By Roy B. Blizzard
We are continuing our study of a comparison between the words of Jesus and the words of rabbis prior to, contemporary with, and following Jesus, recorded for us in the Mishnah, Order Nezikin, Tractate Avot, or the Chapters of the Fathers.
We stated in Part I that there is an underlying, overriding, and yet simple, theme that serves as the foundational theme of biblical faith. That theme is tsedakah frequently translated as righteousness, or purity, but in reality a word that means so much more.
It is difficult for us to understand or to grasp the implication of the word until we listen carefully to the teachings of Jesus and his contemporaries. In order to begin to grasp the full implications, we must first understand that biblical faith is not so much man’s actions directed upward toward God but rather his actions directed outward toward his fellowman.
In Part I in this article, we left off with the sayings of Jose ben Joezer of Zeredah and Jose ben Jochanan of Jerusalem. Joezer had said, "Let your house be a meetinghouse for the wise and sit amidst the dust of their feet and drink in their words thirstily."
In Mishnah 5, Jose ben Jochanan of Jerusalem said, "Let your house be open wide and let the needy be members of your household." Notice again the emphasis being placed upon man’s responsibility to his fellow man.
There is something else to which I would like to-call your attention. To me, it is so exciting! Notice as we read through these pages in Mishnah that it is specifying the city from which each of the rabbis come, i.e., Antigonus of Socho, or Jose ben Joezer of Zeredah. And in Mishnah 6 we read of Nittai the Arbelite.
To me, this is one of the exciting, thrilling things about the Bible, about the Mishnah, even historical documents such as the writings of Josephus, in that they are talking about places, cities, countries, empires, mountains, rivers, kings, kingdoms, etc., all of which can be verified historically and/or archaeologically to establish the authenticity of the document, the accuracy of the author.
I am sure that I got more excited reading this material because I have been there. I have been to the cities, the countries, the historical and archaeological sites, and as I read, just one word will elicit a mental and emotional image that immediately takes me to that place. Arbela, e.g., is one of the great historical sites on the edge of the Sea of Galilee along the southwestern shore bordering the Arbel Valley which, in turn, borders the Valley of Ginnosar that marks the dividing line between lower Galilee to the south, and upper Galilee to the north.
Just one word can elicit an explosion of mental images. You can see the geographic area, the archaeological site, etc., which, in turn, leads to stories from historical writers such Josephus, for example, who talks in detail about Arbela during the first revolt and the time of Herod Agrippa.
Nittai, the Arbelite, also said, "Keep thee far from an evil neighbor, and associate not thyself with the godless, and abandon not belief in retribution." Does this call to your mind the words of Paul in I Thessalonians 5:22 when he writes, "Abstain from all appearances of evil." Do not associate with the godless, and even in the midst of seeming despair, do not abandon the idea of the final judgment and the justice of God. Vengeance belongs to God. One day, there will be a judgment and men will be brought into account for their deeds. Regardless of what it is that is happening to you, do not abandon the idea of the ultimate judgment and justice of God.
In Mishnah 11, Chapter 1, Abtalion said, "Ye Sages, be cautious of your words lest ye incur the penalty of exile and be banished to a place of evil waters whereof the disciples that come after you drink and die and the heavenly name be profaned." This is an interesting Mishnah that, if you know nothing of Jewish history, it will make little sense and will remain a mystery to you. Abtalion enjoins the Sages, the religious leaders, to be cautious in their teachings. Teaching should be so precise that it leaves no room for misinterpretation, or misunderstanding, or could possibly lead from misunderstanding into heresy.
Incurring the penalty of exile and being banished to the place of evil waters is a specific reference to the city of Alexandria in Egypt. During the time of Jeremiah the prophet, and before the destruction of the Temple by Nebuchadnezzer of Babylon in 586 B.C.E, many of the Jews fled from Israel to Egypt. Some even fled as far down the Nile as Aswan, and to the little island in the middle of the Nile known as Elephantine, or Yeb.
At Elephantine, there was a large Jewish community which had constructed a temple oriented toward the Temple in Jerusalem. In the archaeological excavations at Elephantine, many letters were found written on papyrus that were letters of correspondence between the Jews at Elephantine and the Jews back in Jerusalem.
Some of the individuals mentioned in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah are mentioned in the Elephantine papyri. Many of the Jews that were not taken into captivity fled before the destruction to Alexandria. During the time of Alexander the Great, the Greek or Hellenistic period, the Hellenistic culture influenced these Jews to the degree that by the third century B.C.E., they no longer understood Hebrew.
Thus, there was the necessity for the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. That translation was probably finished during the reign of Ptolemy Lagos about 285 B.C.E. and is known today as the Septuagint, sometimes abbreviated as LXX, or the 70. Tradition has it that it was translated by seventy learned Jews. Alexandria is mentioned as a place of exile because it was there, according to the Jews back in the land of Israel, that Hellenistic Jewry corrupted Jewish orthodoxy and promoted heresy.
To illustrate this point, commentators frequently refer to Mishnah 3 of this chapter and state that the teaching of Antigonus of Socho was misrespresented by two of his disciples, Zadok and Boethus, who taught that there is no immortality of the soul and no reward in the world to come.
This heresy led to the establishment of the sects of the Sadducees and the Boethusians. We now learn how the sect of the Sadducees originated. The admonition of Abtalion should be heeded by every teacher today. Be careful what you say. Be careful what you teach.
We all have to watch out for that. I have found out that I have said things that were taken out of context, misunderstood, misquoted, and before I knew what had happened, I had already lapsed into heresy, according to what I had supposedly said. We need to be very careful to make sure that what we say is said in such a way as to be so explicit that it cannot be misunderstood. That is not always easy. There are times when one’s audience might not have a sufficient background to understand what is being said. We need to be aware of our audience and sure of our words.
In Mishnah 12, we are told that Hillel and Shammai received their tradition from the foregoing Sages. Hillel and Shammai are the last and most renowned of the zugot, or pairs. Notice once again how each receives from his predecessor so that all goes back not just to Moses but all the way back to God.
Hillel and Shammai were both contemporary with Jesus and considered two of the greatest Sages of their day, representing two different schools of Jewish thought. Hillel, in most instances, might be considered more liberal. The school of Shammai, on the other hand, might appear more conservative.
I personally believe we could identify a third school of thought as the school of Jesus – all three contemporary with one another in the first century. I believe that can be established from some of the teachings of Jesus when He runs headlong into a controversy between the two different schools, the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai.
To illustrate that point, we can note Jesus’ teaching about divorce in Matthew 5:31 when He says, "Whoever shall put away his wife let him give her a bill of divorcement." Jesus is quoting from Deuteronomy 24:1. He said, "You have heard that it has been said, ‘You shall not commit adultery."’ He goes on to say, "But I say unto you that whosoever puts away his wife save for the cause of fornication causes her to commit adultery, and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced shall commit adultery."
I believe there has been more guilt and condemnation brought upon the people of God from misunderstanding and mistranslation of this passage of scripture than perhaps any other saying or teaching of Jesus. I have actually seen congregations split apart over the subject of divorce. Murder, theft, whatever, God can forgive it all; but in some peculiar way, divorce becomes the unpardonable sin.
What is Jesus really saying? In order to understand what is happening, we have to see Jesus coming into conflict with the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai over the subject of divorce and remarriage.
In Everyman’s Talmud by A. Cohen, p. 166, we read that in the first century of the present era, the schools of Shammai and Hillel took opposite views of the biblical text in Deuteronomy 24:1 which allows a man to send his wife away if she find no favor in his eyes because he has found some "unseeming thing" in her. The phrase "unseeming thing" is literally the nakedness of a thing which the school of Shammai explained to mean that a man may not divorce his wife unless he discovered her to be unfaithful to him.
Hillel, on the other hand, declared he may divorce her even if she spoiled his cooking. From the words, "…if she find no favor in his eyes," Rabbi Akiva argued that he may divorce her even if he found another woman more beautiful than she. (Order Nashim, Tractate Gittin 9:10)
The more lenient opinion of Hillel was adopted as law so that in Jesus’ day a man could put away his wife even if he did not like her looks. Here we have an example of something Jesus taught when he talked about the scribes and the Pharisees teaching for commandment the traditions of men. This was not a commandment. In Jesus’ day, Jewish law was very specific. There were reasons whereby a man could put away his wife and a wife could put away a husband. It was specific in law. Everybody knew it.
I am not going to discuss it in this article in any detail because it is beyond the scope of this study. What is important to understand is that, in Jesus’ day, there was a certain body of law that specified why a man or a woman would be justified in going to a rabbinic court and being granted a bill of divorcement. Bet-Shammai (the school of Shammai) said he could do so only for adultery, and Hillel said he could put away his wife for any reason. In the midst of this controversy, Jesus taught that a man is not to put away his wife for any reason except for the cause of fornication.
What does he mean? Fornication is illicit sexual relations by unmarrieds. In biblical times, virginity was held in high regard, and the marriage was arranged by the bridegroom and the father of the bride, and the contract, called a ketubah, was written and signed. In the contract, it specified, as many as four times, that the bridegroom was paying such-and-such a price for the virgin daughter of so-and-so in lieu of her virginity. The price was agreed upon. The amount was paid.
When the ceremony took place, the bride and groom retired to a special place to consummate their marriage. The marriage would be consummated on a special sheet. The next morning, that sheet would be displayed publically with blood on it to serve as a testimony to all the guests at the wedding feast that the woman had, indeed, been a virgin. That special sheet was known, from Deuteronomy, Chapter 22, as "the tokens of her virginity." It would be kept with her for the rest of her life and, according to Jewish law, if at anytime the husband accused his wife of not being a virgin when they married, all she had to do was bring out the "tokens of her virginity" and show it to a rabbi (or his equivalent), and her husband could never divorce her for any reason because he had falsely accused her.
Jesus enters into the midst of this argument and He says that the only reason whereby a man who is in a proper relationship with both God and his wife should ever put away his wife is if the marriage contract was falsified which would, in turn, render the union null and void, and that is all He has to say about it. He does not go into all of the exceptions because He does not have to. They are already specified by law. He is simply engaging in the controversy between the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai, and He enters into the controversy by setting things into His own unique perspective.
What does it mean when Jesus says that if a man puts away his wife and somebody marries her that he causes her to commit adultery? Because, if she had been put away for no legal reason, she would still be considered to be married. The onus, again, is on the husband who unjustly puts his wife away.
Frankly, this passage has no practical application insofar as our society and our culture is concerned today. To take this controversy out of context and to impose spiritual bondage on individuals in the congregation of God is to render them a grave disservice.
What is exciting to me is that, when you know these things, when you have studied it from its historical and cultural perspective, it is liberating. However, here one must again be careful. Many times when someone starts talking about liberty and freedom, people automatically take that to be license to do whatever they want whenever they want. Liberty is not the right to do what you want; it is the right to do what you ought.
Hillel and Shammai said, "Be thou disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving your fellow creatures and drawing them nigh to the law. If you look very carefully at this statement, you can see that it is very similar to the statements Jesus makes in the Sermon on the Mount. Love peace. Run after the holiness and the completeness that only God can give. Love your fellow creatures, those that God has created…and you shall love your neighbor as yourself. Do you remember when they came to Jesus and asked him which was the greatest commandment of all and He responds, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, and all you soul, and the second is like unto it; you shall love your neighbor as yourself?" If you love them as yourself, you are going to attempt to bring them into an intimate relationship with God and let Him become a reality in their lives.
One of the most famous of the sayings of Hillel is quoted in Mishnah 14, "If I am not for myself, who will be for me, and if I am for mine ownself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel indicates that one can attain true virtue only through his own strivings. No one else can be righteous for you. If one is selfish and disregards others, what kind of man is he? The moral duties and responsibilities that man has to his fellowman must be carried out immediately as the condition or situation arises and not be postponed lest the opportunity to serve others is lost. Selfishness, disregard for others, are not traits of the one who is the child of God and is practicing tsedakah or gemilut hasadim.
In Mishnah 15, Shammai said, "Make the study of the law a fixed duty. Say little and do much and regard every man with cheerful countenance." Notice that the emphasis here is (1) on study; and (2) on actions directed outward toward one’s fellowman.
Professor David Flusser of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem has written a little book entitled Jewish Sources in Early Christianity. On pages 33 and 34, Professor Flusser writes, "The Pious, to whom Jesus belonged, were not scrupulous in matters of purification. In general, they were opposed to the emphasis put on the study of Torah as a supreme value and, instead, emphasized the importance of good deeds…These Pious opposed the growing tendency toward intellectualism. Indeed, most of the Sages accepted the view of the Pious ’not learning but doing is the chief thing’ as stated by Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel (Avot 1:17).
"The tension between good deeds and intellectualism continued until 120 C.E. when the Sages concluded after long debate between themselves that the study of Torah takes precedence since it leads one to action.
"Jesus always emphasized the importance of action. He commanded his disciples to act according to the ruling of the Pharisees and frequently spoke of doing the will of His father in Heaven. Study always took second place with Jesus although He was far more learned than most people of his social position and, certainly, more learned than Paul, although Paul studied in Jerusalem."
Jesus had a deep and thorough Jewish education and was probably much more knowledgeable in these matters than Paul. It is interesting to see the seeming conflict between the importance of study and the importance of doing developing. Ultimately, as Professor Flusser has pointed out, study is given primary importance because, without knowledge, one does not know what they are supposed to do. So, Shammai says, "Make a study of the law a fixed duty. Say little but do much." Once again, we want to notice the importance that is placed upon action.
Rabban Gamliel said in Mishnah 16, "Provide thyself a teacher and relieve thyself of doubt, and accustom not thyself to tithe by conjecture." In this interesting Mishnah, Rabban Gandiel mentions the matter of tithing. He implies there must be no guesswork in the offering of the first fruits offering, (terumah), and the tithes.
Perhaps we would all do well to heed Gamliel’s injunction to provide ourselves with a teacher in the matter of tithing to relieve ourselves not just of doubt but of the erroneous teaching that has been prevalent in the Church for over a thousand years. It is another one of those subjects that has brought a great deal of bondage on the people of God because it has been misinterpreted, taken out of context, and elevated to the stature of an ordinance such as Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
I do not intend to discuss the subject in great detail in this article as details cam be found in my book on the subject, Tithing, Giving, and Prosperity.
For the purposes of this article, I want us to note that there are actually four different tithes in Judaism, not just one. The first is the terumah, or the first fruits offering. The second was the ma’aser rishon, or first tithe. The third was the ma’aser min hama’aser, the tithe of the tithe, or the tithe from the tithe. Finally, there was the ma’aser sheni, or the second tithe.
The tithes were offered during the course of a seven-year period, the seventh year known as the Sabbath Year. The tithe was offered only six years out of the seven. The first, second, fourth, and fifth years, the second tithe was taken up to Jerusalem and offered up unto the Lord and then consumed by the people that offered it. After it had been offered to God, they had a big party and enjoyed the offering that obviously God could not eat. On the third and sixth years, the second tithe stayed at home within the walls of the city and was used to take care of the poor, the widows, orphans, and all that were in need.
No one who lived outside of the boundary of Israel was allowed to tithe. It was strictly for the Jew. The interesting question, however, was what was the purpose of the tithe? If we study the subject carefully, we will see this idea of tsedakah at the heart and the center of the tithe. Remember, the terumah, the first fruits offering, once offered up went to the priests. The first tithe went to the Levites. The Levites offered the tithe from the tithe to the priests, and the second tithe was for the people.
Because the priests and Levites had no inheritance in the land, they were considered to be on a par with the poor and entitled to the support of the community.
The purpose of the tithe was not to support some kind of ecclesiastical establishment but, rather, for the support of the congregation of God.
Tithing, as a matter of law, was first imposed on the Church in the eighth century by Charlemagne, king of the Francs, in one of his Capitularies. From that time until now, we have been taught by religious leaders that the child of God was responsible to give 10% for the support of the religious institution. Notice, however, that in Judaism, the Jew was responsible for approximately 21.7%.
Something must be said at this point about attitude. The real child of God is not responsible for 10%. He was and is responsible for 100%, and he must do and give as God directs in order that the body might be whole.
Rabban Gamliel, in this Mishnah, is dealing specifically with the matter of giving, and he says, "If any of you have any questions about how much to give and to whom to give, get yourself a teacher. Call for someone who can give you proper instruction and relieve any doubt as to what your responsibilities are in this matter."
That admonition might have some practical applications for us today. But again, I want you to notice that underlying it all is the idea of reaching outward to meet the needs of people as opposed to reaching upward in worship of God.
Simon, the son of Gamliel, said, "I was brought up all my life among the Sages, and I have found nothing so essentially good as silence, and not the study of the law is of fundamental import but the practice thereof, and whosoever is profuse of words brings sin." In Proverbs 17:28, it says, "Even a fool when he holds his peace is considered wise." In other words, when he closes his lips he is esteemed to be a man of understanding.
Jewish literature has a lot to say about knowing when to keep quiet. Even in the matter of prayer, Judaism declares that most people spend too much time praying because most of their prayers are nothing more than whining and begging God for something, or they are vain prayers, or unrighteous prayers, and that, ultimately, the only type of prayer that is effective or enduring is the prayer of thanksgiving.
It is concluded that the highest form of prayer is simply silence for the simple reason that God has a difficult time speaking to you when your mouth is moving. The admonition, therefore, is to sit down, be quiet, and open yourself to hear God speak. Shimon is saying that nothing is so essentially good as silence, and not the study of the law is of fundamental importance, but the practicing of it.
Notice how the Sages are echoing one another and how it all harmonizes completely with the words of Jesus. Would that somehow the people of God could gain understanding of the teachings of Jesus and his contemporaries!
