Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Is there anything to this?

Tosefta, Sanhedrin 9.7: 7 Rabbi Meir used to say, "What is the meaning of, 'For a curse of God is he that is hung' (= Deuteronomy 21.23)? [It is like the case of] two brothers, twins, who resembled each other. One ruled over the whole world, the other took to robbery. After a time the one who took to robbery was caught, and they crucified him on a cross. And every one who passed to and fro said, 'It seems that the king is crucified.' Therefore it is said, 'A curse of God is he that is hung.'"

Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 46b: 46b .... It has been taught: Rabbi Meir said, "A parable was stated, 'To what is this matter comparable? To two twin brothers [who lived] in one city; one was appointed king, and the other took to highway robbery. At the king's command they hanged him. But all who saw him exclaimed, "The king is hanged," whereupon the king issued a command and he was taken down.'" ....

I was reading R. Travers Herford when I came across the first passage, and then I tracked down the second, as well. Herford's own interpretation of this passage, that the king is God the Father while the robber is Jesus the Son (making them "twins" somehow), seems highly unlikely to me. But what especially the first passage immediately made me think of was Barabbas, not to mention the crucifixion of Jesus between two robbers. The second passage is perhaps less striking in that regard, but still, the robber is crucified and people exclaim that it is the king, instead, so that some kind of switch is being imagined.

Thoughts?

Ben.

ETA: R. Travers Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, pages 86-88.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Secret Alias »

I too was fascinated by this reference. Meir was a heretic/disciple of the heretic Aher. Close to Christianity. The substitution doctrine (i.e. Simon, Judas, Titus etc being substituted for Jesus).
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Joseph D. L. »

I remember posting this on my facebook page a few years ago. It’s one of the things that got me thinking about the dual nature of some of the Gospel characters, like Judas and Thomas Judas Didymus, the brothers Zebedee, and of course Jesus and Barabbas.

But you try making Giuseppe understand this simple concept while he’s on about Xenu Jesus.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Barabbas is often interpreted in light of the scapegoat ritual, and one detail from the parable seems perfectly consonant with this connection:

Tosefta, Sanhedrin 9.7: 7 Rabbi Meir used to say, "What is the meaning of, 'For a curse of God is he that is hung' (= Deuteronomy 21.23)? [It is like the case of] two brothers, twins, who resembled each other. One ruled over the whole world, the other took to robbery. After a time the one who took to robbery was caught, and they crucified him on a cross. And every one who passed to and fro said, 'It seems that the king is crucified.' Therefore it is said, 'A curse of God is he that is hung.'"

Mishnah, Yoma 6.1a: 1a The two goats of Yom Hakkippurim: it is a requirement that they be alike in appearance, in size, in value, and that they be bought at the same time. But if they are not alike they are still valid. If he bought one today and the other tomorrow, they are valid.

Barnabas 7.6: 6 Pay attention to what he commands: "Take two fine goats who are alike and offer them as a sacrifice; and let the priest take one of them as a whole burnt offering for sins" (≈ Leviticus 16.7-9).

Leviticus 16.7-9: 7 He shall take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the doorway of the tent of meeting. 8 Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat. 9 Then Aaron shall offer the goat on which the lot for the Lord fell, and make it a sin offering.

The original command in Leviticus does not specify that the goats be alike, but we can see that Jewish tradition suggested they be so.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

And of course there is always this parallel to consider:

Philo, Against Flaccus 6.36-40: 36 There was a certain madman named Carabbas, afflicted not with a wild, savage, and dangerous madness (for that comes on in fits without being expected either by the patient or by bystanders), but with an intermittent and more gentle kind; this man spent all this days and nights naked in the roads, minding neither cold nor heat, the sport of idle children and wanton youths; 37 and they, driving the poor wretch as far as the public gymnasium, and setting him up there on high that he might be seen by everybody, flattened out a leaf of papyrus and put it on his head instead of a diadem, and clothed the rest of his body with a common door mat instead of a cloak and instead of a scepter they put in his hand a small stick of the native papyrus which they found lying by the way side and gave to him; 38 and when, like actors in theatrical spectacles, he had received all the insignia of royal authority, and had been dressed and adorned like a king, the young men bearing sticks on their shoulders stood on each side of him instead of spear-bearers, in imitation of the bodyguards of the king, and then others came up, some as if to salute him, and others making as though they wished to plead their causes before him, and others pretending to wish to consult with him about the affairs of the state. 39 Then from the multitude of those who were standing around there arose a wonderful shout of men calling out Maris; and this is the name by which it is said that they call the kings among the Syrians; for they knew that Agrippa was by birth a Syrian, and also that he was possessed of a great district of Syria of which he was the sovereign; 40 when Flaccus heard, or rather when he saw this, he would have done right if he had apprehended the maniac and put him in prison, that he might not give to those who reviled him any opportunity or excuse for insulting their superiors, and if he had chastised those who dressed him up for having dared both openly and disguisedly, both with words and actions, to insult a king and a friend of Caesar, and one who had been honored by the Roman senate with imperial authority; but he not only did not punish them, but he did not think fit even to check them, but gave complete license and impunity to all those who designed ill, and who were disposed to show their enmity and spite to the king, pretending not to see what he did see, and not to hear what he did hear.

This one is more king-and-madman or prince-and-pauper than king-and-robber, but the interchange is still of note.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Giuseppe »

Talmud, Gittin 55b-57a:

It is said that the war [of 70] has been provoked by the rivalry between Kamza and Bar Kamza and the rejection of a sacrifice. This scandal for a minor cause, that did lead to the destruction of Temple and of his city, became the example itself of the gratuitous hatred, a hatred without fondaments".

(My translation from French, Nanine Charbonnel, Jésus-Christ, sublime figure de papier, p. 395).

This resembles the opposition between Barabbas and Jesus Barabbas.

But still all these options are mere tools derived from Jewish tradition.

What was the goal that leads the Judaizers to use these tools, was mere sectarian hostility against the Marcion's Jesus, the only Jesus known to be:
  • Son of Father
  • never self-proclaimed the Christ
Hence the best article on Barabbas remains that (and who disagrees with me on this particular point - Joseph D.L. in primis - is an idiot and dishonest person):

http://radikalkritik.de/geschichte/paul-louis-couchoud
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Giuseppe »


The Gemara explains: Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtza and bar Kamtza. This is as there was a certain man whose friend was named Kamtza and whose enemy was named bar Kamtza. He once made a large feast and said to his servant: Go bring me my friend Kamtza. The servant went and mistakenly brought him his enemy bar Kamtza.

The man who was hosting the feast came and found bar Kamtza sitting at the feast. The host said to bar Kamtza. That man is the enemy [ba’al devava] of that man, that is, you are my enemy. What then do you want here? Arise and leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: Since I have already come, let me stay and I will give you money for whatever I eat and drink. Just do not embarrass me by sending me out.

The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: I will give you money for half of the feast; just do not send me away. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza then said to him: I will give you money for the entire feast; just let me stay. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Finally, the host took bar Kamtza by his hand, stood him up, and took him out.

After having been cast out from the feast, bar Kamtza said to himself: Since the Sages were sitting there and did not protest the actions of the host, although they saw how he humiliated me, learn from it that they were content with what he did. I will therefore go and inform [eikhul kurtza] against them to the king. He went and said to the emperor: The Jews have rebelled against you. The emperor said to him: Who says that this is the case? Bar Kamtza said to him: Go and test them; send them an offering to be brought in honor of the government, and see whether they will sacrifice it.

The emperor went and sent with him a choice three-year-old calf. While bar Kamtza was coming with the calf to the Temple, he made a blemish on the calf’s upper lip. And some say he made the blemish on its eyelids, a place where according to us, i.e., halakha, it is a blemish, but according to them, gentile rules for their offerings, it is not a blemish. Therefore, when bar Kamtza brought the animal to the Temple, the priests would not sacrifice it on the altar since it was blemished, but they also could not explain this satisfactorily to the gentile authorities, who did not consider it to be blemished.

The blemish notwithstanding, the Sages thought to sacrifice the animal as an offering due to the imperative to maintain peace with the government. Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them: If the priests do that, people will say that blemished animals may be sacrificed as offerings on the altar. The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages thought to kill him so that he would not go and speak against them. Rabbi Zekharya said to them: If you kill him, people will say that one who makes a blemish on sacrificial animals is to be killed. As a result, they did nothing, bar Kamtza’s slander was accepted by the authorities, and consequently the war between the Jews and the Romans began.

https://www.sefaria.org/Gittin.56a.4?lang=bi
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2878
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by maryhelena »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 5:48 pm Is there anything to this?

Tosefta, Sanhedrin 9.7: 7 Rabbi Meir used to say, "What is the meaning of, 'For a curse of God is he that is hung' (= Deuteronomy 21.23)? [It is like the case of] two brothers, twins, who resembled each other. One ruled over the whole world, the other took to robbery. After a time the one who took to robbery was caught, and they crucified him on a cross. And every one who passed to and fro said, 'It seems that the king is crucified.' Therefore it is said, 'A curse of God is he that is hung.'"

Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 46b: 46b .... It has been taught: Rabbi Meir said, "A parable was stated, 'To what is this matter comparable? To two twin brothers [who lived] in one city; one was appointed king, and the other took to highway robbery. At the king's command they hanged him. But all who saw him exclaimed, "The king is hanged," whereupon the king issued a command and he was taken down.'" ....

I was reading R. Travers Herford when I came across the first passage, and then I tracked down the second, as well. Herford's own interpretation of this passage, that the king is God the Father while the robber is Jesus the Son (making them "twins" somehow), seems highly unlikely to me. But what especially the first passage immediately made me think of was Barabbas, not to mention the crucifixion of Jesus between two robbers. The second passage is perhaps less striking in that regard, but still, the robber is crucified and people exclaim that it is the king, instead, so that some kind of switch is being imagined.

Thoughts?

Ben.

ETA: R. Travers Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, pages 86-88.
Is there anything to the story in your two quotes? Indeed there is. My thoughts:

This story of two brothers, two kings, does have reflections of Hasmonean history.

Antiquities Book 14.ch.16

And thus did the government of the Asamoneans cease, a hundred twenty and six years after it was first set up. This family was a splendid and an illustrious one, both on account of the nobility of their stock, and of the dignity of the high priesthood, as also for the glorious actions their ancestors had performed for our nation; but these men lost the government by their dissensions one with another, and it came to Herod, the son of Antipater, who was of no more than a vulgar family, and of no eminent extraction, but one that was subject to other kings. And this is what history tells us was the end of the Asamonean family.

Hyrancus II became King and High Priest in 67/66 b.c. His brother, Aristobulus II removed Hyrancus in 66 b.c. and ruled until Pompey removed him in 63 b.c. Hyrancus was restored as High Priest but not as King.

The son of Aristobulus II, Antigonus, removed Hyrancus II in 40 b.c. (cutting of his ear, re Josephus, thus denying him the High Priesthood) Antigonus was himself removed in 37 b.c. by Rome, taken to Antioch and executed.

Roman historian Cassius Dio says that he was crucified and records in his Roman History: "These people [the Jews] Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and scourged, a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, and so slew him. Wikipedia.


Gregory Doudna: What has long been overlooked is that a Qumran text, widely acknowledged to have been authored at about this very time, speaks directly of a Jewish ruler being “hung up alive”—just like Dio Cassius’s account of the fate of Antigonus Mattathias. This is found at 4QpNah 3-4 i 8-ii 1, which is a pesher unit consisting of a biblical quotation followed by its interpretation. The text introduces this unit with the words: “concerning the one hanged up alive on a stake it is proclaimed:”, or “to the one hanged up alive on a stake he (i.e. God) proclaims:”

http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/201 ... 8018.shtml

Philo’s Carabbas story in Flaccus:

It’s an allegory: It’s not Agrippa himself that is being mocked. It’s the Hasmonean history of which he is a descendant that is being mocked. (Ancestry, re Josephus via his father Aristobulus IV and his grandmother Mariamne). The Alexandrian crowd say Agrippa is by birth a Syrian: Hasmonean rulership ended with the execution of Antigonus in Syrian Antioch.

Philo has Agrippa state that he has high priests in his ancestors, i.e. Agrippa has Hasmonean decent.

Embassy to Gaius‘ ’And I have kings for my grandfathers and for my ancestors, the greater part of whom have been called high priests, looking upon their royal power as inferior to their office as priests; and thinking that the high priesthood is as much superior to the power of a king’’.

Philo’s Carabbas mocking story of Hasmonean history is interesting. Agrippa has, re Philo, just arrived in Alexandria from Rome. Rome denied Agrippa’s ancestor’s rulership in Judaea but now, through Agrippa, Rome is resurrecting Hasmonean rulership under Agrippa….

The gospel Jesus story? King of the Jews crucified….that’s what happened to Hasmonean rulership in Judaea.

If it’s early Christian origins that’s of interest - then, methinks, more time should be spend on Philo and Josephus than Eusebius …. ;)

(So.....the two Jewish texts quoted look like backing up Cassius Dio.....and Greg Doudna re the DSS,,,great find Ben....)
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Joseph D. L. »

  • Giuseppe says anyone who thinks Barabbas is the scapegoat is an idiot
  • Richard Carrier thinks Barabbas is the scapegoat
  • Ergo Giuseppe thinks Richard Carrier is an idiot
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Rabbi Meir and the parable of the twins.

Post by Giuseppe »

It is not just so, Joseph D.L.

My point is that there was in the Jewish tradition the (polemical) comparison between two apparently (and only apparently) identical men, as both Ben and Nanine Charbonnel have proved. It is reductive to reduce all to Leviticus 16, even if Leviticus 16 is part of that tradition.

But Couchoud/Stahl's point is more subtle. The tool is given gratuitously by Lev 16 etc, but the goal is: attack Marcion's Jesus (by reducing him to the bastard Barabbas).

The goal has justified the use of that tool.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply