sign in sign up
<<
Home , Gemara, Mishnah, Sifre

AND "IN CONTEXT" SOME COMMENTS ON ' S PROPOSALS*

Craig A. Evans

In recent studies Jacob Neusner has argued that the Mishnah should be understood as philosophy.l This understanding is of interest for the present essay because of its implication for understanding the place and function of the Messiah concept in early and, by of kinship, in early Christianity. The essay will begin with a brief review of the form and function of the Mishnah. The balance of the discussion will then be given over to an assessment of Neusner's recent conclusions regarding Jewish messianic ideas.

THE MISHNAH: WHAT IS IT, WHO WROTE IT, AND WHY? The Mishnah is a compilation of rabbinic from the tannaitic period (roughly the first two centuries CE). The themes of the Mishnah are organized into six major divisions (i.e. sedarim, "orders"), each containing several tractates (massektot). It has been traditionally believed that 'Aqiba and his pupils were the most influential contributors to the mishnaic corpus, especially at Usha (c. 150 CE), in the aftermath of the defeat of Bar Kokhba in 135 CE, apparently the year that 'Aqiba was martyred. 2 The Mishnah was edited and published under the direction of Rabbi Judah ha- (c. 200-220 CE). The , something of a supplement to the Mishnah, was probably published a generation or two later. The Babylonian and Palestinian are made up of Mishnah (and Tosefta) plus interpretive expansions called (from the Hebrew word

* An earlier form of this study appeared in IBL 112 (1993) 267-89. E.g. J. Neusner, ludaism: The Evidence of the Mishnah (Chicago and London: University of Chicago, 1981). See also Neusner's A Religion of Pots and Pans? Modes of Philosophical and Theological Discourse in Ancient ludaism (BJS 156; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988) and ludaism as Philosophy: The Method and Message ofthe Mishnah (Columbia: University of South Carolina, 1991). 2 How much of this tradition al portrait is actually historical is difficult to say. Neusner has rightly called into question scholars' tendency to take this tradition at face value, without further ado. 110 CRAIG A. EVANS gamar, "to complete"). The Palestinian was completed c. 400-425 CE and the Babylonian c. 500-550 CE} Jacob Neusner has brought to the study of the rabbinie writings, virtually all of which he and his colleagues have translated into English in the last two decades, many of the insights that New Testament Gospel critics have acquired. Neusner employs historical criticism, form criticism, tradition criticism, and redaction criticism in his study of rabbinie literature. His work has enabled hirn, he believes, to discem the distinctive literary and theological charac­ teristics of the individual writings. No longer should these writings be lumped together as though they reflect a common, unified Judaism. Although Neusner's work has drawn heated criticisms from some quarters, it has in my opinion done much to lead rabbinie scholarship into the mainstream of biblical and related scholarship. How does Neusner understand the Mishnah? He regards it (and the Tosefta, Mishnah's extension) as the "foundational document" of Judaism.4 He believes that this foundational document constitutes a philosophy5 and complete worldview: "The people who have given us this document clearly propose to tell us about their view of the world as they see it or as they want to see it."6 He accordingly refers to Mishnah's contributors as "philosophers," "lawyer-philosophers," "philosopher-Iawyers," or "philosophical juristS."7 Because there is

For more introduction, see the essays by A. Goldberg and M. B. Lerner in S. Safrai (ed.), The Literature ofthe Sages. First Part: Oral Tora, , Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud, External Tractates (CRINT 2.3; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 211-409. Neusner himself dates the Tosefta and the Babylonian Talmud a bit later. For critical study of the oldest rabbinie literature, see J. Neusner, From Text to Historical Context in Rabbinic ludaism: Historical Facts in Systemic Documents: I. The Mishnah, Tosefta, Abot, , to Numbers, Sifre to Deuteronomy (3 vols., Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994). 4 J. Neusner, Messiah in Context: lsrael's History and Destiny in Formative ludaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 23: " ... the Mishnah constitutes the foun­ dation document of Judaism." Neusner (Messiah, 42-74) calls Pirqe 'Abot and the Tosefta, in relation to the Mishnah, "documents of succession." 5 Neusner, Evidence ofthe Mishnah, 44. 6 Neusner, Evidence of the Mishnah, 15,24,230,237. See also J. Neusner, The Oral : The Books of ludaism (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986) 21: " ... the Mishnah consists of a coherent worldview and comprehensive way of living." 7 Neusner, Messiah, 16, 18,41,75. On pp. 30 and 32 (and a few times else- where) Neusner calls Mishnah's framers "lawyers" and "jurisprudents." Of all the