc.
42. Sifra Behufotai, loc. cit.
43. Tosefta Ta'anit 2.5, p. 217; Yer. ibid. 2.13, 66a; Yer. Megillah 1.6,
7od.
44. It is not to be supposed that the revocation of the plan for the
building of the Temple caused the abolition of Trajan's Day, as Joel
maintains (loc. cit.), for the record explicitly states that "the Day of
the execution of Julianus and Pappus caused the abolition of Trajan's
Day." This can only mean that the festival was abolished because of
the Jewish anger at the execution of their heroes .
45. B. Ta'anit 2ga.
IX. APPROACHING THE PRECIPICE
1. Mishna Rosh Ha-Shanah 4.1.
2. Tosefta Sanhedrin 2.13, p. 417; B. ibid, nb; Yer. ibid, i, i8d; see
also ibid. i8c, for the legendary transformation of the historical facts
surrounding the permission to fix the calendar in Galilee.
3. Mishna Yebamot, end; Mishna Eduyot 8.5.
4. B. Baba Mezia 59b. That Gamaliel was younger than Eliezer and
Joshua follows from the fact, remarked above, chap. V, note 2,
that in the record of his journey to Rome with Eliezer and Joshua,
when he was not yet Nasi, he is mentioned after them.
5. Tosefta Ta'anit 2.5, p. 271; B. Erubin 4ia.
6. See above p. 53.
7. Mishna Bera^ot 1.9.
8. Tosefta Hagiga 2.5, p. 234; Yer. ibid. 2.1, 773; B. ibid. 153; Genesis
R. 2.3, p. 17.
9. See below, p. 254.
10. Tosefta BeraJ^ot 3.4, p. 6.
11. Sifre Deut. 32.
12. See below, p. 276.
13. See above p. 165; and compare, e.g., Mishna Menahot 4.3.
14. Cf., e.g., his ferocious statement in Metylta Beshallah, Vayehi, chap,
i, Horowitz-Rabin p. 89, Lauterbach I, p. 201, cited also in Yer.
Kiddushin, end.
348 FOOTNOTES
15. Tosefta Niddah 2.2, p. 642; B.Ketubot 6ob; B. Niddah
16. Yer. Beratyot 2.1, 4b; ibid. Moed Kafan 3.7, 830.
17. Mishna Sotah 8.5,7; Tosefta, ibid. 7.22, p. 309; Sz'/re Deut. 197.
1 8. Deut. R. chap. 2.
19. B. Baba Batra loa.
20. Tanhumah Terumah, beg.
21. B. Sanhedrin 65b; Genesis R. 11.5, p. 92; Pesifya Rabbati 23,
22. Tanhumah Tazria 9, ed. Buber i8a.
23. B. Nedarim 5ob.
24. Semahot 8.13, p. 159; B. Mo^ Katan 2ib.
25. B. Sanhedrin 68a; /4&02 o/ .R. Nathan I, chap. 25, 413; Semahot
9.2, p. 165.
26. Y(?r. Shabbat 2.6, 5b.
27. Canticles R. chap, i, to verse 3.
28. B. Gi/ft'0 833.
29. Yv Niddah 1.3, 49a. It is obvious that the scenes at Eliezer's sick-
bed described in B. Sanhedrin 68a did not immediately precede his
death, for Akiba was present among those who visited Eliezer, but
was in Caesarea when the great sage died. Akiba is not mentioned
in Yer. Shabbat 2.6, 53, where the deathbed scene is described.
30. B. Yoma 853.
31. Hagiga i5b; Genesis R. 1.14, p. 12.
32. B. Moed Katan 28b.
33. Baba Batra 6ob; Tosefta Sotah 15.11, p. 322. The association of the
name of Ishmael with this movement proves that it cannot have
been organized immediately after the destruction of the Temple as
the sources imply. Nor would Joshua have been the man to argue
with the abstainers at that time; it would more likely have been
Johanan ben Zakkai.
34. Genesis R. 64.10, p. 712.
35. Tosefta Gittin 1.3, p. 323; B. ibid. 6b; Yer. ibid. 1.2, 43C.; for further
reference to Ishmael's removal to Galilee, see B. Baba Batra 28b.
36. See Mishna Ketubot 9.9; Tosefta Bera\ot 2.13, p. 4. Tosefta Me-
gillah 2.4, p. 223; Yer. Rosh Ha-Shanah 4.8, 59d; ibid. Megillah 2.3,
733. B. Rosh Ha-Shanah yk>. and Rashi, ad. loc; Megillah 43.
37. Revue des Etudes Juives, 1932, p. n; Mann in Hebrew Union Col-
lege Annual IV, 256 ff.
FOOTNOTES 349
38. Pesahim 563; see also Elbogen Der. Jiid. Gottesdienst in seiner
Geschichtlichen Entwictyung 3, pp. 63, 140, 587.
39. B. Aboda Zara 2jb; Yer. Shabbat 14.3, 146; ibid. Aboda Zara 2.2,
4od.
40. Sifra Ahare, per. 13.14, 86b; B. Sanhedrin 743.
41. Tosefta Yebamot 12.9, p. 255.
42. Yer. Hagiga 2.1, 77!); B. ibid. 153.
43. Genesis R. 82.8, p. 986.
44. This is implied in the statement, Tosefta Shabbat I5(i6).9, p. 133,
that many of them were recircumcised a truly dangerous operation
in the time of Bar Kokba's successes. As a result of the renegade
practices, the ritual of the circumcision was altered, and the opera-
tion made such that concealing it would be impossible.
45. B. Aboda Zara i8a; ibid. Eera\ot 6ia.
46. B. Sanhedrin 983.
47. B. Hagiga i^b.
48. Sifre Deut. 80. The words, "and they returned to their places,"
which are found in the ordinary editions of the Sifre also after the
incident of the four scholars, are an interpolation, as a comparison
of the Mss. reveals.
49. Semahot 8.1 1, p. 157. I. H. Weiss has recognized the contemporary
allusion in this remark, but he fails to see how it refers to definite
parties (See Dor Dor ve-Dorshav II, p. 132, note i).
50. See above, p. 49.
51. Abot of R. Nathan I, chap. 24, 393; Mefylta Jethro, AmaleJ^ chap. 2,
Horowitz-Rabin p. 197, Lauterbach II, p. 182.
52. Sifre Deut. 41; Metylta of R. Simeon 19.17, p. 100; B. Kiddushin
4ob; Yer. Pesahim 3.7, 3ob; ibid. Hagiga 1.7, 76c; Canticles R. chap.
2, to verse 14.
53. B. Sanhedrin 743; Yer. Shebiit 4.2, 35d; Tosefta Shabbat 15(16)17,
P- 134-
54. PirJ(e Rabbenu Ha-Kadosh, and thence in Nahmanides' Commen-
tary to Ketubot 193.
55. W. Weber, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte d. Kaisers Hadrianus,
p. 239.
56. Ibid. 241; J. Juster, Les Juifs dans L'Empire romaine II, 191, note 2.
Dio Cassius 69.12.
35O FOOTNOTES
57. Tosejta Hullin 2.9, p. 502; cf. Mishna ibid. 2.4.
58. B. Erubin 86a.
59. Mishna Ma'aser Sheni 2.9; Baba Mezia 3.12; Eduyot i.io; Kelim
28.2; U^azin 3.8; perhaps Niddah 6.12.
60. Mishna She^alim 4.7.
61. Tosejta Kelim III, 2.2. p. 591.
62. Tosejta Eduyot i.io, p. 456; cf. Mishna /&W. 2.7.
63. Tosejta Ohalot 4.2, p. 600; cf. *&W. Eduyot 1.7, p. 455; Y<?r. Bera\ot
1.2, 33; B. Afas/V 523.
64. &'/ra Tazria, per. 1.2, 58c;. compare, also, his reply to R. Yeshebab,
in Tosejta Ohalot 16.3, p. 614.
65. Mishna Shebiit 8.9, 10.
66. &'/re Numbers 148, p. 196; B. Menahot 68b.
67. Sijre Deut. i; Sijra Kedoshim, per. 4.9, &9b; Ara\in i6b.
68. Semahot 8.8, p. 154.
69. B. Sanhedrin yfo.
70. Yer. Ta'anit 4.7, 68d; Lament. R. 2.2.
71. //.
72. Metylta Jethro Bahodesh, chap. 6, Horowitz-Rabin p. 227, Lauter-
bach II, p. 247.
73. Dio Cassius 69.12; Jerome, Comm. in ]es. 2.9; Idem, Comm. in
Matth. 24.15.
74. Eusebius, Vita Constantini 111.26; cf., however, W. Weber, Unter-
suchungen zur Gesch. d. Kaisers Hadrianus, p. 243, note 880.
75. Justin, Apology, 1.47; Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiae IV.6.
76. Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiae IV.5,6.
77. Tertullian, Adv. Judaeos, chap. 13.
78. Sijra BehuJ(ptai, pereJ^ 5.2, md.
79. Yer. Ta'anit 4.8, 68d; Genesis R. 65.21, p. 740. The reconstruction
of the history of the period which is made in this chapter was made
possible only through the help of several distinguished scholars.
Professor Alexander Marx was kind enough to discuss the subject
with me in great detail and gave me the benefit of several biblio-
graphical references which had escaped me. At his suggestion, I
read a brief paper, summarizing the conclusions at which I had
arrived, before the Academy of Jewish Research. In the course of
the discussion valuable additional suggestions were made to me by
FOOTNOTES 351
Professor Salo Baron and some others who were present. I am also
indebted to Professor Norman Bentwich and Professor Harry Wolf-
sohn for assistance in the preparation of this part of the book.
X. APOTHEOSIS
1. Tosefta Dere^ Erez in Higger, Masse foot Deref^ Erez, p. 311 (See
variants); Higger, Masse J(tot Kallah, p. 343; Epstein, MiJ(admoniot
Hayehudim p. 115; and Buchler in Jewish Quarterly Review, N.S.,
iv (1913-4) p- 487.
2. B. Berafot 6ib.
3. B. Pesahim 1123.
4. Tosefta Sanhedrin 2.8, p. 417; B. ibid. i2a.
5. Mishna Gittin 6.7.
6. B. Yebamot io8b.
7. Mishna Yebamot 12.5; Yer. ad. loc., i2d.
8. B. Erubin 2ib.
9. Lament. R. chap. 3, verse 44.
10. B. BeraJ(pt 6ib; Yer. ibid. 9.5, i4b; Lament. R., loc. cit.
NOTES TO APPENDIX
1. See above, pp. 158 and 165.
2. Mishna Baba Batra 6.4.
3. Ibid. 1.6.
4. Ibid. 9.9,10.
5. Mishna Ketubot 9.2. This interpretation is obviously the only cor-
rect one, as can be seen from the discussion in Yerushalmi, ad loc.
6. Baba Mezia 623; Sifra Behar par. 8.3, IO9C.
7. Mishna Baba Mezia 2.7.
8. Mishna BeraJ(pt chap. 6, end.
9. Yer. Ma'aser Sheni 1.4, 533; ibid. Erubin 3.1, 2od.
10. Mishna Nazir 7.1.
11. Mefylta Beshallah, Shirah, chap. 3, Horowitz-Rabin p. 127, Lauter-
bach II, p. 25.
12. Mishna BiJ(J(urim 2.8.
13. Sifra Shemini, par. 9.7, 563; and Mishna Kelim 30.2.
14. Mishna Kilaim 1.3; 3.3; 3.6; 6.2; 7.5; see also Shabbat 9.2. For the
35 2 FOOTNOTES
rule prohibiting the preservation of mixtures, see Tosefta Kilaim
1.15, p. 74; Yer. ibid. 8.1, 3id; #. Mo<?</ Katan 2b.
15. Mishna Shebiit 4.6; PraA 4.10; &'/ra Kedoshim per. 2.5, 8yd; cf.,
however, Mishna Peak 3.6; and 3.1.
1 6. Mishna Ma'aserot 3.5. Ishmael admits the principle, but holds that
the yard must actually be unprotected.
17. Mishna Ma'aser Sheni 4.8.
1 8. Yer. Ma'aserot 3.2, 500.
19. Tosefta Sotah 14.6, p. 320; B. Shabbat 563.
20. Mishna She\alim 4.3.
21. S/7r<? Deut. 107.
22. Mishna Demai 6.4. Akiba's bias in favor of the traders appears most
clearly in Midrash Tannaim 25.15, p. 169; and Sifre Deut. 194.
23. See Dalman, Arbeit u. Sitte in Palaestina II, p. 6. Akiba's views
on the subject are implied in the baraita cited in B. Pesahim 53.
Judah ben Ilai agrees with him (Mishna Pesahim 2.1) and so does
Jose, his other plebeian pupil (Me^ilta Bo, Pisha, chap. 8, 93,
Horowitz-Rabin p. 28, Lauterbach I, p. 64). Judah ben Bathyra
opposes Jose in Mefylta, ibid.; and Simeon ben Yohai opposes Judah
in B. Pesahim 28a. Cf. also Pesahim 2.1; Mishna Temurah 7.8.
For the difference in climate between the valley and the hill coun-
try, see Dalman, Arbeit u. Sitte in Palaestina Li, p. 221; 1.2, p. 282.
24. See statistics in Appendix II, E.
25. See Harvard Theological Review XXII, p. 194; and references there
given, especially Josephus, Antiquities XIII.I3.5; Tosefta Su^fyth
3.16, p. 197; B. Sutyah 48b.
26. B. Rosh Ha-Shanah i7b; cf. Sifre Deut. 40. In Yer. Rosh Ha-Shanah
1.3, it is cited in the name of Simeon ben Yohai, who represented
the patrician view in his day, though he was a disciple of Akiba.
27. Tosefta Sutyah 3.18, p. 197; Ibid. Rosh Ha-Shanah 1.12, p. 210;
Yer. Rosh Ha-Shanah 1.3, which states expressly that the purpose of
the Baraita is to justify the water libations; B. Rosh Ha-Shanah i6b.
The text of Tosefta Rosh Ha-Shanah has been influenced by that of
Babli; the text of Tosefta Sui$ah is more original.
28. Mishna Sutyah 3.4; Sifra Emor, par. 16.7, io2d. It may seem strange
at a first glance that there should have been so marked a difference
between Jerusalem and the country in this regard in ancient times,
FOOTNOTES 353
but the cost of fruit was between three and six times higher in
Jerusalem than elsewhere and presumably this also applied to other
vegetable products, including twigs and branches. See Jeremias,
Jerusalem I, p. 35; II A, p. 36.
29. Mishna Par ah 8.1 1.
30. Mishna Mi^yaot 7.1; for the difference in the average snowfall be-
tween Jerusalem and the lowland, see Dalman, Arbeit u. Sitte in
Palaestina, I.i. p. 233.
31. Mishna Shabbat i.io.
32. Ibid. 1.5 ff. The principle enunciated by the Shammaites that "one's
property" must rest on the Sabbath because it is part of one's ex-
tended personality is altogether in accord with their general theories;
but so far as this particular prohibition was concerned, it was a
rationalization rather than a real explanation of their position.
33. Mishna Eduyot 2.6.
34. Yer. Shabbat 14.2, i4b; Tosefta Eduyot 1.9, p. 456.
35. Mishna Baba Batra 4.1,2,9.
36. Metylta Bo, Pisha, chap, u, Horowitz-Rabin p. 37, Lauterbach I,
p. 84.
37. Mishna Hallah 2.3.
38. Mishna Hallah 4.4; compare Yer. ad loc.; see also Mishna ibid. 2.1;
4.5; and Yer. ibid. 2.1, 58b.
39. B. Baba Kamma ja; compare the reading of Mefylta Mishpatim
chap. 14, Horowitz-Rabin p. 296; and Yer. Gittin 5.1, 46c. The
correctness of the text of B. is shown by a comparison with the law
which is certainly a derivative from this, fixing the redemption
money of a victim of a goring ox. This has already been noticed by
Horowitz, Metylia, ed. Horowitz-Rabin, p. 285, line 9, editors' note.
40. Mefylta Mishpatim chap. 10, Horowitz-Rabin p. 285, Lauterbach
III, p. 85; cf. Mishna Sanhedrin 1.4.
41. B. Baba Kamma 53.
42. Ibid. 42b.
43. Cf. the Hillelite opinion in Mishna Hullin 8.1.
44. Mishna Beforot 2.6; cf. also 2.7,8.
45. Ibid. 2.9.
46. Tosefta. Be\orot 3.15, p. 538; cf. Mishna Be^orot 5.1, where Akiba's
354 FOOTNOTES
view is omitted. The rule applies, of course, only to a firstling which
has become unfit for sacrificial purposes.
47. B. Shabbat 973; cf. Stfre Numbers 105, p. 103.
48. Hullin 493.
49. Genesis R. chap. 46, p. 462; Leviticus R. 25.5.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bacher, Agada d. Tannaiten, I, 271 ff.
Billerbeck, R. Atyba, Leben und Wirl^en eines Meisters in Israel (in
Strack's Nathanel, 1916-1918).
Bloch, J. S., in Mimizrach u-Mima'arab, 1894, P- 47 ^ !
Bornstein, D. J., in Encyclopedia Judaica. s.v. A\iba.
Braunschweiger, Die Lehrer der Mishnah, p. 92 ff.
Bruell, Jakob, Mebo ha-Mishnah, p. u6E.
Derenbourg, Joseph, Essai sur I'histoire et la geographic de la Palestine,
p. 329 ff., 395 ff., 418 ff.
Dunner, in Monatsschrijt fur Geschichte u. Wissenschaft des Juden-
thums, 1871, p. 451 E.
Ewald, Geschichte d. Voltes Israel, 11:367 ff.
Frankel, Dar\e ha-Mishnah, p. in ff.
Fiink, S., Atyba.
Gastfreund, L, Toledot R. Afyba.
Ginzberg, Louis, in Jewish Encyclopedia, s.v. A1(iba.
Graetz, Geschichte d. Juden, IV:5oE; see also, Notes 7 and 8.
Gnostizismus, 83 ff.
Halevy, Isaak, Dorot ha-Rishonim le, 455 ff ., 620 E., 659 ff.
Hamburger, Real-Encyclopaedie fur Bibel u. Talmud, 11:32 ff.
Hirsch, J., Die Religions geschichtliche Bedeutung R. AT^ibas.
Hoffmann, David, Zr Einleitung in die halachischen Midraschim, p.
5 ff.
Hyman, Aaron, Toledot Tannaim ve-Amoraim, p. 988 ff.
Javitz, Toledot Jisrael, VI.
Jost, Geschichte d. Judenthums u. seiner Setyen, 11:59 &
Landau, in Monatsschrijt, 1854, p. 45 ff., 81 ff., 130 ff.
Margolis-Marks, A History of the Jewish People, pp. 213 ff.
Moore, G. F., Judaism, I:87ff.; II:io6ff.
Neuburger, in Monatsschrijt, 1873, p. 385 ff., 433 ff., 529 ff.
355
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Oppenheim, H., in Bet Talmud 11:237 ff., 269 ff.
Rosenthal, F., Vier apotyyphische Bucher.
Rubin, Anshe ha-Shem be-Hotynat ha-Nistar, in ha-Eshfol, -.22.
Schuerer, E., Geschichte d. judischen Voltes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi,
11:442 f.
Stein, L., R. Atyba u. seine Zeit.
Strack, Einleitung in Talmud u. Midrash, p. 125.
Weiss, I. H., Dor Dor ve-Dorshav, ILioyff.
Wittkind, Hut ha-Meshulash.
Zuri, Rabbi AJ(iba.
INDEX
Abba Judah of Antioch, 108
Abtalyon, 298, 311
Admon, 299 F.
Aelia Capitolina, 263, 270
Agrippa I, 6, 8 ff., 27
Agrippa II, 52
Akabiah ben Mahalalel, 123, 159, 294 &.,
298
Akiba: grave of, 3; appearance of, 4; his
relation to his age, 6, i4ff.; destruc-
tion of Jerusalem before he was thirty,
n; his blessing for food, 20; attitude
toward wine, 20; childhood games,
21 ; attitude toward scholars in his
youth, 22; his marriage, 23; first at-
tempts to study, 25 ff; his first child,
26; juristic system, 30, 171; at Yabneh,
72, 73; relations to Pappias, 76, 196,
2 55> 2 735 first teachers, 79; death of
his father, 79; sufferings during his
student days, 80; super-piety in his
student days, 81; Tarfon's love for
him, 82; rough playfulness in his
early days, 83; disagreements with
Tarfon, 84 f.; relations with Nahum
of Gimzo, 89, 171; first encounter
with Eliezer, 92 ff.; training under
Joshua and Nahum of Gimzo, 94; in-
terest in Jerusalem, 95, 217, 284 ff.;
Eliezer 's affection for him, 104; con-
troversy with both Eliezer and Joshua,
107; sea voyage with his masters dur-
ing the Passover, 109; controversy
with Tarfon regarding the pool of
Diskos, 109; Tarfon's recognition of
him as master, 109; sense of humor,
no; relations with Elisha ben Abuyah,
in, 163; relations with Gamaliel II,
ii2ff., 152 f., 1 86, 237; removal to
Zifron, 118; union with Joshua against
Eliezer, 122; part in the removal of
Gamaliel from office, 126; oratorical
devices, 132; position in the conclave
after Gamaliel's reinstatement, 130;
travels, 130; appointment as overseer
of the poor, 130; doctrine that all hap-
pens for the best, 131; ability as a
raconteur, 132; insistence on duty of
teaching a child to swim, 133; para-
bles, 133; refusal to permit Yeshebab
to give everything to the poor, 134;
maxims about the poor, 134; number
of his pupils, 135; Babylonian legends
regarding him, 135; on the commis-
sion to Rome, 136 ff.; visit to the
Temple with his colleagues, 136; at-
tempt to set up a booth on the ship,
137; his comfort to his colleagues
when they reached Puteoli, 139; com-
pared to Moses, 153, 156; ability as
systematizer, 154; as statesman, 154;
relation to the Mishna, 155; his work
described to Adam according to leg-
end, 157; references to him by Church
Fathers, 157; his burial by Elijah, 157;
his relations with Johanan ben Nun,
158, 190; system of interpretation,
158, 171, 308 ff.; rules regarding di-
vorce, 158, 188; relations with
younger colleagues, 159; conception of
the status of labor, 161; relation to
Ben Azzai, 161, 181, 182, 242, 246;
mystic speculations, 163; relation to
Ben Zoma, 163, 228, 240; relation to
Aquila, 165; his academy, 167; rela-
tion to Ishmael, 167 ff., 172, 180, 198,
248, 279, 281, 283, 2855., 308; his
later disciples, 168; relation to Simeon
ben Yohai, 169, 273; his rules of in-
terpretation accepted by Joshua, 173;
357
358
INDEX
estimate of the relative value of erudi-
tion and acumen, 174; method of in-
struction, 175; diligence, 175; advice
to one of his disciples to return home,
175; insistence on the duty of teach-
ing, 176; appreciation of his debt to
his masters, 176; principles of his ju-
risprudence, 177; his warning that not
he, but God, was the Judge, 178; at-
tack on superstition, 178 ff.; contro-
versy with Jose the Galilean regarding
sectarians, 180; respect for good man-
ners, i8off.; recording of foreign cus-
toms, 181; effort to inculcate good
manners in pupils and others, 181 f.;
denunciation of outbursts of anger,
182; appreciation of village neighbor-
liness, 183; leniency in punishment,
184; the fine he inflicted for insult to
a woman, 185; consideration for sui-
cides, 185; denial of eternal punish-
ment, 185; anti-Manichaean argu-
ments, 187; denial of immortality to
certain classes of the sinful, 187; rev-
erence for the Song of Solomon, 187,
191; attitude toward women, i87ff.;
conception of marriage, 189; attitude
toward Levirate marriage, 190; his
change in the law of evidence, 191;
attitude toward slavery, 191; his doc-
trine of human equality, 191, 210;
attitude toward royalty, 194; his the-
ology, I95ff.; opposition to anthropo-
morphism, 196; his doctrine of angels,
197; opposition to public discussion of
laws of sex relations or theology, 199;
his doctrine of peace, 199, 209; his
doctrine of determinism, 202; his ex-
planation of the miraculous cures
effected by pagan temples, 203; his
paradoxical assertion of freedom of the
will, 204; his assertion of force of
habit, 205; his denial of determinism
in moral sphere, 205; his assertion that
divine judgment is mercy, 206; the
parable of the fig tree, 206; the simile
of the shopkeeper, 207; suffering in
present life a means of averting
greater pains in future life, 208; his
doctrine of the value of poverty, 209;
acceptance of legal documents drawn
up in Roman courts, 209; attitude
toward the Samaritans, 210; doctrine
of relation of Jew to Gentile, 211;
interpretation of the Selection of Israel,
212; love for Palestine, 213; attain-
ment of comparative wealth, 215; re-
lation to the Trajan Declaration, 219;
expectation of, a Messianic age, 220;
desertion by his disciples, 228; mar-
tyrdom predicted by Eliezer, 230;
journey to Nahardea, 237; friendship
with Rufus, 244; their conversations,
244; death of his son, 246; leadership
of the rationalist-pacifist group, 257;
his description of the various groups,
258; attitude toward martyrdom, 259;
story of his interview with Hadrian,
264; his doubts of himself, 265; con-
version to the cause of Bar Kokba,
269; insistence on teaching despite the
Roman prohibition, 272 ff.; imprison-
ment, 273; arrangement of the inter-
calary month while in prison, 274;
transfer to Caesarea, 274; continued
observance of the Law, 275; trial, 276;
martyrdom, 276; his plebeian stand-
ards, 279 ff.; his distinction between
law and charity, 280; defense of the
ceremony of water-pouring, 285 f.;
defense of shepherds and cattle-dealers,
290; attitude toward the law prohibit-
ing mixtures of meat and milk, 291;
attack on the prerogatives of the
priests, 291; representative of plebeians
in visit to Dosa ben Arkenas, 299;
his doctrine of revelation, 308 ff.; rela-
tion to the prayer for the Kingdom
of God, 312; grave said to be in
Caesarea, 318; legendary account of
descent from Sisera, 321
Albright, W. F., 320
Am ha-arez, 22, 23, 124, 125
Angels, belief in, 197
Antigonus of Socho, 35
Antiochus III, the Great, 293
Antiochus IV, Epiphanes, 36
Aquila, 165, 219, 315
INDEX
359
Arabia, King of, 130
Archelaus, 43
Artisans, 34
Athens, 7
Attica, 17
Azziz, village of, 250
Baba ben Buta, 45
Bacher, Wilhelm, 346
Bar Kokba, n, 255, 269
Barnabas, Epistle of, 223
Baron, S., 350
Baruch, A., 306
Ben Azzai, 108, 118, i59ff., 164, 169,
181, 182, 196, 205, 210, 241, 246,
316
Ben Boion, 131
Ben Dama, 253
Ben Kalba Sabua, 23
Ben Nannos, 118, 165
Ben Petira, 280
Ben Zoma, 118, 162, 164, 198, 228, 240
Bene Bathyra, 311
Bene Berak, 168
Bentwich, N., 350
Bi-partisan government, principle of, 42,
57, 294 S.
Bokser, B., 316
Bones, use of, as charms, 179
Booths: built on ship, 137; controversy
regarding, 102
Brindisi, 138
Caesarea, 246, 262
Calendar, arrangement of, 236, 274
Canaanites, 17
Captive woman,, law of, 101
Cattle dealers, 290
Caveat emptor, principle of, rejected by
Akiba, 288
Cedrenus, 315
Cestius Gallus, 52
Charity, 132 ff.
Christianity, 14, 36, 223
Christians, 221, 270
Chronicon Paschale, 315
Chrysostom, 315
Church, members of in Rome, 141
Circumcision, 244, 255
Clothes, 20
Coastal Plain, 17, 320
Commissions to Rome, 136, 137
Daniel, 258
Darius, 226
Day of Atonement, 119
Derenbourg, 316
Determinism and Free Will, 202
Deutero-Isaiah, 12
Dio Cassius, 231, 232, 315
Diskos, the pool of, 109
Divorce, law of, 158, 188
Domitian, 143, 243
Dosa ben Arkenas, 119, 196, 299
Education: establishment of system, 14;
curriculum of, 24
Eighteen Decrees, 53
Eleazar Hisma, nsff.
Eleazar of Modin, 88, 189, 259, 337
Eleazar ben Azariah, 77, 78, 84, 100,
127, 136, 158, 160, 163, 195, 210,
240, 267, 279, 298, 299, 317, 330
Eleazar ben Jose, 299
Eleazar ben Shammua, 168, 257, 317
Eleazar ben Zadok, 116, 180
Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, 48, 65, 77, 92 .,
99, 105, 114, 116, 122, 137, 166, 167,
189, 198, 208, 211, 215, 224, 227,
229, 236, 238, 247 S., 266, 267, 282,
284, 289, 297, 299, 305, 307, 312,
330, 332, 339. 344
Elijah, 12, 157, 220
Elisha ben Abuyah, 77, in, 126, 164,
198, 254, 256, 259
Enoch, Book of, 197
Epiphanius, 314
Essenes, 205, 256
Expulsion from Pharisaism, 123 F.
Ezekiel, 12, 197
Ezra, 293
Farmers, 28, 30, 199, 283
Flavius Clemens, 136
Food: of peasants, 19; price of, 318
Free will, 204
Future Life, 185
360
INDEX
Galilee, 3, 13, 62, 85, 250
Gamaliel I, 7, 8, 9, 50, 159, 238, 298,
306
Gamaliel II, 77, 78, 112, 114, 123, 126,
129, 136, 151, 180, 186, 225, 229,
234, 237, 238, 239, 266, 296, 299,
304 ff., 325, 347
Gaza, 307
Germany, vestiges of early Jewish cur-
riculum in, 25
Gerousia, 31, 35 (see also Sanhedrin)
Ginzberg, Louis, 294, 331
Gnosticism, 198
God: His Providence, 202; merciful in
His judgment, 206; Kingdom of, 212;
spoke to prophets for the sake of
Israel, 213; His literal dictation of
Torah to Moses, 309; Prayer for the
Kingdom of, on New Year's Day, 312
Gospels, 115
Grace after Meat, 35, 121, 281, 344
Graetz, H., 314, 315
Great Assembly, 34, 293
Habakkuk, 12
Habit, force of, 205
Hadrian, 234, 235, 250, 261, 264, 270,
313
Halafta, father of Jose, 76, 121, 159
Hda\a, 114
Hdizah, 183, 251, 253, 275
Hdlah, law of, 289
Hanan, the high priest, 52, 142
Hanan ben Abishaiom, 299 ff.
Hananiah, nephew of Joshua, 257
Haninah of Ono, 237
Haninah ben Teradyon, 76, 126, 255
Hasideans, 13, 29, 35, 38, 184, 285
Hasmoneans, 36, 83
Heave offering, 83, 87, 98
Hebron, 307
Hellenism, 32 ff., 255
Hellenization, 35
Herod, 43
Herod Antipas, 3
Herod, house of, 142
Hesiod, 304
Hezekiah, King of Judah, 72, 203
Highlands, 320
Hillel, 28, 29, 44, 122, 184, 257, 280,
294,298,304,311
Hillelites, 28, 29, 44, 46, 62, 81, 122,
155, 184, 257, 280, 291, 294, 300,
304, 311, 321
Hoffmann, David, 297, 309, 342
Honey, 102
Horowitz, S. H., 353
Houses, of Akiba's time, 19
Human equality, doctrine of, 191 ff.
Husband, legal evidence of death of, 87
Huzpit the Announcer, 76, 256
Ilai, father of Judah, 251
Imma Shalom, wife of Eliezer ben
Hyrkanos, 238
Imports of grain, controversy over, 289 g.
Interpretation, rules of, 171
Isaiah, 12, 197
Ishmael, 165, 168, 172, 180, 189, 198 ff.,
214, 222, 228, 230, 241, 242, 253,
258, 268, 279, 285, 297, 308 ff., 339,
344 ..
Israel: in relation to other peoples, 211;
in relation to God, 212; as witness to
God, 213
lus primae noctis, 233
Jeremiah, 12
Jeroboam, 28
Jerusalem, 8, 14, 18, 24, 29, 41, 45, 95,
217, 270, 284 ff., 307
Jerusalem: population of, 29; artisans of,
96
Jeshua ben Sira, 35
Jesus of Nazareth, 9
Job, 13, 192, 210
Johanan the Cobbler, 168, 257
Johanan ben Joshua, 23
Johanan ben Nuri, 86, H3f., 159, 190,
239, 308, 312, 337
Johanan ben Zakkai, 22, 50, 6o s 63,
65 ff., 68, 77, 92, 173, 198, 211, 219,
236, 257, 259, 298, 325
John the Baptist, 3 -
John of Gishcala, 65 ff.
John Hyrkan, 200
Jonathan, disciple of Ishmael, 257
Jordan Valley, fertility of, 17
INDEX
361
Jose the Galilean, 165, 180, 193, 194,
209, aai, 256, 260, 279, 297
Jose Ha-Kohen, 76, 126, 195
Jose ben Halafta, 119, 155, 168, 209,
. 242, 296, 343
Jose ben Joezer, 99, 298
Jose ben Johanan, 298
Jose ben Judah ben Ilai, 282
Jose ben Kisma, 255
Joseph, father of Akiba, 18 ff.
Josephus, 51 &., 141 ff., 204, 209, 257,
293, 298
Joshua ha-Garsi, 273 ff.
Joshua ben Gamala, 14, 21
Joshua ben Hananya, 65, 77, 78, 84, 88,
100, 106, 112, 118, 122, 136, 140,
151, 161, 172, 181, 198, 202, 209,
210, 2l8, 222, 227, 230, 238, 239,
240, 243, 247, 248, 249, 254 flF., 259,
265, 298, 299, 300, 305, 307, 313, 332
Joshua ben Perahya, 298
Judah the Baker, 256
Judah ben Baba, 76
Judah ben Bathyra, 257, 284, 292, 308
Judah ben Ilai, 242, 266, 267, 282, 296,
346
Judah ben Nehemiah, 267
Judah the Patriarch, 121, 256, 282, 296,
297, 298
Judah ben Tabbai, 298
Julianus, 231 ff., 314
Jupiter, statue set up in Jerusalem, 263
Juster, J., 315
Krauss, S., 316
Labor: recognition of, by Akiba, 161;
rights of, 178
Lagrange, 316
Landowners, 34, 123, 199, 208
Levirate Marriage, 107, 190, 306
Levites, 29 ff., 34, 83, 178, 282, 283
Levitical purity, 41, 98, 122, 187, 217
Liquids, impurity of, 99
Liturgy, additions to, 220 ff.
Ludd, 17, 68, 216, 232, 258, 261, 307
Lusius Quietus, 232 ff., 261, 314
Mcfamar, 305
Maccabees, 37, 39, 200
Maimonides, 3, 185
MaUytyot, 312
Marital love, 188
Marriage, usual age for, 22, 304
Martyrdom, rules governing, 261
Marx, Alexander, 350
Matthew ben Harash, 257
Meir, 168, 187, 234, 242, 251, 256, 261,
296, 308, 330
Menahem, 298
Menes, Abraham, 293
Menuddah, 124
Mercy, in divine judgment, 206
Messiah, 201, 256, 269
Messianic era, 220
Meyer, Eduard, 293
Miraculous cures, explained by Akiba,
203
Mishna, 4, 40, 199
Mommsen, 344
Moses, 3, 80
Mysticism, 163 .
Nahardea, 237
Nahum of Gimzo, 76, 89, 93, 166
Nathan the Babylonian, 270, 297 ff.
Nationalists, 221, 253, 258, 267, 307
(see also Shammaites, Provincials, Pa-
tricians)
Nehemiah, 293
Nehemiah the potter, 168
Nero, 223
Nerva, 153, 216
Nicephorus Callistus, 315
Nittai of Arbel, 298
Olelot, law of, 101
Olive, 97
Olive oil, 85
Oral Law, 31, 35, 310
Palestine: Akiba's love for, 213; devotion
of persecuted Jews to, 257; origin of
present name, 270
Pappias, 76, 196, 231, 233 f., 255
Pappus, colleague of Julianus, 235, 314
Parthians, 218, 227, 256
Patricians, 18, 24, 31, 57, 137, 188, 196,
217, 239, 286, 299, 311 (see also
Shammaites, Romanophiles)
362
INDEX
Paul the Apostle, 14 S.
Peace, ideal of, 178, 199
Perushim, 80
Peter the Apostle, 10
Petronius, 263
Pharisaism, 13 S., 197, 208 (see also
Pharisees)
Pharisees, 3, 7, 27 ff., 29, 39, 41, 96, 99,
115, 184, 191, 204, 257, 285, 293,
294, 299, 311 (see also Plebeians)
Plebeians 34 ff., 57, 122, 137, 189, 192,
i99 239, 279 ff., 286, 287, 295, 297,
299
Pledges, law of, 100
Pliny the Younger, 225
Poor, Akiba's maxims regarding, 134
Poverty, Akiba's doctrine of . the value
of, 209
Priests, 30, 34, 83, 87, 103, 167, 178,
291
Provincials, 35, 188, 196, 286 (see also
Am ha-arez)
Punishment, leniency in, i84f.
Purim, 251
Rachel, wife of Akiba, 22 ff., 79 ff., 135,
136
Rainfall in Jerusalem, 284, 307
Red Heifer, 98
Revelation, Akiba's doctrine of, 309 ff.
Roman Empire, Eastern, in balance, 67
Roman Law, applied by Jewish teachers,
201
Romanophiles, 254 ff.
Rufus, 243, 250, 262, 276
Sabbath, 138, 244, 254, 287
Sadducees, 27 ff., 39, 197, 200, 204, 296
Salome, Queen, 294, 322
Samaritans, 194, 226, 297
Samuel the Little, 75, 117, 229
Sanhedrin, 7, 35, 53, 73 ff., 128, 184,
293
Saul, King of Israel, 28
Schechter, S., 342
Schuerer, 316
Scribes, 18
Shammai, 44, 49, 62, 79, 259, 298
Shammaites, 46, 53, 81, 97, ii4ff., 167,
189, 200, 209, 280, 287, 291, 295,
296, 305 f., 321 f., 337, 352
Shema, Reading of, 101, 252, 276
Shemaya, 298, 311
Shepherds, 28, 30, 34, 290 (see also
Plebeians)
Shojar, 252
Sibylline oracles, 235
Sijra, 4
Sijre, 4, 152, 199
Simeon, colleague of Ishmael (see Simeon
ben Nethanel)
Simeon, son of Akiba, 246
Simeon the Temanite, 184
Simeon ben Gamaliel I, 46, 69, 259,
296, 298, 316
Simeon ben Gamaliel II, 296, 298, 305,
338
Simeon the Hasmonean, 293
Simeon ben Lakish, 346
Simeon ben Nethanel, 48, 77, 126, 229,
251, 268, 316
Simeon the Righteous, 34 ff., 47, 293
Simeon ben Shatah, 298
Simeon ben Yohai, 3, 168, 169, 213,
266, 273, 284, 296, 299, 317, 352
Simhoni, 323
Slaves, 1 8, 178, 191
Social cleavage, 29
Study, the Hadrianic prohibition of, 272
Suicide, rules regarding eulogy for, 185
Sukkot, 137
Sulpicius, 324
Superstition, 178 ff.
Symeon, son of Clopas, 324
Synagogue, 35 ff.
Tabbai, slave of Gamaliel, 116
.Tarfon, 76, 78, 81 ff., 84 ff., 100, 109,
126, 165, 187, 215, 221, 231, 249,
256, 260, 267, 279, 280, 291, 299
Temple: desire for restoration of, 218;
granted by Hadrian, 262
Temple funds, not to be used commer-
cially, 283
Temple sacrifices, 209
Tephilin, 96
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,
304
INDEX
363
Tiberias, 3, 307
Tithes, 83, 138, 283
Titus, 54, 67, 142, 143, 150
Tosefta, 4
Townsmen, 35 (see also Plebeians, Trad-
ers)
Traders, 34, 283 f.
Trajan, 216, 218, 226, 231, 235
Trajan Declaration, 313
Trajan's Day, 219, 233, 313 F.
Turbo, 232
Wolfson, H., 350
Women, 187 if.
Xerxes, 226
Yabneh, 68, 73 8., 118, 159, 217, 219,
235
Yeshebab, 76, 134, 159, 256, 265, 333
Zadok, 76, 124, 325
Zedakah, 331
Zeitlin, S., 294
Venus, her statue erected in Jerusalem, Zefytt Abot, 204
270
Vespasian, 54, 58, 64, 67, 71, 142
Volkmar, 316
Weiss, I. H., 294, 349
Zelophehad, 342
Zephanaiah, 12
Zifron, 118
Zonen, 203
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
166
/6M
* /* >
f 1
,
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
18 386 166
