The Rabbis of Late Antiquity

by Juan Marcos Gutierrez The rabbis of late antiquity reflect a group of men which performed a variety roles in Jewish religious and civic life and which garnered different responses to these roles. The rabbis of Babylonia, like their counterparts in the land of Israel were seen as or functioned as holy men, sages, mystics, magicians, lawyers, judges and as community organizers.1 The rabbis were often honored and feared by many, but they were also despised and rejected by others. The rabbis reflected a class of individuals which crossed hereditary, financial, and social classes and based their authority on their mastery of Torah knowledge. Their power was significant in many ways and incredible limited in others. In the end, rabbinic authority was limited by the extent to which the local populace accepted their authority and the extent which the Persian ruling authorities allowed them to operate.

Moses our Rabbi The authority of the rabbis was ultimately based on the idea that their mastery of Torah was in fact a reflection of the model embodied by none other than Moses. The premise of a revelation of a dual Torah at Sinai to
Jacob Neusner, There We Sat Down, (Hoboken: Katv, 1978), 74. See also Lee I. Levine, The Rabbinic Class in Late Antiquity, (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1989), 99.
1

Moses and most importantly, the transmission of this Torah, in its dual form, from master to disciple was critical to the authority claimed by the rabbis.2 The rabbis were the recipients of this gnosis and their dedication to Torah study reflected their imitation of not only Moses, but even G-d.
3

The rabbinical academies, as far as the rabbis were

concerned, simply reflected a heavenly reality. G-d studied Torah in a heavenly Yeshiva. The chain of tradition enabled the rabbis to live a holy life which conformed to the image of G-d. This model, as one might expect from a rabbinic perspective, placed the rabbis at the top of other groups of Jewish society. The rabbis saw themselves and their mission of instructing Torah as more important than political leadership, synagogue leadership, charity officials, and others.4

The rabbis were authorities on theology and their holy lives could give them, what appeared to be in the sight of others, supernatural powers. As a reflection of their righteousness and of their authority, the rabbis exerted supernatural authority. Like Elijah the prophet, they could cause rain or draught. They were miracle workers and at times could raise the dead. According to rabbinic lore, they could even create and destroy, bless and curse, engage demons, and communicate with the dead.5

H.L. Strack and Gunter Stemberger, Introduction to Talmud and Midrash, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,1992), 31. 3 Jacob Neusner, Rabbinic Judaism: Structure and System, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,1995), 60. 4 Jacob Neusner, There We Sat Down, (Hoboken: Katv,1978), 73-74. 5 Ibid. 79.
2

They were as Neusner describes, anthropologically speaking, medicine men.6 This authority found in the rabbis who had fled the aftermath of the Bar Kokhba war and arrived in Babylon was eventually capitalized by the Elixarch who likely allied himself with the rabbinic class in a trend towards the replacement of the previous authorities then existent in Babylonian Jewish communities.7

They were repositories of a mystical and a legal tradition. While the rabbinic tradition recognized the cessation of prophecy during the time of Malachi the prophet, the rabbis saw themselves as the successors to the prophets. Moreover, the rabbis could engage with prophets like Elijah who regularly appeared to rabbis who provided them with moral and legal instruction.8 This access to the spiritual world reinforced the aura around the rabbinic class.

A key differentiator of the rabbinical class in late antiquity appears to lie in the manner in which the rabbis transcended social class structure. Neusner points to the critical difference in Manichaeism, Mazdaism, Christianity and Judaism, as one connected to the rabbis.9 As where in the former, the masses were exempted from the expectation of achieving or accessing the supernatural skills of the clergy of the various
6 7 8 9

Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.

79. 127. 102. 94.

religious traditions, the rabbis espoused the view and desire that all Jews would become rabbis.10 Rabbis were found from both humble and elevated family positions. Some were poor and others were wealthy. The rabbis encouraged the education of poor students, and often secured their livelihood by arranging marriages with their daughters. While many scholars were part of recognized ancestral families, many were not. Even political influence was not a source of inclusion to the ranks of the rabbis. Learning from the rabbis and imitating their behavior were ultimately the basis for inclusion in their circles.

For of all of the authority that the rabbis may have wielded, the basis for this authority rested on their ability to exert moral and religious influence because of their Torah knowledge.11 The rabbis it appears held little sway in the liturgical life of the synagogue. In the land of Israel, the priests likely served as a counter group contending for authority, in Babylonia, this struggle was not present. The influence and respect for the rabbis was ultimately based on their status as holy men capable of bringing about supernatural effects. Even in those legal areas that they held sway and presided over recognized courts, their realm of authority appears to have been quite limited. Another tool in the world of rabbinic influence was he ban or excommunication. The effectiveness of excommunication however on groups of individuals was questionable,
Ibid. 78. Lee I. Levine, The Rabbinic Class in Late Antiquity, (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1989), 104.
10 11

since ban was dependent upon the support of the large community. A perfect example of this lies in Hullin.

Rabbi Hisda said, A butcher who is a priest and does not give the priestly dues [to another priest] is to be excommunicated from the G-d of Israel. Rabbah ben Rabbi Shila said, The butchers of Huzal have been under Rabbi Hisdas ban for the past twenty-two years.12

The rabbis were particularly conscious of this and attempted to establish their rulings with the recognition that public acquiescence was critical. In the end, only the willingness of Jewish communities to obey rabbinic edicts established rabbinic authority.13

The daily functions which rabbis performed were quite varied.

As

Neusner summarizes, a rabbi might be responsible for everything from securing a that mud build buildings did not collapse after a storm or that logisticals needs of the local food market were maintained. Medical information, public health, and providing for the poor were all responsibilities.14 These civic responsibilities are seen in the life Rabbi Huna in Sura.

12 13 14

Bavli Hullin 132b. Jacob Neusner, There We Sat Down, (Hoboken: Katv,1978), 106, 111. Ibid. 107.

Every cloudy day they would carry him out in a golden palanquin, and he would survey the whole town. Every wall which looked unsafe he would order torn down. If the owner could rebuilt it, he did so, but if not, he [Rabbi Huna] would rebuild it of his own funds...On the eve of every Sabbath, he would send a messenger to the market, and all the vetegables that remained to the market-gardeners, he would buy and throw into the river. Whenever he discovered a medicine, he would fill a jug with it, and suspend it above the doorstep and announce, Whoever wants to, let him come and take. Some say, he knew from traditiona a medicine for [ a certain disease caused by eating with unwashed hands], and he would suspend a jug of water and proclaim, Whoever needs it, let him come so that he may save his life from danger...When he ate bread, he would open his door wide and declare, whoever is in need, let him come and eat.15

It is clear then that a rabbi could function as a judge, adminstrator, or even doctor.16 The variation of offices and the penalties that can be

weilded is further highlighted by a saying of Rabbi Huna.

15 16

B. Ta. 20b-21a. Jacob Neusner, There We Sat Down, (Hoboken: Katv,1978), 107.

When Rabbi Huna would go to court he would say, Bring me the instruments of my trade; the staff, and the strap, and the shofar, and the sandal.17

Here the staff is for beating; the purpose of the strap is for flogging; the shofar is to excommunicate; and lastly, the sandal for the ceremony of halitzah.18

In terms of their position as ajudicators of the law, the rabbis played a dual role. In Babylonia, they operated as extensions or agents of the Exilarch. In doing so they operated as part of the Jewish autonomous government when cases were brought before them. They had

authorization to perform certain duties and inflict certain penalties. They also desired to introduce or enforce laws that were outside of the purview they were granted as agents of the Exilarch.19

The limitations of rabbinic authority are clear when it is realized that not even exilarch under Persian hegemony could exert a measurable degree of coercive power.20 As Neusner notes, the ability of the rabbis to see themselves as lawyers and politicians is amazing. This is because the Persian authorities were concerned with peace and order only. The
Bavli Sanhedrin 7b. Jacob Neusner, There We Sat Down, (Hoboken: Katv,1978), 109-110. 19 Ibid. 111. 20 Ibid. 106.
17 18

rabbis were determined to spread the observance of the Torah per their interpretation. They did not do this so much by operating under the

authority granted by the Exilarch as much as extending their influence in the spheres where they did exercise control as in the academies and in areas of personal status.
21

In those situations where the rabbis did exercise judicial authority, it appears that the cases they reviewed were typically over very small claims. Regarding this, Neusner states:

Litigations coming before the Jewish courts were not particularly important; on the whole they corresponded to those likely to come before a small-claims courr in modern societycases such as these [e.g. theft, betrothal cases, settlement of small estates, etc.] clearly reveal the real substance of issued left in the rabbis hands. With few exceptions, strikingly petty sums of money or barely consquential amounts of property were all that the courses actually ajudicated. Since these were mainly affairs of the lower classes of society, it was those classes that were primarily subject to rulings of the rabbinical courts.22

21 22

Ibid. 126. Ibis. 120.

On a day to day basis, the limitations of rabbinic influence and teaching are clear. The rabbis often sermonized on subjects which reflect a disregard for their perspectives on a number of issues. This does not necessarily point to a wholesale disregard for Torah law, does present a distinction between those observances that the rabbis were promoting and the level of observance common to the masses. But in the sphere of personal status, the rabbis in Babylonia did exert considerable influence. In matters of marriage, offspring, and in areas of divorce for example, their control of the courts insured that their views garnered greater influence than in other areas.23

Rav ordered ordered the chatisement of any person who betrothed by cohabitation [rather than by a document or money exchange], who betrothed in the open street, or who betrothed without previous negotiation; who annulled a letter of divorce, or who mad a declaration against [the validity of] a letter of divorce; who was insolent towards the representative of the Rabbis, or who allowed a Rabbinical ban upon him to remain for thirdy days and did not come the [court] to request the removal of that ban; and of a sonin-law who live sin his father-in-laws house24
23 24

Ibid. 122. Bavli Yevamot 52a.

Rabbinic Conflicts with Segments of Society While the rabbis were respected by much of society, there were elements and individuals who did not find the rabbis worthy of the respect they garnered. The image of the rabbis as holy men with supernatural power could have a negative impact. If rabbis failed to deliver when the masses came to them for aid, they could be ill treated for their failure. They rabbis could also be subjected to ridicule for their pious behavior and was also the result of the privileges that were granted to them and at times demanded by them. The rabbis also saw certain segments of Jewish society with disdain. Individual disregard if not disgust with individual rabbis appears to have been based upon arrogance attributable to certain Sages. The Talmud records the incident of Rabbi Elazar ben Simeon and his poor treatment of a certain individual. While the Talmud records Rabbi Elazars eventual repentance at his own behavior, the impact that such arrogant treatment or attitude could create among the masses is clear. Rabbinic attitudes toward the ammei ha-aretz, a somewhat nebulous class of society appears to have been upon the general lack of education present in their circles. The ammei ha-aretz do not appear to have abandoned Jewish observances, but their approach to Jewish observance and its deviation from rabbinic interpretation appears to have been the major source of contention.
Lee I. Levine, The Rabbinic Class in Late Antiquity, (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1989), 117-118.
25

25

10

The rabbis reflected an emerging class of scholars in Jewish society whose influence and power grew slowly and over time. The rabbis did not see the same impact of their teachings in all communities since the acceptance of each community was critical in the formulation of Jewish life as the rabbis saw it. The rabbis in rabbinic literature therefore often noted an idealized Israel of either former years or of a Jewish community they wished to see. Since their numbers were relatively small in comparison to the community as a whole, the achievements of instituting a Judaism fashioned through the interpretative lenses of the rabbis ultimately required a slow and steady process to achieve the eventual commonality among widely dispersed Jewish communities.

11