Journal Articles and Book Chapters by Sarit Kattan Gribetz
The Palestinian and Babylonian Talmuds preserve fascinating stories about the origins of Roman fe... more The Palestinian and Babylonian Talmuds preserve fascinating stories about the origins of Roman festivals, through which they attempt to connect Roman history with Jewish history. This paper offers contextual readings of these narratives (Y. Avodah Zarah 1:2 [39c] and B. Avodah Zarah 8b) in light of Greek and Roman texts, epigraphical material, and numismatics, and places these rabbinic narratives within broader debates about cultural memory, Jewish historiography, calendars, and time. In one story, the idolatrous sins committed by a series of Israelite kings are blamed for the geological, mythical, and historical origins of the city of Rome, and a series of Roman imperial motifs and figures (the Tiber River, Remus and Romulus, Numa) are inverted. In another, the Romans are said to draw on the power of the Torah in order to defeat their Greek rivals. The rabbinic stories of Roman festivals and their Jewish origins can be understood as examples of what James C. Scott has called "a hidden transcript"-texts that bring to light an alternative perspective, that of the rabbis, within a Roman imperial context that they often interpreted as hostile or threatening.
The precise historical moment when Deut 6 (Shema Israel) was transformed into a prayer ritual is ... more The precise historical moment when Deut 6 (Shema Israel) was transformed into a prayer ritual is uncertain and a matter of scholarly debate. It is generally assumed that by the time of the Mishnah's redaction (ca. 200 C. E.), the recitation of the Shema was already a standardized ritual because the Mishnah refers to it as a well-known practice. Indeed, the Mishnah takes for granted that its audience is so familiar with the prayer that it does not define it at all, but rather delves immediately into detailed discussions of its timing and exceptions that might arise in everyday life. Other sources from the Second Temple period, however, challenge the idea of the antiquity and ubiquity of such a standard prayer ritual composed of biblical verses from Deuteronomy and Numbers. This paper examines a number of key texts from the Second Temple period that seemingly refer to the recitation of the Shema prayer and that have been used by scholars to reconstruct the origins of this liturgical ritual. Through a close reading of four of these sources (the Letter of Aristeas, Philo, the Community Rule, and Josephus), I argue that they might not refer to the practice of the Shema recitation that we know from later rabbinic literature. Rather, they provide us with a lens into the diversity of ways that Deut 6:6-7 -"take to heart these instructions… impress them on your children… recite them when you stay at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you get up" -was understood and fulfilled in the Second Temple period. The Letter of Aristeas describes an act of meditating on God's works of creation; the Community Rule prescribes daily recitation of laws; Philo emphasizes the instruction of justice; and Josephus frames the obligation as a commandment to commemorate the deliverance out of Egypt twice daily. The particular framing of the Shema ritual that we come to know in the Mishnah might have appropriated and extended the practice of reciting the Shema in the temple (some evidence suggests that the Shema was recited in the temple), but this was only one of the ways in which Deut 6:7 was enacted and fulfilled in the pre-destruction period. Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is One. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. Take to heart these instructions with which I charge you this day. Impress them upon your children, and recite them when you stay at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you get up. Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead; inscribe them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates (Deuteronomy 6:4-9). 1
Throughout rabbinic literature, we find accounts of dialogues between rabbis and non-rabbinic fig... more Throughout rabbinic literature, we find accounts of dialogues between rabbis and non-rabbinic figures: so-called "heretics" (minim) and "idolaters," magicians and philosophers, Roman and Persian officials, members of competing Jewish elites, amei ha-aretz, Gentile women, and others. The topics of these conversations -the interpretation of biblical verses, the nature of God, the meaning of dreams, the reasoning for particular laws, the operation of the cosmos -are usually topics discussed internally amongst the rabbis themselves, and yet dozens of such dialogues between rabbis and their "others" appear in rabbinic sources. The ubiquity of such dialogues might surprise readers who are accustomed to the inward-looking orientation of rabbinic texts, and it is tempting, in light of that orientation, to write off these conversations as marginal to the rabbinic project. Some rabbinic statements leave very little room for engagement with outsiders: in the Babylonian Talmud, Rabbi Yohanan warns that "a Gentile who studies the Torah is punishable by death," while another passage recalls Ravs caution that "one who learns even a single thing from a Magus is punishable by death!" 1 These texts both discourage Gentiles from turning to the Torah and rabbis from approaching the wisdom of Gentiles, and while their Jewish Studies Quarterly, Volume 19 (2012) pp. 91-103 ' Mohr Siebeck -ISSN 0944-5706 * In May 2009 Princeton University hosted a two-day conference devoted to exploring accounts of dialogues between rabbis and non-rabbis within rabbinic sources, with a focus on the intersections between the literary texts and their historical contexts. The following two issues of JSQ feature six articles that emerged out of the conference and together represent new approaches to the topic. Many thanks to Peter Schäfer for his ongoing support (material and moral) of the conference and this set of special issues and to Baru Saul for her logistical help during the conference. Thanks also to conference respondents, whose feedback improved the ideas presented in this issue -
Introduction to "Jewish and Christian Cosmogony in Late Antiquity."
In 1584, in the Italian village of Montereale, a poor miller named Domenico Scandella, known more... more In 1584, in the Italian village of Montereale, a poor miller named Domenico Scandella, known more commonly by his nickname Menocchio, described his view of the world's creation:
On the location of this tree and its relationship to other sacred trees mentioned in biblical tex... more On the location of this tree and its relationship to other sacred trees mentioned in biblical texts and to the prophet Deborah (described as sitting "under the palm tree of Deborah, between
Despite the apparent finality of Heschel’s pronouncement, in 1951, that Judaism is a ‘religion of... more Despite the apparent finality of Heschel’s pronouncement, in 1951, that Judaism is a ‘religion of time’, the past two decades have seen renewed scholarly interest in the relationship between time, time-keeping, and forms of temporality in Jewish culture. This vibrant engagement with time and temporality in Jewish studies is not an isolated phenomenon. It participates in a broader interdisciplinary examination of time across the arts, humanities and sciences, both in the academy and beyond it. The current article outlines the innovative approaches of this ‘temporal turn’ within ancient Judaism and Jewish studies and reflects on why time has become such an important topic of research in recent years. We address a number of questions: What are the trends in recent work on time and temporality in the fields of ancient Judaism and Jewish studies? What new insights into the study of Judaism have emerged as a result of this focus on time? What reasons (academic, historiographical, technological and geopolitical) underpin this interest in time in such a wide variety of disciplines? And finally, what are some new avenues for exploration in this growing field at the intersection of time and Jewish studies? The article identifies trends and discusses key works in the broad field of Jewish studies, while providing more specific surveys of particular developments in the fields of Second Temple Judaism, Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls, rabbinic literature, and some medieval Jewish sources.
This article examines the reception of rabbinic literature in South Korea, focusing on a series o... more This article examines the reception of rabbinic literature in South Korea, focusing on a series of books titled Talmud (T’almudŭ). We analyze dozens of volumes published between 1979 and 2016, identifying the subgenres that have been produced, individual editions that exemplify the development and diversity of the editions, and the religious traditions—Jewish, Confucian, and Christian—with which these books engage. The article also reflects on the place and significance of these Korean texts in the long reception of rabbinic literature.
Recent scholarship has analyzed the Nag Hammadi codices as fourth- or fifth-century books that ou... more Recent scholarship has analyzed the Nag Hammadi codices as fourth- or fifth-century books that ought to be interpreted in the historical, ecclesiastical, ritual, theological, and literary environment in which they were produced. Most studies have assumed, implicitly or explicitly, that the codices’ primary readers were men—either in monastic, scholastic, or other settings. This article proposes that, in light of evidence for women’s literacy in the region, we ought to consider that women, too, were among the codices’ readers, and then explains what difference it makes, for our interpretation of the textual collec- tions and our understanding of their reception and transmission, to imagine such women readers.
In Book Two of De Specialibus Legibus (Special Laws), Philo of Alexandria presents his readers wi... more In Book Two of De Specialibus Legibus (Special Laws), Philo of Alexandria presents his readers with a “festival manual”: a list of ten holidays, their origins, and the practices associated with each one. Philo names the first festival in his list ἡμέρα πᾶσα, “every day,” about which he muses: “If all the forces of the virtues remained unvanquished throughout, then the time from birth to death would be one continuous feast.” In what historical, intellectual, and literary context might we best understand Philo’s “every day festival”? And how can we understand Philo’s view of quotidian time in the context of his conception of time and temporality more generally? In this paper, I argue that Philo’s presentation of this festival of the every day, and, more generally, his perspective on daily time, is an engagement not only with biblical texts but also with contemporaneous Stoic perspectives about time, especially those articulated by the philosopher Seneca the Younger. I thus read Philo’s De Specialibus Legibus in conversation with Seneca’s De Brevitate Vitae (On the Shortness of Life), analyzing their similar perspectives on daily time and suggesting several ways of understanding the connections between the two texts. I conclude by explaining how appreciating the similarities between Philo and Seneca’s ideas about quotidian time also allows us better to understand Philo’s exposition of the other festivals, especially his presentation of the Sabbath.
Rabbinic sources develop the theological concept of ancestral merit, the idea that the merits of ... more Rabbinic sources develop the theological concept of ancestral merit, the idea that the merits of parents, especially fore-parents, continue to offer their descendants favor in the eyes of God. The term zekhut avot is often translated as “merit of the fathers.” In this article, I ask: to whom does “avot,” in the term zekhut avot, refer? I argue that the con- cept of zekhut avot encompassed the biblical matriarchs in addition to the patriarchs, though this fact has often gone unnoticed or been deemphasized in modern schol- arship, and that the terms “maʿaseh imahot” and “zekhut imahot” appear alongside “maʿaseh avot” and “zekhut avot” in the sources. I argue further that the figure of Rachel stands most prominently among the matriarchs whose merit assists her descendants, parallel to Abraham’s binding of Isaac as the paradigmatic event that accrued patriar- chal merit. I conclude by offering historical and literary reasons for this development in rabbinic sources.