Читать книгу A Companion to the Hellenistic and Roman Near East онлайн

189 страница из 236

While the Mishnah, the Tosefta, and the two Talmuds certainly utilize the written Torah, the writings of the Hebrew Bible, in their discussions and debates about the Oral Torah, it is in the collections of writings known as the Midrashim that commentary upon, and exegesis of, Scripture in and of itself makes up the primary subject of discourse. Although a few students would date it to the Islamic period, most scholars of Rabbinic Literature are still of the opinion that the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael, a commentary on parts of the book Exodus, is to be dated to the fourth century CE, and originated in the land of Israel. Along with the commentary on Leviticus called Sifra, those on Numbers and Deuteronomy named Sifre, and a second commentary on Exodus known as the Mekhilta of R. Simeon bar Yohai, it makes up a group of writings commonly designated the Tannaitic Midrashim, or the Halakhic Midrashim. These texts present themselves as reports of Rabbinic discussion of quoted segments of Scripture, the majority of named authorities in the texts belonging to the period of the Tannaim, or to a generation or so later. Discussion of particular points of law, disputes about the correct interpretation of Scripture, particularly as it affects halakhic decisions, and provision of Scriptural support for the correct execution of individual commandments is prominent in these texts. They do, however, contain haggadic material and some mini-narratives, suggesting a concern with a broader agenda (Schremer 2007). There is no doubting the capital importance of the Midrashim for our understanding of the early Rabbinic movement, and its stances on the meaning and application of Scripture, and its own distinctive attitudes toward Roman power and authority, and the effect which these things may have exercised on decisions taken about halakhic matters. That said, Günther Stemberger speaks for those who engage in research on these texts when he writes: “There is much less that we can learn regarding the political, economic, and social history of Palestine in the tannaitic and early amoraic periods” (Stemberger 2010: 133). Noting that only two Roman emperors (Titus and Trajan) are named in these Midrashim, and that the only other named figure representing Roman authority is an elusive character named Antoninus, Stemberger emphasizes the indirect character of the historical information which these texts may yield: details about the daily workings of Roman administration; Roman officials and their relative positions in the administrative chain of command; the military presence in the Roman district of Palestine, and Rabbinic reactions to it; and, above all, Rabbinic reaction to the impact of Roman culture on Jewish social and domestic life. Indeed, much the same must be said of the Mishnah, the Tosefta, and the Jerusalem Talmud: they convey little in the way of direct, “hard” historical information in the area of politics (and when they do, evidence from other sources is often required to verify or corroborate it). At the same time, however, they provide invaluable insight into the growth and development of Rabbinic Judaism; the various stances it adopts toward the ruling power; and the strategies which it employs for effectively dealing with Roman incursions in daily life and maintaining the survival, identity, and integrity of the Jewish people (S. Schwarz 2005).