From death to life: conversion in Joseph and Aseneth

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA SUPPLEMENT SERIES

16

Editor James H. Charlesworth

Associate Editors Philip R. Davies James R. Mueller James C. VanderKam

Sheffield Academic Press

This page intentionally left blank

From Death to Life Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth

Randall D. Chesnutt

Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 16

Copyright © 1995 Sheffield Academic Press Sheffield Academic Press Ltd Mansion House 19 Kingfield Road Sheffield SI1 9AS England

Typeset by Sheffield Academic Press and Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by Bookcraft Midsomer Norton, Somerset

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 1-85075-516-7

CONTENTS Preface Abbreviations Introduction

9 11 15 PARTI: PROLEGOMENA

Chapter 1

HISTORY OF RESEARCH Early Contributions P. Batiffol's Contribution and its Aftermath Stimulus from the Qumran Discoveries and the Study of Christian Origins Landmark Monographs by C. Burchard and M. Philonenko Recent Studies Application to New Testament Study New Annotated Translations

20 20 23 30 36 41 56 61

Chapter 2

TEXT, ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, CHARACTER, PROVENANCE, DATE AND GENRE: THE PRESENT STATE OF RESEARCH Text Original Language Character Provenance Date Genre Retrospect and Prospect

65 65 69 71 76 80 85 92

6

From Death to Life

PART II: DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS Introduction to Part II

96

Chapter 3

THE LITERARY CONTEXT: SOCIAL TENSIONS IN THE NARRATIVE OF ASENETH'S CONVERSION Jews and Gentiles Internal Jewish Dissension Familial Ostracism of the Convert

97 97 108 115

Chapter 4

FORMAL AND CONCEPTUAL FEATURES OF ASENETH's CONVERSION Elements of a Ritual Form? Intercessory Prayer Rejection of Idolatry Asceticism and Prayer Enrollment in the Book of the Living Change of Clothing Washing of the Face and Hands Change of Name Bread, Cup, Ointment and Honey Physical Transformation Three Kisses Conceptual Features The Human Predicament The Nature of Salvation The Terminology of Conversion Conclusion

118 119 119 120 121 124 125 126 127 128 136 138 139 139 143 145 149

PART III: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Introduction to Part III Chapter 5

JEWISH PROSELYTISM

152

153

Contents Requirements for the Admission of Proselytes: Rabbinic Dicta The Silence of Joseph and Aseneth concerning These Requirements Sacrifice Immersion Circumcision Points of Comparison Familial and Social Ostracism of the Proselyte Divine Protection of the Proselyte Parity of the Proselyte and the Jew by Birth Repudiation of Idolatry as the Quintessence of Conversion New Creation Imagery Table Fellowship Darkness-Light and Death-Life Antitheses For Further Investigation Conclusion

7

155 155 156 156 162 166 166 168 170 171 172 176 180 181 183

Chapter 6

INITIATION INTO GROUPS WITHIN JUDAISM: ESSENES, THERAPEUTAE, HABUROTH, GNOSTICS, AND MERKABAH MYSTICS Essenes Therapeutae Haburoth Gnostics Merkabah Mystics Conclusion Chapter 7

MYSTERY INITIATION Method The Mystery Religions and Modern Research: Problems and Caveats Isiac Initiation as a Model The Hypotheses of K. Kerényi, R. Merkelbach and E.R. Goodenough Isiac Initiation: A Descriptive Analysis

185 186 195 199 202 207 215

217 218 218 220 222 225

8

From Death to Life Formal Rites Underlying Conceptions Isiac Initiation and the Conversion of Aseneth: Comparisons and Contrasts Preliminary Considerations Conceptual Features Formal Features Conclusion

Chapter 8

CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions regarding the Conversion of Aseneth The Conversion of Aseneth and the Readership and Purpose of Joseph and Aseneth Desiderata

Bibliography Index of References Index of Authors

225 230 235 235 237 240 252

254

254

256 265 272 296 304

PREFACE Readers trained in form criticism will readily perceive that this work originated as a doctoral dissertation. Although a few sections have been expanded and the bibliographical coverage extended through 1990, the bulk of the work is essentially that accepted by the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Duke University in 1986 for the PhD in Religion. The assistance of many people, both on the dissertation and in the later project to revise it, has been indispensable. I record my indebtedness to a few of them here not merely out of convention but especially out of sincere appreciation. An expression of gratitude is due first of all to Professor James H. Charlesworth, now the distinguished George L. Collord Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Princeton Theological Seminary. It was in his seminar on the Pseudepigrapha at Duke University that I first read Joseph and Aseneth, with his enthusiastic approval that I chose this fascinating ancient writing as a dissertation topic, under his supervision that I wrote the dissertation, and with his encouragement that I completed this revision. Without implying that he is in any way responsible for the deficiencies in my work, I wish to acknowledge that he has done much to stimulate and inform my interest in the literature of early Judaism and to facilitate the publication of the present study. I am grateful also to the other members of my dissertation committee—Professors Eric M. Meyers, D. Moody Smith, Orval Wintermute, and John F. Oates—for their valuable input; to Professor W.D. Davies, who retired too early to serve on the committee but whose unforgettable seminars at Duke University in 1979-81 did much to shape my perception of early Judaism and Christian origins; to Amy-Jill Levine, a former classmate and now Assistant Professor of Religion at Swarthmore College, who made helpful suggestions on an early draft of this work and with whom I have had many helpful conversations on the issues addressed in it; to Professor Christoph Burchard of the University

10

From Death to Life

of Heidelberg, who has graciously shared his ongoing research on Joseph and Aseneth with me, sometimes long before it appeared in print; to my colleagues at Pepperdine University for their friendship and encouragement; and to the Pepperdine University Research Council and the Gail and Caroline Hopkins Research Fund for grants which enabled me to complete the project. Finally, and most importantly, I am thankful to my family. My parents, Mr and Mrs Alex D. Chesnutt of Montgomery, Alabama, supported my education both financially and morally. My sons, Brian and Christopher, frequently interrupted the work but also provided the joy that inspired me to continue. My devoted wife, Marilyn, has been a constant source of encouragement, taking on more than her share of family responsibilities in order to enable me to bring this project to completion. To her this volume is affectionately dedicated.

(Prov. 31.26-29)

ABBREVIATIONS AGJU ALGHJ AnBib ANET3 ANR W AOS ATR BARev BJRL BJS BLE BWANT ByzZ BZ BZAW BZNW ConBNT ConBOT CBQ CRINT CSCO DBAT EHR EJ EncJud EPROER ER EvT ExpT FRLANT HDB

Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums Analecta Biblica J.B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts (3rd edn) Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, ed. W. Haase and H. Temporini American Oriental Series Anglican Theological Review Biblical Archaeology Review Bulletin of the John Rylands Library Brown Judaic Studies Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Byzantinische Zeitschrift Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Coniectanea biblica, New Testament Coniectanea biblica, Old Testament Catholic Biblical Quarterly Compendia Rerum ludaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalum Dielheimer Blätter zum Alten Testament Etudes d'histoire des religions Encyclopedia Judaica, ed. C. Roth et al. Encyclopaedia Judaica (\91l) Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l'empire romain Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. M. Eliade Evangelische Theologie Expository Times Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments A Dictionary of the Bible, ed. J. Hastings

12 HKAW HNT HNTC HS S HTKNT HTR HTS HUCA ICC IDE IDBSup ISBE JAOS JBL JEGP JewEnc JJS JQR JSHRZ JSJ JSNT JSOT JSP JSS JTS LCL LD LEC MeyerK MGWJ Neot NHS NovT NovTSup NTA NTAbh NTS NedTTs PTMS PVTG

From Death to Life Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Harper's NT Commentaries Harvard Semitic Studies Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Harvard Theological Review Harvard Theological Studies Hebrew Union College Annual International Critical Commentary Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, ed. G.A. Buttrick IDB, Supplementary Volume International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, rev. edn, ed. G.W. Bromily Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of English and Germanic Philology The Jewish Encyclopedia Journal of Jewish Studies Jewish Quarterly Review Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit, ed. W.G. Kümmel et al Journal for the Study of Judaism Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of Theological Studies Loeb Classical Library Lectio divina Library of Early Christianity H.A.W. Meyer (ed.), Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums Neotestamentica Nag Hammadi Studies Novum Testamentum Supplements to Novum Testamentum New Testament Abstracts Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen New Testament Studies Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrifl Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece

Abbreviations PW KB RechBib REG REJ ResQ RGG1 RGG2 RGG3 RHR RevQ SBLDS SBLSP SBLTT SB S SBT SCS Sem SHR SJ SJLA SNT SNTSMS SPB ST STDJ Str-B SUNT SVTP TDNT TED TF TLZ TQ TRE TSAJ ThWNT TZ UUÂ

13

Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft Revue biblique Recherches bibliques Revue des études grecques Revue des études juives Restoration Quarterly Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 1st edn, ed. P.M. Schiele and L. Zscharnack Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 2nd edn, ed. H. Gunkel and L. Zscharnack Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3rd edn, ed. K. Gallung Revue de l'histoire des religions Revue de Qumran SBL Dissertation Series SBL Seminar Papers SBL Texts and Translations Stuttgarter Bibelstudien Studies in Biblical Theology Septuagint and Cognate Studies Semítica Studies in the History of Religions Studia Judaica Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity Studien zum Neuen Testament Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas Monograph Series Studia post-biblica Studia Theologica Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah [H. Strack and] P. Billerbeck, Komentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. G. Kittel Translations of Early Documents Theologische Forschung Theologische Literaturzeitung Theologische Quartalschrift Theologische Realenzyklopädie Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum Theologische Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, ed. G. Kittel (ET: TDNT) Theologische Zeitschrift Uppsala universitetsârsskrift

14 VC WMANT WUNT ZNW ZTK

From Death to Life Vigiliae Christianae Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche

INTRODUCTION After decades of neglect because of the late date and Christian character assigned to the document by its early interpreters, Joseph and Aseneth has attracted considerable attention in recent years among specialists in early Judaism and Christian origins, and a strong consensus has emerged on some of the basic literary and historical questions. However, no accord has been reached on the nature of conversion as it is represented in Joseph and Aseneth. The purpose of the present study is to investigate Aseneth's conversion and clarify its nature, religionsgeschichtliche affinities, and function within the larger purposes of the work. Not only does Aseneth's conversion as narrated in Joseph and Aseneth need clarification, but the approach to be taken in investigating it needs basic methodological refinement. Too often the understanding of Aseneth's conversion, and hence of the entire apocryphon in which that conversion is central, has been determined by premature and superficial comparisons with other paradigms of conversion and initiation in the Hellenistic world. In the present study, priority is assigned to descriptive over comparative analysis; Aseneth's conversion is compared with other models of conversion and initiation only after it has been carefully examined in its own right within the literary context of Joseph and Aseneth. Every effort is made to avoid the imposition of ideas upon Aseneth's conversion from sources which offer some analogy in form or language, but not necessarily in essence and function, to what is found in Joseph and Aseneth. The study is divided into three parts. Part I, 'Prolegomena', surveys previous research on Joseph and Aseneth with special reference to the interpretation of Aseneth's conversion, and summarizes the present state of research on the text, original language, character, provenance, date, and genre of the work. Part II, 'Descriptive Analysis', is an examination of Aseneth's conversion within the literary context of Joseph and Aseneth. Special attention is given to the social tensions which dominate the narrative and to the question whether these tensions mirror social

16

From Death to Life

reality in the author's community. The formal and conceptual features of conversion that can be extrapolated from the story of Aseneth are described and analyzed. In Part III, 'Comparative Analysis', conversion as represented in Joseph and Aseneth is compared with several contemporaneous paradigms of conversion and initiation which are potentially instructive for Aseneth's case. The final chapter summarizes the findings of the study, assesses the impact of these findings on the questions of the readership and purpose of Joseph and Aseneth, and suggests areas where further research is needed. Two further preliminaries should be addressed. The first concerns the text and translation of Joseph and Aseneth employed in this study. Unless otherwise noted, all quotations of Joseph and Aseneth are my own translation of the provisional Greek text published by C. Burchard. The differences between this text and the other major edition currently available, that by M. Philonenko, are described in Chapter 1, and the reasons for preferring Burchard's edition over Philonenko's are explained in Chapter 2.1 have also followed Burchard in employing the chapter divisions established by P. Batiffol and the versification introduced by P. Riessler.1 Rather than clutter the text with multiple systems of versification for each reference, I have given the corresponding references to Philonenko's edition only where there is a significant textual variation from Burchard's edition. Secondly, working definitions of two terms used throughout this study should be provided at the outset. 'Conversion' may be defined as the reorientation of a person's life from a pattern of attitudes, beliefs, and practices judged to be wrong or inferior to another judged to be right or superior.2 'Initiation' is the process by which a person is inducted into a group or invested with new social or religious status. That the two terms sometimes overlap is recognized; initiation may or may not entail conversion. Considerable attention has been devoted recently to these terms and the phenomena they represent.3 Definitions 1. See Chapter 1 below. 2. This definition is similar to that by A.D. Nock, Conversion: The Old and the New in Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933), pp. 6-7. 3. E.g., see D. Snow and R. Machalek, 'The Convert as a Social Type', in Sociological Theory (ed. R. Collins, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983), pp. 259-89; A. McGuire, 'Conversion and Gnosis in the "Gospel of Truth'", NovT 28 (1986), pp. 338-55; L.R. Rambo, 'Conversion', ER, IV, pp. 73-79; and M. Eliade, 'Initiation', ER, VII, pp. 224-29. For a helpful bibliographical guide, see L.R.Rambo, 'Current

Introduction

17

differ sharply, depending on such variables as whether one emphasizes the psychological or sociological dimension. Some would object, for example, that the definition of conversion offered above is inadequate for Aseneth's case since it does not do justice to the wrenching psychological trauma which she undergoes; others would find the sociological dimension of the definition lacking, since the convert's relation to her old and new communities is clearly central in the story.4 However, a useful definition of something as multi-dimensional as conversion need not say everything that can be said. Moreover, since Aseneth's conversion is not the only one considered in this study, the definition should not be so tailored to Aseneth's case as to prejudice the comparison with other paradigms of conversion and initiation in antiquity. The broad definitions given above are therefore sufficient for our purposes. The bibliographical coverage of this study extends through 1990, the one hundredth anniversary of P. Batiffol's publication of the editio princeps of Joseph andAseneth in Greek. In the century since Batiffol made the text available, there have been great strides in research on Joseph andAseneth, but also many unfounded assumptions, superficial comparisons and flawed methods. This analysis of Aseneth's conversion is presented in the hope that it will help clear the air of this confusion and contribute to a better understanding of a very important but neglected and misunderstood apocryphon.

Research on Religious Conversion', RSR 8 (1982), pp. 146-59. 4. Thus, e.g., S.J.D. Cohen, 'Respect for Judaism by Gentiles According to Josephus', HTR 80 (1987), p. 411, raises this complaint about Nock's definition: 'For Judaism, at least, Nock's definition is not complete. If "conversion" is to be something other than a theological abstraction and if a "convert" is to live in something other than monkish isolation, he or she must be integrated into the community of believers... full "conversion" to Judaism entailed not only recognition of Judaism's truth but also incorporation into the Jewish community'.

This page intentionally left blank

PARTI PROLEGOMENA

Chapter 1 HISTORY OF RESEARCH Early Contributions Although it has been only within the last four decades that Joseph and Aseneth has attracted much attention among specialists in early Judaism and Christian origins, and only within the last century that it has come under any sort of scientific scrutiny, the work has been known for a long time. The abundance of Greek and versional witnesses, including sixteen manuscripts in Greek and more than eighty in all,1 and the considerable influence of the work on Christian literature, iconography, drama and liturgy,2 attest to its long-standing popularity. Joseph and Aseneth first became widely known in the West in the mid-thirteenth century through an abridged Latin version in Vincent of Beauvais' Speculum historíale.3 In addition to the wide circulation of the Speculum historíale itself, both in Latin and in several translations, Vincent's epitome of Joseph and Aseneth was often copied separately and was translated into several European languages. A French version made in the fourteenth century was published in 1495,4a German 1. See C. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth: ÜberlieferungOrtsbestimmung (WUNT, 8; Tübingen: Mohr, 1965), pp. 4-17; and more recently idem, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung. Von Egeria zu Anna Katharina Emmerick oder von Moses aus Aggel zu Karl Kerényi', ANRW 2.20.1 (1987), pp. 552-617. 2. See M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes (SPB, 13; Leiden: Brill, 1968), pp. 110-23, 'Appendices'; C. Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J.H. Charlesworth; 2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983-85), II, pp. 195-99, a section entitled 'Cultural importance'; and for more detail, Burchard, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', pp. 617-38. 3. Speculum historíale 1.118-24. 4. Non vidï, see P. Batiffol, Le Livre de la Prière d'Aseneth (Studia Patrística: Etudes d'ancienne littérature chrétienne, 1-2; Paris: Leroux, 1889-90), p. 1.

1. History of Research

21

translation followed in 1539,5 and even an Icelandic version is extant in a British Museum manuscript dated 1745.6 A Middle English translation based on a Latin epitome independent of that prepared by Vincent is preserved in a fifteenth-century manuscript.7 In 1713-23 J.A. Fabricáis republished Vincent's Latin text along with a partial Greek text based on a fragmentary manuscript.8 Fabricius' edition of the Latin served as the basis for a German translation by R. Akibon in 18509 and a French translation by G. Brunet in 1856.10 The Syriac text was first published in 1870 by J.P.N. Land,11 and a Latin translation of this by G. Oppenheim followed in 1886.12 Also in 1886, A. Carrière published an Armenian manuscript of part of Joseph and Aseneth with a French translation.13 In 1896, S. Yovsêp'eanç published an Armenian text14 edited earlier by Benedictine Mechitarists in Venice.15 This edition, which incorporated still other Armenian manuscripts in an apparatus, was translated into English by J. Issaverdens in 5. Non vidï, see Batiffol, Prière d'Aseneth, p. l n 3. 6. British Museum, Add. 11068. On the translations of Vincent's Latin text, see further Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 41-45. 7. See H.N. MacCracken, The Storie of Asneth: An Unknown Middle English Translation of a Lost Latin Version', JEGP 9 (1910), pp. 224-64; G.L. Hamilton, The Latin Historia Assenech', JEGP 11 (1912), pp. 143-44; H.N. MacCracken, The Source of the Story of Asneth', JEGP 11 (1912), pp. 291-92; and R.A. Dwyer, 'Asenath of Egypt in Middle English', Medium Aevum 39 (1970), pp. 118-22. 8. Codex Pseudepigraphus Veteris Testamenti (2 vols.; Hamburg: Sumptu Christiani Liebezeit, 1713 [vol. 1]; Sumptu Theodor! Christolph Felgineri, 1723 [vol. 2]), I, pp. 774-84 [Latin]; II, pp. 85-102 [Greek]. 9. Die Testamente der zwölf Patriarchen, der Söhne Jakobs, und die Geschichte der Aseneth, der Frau Josephs (Kassel: n.p., 1850), pp. 121-41. [R. Akibon is a pseudonym for L. Noack.] 10. Dictionnaire des Apocryphes (ed. J.P. Migne; Paris: n.p., 1856-58), I, cols. 705-12. 11. Zachariae episcopi Mitylenes aliorumque scripta histórica Graece plerumque deperdita: Syriace editit (Anécdota Syriaca, 3; Leiden, n.p., 1870), pp. 15-46. 12. Fabuli Josephi et Asenethae apocrypha e libro Syriaco Latine versa (Berlin Dissertation, 1886); non vidi. 13. 'Une version arménienne de l'Histoire d'Asséneth', in Nouveaux mélanges orientaux (Publications de l'Ecole des Langues Orientales Vivantes, 2.19; Paris: n.p., 1886), pp. 473-511. 14. Tangaran hin ew nor naxneaç /. Ankanon girk'hin ktakaranaç (Venice: n.p., 1896), pp. 152-98. 15. Revue polyhistore 43 (1885), pp. 200-206; 44 (1886), pp. 25-34.

22

From Death to Life

1900.16 A Serbian Slavonic text edited by S. Novakovic appeared in 1877.17 Until the pioneering work of P. Batiffol discussed below, the production of texts and translations was seldom complemented by published attempts to interpret Joseph and Aseneth and assess its significance. Those few who did take note of the work and venture brief comments upon it typically assumed that it is a Christian work even if Jewish materials were used.18 F.J.A. Hort concluded similarly in a short article in 1877.19 Hort declined to speculate on the date, provenance or purpose of Joseph and Aseneth and even seemed doubtful of the value of the work: The purpose of this history is not very evident. The greater part of it has no distinctly religious character and is verbose and wearisome; yet passages of some beauty occur now and then.20

On one point, however, Hort was certain: the eucharistie language and the symbolism of the cross in the reference to the bloody tracks on the honeycomb indicate that 'the signs of Christian origin, if few in number, are not to be mistaken, though Jewish legend may have supplied materials'.21

16. Separately as The History ofAssaneth (Venice: n.p., 1900); and in his collection, The Uncanonical Writings of the Old Testament (Venice: Armenian Monastery of St Lazarus, 1901; repr. 1907), pp. 91-160. Other late nineteenthcentury texts and translations of the Armenian version, most fragmentary and some no longer extant, are mentioned by Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 155-56; and idem, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', pp. 639-40. 17. 'Srpsko-slovenski zbornik iz vremena despota Stefana Lazarevica', Starine (Zagreb) 9 (1877), pp. 1-47. 18. A. Dillmann, 'Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments', in Real-Encydopadie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche (ed. J.J. Herzog; 22 vols.; Hamburg: R. Besser, 1854-68), XII, pp. 318-19; Oppenheim, Fabuli Josephi etAseneîhae\ and A.H. Wirth, Danae in christlichen Legenden (Prague: F. Tempsky, 1892), pp. 27-29, 85,94. 19. 'Aseneth, History of, in A Dictionary of Christian Biography (4 vols.; ed. W. Smith and H. Wace; London: John Murray, 1877-87), I, pp. 176-77. 20. 'Aseneth', p. 177. 21. 'Aseneth', p. 177.

1. History of Research

23

P. Batiffol's Contribution and its Aftermath The distinction of being the first to publish in full the Greek text of Joseph and Aseneth belongs to P. Batiffol,22 whose publication in 1889-90 also included an edition of the longer Latin version based on manuscripts located by M.R. James.23 With due regard to earlier contributors, it is only a slight exaggeration to say with M. Philonenko that 'Batiffol fut le premier à ouvrir, en fait, le dossier de Joseph et Aséneth9.24 Batiffol's contribution is pivotal both because he published the editio princeps of the full Greek text, upon which most subsequent study has been based, and because of his highly influential views on the date, character and purpose of Oie work. In the important introduction which accompanies his Greek and Latin texts, Batiffol suggested that Joseph and Aseneth is a fifth-century Christian work based in part upon the fourth-century haggadic legend of Dinah and Aseneth.25 The Christian elements in the present form of the story are 'retouches aisément reconnaissables' because they represent a distinct shift from a rather straightforward narrative to a much deeper meaning, from haggadic legend to mystical symbolism.26 In the Christian adaptation 'Joseph et Aseneth n'y sont pas des personnages vivants, mais des abstractions personnifées'.27 Joseph, according to Battifol, is clearly the figure of Christ.28 The symbolic significance of Aseneth he found more complex but concluded:

22. Prière d'Aseneth, pp. 39-87. For a description of the four manuscripts employed, see pp. 6-7. 23. Prière d'Aseneth, pp. 2-3, 89-115. 24. Joseph et Aséneth, p. 99. 25. Prière d'Aseneth, pp. 7-18, 30-37; see also Batiffol, 'Apocryphes (Livres)', in Dictionnaire de la Bible (ed. F. Vigouroux; 5 vols.; Paris: Letouzey & Ane, 18951912), I, col. 771: '...un apocryphe chrétien du Ve siècle, fait d'après un source juive'. 26. Prière d'Aseneth, pp. 19-29. Already in the sixth century such a distinction among levels of meaning in Joseph and Aseneth had been drawn. The writer of a letter to Moses of Ingila attached to the Syriac version in Pseudo-Zacharias Rhetor's Historia Ecclesiastica indicated an understanding of the literal sense (iaiopia) but an inability to perceive the deeper meaning (8eopia). 27. Prière d'Aseneth, p. 23. 28. Prière d Aseneth, p. 24.

24

From Death to Life Elle est une vierge consacrée, elle est la Virginité, représentée sous des traits qui la font ressembler par endroits à l'Eglise et plus encore au personnage indéterminé des orantes.29

The story of Aseneth's conversion is therefore a 'commentaire symbolique d'une catéchèse et de l'initiation à la vie sacramentaire'.30 This expansion and allegorization of a Jewish legend, Batiffol suggested, was written in Greek in 'quelque centre catholique' in upper Asia Minor in the fifth century and is therefore 'un document précieux pour l'histoire de la théologie rituelle et de la vie chrétienne'.31 Although Batiffol later modified his position, allowing that Joseph and Aseneth might be a Jewish work from about the time of Jesus with considerable Christian reworking,32 it was his earlier opinion that carried the field in the continuing study of Joseph and Aseneth. As others began to take note of the text made available by Batiffol, they also echoed the preliminary views he had published along with the text. Thus in 1898 M.R. James described Joseph and Aseneth as 'a Christian version of a Jewish legend', though he dated it somewhat earlier than had Batiffol, favoring a date for the original 'at least as early as the 3rd cent'.33 Similarly, E. Schürer described the work as 'eine christliche Legende, welche wohl auch jüdischer Grundlage ruht'.34 Others voiced similar opinions, 35 but perhaps the programmatic influence of Batiffol's 29. Prière d'Aseneth, p. 29. 30. Prière d'Aseneth, p. 25. 31. Prière d'Aseneth, pp. 36-37. 32. P. Batiffol, Review oí Apocrypha Anécdota II (Texts and Studies, 5.1), by M.R. James, RB1 (1898), pp. 302-304. 33. 'Asenath', A Dictionary of the Bible (4 vols.; ed. J. Hastings; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1898-1902), I, p. 162; see also idem, 'Apocrypha', Encyclopaedia Bíblica (4 vols.; ed. T.K. Cheyne and J.S. Black; New York: Macmillan, 1899-1903), I, col. 254, where the work is introduced as 'a Jewish legend of early date; Christianized'. 34. Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (3 vols.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 3rd edn, 1898-1901), III, p. 290. The English translation of Schürer's classic work follows the second German edition, which lacks the section on Joseph and Aseneth. 35. W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums in neutestamentlicher Zeitalter (Berlin: Reuther & Reichard, 1903), p. 24; P. Fiebig, 'Pseudepigraphen des ATs', RGG1, IV, col. 1963; and O. Stählin, 'Die hellenistisch-jüdische Literatur', in Geschichte der griechischen Literatur (ed. W. Schmid and O. Stählin; 3 vols.; HKAW, 7; Munich: Beck, 1912-24), II.l, pp. 587-88. R. Reitzenstein, Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen (Leipzig: Teubner, 3rd edn, 1927), pp. 248-49 (ET: The

1. History of Research

25

assignment of Joseph and Aseneth to a late date and Christian author is illustrated best not by the explicit references to the document which echo Batiffol's views, but precisely by the absence of reference to the document where one might expect to find it. Joseph and Aseneth is conspicuously absent from the collections of Jewish pseudepigrapha by E. Kautzch36 and R.H. Charles37 and even later from the works of E.R. Goodenough, who, had he considered the document Jewish, surely would have cited it in support of his theory of a Jewish mystery cult with sacramental rites.38 Batiffol's early approach was popularized by E.W. Brooks, who in 1918 published an English translation of Joseph and Aseneth with an introduction.39 Brooks based his translation on Batiffol's Greek text,40 though he corrected a few readings where Batiffol was 'obviously wrong'41 and took into account for the first time the evidence of the Latin, Syriac, Armenian and Slavonic versions.42 In his view of the date Hellenistic Mystery Religions [trans. J.E. Steely; PTMS, 15; Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1978], pp. 313-14) described Joseph and Aseneth as Christian in the latest of its many revisions but also cited the work as clear evidence of the influence of Egyptian-Hellenistic mystery ideas upon Judaism. 36. Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments (2 vols.; Tübingen: Mohr, 1900). 37. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1913). Charles did refer once to Joseph and Aseneth in his A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation ofSt John (2 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920), II, p. 10, but he gave no indication there of his view of its character or date. 38. Especially By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935); see on this Chapter 7 below. 39. Joseph andAsenath (TED, 2; London: SPCK, 1918). 40. Another edition of the Greek text had been published in the interim between the work of Batiffol and that of Brooks (V.M. Istrin, 'Apokrif ob losife i Asenefë', Drevnosti [Trudy Slavjanskoj kommissii Imperatorskago moskovskago archeologiöeskago obSfcestva, 2; Moscow, n.p. 1898], pp. 146-99), but this text had negligible impact on the study of Joseph and Aseneth, in part because of a scathing review in Germany (K. Krumbacher, ByzZ 8 [1899], pp. 22-23) and in part because it was published in Moscow under a Russian title so that it was never as widely known nor as readily accessible in Western Europe as Batiffol's text. 41. Brooks, Joseph and Asenath, p. xx. 42. Brooks in no sense produced a critical edition. He recorded only 'the variants in passages in which the Greek text is unsupported and a few others which there is some special reason for recording' (p. xx). Translations of some of the longer 'insertions' are given in an Appendix (pp. 79-84).

26

From Death to Life

and character of the work, Brooks did not differ markedly from Batiffol. He maintained, as had Batiffol, that Joseph andAseneth is 'a Christian revision of a Jewish production'.43 In its present form the work represents Aseneth as converting to a monastic form of Christianity wherein virginity and penitence were leading virtues.44 According to Brooks, the references to bread and cup and chrism (which he understood as the Eucharist and Confirmation), the exaltation of virginity, and the emphasis on forgiveness beyond what one would expect from a Jewish writer, make the Christian character of the work a 'fact beyond doubt'.45 Brooks would not venture to assign a date to Joseph and Aseneth except to say that 'it can hardly be later' than the fifth-century date suggested by Batiffol.46 In other contributions Brooks edited and published the Syriac text of Joseph and Aseneth preserved in the sixthcentury Historia ecclesiastica of Pseudo-Zacharias the Rhetor47 and the Latin text translated from the Syriac and likewise preserved by PseudoZacharias.48 Not everyone who examined the text which Batiffol had made available followed his theory of Christian authorship. As was noted above, Batiffol himself modified his early assessment and conceded that Joseph and Aseneth might be a Jewish work from around the time of Jesus, though he insisted that if this is the case there has been considerable Christian reworking, as is evident especially in the eucharistie passages.49 This change of opinion came in response to two reviewers of Batiffol's work, L. Duchesne50 and L. Massebieau,51 who had concluded independently that Joseph andAseneth is of purely Jewish origin and belongs to the propaganda literature of Hellenistic Judaism contemporaneous with Jesus or even earlier. Duchesne in particular struck at the very foundations of Batiffol's approach by criticizing the tendency to read too much symbolism into the story and disputing the claim that the rabbinic legend 43. Joseph and Asenath, p. xiii. 44. Joseph and Asenath, p. xv. 45. Joseph and Asenath, p. xi. 46. Joseph and Asenath, pp. xviii n. 1. 47. Historia ecclesiastica Zachariae Rhetori vulgo adscripta (CSCO, 83-84; Scriptores Syri, 38-39; Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1919; repr. 1953), I, pp. 21, 55. 48. Historia ecclesiastica Zachariae Rhetori vulgo adscripta (CSCO, 87-88; Scriptores Syri, 41-42; Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1924; repr. 1953), I, pp. 15-39. 49. Review tí Apocrypha Anécdota II, p. 303. 50. Bulletin critique 10 (1889), pp. 461-66. 51. Annales de Bibliographie Theologique 11 (1889), pp. 161-72.

1. History of Research

27

of Dinah and Aseneth underlies the present form of the work at many points and is visible through the redactional overlay. In a brief study in 1902, K. Kohler also expressed the opinion that Joseph and Aseneth is 'of pronounced Jewish character', insisting that there is 'only one small Christian interpolation'.52 The story of Aseneth's conversion, he argued, lacks a peculiarly Christian savior or forgiving power and in fact is in some places 'so thoroughly Jewish that the Christian copyists seem to have been puzzled by it'. It is 'a typical story of the conversion of a heathen to Judaism'.53 The ethical material in the second part of the book is likewise devoid of characteristic Christian emphases and is 'decidedly Je wish'.54 Kohler assigned the book to the 'Hellenistic propaganda literature by which Jewish writers endeavored to win the non-Jewish world for the Jewish faith'.55 He also introduced the idea of a connection with the Essenes—an idea destined to figure prominently in subsequent work on Joseph and Aseneth. Kohler himself believed that there 'are indisputable elements of Essene lore', particularly in Aseneth's prayer and in Levi's disclosure of divine secrets to her.56 Among those convinced by Kohler's case for the Jewish character of Joseph and Aseneth were W.O.E. Oesterley and G.H. Box, who, as editors of the volume in which Brooks had argued for the Christian character of the work, exercised their editorial prerogative to insert a bracketed discussion indicating their disagreement with Brooks and agreement with Kohler.57 'The Jewish features', they wrote, 'are pronounced', though the work has been 'subjected to slight Christian revision'.58 To Kohler's article, which they endorsed as representing 'the correct view', Oesterley and Box added the suggestion that the Jewish original of Joseph and Aseneth was no later than the early years of the second century CE.59 P. Reissler, another who favored a Jewish origin for Joseph and Aseneth, was the first to develop the Essene hypothesis systematically. 52. 'Asenath, Life and Confession or Prayer of, JewEnc, ïï, p. 172. 53. 'Asenath',p. 174. 54. 'Asenath',p. 176. 55. 'Asenath',p. 176. 56. 'Asenath', pp. 173-75. 57. Brooks, Joseph and Asenath, pp. xv-xvii. 58. Joseph and Asenath, p. xv. 59. Joseph and Asenath, pp. xv, xviii.

28

From Death to Life

In the introduction to his German translation of the work, based on Batiffol's text and first published in 1922,60 Riessler argued that of the Jewish sects described by Josephus, the Essenes are the one most likely to have produced Joseph andAseneth. The affinities he discerned which suggested to him this connection include the wearing of white clothing, prayer toward the sun, the exaltation of virginity, and the sacred meal. In keeping with his view of the Essene character of Joseph and Aseneth, Riessler argued for a Hebrew original, a Palestinian provenance and a date between the Maccabean Revolt and 70 CE.61 The most durable feature of Riessler's contribution on Joseph and Aseneth has been his versification of the text. The chapter divisions established by Batiffol and the system of versification added by Riessler remain standard.62 An extensive article by V. Aptowitzer in 1924 also highlighted the Jewishness of Joseph andAseneth by amassing numerous parallels with Jewish sources as 'convincing evidence of the Jewish origin of our Apocryphon'.63 Even those sections which some had thought to represent Christian symbolism superimposed upon an originally Jewish narrative, Aptowitzer argued, are 'permeated thoroughly with Jewish, and especially Haggadic, conceptions and thoughts' and 'must be interpreted and explained from the Jewish point of view'.64 Joseph symbolizes not Christ but Israel, and Aseneth's story represents the conversion of heathendom not to Christianity but to Judaism. The time of composition must have been a period when many pagans were strongly inclined 60. 'Joseph und Asenath. Eine altjüdische Erzählung', TQ 103 (1922), pp. 1-22, pp. 145-83. The translation is based on Batiffol's text and is reproduced almost verbatim in Riessler, Altjüdisches Schrifttum ausserhalb der Bibel (Augsburg: Filser, 1928; repr. Heidelberg: Kerle, 1966), pp. 497-538, with the introductory material reduced to a few brief notes, pp. 1303-1304. A novelistic German rendering of the first part of Joseph and Aseneth had appeared in 1921 (C. Lucerna, Asseneth: Eine apokryphe Erzählung aus der Werdezeiten des Christentums [Vienna: n.p., 1921]), but it is based on an uncritical mixture of texts and versions and is of no signficance for the scientific study of Joseph andAseneth. 61. 'Joseph und Asenath', pp. 4-13. 62. Exceptions to this standard usage are the short form of the text edited later by M. Philonenko and the translations and studies based thereon. Philonenko devised a system of versification better suited to the shorter text. See the section on 'New Annotated Translations' below in this chapter. 63. 'Asenath, the Wife of Joseph: A Haggadic Literary-Historical Study', HUCA 1 (1924), p. 286 (emphasis his). 64. 'Asenath', pp. 286-87 (emphasis his).

1. History of Research

29

towards Judaism, and the conversion to Judaism by Queen Helena of Adiabene—the greatest success achieved by Jewish propaganda in this period—probably provided the specific occasion of writing.65 Joseph and Aseneth thus belongs to the middle of the first century CE. It was written in Hebrew by a Palestinian Jew, as the many affinities with rabbinic sources attest, and later was translated into Greek to enhance its utility as a propaganda booklet.66 Another who favored both the Jewish character of Joseph and Aseneth and a Semitic original was L. Ginzberg.67 Ginzberg's comment that 'almost all scholars agree upon the Jewish character of this pseudepigraphic work'68 is an exaggeration, but it does indicate that the trend toward recognizing the Jewishness of Joseph and Aseneth had gained considerable momentum in the first quarter of the twentieth century. Concurrent with the increasing recognition of the Jewishness of Joseph and Aseneth was another trend which was dominant especially in Germany in the heyday of the religionsgeschichtliche Schule. This was a reassertion of the Christian character of Joseph and Aseneth in the form of an effort to situate the document within Christian gnostic circles. Thus, for example, in 1903 W. Bousset had described Joseph and Aseneth as a gnosticizing Christian reworking of an old Jewish legend.69 Similarly, in 1929 G. Beer described Joseph and Aseneth as a gnosticizing Christian romance resting on a Jewish Grundlage.™ J. Jeremías also referred to 'der christl-gnostische Joseph-Asenath Roman', allowing that it probably rests on a Jewish basis.71 Although most such assessments were expressed only in passing comments or in brief articles in dictionaries and handbooks, the gnostic frame of interpretation did receive one extensive treatment in the work of H. Priebatsch. In his 1937 monograph entitled Die Josephsgeschichte in der 65. 'Asenath', pp. 299-305. 66. 'Asenath', pp. 305-306. 67. The Legends of the Jews (7 vols.; trans. H. Szold et al.\ Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1909-1938), V, pp. 374-75. 68. Legends, V, p. 374. 69. Die Religion des Judentums, p. 24. So also Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter (ed. H. Gressmann; HNT, 21; Tübingen: Mohr, 1926), p. 24. 70. 'Joseph und Aseneth', RGG2, III, col. 379. 71. 'vuuxpTi, vvuxpioc', ThWNT, IV, p. 1095 (ET: TDNT, IV, p. 1102. See also E. Stauffer, 'ya^éœ, yauoç', ThWNT, I, pp. 654-55. (ET: TDNT, I, pp. 654-55).

30

From Death to Life

Weltliteratur,12 Priebatsch argued at length that Joseph and Aseneth grew out of Valentinian gnostic circles in Egypt in the late second century.73 Among Priebatsch's arguments is the claim that Joseph and Aseneth—which he insisted was originally called the Prayer of Aseneth—is a Christian imitation of the Jewish Prayer of Joseph known from excerpts in Origen and Eusebius.74 In the Valentinian myth of Sophia-Achamoth's separation from the Pleroma and redemption by Christ-Soter, Priebatsch found a close analogy to the story of Aseneth's tribulation and deliverance. Joseph, who is called the Son of God in Joseph and Aseneth, is to be understood as the Christ-Soter who redeems Aseneth-Sophia.75 In the statement that the man who worships God does not sleep with his wife before marriage (Jos. Asen. 21.1), Priebatsch detected a polemic agaiust Valentinian sexual promiscuity and thus another indication that the author was a Valentinian gnostic or at least someone heavily influenced by Valentinian thought.76 Stimulus from the Qumran Discoveries and the Study of Christian Origins The gnostic frame of interpretation never won wide acceptance outside Germany, and, as we have seen, the view that the work is early and Jewish rather than late and Christian gained considerable momentum in the early decades of the twentieth century. Nevertheless, the potential significance of Joseph and Aseneth for illuminating the Jewish origins of Christianity was not immediately perceived and exploited. Not until 1952 was Joseph and Aseneth introduced into the study of the New Testament and Christian origins. In a brief but pivotal article in that year, G.D. Kilpatrick cited the document for its bearing on eucharistie origins, arguing that the meal of bread and wine in Joseph and Aseneth and the tradition of the Lord's Supper in the New Testament exhibit a common pattern and represent separate developments of an older Jewish meal distinct from the Passover.77 As to the date and circumstances of the book, Kilpatrick held that it is a piece of Hellenistic Jewish propaganda 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77.

(Breslau: n.p., 1937). Josephsgeschichte, esp. pp. 12,135. Josephsgeschichte, p. 11. Josephsgeschichte, p. 131. Josephsgeschichte, p. 132. 'Last Supper', ExpT64 (1952), pp. 5-7.

1. History of Research

31

designed to attract converts by representing conversion to Judaism in the guise of initiation into a mystery. He suggested that it was written in Egypt between 100 and 30 BCE and reveals no trace of Christian interpolations or alterations.78 Of even greater historical significance than the particulars of Kilpatrick's understanding of Joseph and Aseneth is his recognition that 'the text deserves further study by New Testament scholars and it is to be hoped that it will receive it'.79 J. Jeremias, against whose views on the Last Supper Kilpatrick's article had been directed, soon responded. Noting the solemnity of everyday Jewish meals, Jeremias interpreted the bread, cup and ointment in Joseph and Aseneth as the ordinary daily meal and the anointing of the guest before the meal rather than as a special sacramental rite.80 However, in other, more fundamental ways, Jeremias concurred with Kilpatrick: Joseph and Aseneth is 'a most important, but almost wholly neglected apocryphon'; it is indeed a piece of Hellenistic Jewish propaganda designed to represent conversion to Judaism under the guise of initiation into a mystery; and it 'will be playing a considerable part in further investigation in the religious environment of the New Testament'.81 Through this important exchange of articles, Joseph and Aseneth attained a permanent place among those Jewish writings considered significant for the study of the New Testament and early Christianity. The introduction of Joseph and Aseneth into Christian origins intensified interest in the document and heightened the concern to situate it within Judaism. The recently discovered Qumran scrolls furnished an additional stimulus for this enterprise. Attention naturally focused on the point where contact between Joseph and Aseneth and the New Testament had been affirmed and where the Qumran texts also provided intriguing data for comparative analysis—the meal of the bread and cup. Thus, in an early study of the Lord's Supper in the light of the Qumran discoveries, K.G. Kühn referred also to the 'blessed bread of life' and the 'blessed cup of immortality' in Joseph and Aseneth'. It is certainly wrong to take for granted that these instances refer to the Christian Eucharist and that they are therefore Christian interpolations. Even if one thinks in terms of a Christian revision of the text, the Jewish 78. 79. 80. 81.

'Last Supper', pp. 4-5. 'Last Supper', p. 7. 'Last Supper', ExpT64 (1952), pp. 91-92. 'Last Supper', p. 91.

32

From Death to Life character of the original is beyond doubt, and the references to a cult meal must belong to the original, since they form an integral part of the narrative. Thus they must be originally Jewish, and have to be interpreted accordingly.82

Kühn suggested that the similarities between these passages in Joseph and Aseneth and the cult meal of the Essenes are so striking that 'a connection between the two must be postulated', but the connection is not direct.83 Since the Essene meal involved men only, it cannot explain Aseneth's case. But in the sacred meal of the Therapeutae, 'an Egyptian offshoot of the Palestinian Order of the Essenes', women also took part. Moreover, the meal in Joseph and Aseneth mediates immortality and is more explicitly sacramental than the Essene meal, and this too fits better with the cult meal of the Therapeutae, which was conceived under Hellenistic influence as 'food of immortality'. Kühn thus related the Egyptian Jewish community behind Joseph and Aseneth very closely to the Therapeutae and indirectly to the Essenes.84 Since he also saw a close kinship between the Essene meals and the sacred meals of early Palestinian Christianity,85 Joseph and Aseneth could be cited in connection with eucharistie origins. The view that Joseph and Aseneth originated among the Therapeutae was taken up and developed in an article by M. Delcor in 1962,86not only on the basis of the meal but on other grounds as well. Delcor acknowledged the affinities with the Essenes noted by Riessler and others and even expanded upon these, but observed significant differences as well, concluding that Joseph and Aseneth is 'plus thérapeute 82. The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', The Scrolls and the New Testament (ed. K. Stendahl; New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957), pp. 7475. This article is a substantially revised and enlarged edition of Kühn's earlier study, 'Über den ursprünglichen Sinn des Abendmahles und sein Verhältnis zu den Gemeinschaftsmahlen der Sektenschrift', EvT 10 (1950-51), pp. 508-27, which does not include the discussion of Joseph and Aseneth. See also his 'Repas cultuel essénien et cène chrétienne', in Les manuscrits de la Mer Morte: Colloque de Strasbourg 25-27 mai 1955 (Paris: n.p., 1957), pp. 75-92. 83. 'The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', pp. 75-76. 84. 'The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', pp. 75-77. 85. 'The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', pp. 77-93. 86. 'Un roman d'amour d'origine thérapeute: Le Livre de Joseph et Asénath', BLE 63 (1962), pp. 3-27. Later Delcor defended this thesis against objections raised by C. Burchard; see Delcor, Review of Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Asenath, by C. Burchard, RevQ 5 (1966), pp. 592-95.

1. History of Research

33

qu'essénien'.87 For instance, the ablutions that were central in Essene practice but lacking in Joseph and Aseneth** are also absent from Philo's description of the Therapeutae.89 Similarly, as Kühn had argued already, the meal in which Aseneth is invited to participate is unlike that of the Essenes, in which only men participated, but like that of the Therapeutae, in which both men and women took part.90 Other features in which Delcor found a closer analogy among the Therapeutae than among the Essenes include the place of fasting and the disposal of worldly possessions in the process of conversion.91 Still other features, such as the wearing of white garments, the high estimation of virginity, and prayer toward the rising sun, argue at least as well for a Therapeutic as for an Essene origin since they characterize both groups.92 Delcor concluded that Joseph and Aseneth was composed in Greek as 4un écrit de propagande judéo-hellénistique', that it is of Egyptian and probably Alexandrian provenance, and that it is of Therapeutic origin. Since Egypt seems still to be independent and there are no references to the Romans, it must have been written prior to 30 BCE and probably dates between 100 and 30 BCE.93 Others advocating an Essene or Therapeutic origin for Joseph and Aseneth are few. W. Nauck related the work closely to the Qumran tradition, adding to previous discussion the argument that Aseneth's great prayer parallels the confession of sin in the initiatory ritual described in 1QS 1.24-25.94 H. Schlier linked the earliest Jewish strata of Joseph and Aseneth, which underlie the Christian-gnostic veneer, to Essene circles in 87. 'Un roman d'amour', p. 26. 88. Aseneth is told to wash her face and hands (14.12), but according to Delcor this is only because she has been lying in cinders for a week; no purificatory significance is indicated and certainly there is no washing of the whole body such as the Essenes practiced: 'on ne trouve pas mentionnées beaucoup d'ablutions en dehors de celles nécessaires aux simples soins de propreté' ('Un roman d'amour', p. 23; see also p. 21). 89. 'Un roman d'amour', pp. 1-23. 90. 'Un roman d'amour', p. 23. 91. 'Un roman d'amour', pp. 23-24. 92. 'Un roman d'amour', pp. 22-24. 93. 'Un roman d'amour,' pp. 26-27; see also Delcor, 'José y Asénet, Historia de', in Enciclopedia de la Biblia (ed A. Diez-Macho and S. Bartina; 6 vols.; Barcelona: Ediciones Garriga, 1963), IV, col. 638. 94. Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefes (WUNT, 3; Tübingen: Mohr, 1957), pp. 169-71.

34

From Death to Life

Egypt.95 M. Philonenko rendered a preliminary opinion, to be revoked in his later contributions, that Joseph and Aseneth is 'zweifellos therapeutisch'.96 Thus the 'Qumran fever' that heavily influenced the interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth for a time was as short-lived as the 'gnostic fever' that had raged a generation earlier, and in its place came a reaffirmation of the various viewpoints advanced previously. Some discounted the use tí Joseph and Aseneth in connection with eucharistie origins by insisting on the late date and Christian character of the work.97 Others reiterated the Christian-gnostic character of the work, at least in its present form.98 M. Philonenko took up Kilpatrick's suggestion that Joseph and Aseneth portrays Judaism in the guise of a mystery religion, arguing in particular that the threefold liturgical formula (bread, cup and ointment) furnishes evidence que certains conventicules juifs de la Diaspora ont célébré un repas sacré 'mystérieux' et qu'ils ont présenté l'entrée dans la communauté juive comme une initiation au mystère.99

95. Der Brief an die Epheser: Ein Kommentar (Düsseldorf: Patmos-Verlag, 2nd edn, 1958), p. 275 n. 4. 96. 'Joseph und Asenath', Biblisch-historisches Handwörterbuch: Landeskunde, Geschichte, Religion, Kultur, Literatur (ed. B. Reicke and L. Rost; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962-66), II, cols. 889-90. See also his '"Le Testament de Job" et les Thérapeutes', Sem 8 (1958), p. 52. 97. E.g. see M. Black, The Scrolls and Christian Origins: Studies in the Jewish Background of the New Testament (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1961), pp. 105-106: '... a product of Alexandrian syncretism of the fourth or fifth century AD. The work is not only late, however, but obviously, in its only available form, a christianized document, and cannot be admitted as evidence'. See also E. Schweizer, 'Das Herrenmahl im Neuen Testament: Ein Forschungsbericht', TLZ 79 (1954), p. 583; and R.D. Richardson, 'Supplementary Essay. A Further Inquiry into Eucharistie Origins with Special Reference to New Testament Problems', in Mass and Lord's Supper: A Study in the History of the Liturgy (ed. H. Lietzmann; Fase. 6; Leiden: Brill, 1964), pp. 343-47. 98. So H. Schlier, Der Brief an die Epheser, p. 275 n. 4; E. Lohse, 'Joseph und Aseneth', RGG3, III, col. 864; and E. Frenzel, 'Joseph in Ägypten', Stoffe der Weltliteratur: Ein Lexicon dichtungsgeschichtlicher Längsschnitte (Stuttgart: Kröner, 1963), p. 321. 99. 'Initiation et mystère dans Joseph et Aseneth', in Initiation (ed. C.J. Bleeker; Supplements to Numen, SHR, 10; Leiden: Brill, 1963), p. 153.

1. History of Research

35

Notwithstanding this diversity of opinion, the surge of interest in Joseph andAseneth in the first twenty years after the initial Qumran discoveries had a cumulative effect of momentous import. In fulfilment of the dream articulated by G.D. Kilpatrick and J. Jeremias, this important but neglected apocryphon had finally gained the attention of specialists in early Judaism and Christian origins. In ever-increasing numbers New Testament scholars cited Joseph and Aseneth to elucidate missionary preaching in early Judaism and Christianity,100 eucharistie origins,101 Greek grammar,102 Jewish missionary activity and Paul's opponents in 2 Corinthians,103 the conversion accounts in Acts,104 the resurrection of believers as a historical and theological problem in the New Testament,105 the Pauline imagery of 'new creation',106 Pauline anthropological terms,107 the Hagar-Sarah allegory in Galatians 4,108 and various other New Testament themes.109 100. W. Nauck, 'Die Tradition und Komposition der Areopagrede', ZTK 53 (1956), p. 23 n. 2; 39. 101. Kühn, The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', pp. 74-77. For criticisms of this usage, see, in addition to the works listed above, J. Jeremias, Die Abendmahlsworte Jesu (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 3rd edn, 1960), pp. 27-28 (ET: The Eucharistie Words of Jesus [trans. N. Perrin; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966], pp. 33-34). 102. C. Burchard, 'Ei nach einem Ausdruck des Wissens oder Nichtwissens Joh 9.25, Act 19.2,1 Cor 1.16, 7.16', ZNW52 (1961), pp. 73-82. 103. D. Georgi, Die Gegner des Paulus im 2. Korintherbrief: Studien zur religiösen Propaganda in Spätantike (WMANT, 11 ; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1964), p. 97 nn. 1-2 (ET: The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986], pp. 183-84 nn. 62-63). 104. G. Lohfink, 'Eine alttestamentliche Darstellungsform für Gotteserscheinungen in den Damaskusberichten (Apg 9; 22; 26)', BZ 9 (1965), pp. 246-57; and Paulus vor Damaskus: Arbeitsweisen der neueren Bibelwissenschaft dargestellt an den Texten Apg 9,1-19; 22,3-21; 26,9-18 (Stuttgarter Bibelstudien, 4; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1965). 105. E. Brandenburger, 'Die Auferstehung der Glaubenden als historisches und theologisches Problem', Wort und Dienst 9 (1967), pp. 24-25. 106. P. Stuhlmacher, 'Erwägungen zum ontologischen Charakter der KOUVTI Ktiaic bei Paulus', EvT21 (1967), pp. 17-21; and Das Paulinische Evangelium. I. Vorgeschichte (FRLANT, 95; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968), pp. 19192,260-61. 107. E. Brandenberger, Fleisch und Geist: Paulus und die dualistische Weisheit (WMANT, 29; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, \96Z\passim. 108. Fleisch und Geist, p. 202. 109. J. Jeremias, 'Die missionarische Aufgabe in der Mischehe (I Cor. 7,16)', in

36

From Death to Life

Landmark Monographs by C. Burchard and M. Philonenko The decade of the 1960s saw the publication of two major monographs on Joseph and Aseneth which brought previous discussion to a head, proposed new and distinctive views, and raised the issues which have dominated subsequent discussion. The first, written by C. Burchard and published in 1965,110began by lamenting the absence of accord on key issues requisite to an appreciation of the document: Es ist nur kümmerlich herausgegeben, kaum philologisch untersucht, religionsgeschichtlich nicht sicher eingeordnet, ungenügend interpretiert.111

The most urgent need, Burchard argued, is for a new edition of the text of Joseph and Aseneth. Accordingly, the first part of his monograph provides the first in-depth study of the textual tradition. Building on his Göttingen dissertation of 1961, Burchard catalogued all known manuscripts and versions and assessed their relative importance. He arranged the sixteen Greek manuscripts into four families, which he designated a, b, c and d. Of these, he concluded, family b represents the oldest and most reliable text; family a, the longest text, is the latest and most stylistically improved form; and families c and d, though shorter than b, exhibit stylistic improvements similar to those found in a.112 These findings indicated to Burchard the pressing need for a new edition, since the printed texts of Batiffol and Istrin had been based on manuscripts of families a and d with no representatives of the best text, Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann (ed. W. Ehester; BZNW, 21; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1954), pp. 255-60; Jeremias, Jesu Verheissungßr die Völker (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1956), pp. 10-11, 59 (ET: Jesus1 Promise to the Nations, [trans. S.H. Hooke; SBT, 24; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1958], pp. 13, 69); Jeremias, Die Kindertaufe in der ersten vier Jahrhunderten (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958), pp. 38-41 (ET: Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries [trans. D. Cairns; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962], pp. 33-35); Jeremias, Die Gleichnisse Jesu (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 6th edn, 1962), pp. 142, 146 (ET: The Parables of Jesus [trans. S.H. Hooke; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1963], pp. 143,147); W. Nauck, Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefs, pp. 169-71; H. Schlier, Der Brief an die Epheser, p. 274 n. 4; and G. Delling, 'Partizipiale Gottesprädikationen in den Briefen des Neuen Testaments', ST 17 (1963), pp. 22-24; 29 n. 1; 31 n. 4. 110. Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth. 111. Untersuchungen, p. 1. 112. Untersuchungen, pp. 18-23.

1. History of Research

37

family b. The new edition, Burchard maintained, should be based primarily on family b, with the help of the other families when individual readings in them clearly prove superior. The Syriac, the Armenian, and the two Latin versions must also be taken into account, since these are related to the Greek family b, but the Slavic, Modern Greek and Rumanian versions are of little text-critical value.113 Considering his work only a prolegomenon to the needed Gesamtausgabe, Burchard reconstructed a provisional text of six brief passages.114 The second part of Burchard's work deals with the origins of Joseph and Aseneth. He argued that Greek is the original language and that the work is Jewish and not Christian. On the latter point, he insisted: Es gibt, negativ gesprochen, in ihr keinen Satz, der nicht jüdisch sein könnte. Es gibt dazu, positiv gesprochen, reichlich Bezeihungen zu judischen Denktiven und Sitten.115

Though confident of the Jewish character of Joseph and Aseneth, Burchard declined to relate it specifically to any known Jewish group. Alongside the alleged parallels with the Essenes and Therapeutae, he found significant differences which attenuated the connections that some had drawn between Joseph and Aseneth and these groups.116 In separate studies of two topics relating to the basic interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth, Burchard challenged still other assumptions made in previous research. He rejected the idea that Joseph and Aseneth is an allegory, while acknowledging that Aseneth does have symbolic significance. In his view, 'Aseneth ist das gottewollte Urbild und damit die theologische Rechtfertigung der Proselyten'.117 He suggested further: Sie ist ein weiblicher Abraham (der nach rabbinischer Auffassung übrigens selbst der erste Proselyt und ein grosser Missionar war), Mutter vieler VölkerrcercoiGOTeçèni TCO icupico. Als Zuflucht vieler Völker ist sie sogar auch das Gegenstück zu Abraham, dem Vater der Juden.118

Burchard also challenged the assumption that the difficult breadcup-ointment passages refer to a ritualistic cult meal. Instead he followed 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118.

Untersuchungen, pp. 45-49. Untersuchungen, pp. 49-90. Untersuchungen, pp. 99-100. Untersuchungen, pp. 99-112. Untersuchungen, p. 117. Untersuchungen, ?. 120.

38

From Death to Life

the suggestion of his teacher, J. Jeremias, that the reference is to the daily Jewish meal, which itself had a solemn religious character.119 The passages are designed to show that life and immortality are attained through the proper (that is, the Jewish) use of food and ointment and the pronouncement of the proper blessings over them, whereas pagan meals honor dead idols and lead to death. Eating the food of the daily Jewish meals is tantamount to eating manna, so that Aseneth and all other proselytes gain immortality when they live more judaico.120 With regard to date, Burchard argued that since Joseph and Aseneth is 'eine jüdisch-hellenistische Missionsschrift',121 a terminus ante quern can be set at the time of the Hadrianic measures against Judaism in 135 CE, and since Egyptian provenance is virtually certain, the date can be pushed still earlier, prior to the Jewish revolt in Egypt in 116 CE.122 A terminus post quern of c. 100 BCE is fixed by the dependence of Joseph and Aseneth on the Septuagint.123 Roughly the same termini can be deduced, Burchard argued, from another, previously unnoticed datum. The author's assumption that there existed a Moabite kingdom of sufficient eminence to furnish a bride for the crown prince of Egypt (1.8-9) points to the period between c. 110 BC and 105/106 CE, when the Nabatean Kingdom was dominant in Moab.124 As to a precise date within this range, Burchard was reticent to speculate but cautiously favored the late first century BCE on the basis of lexical considerations and the absence of any reference to proselyte baptism.125 Burchard concluded his study with an appeal for New Testament scholars to take up the task of investigating Joseph and Aseneth to illuminate the New Testament. Such research, he indicated, is potentially illuminating not only in a general way for the language, style and Hellenistic Jewish world of the New Testament, but also for specific ideas such as the meal of the bread and cup, the nature of conversion, and the collective role of Aseneth in comparison with that of Abraham

119. Untersuchungen, pp. 121 -29. 120. Untersuchungen, pp. 126-31. 121. He used this expression 'in einem weiten Sinn, ohne damit sagen zu wollen, dass JA speziell für Heiden geschreiben wäre' (Untersuchungen, p. 142 n. 5).

122. 123. 124. 125.

Untersuchungen, pp. 143-44. Untersuchungen, p. 144. Untersuchungen, pp. 144-46. Untersuchungen, pp. 146-51.

1. History of Research

39

in Romans 4, Hagar and Sarah in Galatians 4, and Peter in Mt. 16.171 9 126

Only three years after the publication of Burchard's study, a second major monograph on Joseph and Aseneth appeared in the form of an introduction, critical text, and annotated French translation by M. Philonenko.127 Like Burchard, Philonenko devoted considerable attention to the textual tradition. He endorsed Burchard's basic grouping of the Greek witnesses but disagreed with him on the relationships and relative value of the four families. Whereas Burchard had argued that family d, the shortest form of the text, is an abbreviated form of the original, Philonenko argued that it is the oldest available form and that the others expanded the original by means of stylistic improvements and interpolations; families b, c and a represent, respectively, the first, second and third long recensions.128 Accordingly, Philonenko based his own text on the two manuscripts of family d and the related Slavonic version, though he did adopt a few readings from the long recensions in places where he felt compelled to admit that d is an abbreviated text.129 Since the resulting edition is considerably shorter than Batiffol's, Philonenko replaced Riessler's system of versification with a new system better suited to the short text. In the second half of his introduction, Philonenko stressed the importance of reading Joseph and Aseneth as a Hellenistic romance and not merely as a Jewish apocryphon.130 More specifically, he identified three types of the romantic genre within Joseph and Aseneth: (1) roman missionaire, (2) roman à c/e/and (3) roman mistique. As a missionary romance, Joseph and Aseneth illustrates repentance and conversion to Judaism and presents Aseneth as the model proselyte.131 As a roman à clef, it encodes the Egyptian goddess Neith (who had become assimilated to Isis) in its portrayal of Aseneth.132 According to Philonenko, the name Aseneth itself would have been recognized to mean 'one who belongs to Neith',133 and 'le portrait d'Aséneth répond, trait pour trait, à 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133.

Untersuchungen, pp. 151-52. Joseph et Aséneth. Joseph et Aséneth, pp. 3-11,21-26. Joseph et Aséneth, pp. 21-26,125-226. Joseph et Aséneth, p. 53. Joseph et Aséneth, pp. 53-61. Joseph et Aséneth, pp. 61-19. Joseph et Aséneth, pp. 61-62.

40

From Death to Life

celui de Neith'.134Similarly, as a mystical romance, Joseph andAseneth is replete with (1) astrological allegory, in which Joseph (representing the sun-god, Helios) and Aseneth (representing the moon-goddess, Selene) are united in a iepoç yafioç;135 (2) mythological drama of a Valentinian gnostic character, in which the mythical figure Sophia (Aseneth) is delivered from error, ignorance and darkness by means of mystical union with the divine Logos (Joseph);136 and (3) references to a sacramental ritual (food, drink and ointment) closely akin to the sacred feasts and initiation liturgies of the mystery cults.137 In the course of his extended discussion of Joseph and Aseneth as a Hellenistic romance, Philonenko cited numerous religionsgeschichtlich analogies to the astrological, mythological and liturgical motifs he found in the text. For example, in the seven virgins who attend Aseneth he found a disguised reference to Neith, the goddess of Sais, because Philo associates the number seven with Athena, who is called rcapOévoç and who can be identified with Neith. Furthermore, since these seven virgins are said to have been born on the same night as Aseneth and to be 'very beautiful, like the stars of heaven' (2.6), they represent the seven stars of Ursa Major and indicate that Aseneth is under the beneficent influence of the Great Bear just as Sais was.138 Sensitive Hellenistic readers detecting these allusions to various elements of their cultural heritage would thereby be attracted to the God of Israel. Thus, by the conversion of Neith (in the person of Aseneth) to the Most High God, devotees of Neith (Isis) would be influenced in the same direction.139 Similarly, in the ritual of the bread of life, cup of immortality, and ointment of incorruption, readers would perceive the same promises of glorious immortality that characterized the cultic meals of Attis, Cybele, Mythra and Isis, and would be drawn to the Jewish mystery cult.140 Like Burchard, Philonenko defended the Jewish character of Joseph and Aseneth, at least in its earliest form,141 without subscribing to 134. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 79. 135. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 81. 136. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 83-89. 137. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 89-98. 138. Joseph et Aseneth, w. 73-74. 139. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 106-107. 140. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 93-94. 141. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 101. Philonenko's argument applied only to the short text represented by manuscript family d. Groups c and a, which he regarded as the second and third long recensions, are in his view clearly Christian. He considered the

1. History of Research

41

theories of an Essene or Therapeutic origin.142 Instead, he related the document to 'quelque secte mystique' closely akin to the widespread mystical Judaism posited by E.R. Goodenough.143 With regard to provenance, Philonenko echoed the growing consensus that Joseph and Aseneth is of Egyptian origin and adduced vast new evidence for this view: Non seulement l'auteur a pu s'inspirer de sources égyptiennes, comme le 'Conte du Prince prédestiné', mais il a un connaissance approfondie de la théologie égyptienne tardive. Il connaît la cosmologie héliopolitaine, il connaît surtout, et de la façon la plus précise, la légende de Neith, la dame de Saïs. Il la connaît comme seul un Egyptien peut la connaître.144

The intended readership and function of the document, in Philonenko's view, was twofold: for Jews it was an apology for mixed marriage (on the condition that the pagan partner convert to Judaism); for Egyptians it was a polemic against idolatry and an appeal to take refuge in the Most High God.145 Because of the intransigence toward paganism which characterized Philo and the burgeois Jews of Alexandria, Philonenko preferred the Egyptian chora over Alexandria as the milieu of the work.146 A date of composition prior to the Egyptian Jewish revolt of 115-17 CE is virtually certain, according to Philonenko, and a date early in the second century CE is most likely because of affinities with the sacred meal language in the Gospel of John and Ignatius, and because of the place of Joseph and Aseneth in 'la littérature romanesque antique'.147 Recent Studies The quarter-century since the publication of the landmark monographs by Burchard and Philonenko has been marked by a proliferation of first long recension, preserved in family b, to be the work either of a gnostic Christian or of a Jew strongly inclined toward mystical speculation. 142. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 100. As was noted above, Philonenko at one point had been convinced that Joseph and Aseneth is Therapeutic, but in his monograph he backed away from this view. 143. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 98, 105. 144. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 106. 145. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 106-107. 146. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 107'. 147. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 108-109.

42

From Death to Life

studies which either deal directly with Joseph and Aseneth or cite the work for its bearing on related topics. Even though these publications have continued to reflect the widest diversity of opinion on some aspects of Joseph and Aseneth—not the least controversial of which is the theme of conversion, which is to be investigated in the chapters following—they have also been characterized by a growing consensus on at least some of the basic literary and historical issues. Thus, in the same year in which Philonenko's monograph on Joseph and Aseneth was published, T. Holtz could write: Die meisten und vor allem die neueren Forscher, die sich mit 'Joseph und Aseneth' (JA) beschäftigt haben, halten diese Schrift für reinjüdisch.148

Holtz himself disagreed with this consensus, arguing from such things as the imagery of rebirth, the use of honey in a sacred initiatory meal, the gnostic influence on some of the vocabulary and imagery, and the portrayal of Joseph as a Christ-figure, that the account of Aseneth's conversion 'nicht jüdisch ist, sondern mindestens die christliche Umprägung eines ursprünglich andersartigen jüdischen Berichts'.149 Nevertheless, the arguments by which Holtz sought to establish 'den christliche Ursprung oder doch eine christliche Bearbeitung'150 remained unconvincing to most, and the consensus which he had summarized and set up as a foil at the outset of his article remained in effect. A measure of uniformity has also been brought to the text-critical discussion by the continuing work of C. Burchard. In an influential article in 1970,151 Burchard took to task Philonenko's theory of the recensional history of Joseph and Aseneth and his preference for the short form of the text. Burchard challenged Philonenko's basic assumption that since family a exhibits extensive redactional alterations in matters of style, its greater length as compared to family d is also due to scribal redaction. While agreeing that the wording (Wortlauf) of a has undergone considerable stylistic polishing and is often secondary in comparison with d, Burchard cited numerous instances in which the longer substance (Umfang) of a is better explained in terms of omissions by d than in terms of interpolations in a. In many cases he found even the wording of 148. p. 482. 149. 150. 151.

'Christliche Interpolationen in "Joseph und Aseneth'", NTS 14 (1968), 'Christliche Interpolationen', p. 486. 'Christliche Interpolationen', p. 497. 'Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth'", JSJ 1 (1970), pp. 3-34.

1. History of Research

43

d to be secondary to that of other families. Thus the view that family d embodies the Grundlage that underlies the other families and that the textual history of the document follows the linear sequence d-b-c-a is untenable, and Philonenko's short text based on family d is inadequate.152 Burchard insisted further that even though a great deal more textual work is needed, a fairly reliable text can be reconstructed on an eclectic basis with the greatest weight being attached to family b. The article ends with a sample reconstruction of 4.1-8.153 Burchard's work on the textual tradition of Joseph and Aseneth has continued down to the present. In the period 1977-80 he published editions of the Modern Greek,154 Armenian155 and Serbian Slavonic156 versions. Also in this period he published a preliminary Greek text of Joseph and Aseneth with a few notes,157 and currently he is preparing an editio minor for the Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece series. Although Burchard's own recent text has had minimal impact because of its provisional nature and its publication in ajournai of limited circulation, his approach to the textual problem has been widely endorsed,158 with the result that much recent work has been built upon Batiffol's old edition of the long text rather than Philonenko's edition of the short recension. Reflecting both the emerging consensus on some key matters and the continuing debate on others are the several manuals and textbooks on the literature of early Judaism which have appeared in recent years. In their respective introductions, A.-M. Denis,159 H. Hegermann,160

152. 'Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth" ', pp. 12-30. 153. 'Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth" ', pp. 30-34. 154. 'Joseph und Aseneth neugriechisch', NTS 24 (1977), pp. 64-84. 155. 'Joseph und Aseneth 25-29 Armenisch', JSJ 10 (1979), pp. 1-10; see also his 'Zur armenischen Übersetzung von Joseph und Aseneth', Revue des Etudes Arméniennes 17 (1983), pp. 207-40. 156. 'Joseph und Aseneth serbisch-kirchenslawisch. Text und Varianten', DBAT 15 (1980), pp. 3-46. 157. 'Ein vorläufiger griechischer Text von Joseph und Aseneth', DBAT 14 (1979), pp. 2-53; supplemented in his 'Verbesserungen zum vorläufigen Text von Joseph und Aseneth', DBAT 16 (1982), pp. 37-39. 158. See the discussion in Chapter 2 below. 159. Introduction aux pseudépigraphes grecs d'Ancien Testament (SVTP, 1; Leiden: Brill, 1970), pp. 40-48.

160. 'Griechisch-jüdisches Schrifttum', Literatur und Religion des

44

From Death to Life

J.H. Charlesworth,161 G. Stemberger,162 G.W.E. Nickelsburg,163 H. Koester,164 JJ. Collins,165 A.R.C. Leaney,166 J.R. Bartlett,167 C. Burchard,168 M. Goodman,169 R. Doran,170 N. Walter,171 Frühjudentums: Eine Einführung (ed. J. Maier and J. Schreiner; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1973), p. 174. 161. The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research (SCS, 7; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), pp. 137-40; updated in The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research with a Supplement (SCS, 7s; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981), pp. 291-92. See also Charlesworth's brief comments in 'Pseudepigrapha', in Harper's Bible Dictionary (éd. P.J. Achtemeier; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), p. 839; and in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and thé New Testament: Prolegomena for the Study of Christian Origins (SNTSMS, 5; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 24-25,42. 162. Geschichte der jüdischen Literatur: Eine Einführung (Munich: Beck, 1977), pp. 56-57. 163. Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah: A Historical and Literary Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), pp. 158-63, 271-72. The same basic material appears in Nickelsburg, 'Stories of Biblical and Early PostBiblical Times', in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (ed. M.E. Stone; CRINT, 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1984), pp. 65-70. 164. Introduction to the New Testament (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982), I, p. 265. 165. Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1983), pp. 89-91, 211-18. See also Collins's brief comments in 'A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century', in To See Ourselves as Others See Us: Christians, Jews, 'Others' in Late Antiquity (ed. J. Neusner and E.S. Frerichs; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985), pp. 176-77. 166. The Jewish and Christian World 200 EC to AD 200 (Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, 7; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 169-70. 167. Jews in the Hellenistic World (Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, 1.1; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 5, 9. Bartlett mentions Joseph and Aseneth only in passing. 168. 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Outside the Old Testament (éd. M. de Jonge; Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200,4; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 92-110. 169. E. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (ed. G. Vermes et al\ 3 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1973-86), m. 1, pp. 546-52. 170. 'Narrative Literature', Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters (ed. R.A. Kraft and G.W E. Nickelsburg; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986), pp. 290-93. 171. 'Judisch-hellenistische Literatur vor Philo von Alexandrien (unter

1. History of Research

45

D.S. Russell,172 and M. Delcor173 treat Joseph and Aseneth as an early (first century BCE or CE) Jewish composition without Christian elements.174 All of these who mention the original language favor Greek, all who discuss provenance favor Egypt, and all who render a judgment on the textual problem favor the long version of the Batiffol-Burchard tradition over Philonenko's short version. These writers also represent a distinct trend away from the thoroughgoing allegorical kind of approach taken by Batiffol. While no one doubts the presence of symbolic and allegorical elements, the trend now is toward a method which recognizes those elements of symbolism and allegory which are straightforward and explicit in the narrative of Aseneth's conversion rather than those supposed to be encoded deep within it.175 Also evident in the handbooks, if sometimes only in brief and noncommittal remarks, are the unresolved issues in the interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth, such as the intended audience of the work, the circles from which it came, the significance of the bread-cup-anointing passages, the influence of non-Jewish initiatory rituals, and the curious juxtaposition of religious syncretism with strong polemic against paganism. Finally, it should be mentioned that, in addition to the handbooks mentioned above, there are other recent surveys Ausschluss der Historiker)', ANRW2.20.1 (1987), pp. 104-105. 172. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Patriarchs and Prophets in Early Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), pp. 91-94. 173. 'The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Hellenistic Period', The Cambridge History of Judaism (4 vols.; ed. W.D. Davies and L. Finkelstein; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984-), II, pp. 500-503. [vol. 2 was published in 1989]. 174. Walter, 'Jüdisch-hellenistische Literatur', pp. 104-105, does not actually deny the presence of Christian insertions but says that the issue is 'strittig'. N. DeLange, Apocrypha: Jewish Literature in the Hellenistic Age (New York: Viking Press, 1978), also includes Joseph and Aseneth but gives only a summary of the story (pp. 68-78). Literary, historical and theological issues are not treated except for the brief comment that certain elements in the story are 'probably a survival from an ancient conversion ritual' (p. 69). 175. Koester's suggestion that 'the primary characters of the romance must be understood allegorically' (Introduction to the New Testament, I, p. 265) is only a partial exception to this trend. In Koester's view Aseneth represents the Jewish community. But this much is apparent in the narrative and is a far cry from the subtle and detailed allegorical meanings which Batiffol, Philonenko, and others have discovered in Joseph and Aseneth. Goodman (Schürer, History [ed. Vermes et al], III. l, p. 548 and n. 64) cautiously allows that there may be a number of different meanings on various levels of the text.

46

From Death to Life

of early Jewish literature which do not include Joseph and Aseneth.116 Similarly, a number of the recent dictionaries and encyclopedias important for the study of early Judaism and Christianity have no article on this apocryphon.177 If the foregoing treatment of the growing consensus on certain points has created the impression that research on Joseph and Aseneth has stagnated and that recent opinion has tended only to crystallize around already existing poles, that impression must now be dispelled by reference to some recent contributions wherein debate continues and wherein new issues and approaches, along with significant revivals of older ones, have been brought into the discussion. That strong disagreement persists even on some very basic issues is illustrated by the continuing contributions of Burchard and Philonenko. In a portion of a monograph in 1970178and an article in 1974,179 Burchard reiterated the positions he had stated earlier, but this time with more openness to the influence of the non-Jewish heritage. In particular he noted numerous formal and structural parallels between Joseph and Aseneth and the Hellenistic romances, especially the Metamorphoses of Apuleius.180 Still other 176. E.g. L. Rost, Judaism Outside the Hebrew Canon: An Introduction to the Documents (trans. D.E. Green; Nashville: Abingdon, 1976); and M. McNamara, Intertestamental Literature (Old Testament Message, 23; Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1983). 177. E.g. neither The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (4 vols.; éd. G.A. Buttrick; Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), nor the Supplementary Volume (ed. K. Crim; Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), includes Joseph and Aseneth. The recent International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (4 vols.; éd. G.W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979-88), has no article on Joseph and Aseneth and includes only a few lines about the work in G.E. Ladd's article on Tseudepigrapha', III, pp. 104043. There it is listed under 'Minor Pseudepigrapha' and is described as a Jewish composition which has 'been reworked by a Christian editor'. The Anchor Bible Dictionary (6 vols.; éd. D.N. Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992), which was published after the terminus of this survey, contains an entry on Joseph and Aseneth by R.D. Chesnutt (III, pp. 969-71). 178. Der dreizehnte Zeuge: Traditions- und kompositions-geschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Lukas' Darstellung der Frühzeit des Paulus (FRLANT, 103; Tübingen: Mohr, 1970), pp. 59-91 et passim. 179. 'Joseph et Aseneth: Questions actuelles', La littérature juive entre Tenach et Mischna: Quelques problèmes (ed. W.C. van Unnik; RechBib, 9; Leiden: Brill, 1974), pp. 77-100. 180. Der dreizehnte Zeuge, pp. 66-81; and 'Joseph et Aseneth: Questions actuelles', pp. 87-94.

1. History of Research

47

recent studies from Burchard's pen survey some of the major areas in which Joseph and Aseneth is significant for New Testament study,181 summarize the present state of research on Joseph and Aseneth™2 and trace the history of the apocryphon from the time of its composition to the present in terms of its preservation, translation, adaptation, usage and influence in the Christian world.183Burchard also wrote a brief dictionary entry on Joseph and Aseneth which appeared in 1987.184 Brief articles by Philonenko in 1971, 1974 and 1975 reiterated his position regarding the text and literary genre of Joseph and Aseneth and his view that the bread-cup-ointment passages corroborate E.R. Goodenough's hypothesis of a Jewish mystery with initiatory rites and a sacred meal.185 Alongside the names of those with long records of publishing on Joseph and Aseneth are the names of significant new contributors. In 1974 E.W. Smith, Jr catalogued the parallels to early Christian literature in Joseph and Aseneth 1-21 as a Claremont dissertation and contribution to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti.186 Although 'intended primarily as a tool for the study of the early Christian literature',187 Smith's study included an extensive introduction to Joseph and Aseneth which aired the major issues. Here he concurred with many of the emerging points of consensus: the work is Jewish and not Christian, but the association of it with any particular Jewish sect is inadvisable; its 181. The Importance of Joseph and Aseneth for the Study of the New Testament: A General Survey and a Fresh Look at the Lord's Supper', NTS 33 (1987), pp. 10234. 182. 'The Present State of Research on Joseph and Aseneth', Religion, Literature, and Society in Ancient Israel, Formative Christianity and Judaism (2 vols. ; ed. J. Neusner et al ; Langham, MD: University Press of America, 1987), II, pp. 31-52. 183. 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung'. 184. 'Joseph und Aseneth', TRE, XVII, pp. 246-49.1 am indebted to Professor Burchard for keeping me updated on his publications on Joseph and Aseneth while this monograph was in progress. 185. 'Joseph and Asenath', EncJud, X, pp. 223-24; 'Joseph et Aseneth: Questions actuelles', La littérature juive entre Tenach et Mischna: Quelques problèmes (éd. W.C. van Unnik; RechBib, 9; Leiden: Brill, 1974), pp. 73-76; and 'Un mystère juif?', in Mystères et syncrétismes (EHR, 2; Paris: Geuthner, 1975), pp. 65-70. 186. 'Joseph and Asenath ' and Early Christian Literature: A Contribution to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti (Claremont Dissertation, 1974). 187. 'Joseph and Asenath ', p. vi.

48

From Death to Life

provenance is most likely Egypt; it was written in Greek sometime between the early first century BCE and 115 CE; and Philonenko's textual theory is to be rejected.188 Smith also addressed the more controversial aspects of Joseph and Aseneth. The passages on the bread, cup and anointing are not to be explained in terms of Christian redaction, but neither do they refer merely to living more judaico. They rather reflect a liturgy of initiation comparable to that of the mystery religions. Other evidences of an initiation liturgy confirm that Joseph and Aseneth Represents entrance into the Jewish community as a mystery initiation'.189 Smith concluded that Joseph and Aseneth was written to support the Jewish missionary appeal by showing that conversion to Judaism confers the benefits offered by the mysteries.190 In another study published in 1974, Smith isolated individual traditions in the Testament of Joseph which have parallels in Joseph and Aseneth,191 but this brief study is designed to elucidate the Testament of Joseph and has little to say about the interpretation tí Joseph and Aseneth. H.C. Kee has addressed the question of the setting and aims of Joseph and Aseneth in two recent articles.192 In the first, Kee suggested that while many elements of Hellenistic religion and culture are evident in Joseph and Aseneth—including the romantic genre, the ethical virtues, and the solar, astral, allegorical, magical and revelatory features—the community behind the document was 'not a syncretistic movement, at least not consciously', but a community concerned to maintain its own Jewish identity and reflecting close affinity with Merkabah mysticism.193 The problem of exogamy and the related issue of the admission of proselytes are central concerns in Joseph and Aseneth, according to Kee. The author champions the cause of conversion of Gentiles, assures the readers that God will protect his people (whether born Jews or 188. 'Joseph andAsenath', pp. 13,17-20,36. 189. 'Joseph andAsenath', pp. 23, 36-45. 190. 'Joseph andAsenath', pp. 32, 35. 191. 'Joseph Material in Joseph and Asenath and Josephus Relating to the Testament of Joseph', Studies on the Testament of Joseph (ed. G.W.E. Nickelsburg; SCS, 5; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), pp. 133-37. 192. 'The Socio-Religious Setting and Aims of "Joseph and Asenath'", SBLSP 1976 (ed. G. MacRae; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), pp. 183-92; and 'The Socio-Cultural Setting of Joseph and Aseneth', NTS 29 (1983), pp. 394-413. The latter article was first read before the Pseudepigrapha Seminar of the SNTS in Leuven in 1982. See Charlesworth, OT Pseudepigrapha and NT, pp. 134-36. 193. 'Socio-Religious Setting', pp. 185-88.

1. History of Research

49

proselytes), and counsels clemency and non-retaliation on the part of Jews and Jewish converts faced with hostility from both fellow Jews and pagan civil powers. This social situation, Kee concluded, likely reflects an Alexandrian provenance and a date soon after the turn of the eras.194 In his second article, Kee further developed the idea of a link with the Merkabah mystical tradition but was especially impressed with the similarities between Aseneth's conversion and Lucius' initiation into the cult of Isis in Apuleius' Metamorphoses 11: The ascetic preparation through which Aseneth passes, including her donning the garb symbolic of death (the black tunic) and her break with family and religious heritage, matches well with the preparations of Lucius for initiation into the Isis cult. Similarly, the giving of a new name to Aseneth, with its symbolic significance, City of Refuge, corresponds to the experience of those devoting themselves to the Isis cult.195

The 'standards of proselytism' (circumcision and baptism), Kee argued, are absent from Joseph and Aseneth, so that we are not dealing here with 'traditional Jewish legal piety'; rather, 'it is the changing image of Isis which seems to have developed in ways that shed light on the portrait of Aseneth and her conversion in our document'.196 In the same volume of SBL Seminar Papers in which Kee's first paper appeared, two other articles on Joseph and Aseneth were also published. In a study of the artistic embellishments related to Joseph and Aseneth and the Joseph cycle, G. Vikan attempted to organize the illustrated manuscripts into an iconographie lineage.197 More germane to the interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth19* is R.I. Pervo's comparative study of the literary genre of the apocryphon. Pervo argued that while Joseph and Aseneth is an example of literary syncretism and was influenced by various species of the Hellenistic genre 'novel' or 'romance', the closest affinities are with the Jewish sapiential novels of the type represented byAhiqar, Tobit and Daniel 1-6. Pervo concluded 194. 'Socio-Religious Setting', pp. 186-90. 195. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 400. 196. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 399,409. 197. 'Illustrated Manuscripts of the Romance of Joseph and Aseneth', pp. 193208. 198. This is not to suggest that the illustrations are of no value for understanding the text. Not only are they of great interest in their own right, but further investigation of the relationship between the pictorial tradition and the textual tradition could perhaps shed light on the exceedingly complex textual history of Joseph and Aseneth.

50

From Death to Life

that 'Jos. and As. is a "Sapiential Novel" of a branch of the Jewish tradition which was evolving a gnosticizing theological position'.199 Also exploring the relationship of Joseph andAseneth to the romantic genre were articles by T. Szepessy in 1973200and S. West in 1974.201 Szepessy classified Joseph and Aseneth as a novel about religious conversion and suggested that it is quite similar to the apocryphal acts of the apostles, especially the Acts of Paul and Thecla. West called attention to the deplorable neglect of Joseph andAseneth by classicists. The work is not entirely explicable, she argued, from the perspective of religious romances such as Ruth, Esther, Judith and Tobit. It has strong affinities with the Greek romantic novels and deserves the careful attention of students of that genre. The question of the religionsgeschichtlich background and aim of Joseph andAseneth was discussed by D. Sänger in an article in 1979.202 Sänger took to task Philonenko's thesis that the Egyptian goddess Neith stands behind the figure of Aseneth, arguing instead that precisely in the person of Aseneth the Jewish flavor of the document is most evident. Although Aseneth's name certainly is theophoric, the numerous functions and epithets attributed to Neith are too varied and generic to allow our isolating her individual personality traits and finding them encoded in Aseneth: 'Abgesehen von dem Namen erinnert nichts an die grosse ägyptische Göttin'.203 Rather, Sänger argued, Aseneth is portrayed in strongly Jewish terms, as is most evident in the formal parallels between her great prayer in Jos. Asen. 12.1-2 and the Old Testament 'descriptive psalms of praise', such as Pss. 135.5-11 and 145.5-7 (LXX).204 An especially noteworthy feature in common with this Psalmengattung is the heavy appeal to the exodus tradition to characterize Aseneth's conversion:

199. 'Joseph and Asenath and the Greek Novel', pp. 171-81. 200. 'József es Aszeneth törtenete es az antik regény' [The Joseph and Aseneth Story and the Ancient Novel'], Antik Tanulmányok 20 (1973), pp. 158-68 [in Polish; non vidi]', and 'L'Histoire de Joseph et d'Aséneth et le roman antique', Acta Classica Universitatis Scientiarum Debreceniensis 10 (1974), pp. 121-31. 201. ' "Joseph and Asenath": A Neglected Greek Romance', Classical Quarterly 24 (1974), pp. 70-81. 202. 'Bekehrung und Exodus: Zum jüdischen Traditionshintergrund von "Joseph und Aseneth" ', JSJ 10 (1979), pp. 11-36. 203. 'Bekehrung und Exodus', p. 33. 204. 'Bekehrung und Exodus', pp. 21-29.

1. History of Research

51

Cum grano salis darf man von einer Spiritualisierung des Exodusmotivs sprechen, bie der das historische Ereignis innersubjektiv gedeutet und aktualisiert wurde.205

To Sänger this conclusion indicated that Joseph andAseneth should not be reckoned among the Missionsliteratur of the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora, since outsiders could scarcely have been expected to understand the Jewish traditions that are presupposed. The document is rather intended for the author's own community and is designed to defend and legitimize that community's self-identity as a corpus permixtum of born Jews and proselytes in the midst of a pagan environment.206 Also from the pen of D. Sänger is a major monograph published in 1980 on the religionsgeschichtlich problem of Joseph and Aseneth 2Q1 Following an extended critique of previous attempts to resolve this problem, Sänger set out to determine ob JosAs als eine Kombination von Elementen einer Mysterieninitiation in Gestalt eines hellenistischen Romans begriffen werden darf und damit die literarische und religionsgeschichtliche Eigenart von JosAs erfasst ist.208

To this end he focused on the question whether a common structure underlies the conversion reported in Joseph and Aseneth and the initiation of Lucius into the cult of Isis as reported in Book 11 of the Metamorphoses of Apuleius. In Sänger's view the parallels often drawn in this connection are premature and methodologically flawed. Elements which, on the surface, invite positive comparison, such as the fasting of Aseneth in Joseph and Aseneth and that of Lucius in Metamorphoses 11, or the clothing symbolism in the two works, prove on closer inspection to function differently in the larger initiatory pattern reflected in each.209 There are indeed elements of a cultic ritual for the admission of proselytes in Joseph and Aseneth, and these include a communion of honey by which the Spirit is conferred and which is distinct from the ordinary meals mentioned elsewhere in the work, but the characteristic structure of a mystery initiation is absent from Joseph andAseneth.210 205. 'Bekehrung und Exodus', p. 28. 206. 'Bekehrung und Exodus', pp. 33-36. 207. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien: Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth (WUNT, 2.5; Tübingen: Mohr, 1980). 208. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 88. 209. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 150-67. 210. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 167-90.

52

From Death to Life So wird man abschliessend aufgrund formaler und inhaltlicher Kriterien urteilen müssen: JosAs ist kein Mysterienroman. In ihm lassen sich folglich auch keine Mysterieninitiation noch auch eine damit in Verbindung zu bringende jüdische Gemeinschaft erkennen, geschweige denn namhaft machen.211

In a brief section on Joseph and Aseneth and wisdom, Sänger suggested that Jewish wisdom speculation illuminates several important motifs in Joseph and Aseneth, including the designation of Joseph and all the chosen of God as 'sons of God' and the notion that divine wisdom is transmitted through a kiss (19.10-11).212 Sänger's monograph concludes with a discussion of the purpose of Joseph and Aseneth. Because the text presupposes considerable knowledge of Jewish tradition on the part of its readers, Sänger reiterated his earlier conclusion that it was not likely intended as Missionsliteratur for non-Jews. Rather, the personae and events in the narrative represent current problems in the Jewish community, and the work is designed to help that community define its identity and legitimize its life and praxis as a mixed community of born Jews and proselytes living in a sometimes hostile Gentile environment.213 In a subsequent article, published in 1981,214 Sänger developed the idea that Joseph and Aseneth stands in a tradition of Jewish wisdom speculation in which manna was conceived as spiritual food. As in that tradition, wherein it was assumed that one acquires the basic qualities of the substances one eats, so Aseneth receives life, wisdom and truth upon eating the manna (in the form of the honeycomb) which possesses these qualities. To eat the bread of life is therefore to belong to the elect people of God (by birth or conversion) and thus to participate in divine life, wisdom and truth.215 Yet another article by Sänger appeared in 1985.216 Here he argued that Joseph and Aseneth is not mere literary fantasy but reflects in very 211. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 190. 212. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 191-208. 213. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 209-15. 214. 'Jüdisch-hellenistische Missionsliteratur und die Weisheit', Kairos 23 (1981), pp. 231-42. 215. Sänger assumes here, as in his monograph, that some sort of actual cultic meal lies behind this language in Joseph and Aseneth', see 'Jüdisch-hellenistische Missionsliteratur und die Weisheit', p. 234 n. 21a. 216. 'Erwägungen zur historischen Einordnung und zur Datierung von "Joseph und Aseneth'", Z/VW76 (1985), pp. 86-106.

1. History of Research

53

specific ways the problems experienced by Alexandrian Jews under Roman rule. The characters in the story represent specific groups in the real world of the author. Thus Joseph and the members of his family who are presented in a favorable light represent the majority of Egyptian Jews, who tried to live peacefully with their Gentile neighbors. Aseneth represents proselytes, and Pharaoh and Pentephres represent sympathizers or God-fearers from the governing class. Pharaoh's son personifies the militant anti-Judaic sentiments of those Gentiles jealous of the growing friendship between the Roman administration and the Jews. The sons of Jacob who oppose Joseph and Aseneth stand for an opportunistic Jewish faction eager to collaborate with the anti-Jewish forces for personal advantage. On this basis Sänger concluded that Joseph and Aseneth was most likely written c. 38 CE, when precisely such smouldering tensions in Alexandria led to the pogrom against the Jews during the reign of Gaius Caligula. Two studies of Joseph and Aseneth have been published recently by G. Delling.217In the first, which appeared in 1978, Delling discussed the pervasive influence of the Septuagint on Joseph and Aseneth in terms of idiomatic expressions, the special usage of words and combinations of words, and the borrowing of fixed expressions and even of entire sentences, including various predicates and descriptions of God, Joseph, Levi, and other figures. Delling concluded: Offensichtlich ist der Autor im Judentum, im Alten Testament, und in der jüdischen Gemeinde fest verwurzelt.218

The author's extensive borrowings from the Septuagint as the Holy Scripture of the community suggested to Delling that Joseph and Aseneth was intended primarily for Jewish readers.219 In a second article, published in 1984, Delling explored the literary artistry of Joseph and Aseneth with special reference to the temporal and spatial framework of the narrative, the character portrayals, and the use of Gattungen such as monologues and dialogues.220 Once again the influence of biblical style and idiom and the narrator's assumption that 217. 'Einwirkungen der Sprache der Septuaginta in "Joseph und Aseneth'", JSJ 9 (1978), pp. 29-56; and 'Die Kunst des Gestaltens in "Joseph und Aseneth'", NovT26 (1984), pp. 1-42. 218. 'Einwirkungen der Sprache der Septuaginta', p. 56. 219. 'Einwirkungen der Sprache der Septuaginta', p. 56. 220. 'Die Kunst des Gestaltens', pp. 1-42.

54

From Death to Life

the audience is acquainted with biblical characters and events led Delling to suggest that the work is not a missionary document but was intended for Jewish readers or at least those who stood very close to Judaism.221 In an article in 1984, R.T. Beckwith revived the notion that Joseph and Aseneth has strong Essene affinities and added the suggestion that calendrical concerns in the document corroborate this view.222 While conceding that Joseph and Aseneth does not presuppose the 364-day calendar known from Jubilees and the Qumran texts, Beckwith argued that the work is based on a relatively unknown adaptation of the 364-day calendar, in which the year begins not on Wednesday but on Thursday, and all the dates have consequently been shifted back one day in the week.223

The motive for this adaptation, Beckwith suggested, was to avoid having Jewish characters in the story travel on the Sabbath or on traditional Jewish feast days. Thus the few dates mentioned in Joseph and Aseneth are not arbitrary but conform to an intentional pattern, and the only calendar which accommodates this pattern is the proposed 'adapted Essene calendar' ,224 This pattern not only corroborates the connection with the Essenes but also clarifies the nature of the sacred meal in Joseph and Aseneth. Calculating from the dates mentioned in the narrative, Beckwith concluded that the completion of the marriage festivities in ch. 21 would coincide with the Essene festival of the Firstfruits of Wine according to the modified solar calendar. Thus the meals held at the Essene firstfruits festivals, including those of barley, wheat and oil, as well as wine, provide the background for understanding the bread, cup and ointment in Joseph and Aseneth?15 Also in 1984, J. Schwartz published a study in which he traced the history of some of the traditions in Joseph and Aseneth and on this basis offered a reconstruction of the process by which the work achieved the earliest form presently attainable.226 Schwartz argued that certain works 221. 'Die Kunst des Gestaltens', pp. 4-5, 39, et passim. 222. The Solar Calendar of Joseph and Asenath: A Suggestion', JSJ 15 (1984), pp. 90-111. 223. 'Solar Calendar', pp. 98-99. 224. 'Solar Calendar', pp. 106-10. 225. 'Solar Calendar', pp. 108-11. 226. 'Recherches sur l'évolution du roman de Joseph et Aséneth', REJ 143 (1984), pp. 273-85.

1. History of Research

55

in the Christian hagiographie cycle reflect dependence upon a form of Joseph and Aseneth older than both the long and the short recensions now extant.227 Only the nucleus of the story in chs. 1-21, and perhaps also of that in chs. 22-29, originated in Egyptian Judaism prior to the revolt under Trajan in 115-17 CE. The extant forms of the work evolved over a much longer period, with major expansions resulting from the assimilation of Aseneth to the figures of the ideal proselytes, Rahab and Ruth.22* Joseph and Aseneth as we now know it did not exist prior to the Byzantine period.229 The Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, which began publication in 1988, included two articles on Joseph and Aseneth in that year. In the first, R.D. Chesnutt examined the social tensions reflected in Joseph and Aseneth and argued that these afford a more reliable guide to the setting and purpose of the work than do the many superficial comparisons which have been drawn with external phenomena.230 In addition to the obvious tension between Jews and Gentiles and the author's concern to maintain a distinctive Jewish identity, Chesnutt found evidence of internal Jewish dissension centering on the perception of the Gentile convert to Judaism and especially on the propriety of marriage between a born Jew and a convert.231 The exalted portrayal of Aseneth in the story of her conversion and marriage to Joseph, he concluded, was designed to enhance the status of converts within the Jewish community and establish the worthiness of the true convert to be married to a born Jew. Such an intramural purpose, he argued, accords better with the social tensions reflected in the narrative than does the common view that Joseph and Aseneth was written for missionary purposes.232 In the next issue of the same journal, R.C. Douglas examined Aseneth's conversion in light of anthropological models of initiation rites. He found that Aseneth's conversion reflects the same tripartite 227. 'Recherches', pp. 273-76. 228. 'Recherches', pp. 276-80. 229. 'Recherches', pp. 284-85. Schwartz gives the beginning of the fifth century as a terminus post quern for the short recension (p. 285); the long version presumably was later still (see p. 274 n. 6). 230. The Social Setting and Purpose of Joseph and Aseneth', JSP 2 (1988), pp. 21-48. The essence of this article is repeated in Chapters 3 and 8 below in this work. 231. 'Social Setting and Purpose', pp. 30-37. 232. 'Social Setting and Purpose', pp. 37-43.

56

From Death to Life

structure which anthropologist A. van Gennep discerned in various rites of passage: separation (preliminal phase), transition (liminal phase), and aggregation (postliminal phase).233 In particular, the liminal phase as analyzed further by V.W. Turner finds characteristic expression in Aseneth's estrangement following her renunciation of idols and in the imagery used to describe that estrangement.234 Similarly, Aseneth's symbolic acts signifying her new status and her incorporation into the Jewish community correspond to aggregation, the third phase in van Gennep's paradigm. The narrative of this final phase of Aseneth's conversion also well illustrates the cosmic significance which, according to B. Lincoln, is often associated with rites of initiation, especially the initiation of women.235 Application to New Testament Study In addition to recent studies dealing directly with Joseph and Aseneth are a host of others in which the work has been cited for its bearing on numerous aspects of the Jewish origins of Christianity. The following are representative, but by no means exhaustive, of the range of topics on which illumination has been sought by reference to Joseph and Aseneth: love of God and neighbor as the greatest commandments;236 the concept of rest in Hebrews;237 Paul's conversion in Acts and the Pauline writings;238 the concept of forgiveness in the New Testament;239 the 233. 'Liminality and Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth', JSP 3 (1988), pp. 31-42. 234. 'Liminality and Conversion', pp. 32-33, 36-37. 235. 'Liminality and Conversion', pp. 33-34, 37-38. 236. C. Burchard, 'Das doppelte Liebesgebot in der frühen christlichen Überlieferung', in Der Ruf Je su und die Antwort der Gemeinde: Exegetische Untersuchungen Joachim Jeremías zum 70. Geburstag gewidmet von seinen Schülern (ed. E. Lohse; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970), pp. 56-57 n. 78; and A. Nissen, Gott und der Nächste im antiken Judentum: Untersuchungen zum Doppelgebot der Liebe (WUNT, 15; Tübingen: Mohr, 1974), passim. 237. O. Hofius, Katapausis: Die Vorstellung vom Endzeitlichen Ruheort im Hebräerbrief '(WUNT, 11; Tübingen: Mohr, 1970), passim. 238. Burchard, Der dreizehnte Zeuge, pp. 59-91; and A.F. Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), pp. 91-92. 239. H. Thyen, Studien zur Sündenvergebung im Neuen Testament und seinen alttestamentlichen und jüdischen Voraussetzungen (FRLANT, 96; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970), pp. 126-130; and U. Wilckens, 'Vergebung für die

1. History of Research

57

usage of rcapOévoç in Rev. 14.4;240 the background of Rom. 7.24-25 in pre-conversion laments of the Hellenistic and Jewish world;241 the idea of the election of God's people before creation in Eph. 1.4;242 missionary activity in early Judaism and Christianity;243 the bread of life in John 6;244 the christological titles in the New Testament;245 the description of Sünderin (Lk. 7, 36-50)', in Orientierung an Jesus: Zur Theologie der Synoptiker für Josef Schmid (ed. P. Hoffmann; Frieburg: Herder, 1973), pp. 419-21. 240. C.H. Lindijer, 'Die Jungfrauen in der Offenbarung des Johannes XIV.4', Studies in John Presented to Professor J.N. Sevenster on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday (NovTSup, 24; Leiden: Brill 1970), p. 128. Reference to Joseph and Aseneth to shed light on Rev. 14.4 is by far the oldest sustained usage of the apocryphon in connection with New Testament study. It dates at least as far back as F.H.C. Düsterdieck, Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Offenbarung Johannis (MeyerK, 16; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1859), p. 62. From there it established a place in the commentary tradition on the Apocalypse and found its way into W. Bauer's Greek lexicon. See Burchard, 'Importance of Joseph and Aseneth', pp. 102-103. 241. E.W. Smith, Jr, 'The Form and Religious Background of Romans VII 2425a', NovT 13 (1971), pp. 128-32. 242. O. Hofius, ' "Erwählt vor Grundlegung der Welt" (Eph. 1.4)', ZNW 62 (1971), pp. 125-28. 243. C. Bussmann, Themen der paulinischen Missionspredigt auf dem Hintergrund der spätjüdisch-hellenistischen Missionsliteratur (Europäische Hochschulschriften, 23.3; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1971), pp. 30-31, 160-62, et passim', and S. McKnight, A Light among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), pp. 60-62, 88-89 nn. 55-60, et passim. 244. R. Schnackenburg, 'Das Brot des Lebens', in Tradition und Glaube: Das frühe Christentum in seiner Umwelt: Festgabe für K.G. Kühn (ed. G. Jeremías, H.-W. Kühn and H. Stegemann; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971), pp. 328-42; Schnackenburg, Das Johannesevangelium (4 vols.; HTKNT; Freiburg: Herder, 1965-84), II, pp. 57-58 (ET: The Gospel according to St John [3 vols.; trans. K. Smyth et al\ New York: Seabury Press, 1968-82], II, p. 44); S. Légasse, 'Le pain de la vie', BLE 83 (1982), pp. 248-51; and R.D. Chesnutt, 'Bread of Life in Joseph and Aseneth and in John 6', in Johannine Studies in Honor of Frank Pack (ed. J.E. Priest; Malibu, CA: Pepperdine University Press, 1989), pp. 1-16. 245. K. Berger, 'Die Traditionsgeschichtlichen Hintergrund Christologischer Hoheitstitel', NTS 17 (1971), pp. 391-425, passim; idem, 'Zum Problem der Messianität Jesu', ZTK 71 (1974), pp. 17-18; idem, Die Auferstehung des Propheten und die Erhöhung des Menschensohnes: Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Deutung des Geschickes Jesu in frühchristlichen Texten (SUNT, 13; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976), passim; and G. Delling, 'Die Bezeichnung "Söhne Gottes" in der judischen Literatur der hellenistisch-römischen Zeit', in God's Christ

58

From Death to Life

God as one who gives life to the dead;246 the 'then-now' schema in New Testament paranesis;247 the requirement to renounce possessions and family for the sake of Jesus and the gospel in Mk 10.17-31;248 the doctrine of the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15;249 the darkness-light and death-life polarities;250 Jewish epiphany stories and the gospel narratives of Jesus' post-resurrection appearances;251 the vocabulary of conversion in early Judaism and Christianity;252 covenant as a soteriological category;253 the representative role of Peter in Mt. 16.17and his People: Studies in Honour of Nils Alstrup Dahl (ed. J. Jervell and W.A. Meeks; Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1977), pp. 24-25. 246. O. Hofius, 'Eine altjüdische Parallele zu Rom. IV.17b', NTS 18 (1971), p. 93. 247. P. Tachau, 'Einst' und 'Jetzt' im Neuen Testament: Beobachtungen zu einem urchristlichen Predigtschema in der neutestamentlichen Briefliteratur und zu seiner Vorgeschichte (FRLANT, 105; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972), pp. 5258; and P. Borgen, The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue', 5137 (1983), p. 59; repr. in Paul Preaches Circumcision and Pleases Men and other Essays on Christian Origins (Trondheim: Tapir, 1983), p. 79. 248. K. Berger, Die Gesetzesauslegung Jesu: Ihr historischer Hintergrund im Judentum und im Alten Testament. I. Markus und Parallelen (WMANT, 40; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1972) pp. 423-31. 249. H.C.C. Cavallin, Life after Death: Paul's Argument for the Resurrection of the Dead in I Cor. 15. I. An Enquiry into the Jewish Background (ConBNT, 7.1; Lund: Gleerup, 1974), pp. 155-60; C. Burchard, 'l Korinther 15.39-41', ZNW15 (1984), pp. 255-58; G. Sellin, Der Streit um die Auferstehung der Toten: Eine religionsgeschichtliche und exegetische Untersuchung von l Korinther 15 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), pp. 26, 85-86 et passim', and C.H. Talbert, Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (New York: Crossroad, 1987), p. 102. 250. S. Pines, 'From Darkness into Great Light' (trans. J. Halpern), Immanuel 4 (1974), pp. 47-51. 251. J.E. Alsup, The Post-Resurrection Appearance Stories of the Gospel Tradition (Calwer Theologische Monographien, 5; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1975), pp. 258-59 n. 722. 252. K. Berger, 'Jüdisch-hellenistische Missionsliteratur und apokryphe Apostelakten', Kairos 17 (1975), pp. 232-48; T. Holtz, ' "Euer Glaube an Gott": Zu Form und Inhalt von l Thess l,9f.', in Die Kirche des Anfangs: Festschrift für Heinz Schurmann zum 65. Geburstag (ed. R. Schnackenburg, J. Ernst and J. Wanke; Erfurter Theologische Studien, 38; Leipzig: St Benno-Verlag, 1977), pp. 459-88; and E. Pax, 'Beobachtungen zur Konvertitensprache im ersten Thessalonicherbrief, Studii Biblici Franciscani Liber Annuus 21 (1971), pp. 220-62 [non vidi]. 253. E.P. Sanders, 'The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism', in Jews, Greeks and Christians:

1. History of Research

59

19;254 the tradition of almsgiving in Judaism and the Pauline collection;255 eschatological expectations in early Judaism and Christianity;256 the expression 'neither male nor female' in Gal. 3.28;257 the blessings accompanying justification in Rom. 5.1-ll;258the semantic function of the questions in 1 Cor. 7.16;259the parenetic tradition reflected in the New Testament commands to love one's enemies and avoid retaliation;260 the concept of believers as sons of God and offspring of Abraham in Gal. 3.23-29;261 the portrayal of the righteous as

Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity. Essays in Honor of W.D. Davies (ed. R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs; SJLA, 21; Leiden: Brill, 1976), pp. 22-25. 254. C. Kahler, 'Zur Form- und Traditionsgeschichte von Matth. XVI. 17-19', NTS 23 (1977), pp. 48-50; and W. Schenk, 'Das "Matthäusevengelium" als Petrusevangelium', BZ 27 (1983), p. 72. 255. K. Berger, 'Almosen für Israel: Zum historischen Kontext der Paulinischen Kollekte', ATO 23 (1977), pp. 180-204 et passim. 256. U. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseitserwartung im hellenistischen Diasporajudentum (BZNW, 44; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978), pp. 106-23; G. Fischer, Die himmlischen Wohnungen: Untersuchungen zu Joh 14.2f. (Europäische Hochschulschriften, 23.38; Bern: H. Lang; Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 1975), pp. 186-89; and A. Lindemann, Die Aufhebung der Tœit: Geschichtverständnis und Eschatologie im Epheserbrief (SNT, 12; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975), pp. 141-42 and n. 193. 257. H. Thyen, *...nicht mehr männlich und weiblich... : Eine Studie zu Galater 3,28', Als Mann und Frau geschaffen: Exegetische Studien zur Rolle der Frau (Kennzeichen, 2; Geinhausen: Burckhardthaus-Verlag, 1978), pp. 141-42. 258. M. Wolter, Rechtfertigung und zukünftiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu Rom 5,1-11 (BZNW, 43; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978), pp. 67-68, 165-66, 199. 259. S. Kubo, 'I Corinthians VII.16: Optimistic or Pessimistic?', NTS 24 (1978), p. 540. 260. J. Piper, ''Love Your Enemies': Jesus' Love Command in the Synoptic Gospels and in the Early Christian Paraenesis (SNTSMS, 38; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 16, 37-39, 64; D. Lührmann, 'Liebet eure Feinde', ZTK 69 (1972), p. 427; J. Becker, Untersuchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Testamente der zwölf Patriarchen (AGJU, 8; Leiden: Brill, 1970), pp. 389-91; E. Best, A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (HNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1972), p. 233; L. Schottroff, 'Gewaltverzicht und Feindesliebe in der urchristlichen Jesustradition. Mt. 5,38-48; Lk. 6,27-36', in Jesus Christus in Historie und Theologie: Neutestamentliche Festschrift für Hans Conzelmann zum 60. Geburstag (ed. G. Strecker; Tübingen: Mohr, 1975), p. 210 and n. 63; and in the same volume, C. Burchard, 'Versuch, das Thema der Bergpredigt zu finden', p. 425 and n. 69. 261. B. Byrne, 'Sons of God'—'Seed of Abraham'. A Study in the Sonship of

60

From Death to Life

angels;262 predestination and the concept of faith as a gift in Johannine theology;263 Jewish and Hellenistic sacred meals and eucharistie origins;264 the origins of proselyte baptism;265 prayer in Judaism and early Christianity;266 water-spirit symbolism;267 the concept of works in

God of All Christians in Paul against the Jewish Background (AnBib, 83; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1979), pp. 49-54: and E. Stegemann, '"Das Gesetz ist nicht wider die Verheissungen!" Thesen zu Galater 3,15-29', in Theologischer Brosamen für Lothar Steiger (ed. G. Freund and E. Stegemann; Beihefte zu DB AT, 5; Heidelberg: Wiss.-Theol. Seminar, 1985), pp. 389-90. 262. J.H. Charlesworth, 'The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel', in J.J. Collins and G.W.E. Nickelsburg (eds.), Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980), pp. 145-46. 263. R. Bergmeier, Glaube als Gabe nach Johannes: Religions- und theologiegeschichtliche Studien zum prädestinatiansischen Dualismus im vierten Evangelium (BWANT, 112; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1980), passim. 264. H.-J. Klauck, Herrenmahl und hellenistischer Kult: Eine religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zum ersten Korintherbrief(NTAbh n.F. 15; Münster: Aschendorff, 1982), pp. 187-96; I.H. Marshall, Last Supper and Lord's Supper (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), pp. 26-27; K.-G. Sandelin, Maltidens symboliska betydelse i den alexandrinska judedomen. Ett bidrag till fragan om den Kristna eukaristins bakgrund (Meddelanden fran Stifteisens för Abo Akademi Forskningsinstitut, 56; Abo: Abo Akademi, 1980), pp. 128-34 [non vidï\\ H. Patsch, Abendmahl und historischer Jesus (Calwer Theologische Monographien, 1; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1972), pp. 26-28; G.D. Kilpatrick, The Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy: The Moorhouse Lectures 1975 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 59-68; and B. Lindars, '"Joseph and Asenath" and the Eucharist', in Scripture: Meaning and Method. Essays Presented to Anthony Tyrell Hanson for his Seventieth Birthday (ed. B.P. Thompson; Hull: Hull University Press, 1987), pp. 181-99. 265. D. Smith, 'Jewish Proselyte Baptism and the Baptism of John', ResQ 25 (1982), pp. 18-19,24-25; and McKnight, Light among the Gentiles, p. 83. 266. J.H. Charlesworth, 'A Prolegomenon to a New Study of the Jewish Background of the Hymns and Prayers in the New Testament', JJS 33 (1982), p. 276; idem, 'Jewish Hymns, Odes, and Prayers (c. 167 BCE-135 CE)', in Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters (ed. R.A. Kraft and G.W.E. Nickelsburg; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986), pp. 424; idem, 'Prayer of Manasseh', in Charlesworth (ed.), Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 631; D. Flusser, 'Psalms, Hymns and Prayers', in Stone (ed.), Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, pp. 564-65; and A. Enermaln-Owaga, Un langage de prière juif en grec: Le témoignage des deux premiers livres des Maccabees (ConBNT, 17; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987), passim. 267. F. Manns, Le Symbole eau-espirit dans le judaïsme ancien (Studium

1. History of Research

61

Jewish tradition and in Paul;268 the language of resurrection to a new life in Rom. 6.1-11;269 the Pauline conception of hope;270 the theme of the 'suffering righteous' in early Jewish literature and in Paul's writings;271 the contribution of Jewish angelology to early christological formulation;272 the usage of prjfia in Luke and Acts;273 the issue of circumcision as a requirement for Gentiles;274 the usage of Joseph traditions in early Judaism and Christianity;275 the personification of sin in Romans 57;276the veiling of women in 1 Corinthians II;277 and the Jewish background of Paul's 'new creation' imagery.278 New Annotated Translations Recent translations tí Joseph andAseneth and their respective introductions and notes provide a convenient terminus for this Forschungsbericht. That the rounding out of this survey by reference to nine new Biblicum Franciscanum Analecta, 19; Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press, 1983), pp. 168-71, 173-74. 268. R. Heiligenthal, Werke als Zeichen: Untersuchungen zur Bedeutung der menschlichen Taten im Frühjudentum, Neuen Testament und Frühchristentum (WUNT, 2.9; Tübingen: Mohr, 1983), pp. 91, 129-30,172, 182. 269. A.J.M. Wedderburn, 'Hellenistic Christian Traditions in Romans 6?', NTS 29 (1983), p. 348. 270. G. Nebe, 'Hoffnung' bei Paulus: Elpis und ihre Synonyme im Zusammenhang der Eschatologie (SUNT, 16; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983), passim. 271. K.T. Kleinknecht, Der leidende Gerechtfertige: Die alttestamentlich-jüdische Tradition vom 'leidenden Gerechten' und ihre Rezeption bei Paul (WUNT, 2.13; Tübingen: Mohr, 1984), p. 136. 272. C. Rowland, 'A Man Clothed in Linen: Dan. 10.6ff. and Jewish Angelology', /SAT24 (1985), pp. 99-110. 273. C. Burchard, 'A Note on 'PHMA in JosAs 17.1f.; Luke 2.15; Acts 1.37', ^727 (l985), pp. 281-95. 274. J.J. Collins, 'Symbol of Otherness', pp. 176-77. 275. J.-D. Dubois, 'Joseph et la vertu, dans le judaïsme hellénistique et le christianisme ancien', Foi et Vie 86 (1987), pp. 26-28. 276. G. Röhser, Metaphorik und Personifikation der Sünde: Antike Sündenvorstellungen und paulinische Hamartia (WUNT, 2.25; Tübingen: Mohr, 1987), pp. 171-72. 277. Talbert, Reading Corinthians, p. 68. 278. U. Mell, Neue Schöpfung: Eine Traditionsgeschichtliche und exegetische Studie zu einem soteriologischen Grundsatz paulinischer Theologie (BZNW, 56; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989), pp. 226-51.

62

From Death to Life

translations is not arbitrary but truly representative of the contemporary scene is evidenced by the fact that all nine were published in the period 1978 to 1988.279 C. Burchard has recently published translations of Joseph andAseneth in both German280 and English.281 Both include extensive introductions and notes and follow the same basic approach articulated in his earlier publications. However, other recent introductions and translations follow quite different approaches. Translations of Joseph and Aseneth into Polish by A. Suski in 1978,282 into Dutch by M. de Goeij in 1981,283 into Spanish by R. Martinez Fernandez and A. Pinero in 1982,284 and into English by D. Cook in 1984285 and R.S. Kraemer in 1988,286 are all based upon Philonenko's short text and naturally follow Philonenko's system of versification as well. Philonenko has adapted his own French translation tí Joseph andAseneth for inclusion in a French anthology of 'intertestamental' Jewish writings which was published in 1987.287 An Italian translation (inaccessible to me) was published by M. Cavalli in 1983.288

279. In addition to the nine translations mentioned here, translations into Japanese by T. Muraoka and into French by M. Testuz are in preparation. 280. Unterweisung in erzählender Form: Joseph und Aseneth (JSHRZ, 2.4; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1983). 281. OTPseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth), II, pp. 177-247. 282. 'Józef i Asenet: wstep, przekfad z greckiego, kommentarz', Studia Theologica Varsaviensia 16 (1978), pp. 199-240. 283. Joiefen Aseneth: Apokalyps van Baruch (De Pseudepigraphen, 2; Kämpen: Kok, 1981). 284. 'José y Asenet', Apócrifos del Antiguo Testamento (6 vols.; ed. A. Diez Macho; Madrid: Ediciones Christiandad, 1982-), III, pp. 191-238; see also the introduction in I, pp. 214-21. 285. 'Joseph and Aseneth', The Apocryphal Old Testament (ed. H.F.D. Sparks; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), pp. 465-503. 286. Maenads, Martyrs, Matrons, Monastics: A Sourcebook on Women's Religions in the Greco-Roman World (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), pp. 26379. Kraemer's anthology includes only chs. 1-21. 287. 'Joseph et Aseneth', La Bible: Ecrits intertestamentaires (ed. A. DupontSommer and M. Philonenko; Paris: Gallimard, 1987), pp. cxii-cxxv, 1559-1601. 288. Storia del bellissimo Guiseppe e délia sua sposa Aseneth (Palermo: Sellerio Editore, 1983). According to NTA 29 (1985), p. 341, Cavalli's translation is accompanied by an essay by D. Del Corno on Jewish and Greek elements in the work.

l. History of Research

63

The Dutch introduction and translation by de Goeij reverts not only to Philonenko's text but also to a gnostic frame of interpretation. Goeij cites the clothing symbolism, the representation of those not belonging to the people of God as Egyptians, the descent of a heavenly savior figure, and the convert's reception of the Spirit and knowledge of the divine mysteries as evidence that Joseph and Aseneth is not in the first instance about a pagan who becomes a Jewish proselyte, but about one who is called out of error into the true gnosis.289 Goeij dates Joseph and Aseneth in the first half of the second century when Valentinian gnosticism was also taking shape.290 Though aware of the major limitations of Philonenko's text, H.F.D. Sparks and D. Cook also follow this text in the recent Clarendon edition of the Pseudepigrapha and even endorse Philonenko's basic understanding of the recensional history of Joseph and Aseneth: 'If a generally agreed solution of the problem is ever arrived at, it is likely to be along the lines that Philonenko has laid down'.291 However, whereas Philonenko had suggested that the short text represented by family d is thoroughly Jewish and that Christian redaction is evident only in the longer and later recensions (perhaps already in b but certainly in c and a), in Sparks's view the bread-cup-ointment passages in ch. 8 and in the incident of the honeycomb in ch. 16 betray Christian interest and influence already in the shortest version of the text as published by Philonenko (family ¿/).292That Joseph and Aseneth was written originally in Greek Sparks regarded as 'certain',293 but on the date and provenance of the work he ventured no opinion. The diversity among these most recent introductions to and translations of Joseph and Aseneth illustrates the fact that disagreement lingers even on some matters where a strong consensus has emerged and suggests that the recent surge of interest in the apocryphon is likely to continue and intensify. The curious juxtaposition of an emerging consensus on some basic matters and ongoing dispute on others, the unprecedented availability of convenient annotated translations in

289. Jozef en Aseneth, pp. 15-22. 290. Jozefen Aseneth, p. 22. 291. Apocryphal OT (ed. Sparks), p. 470; cf. pp. 467-68; the introduction is by Sparks and the translation by Cook.

292. Apocrypha^ OT (ed. Sparks), p. 469. 293. Apocryphal OT(ed. Sparks), p. 470.

64

From Death to Life

America, Britain and the European continent, and the long overdue but now widespread recognition that Joseph and Aseneth is extremely important for the study of early Judaism and Christian origins, combine to suggest that we are currently poised on the brink of the most productive years yet in the study of this apocryphon.

Chapter 2

TEXT, ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, CHARACTER, PROVENANCE, DATE AND GENRE: THE PRESENT STATE OF RESEARCH Before broaching the major unanswered question in the study of Joseph andAseneth which is the focus of the present investigation—namely, the nature and function of Aseneth's conversion—it is appropriate to set forth the current consensus on those introductory questions which can be answered with reasonable confidence. Six such matters on which a strong consensus has emerged, and on which some position statement is needed as a basis for what follows, are treated here. Text As our Forschungsbericht reveals, the two major contributors to the text-critical study of Joseph and Aseneth disagree on the relationships and relative value of the various text types and thus on the approach for establishing the earliest attainable form of the text. On one basic point C. Burchard and M. Philonenko concur: the extant Greek manuscripts fall into four discrete families, which both scholars label #, b, c and d. Beyond this, however, their views diverge sharply. Whereas Philonenko posits the priority of the short version represented by family d and regards the longer forms of the text as a series of recensional expansions from u?, Burchard defends the priority of the long version, whose most trustworthy representative is family b, and argues that the short text preferred by Philonenko is an abbreviated form of the original. This divergence of opinion is not inconsequential; Philonenko's text lacks many readings and even some large blocks of material found in Burchard's text (ll.lx-18; most of chs. 18 and 19; 21.10-21; and 22.6b-9a) and is a total of about one-third shorter than that which Burchard believes to lie closest to the original. Current scholarly consensus favors—justly, in my view—Burchard's approach to this issue. Even before Burchard published his article in

66

From Death to Life

1970 defending his position vis-à-vis Philonenko's,1 reviewers of Philonenko's monograph had observed serious flaws in the latter's textual reconstruction. For example, S. Brock had pointed to several instances where Philonenko himself had been compelled to concede that d is in fact an abbreviated text and that readings from the 'long recensions' are to be preferred. Brock insisted that Philonenko had ignored other readings in the longer texts which have equally strong claim to inclusion on internal grounds and that there are also other indications of the abbreviating nature of d.2 Similar reservations were voiced by E.W. Smith: while he emphasizes the tendency of redactors to interpolate, Philonenko admits that there has been at least some omission in d, but does not seem to have considered sufficiently the possibility that some of the 'interpolations' in a, b, and c might really be further omissions by d?

Criticisms by these and others notwithstanding, it was Burchard's article in 1970 that provided the most telling criticisms of Philonenko's textual theory and laid to rest in the minds of most specialists the idea that the short version represented by family d is the earliest attainable form of the text and the Grundlage from which the longer versions evolved. As was indicated above in Chapter 1, Burchard challenged Philonenko's basic assumption that since redactional activity is evident in the stylistic polish of family a, the greater length of a as compared to d must also be explained as redactional. This assumption, Burchard showed, had determined Philonenko's assessment not only of the relative value of a and d, but also of the more recently discovered witnesses of b and c, which had been construed as intermediate stages in the supposed linear development from d to b to c to a. Burchard amassed a 1. 'Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth" ', pp. 3-34. 2. Review of Joseph et Aséneth, by M. Philonenko, JTS 20 (1969), pp. 588-91. 3. Review of Joseph et Aséneth, by M. Philonenko, JBL 89 (1970), p. 257. As we have seen, Smith based his own study of Joseph and Aseneth on the material in Batiffol's text (using the corrections published by Burchard and Philonenko) but the less refined wording (where this is available) in Philonenko's edition of family d. See Smith's discussion in 'Joseph andAsenath' and Early Christian Literature, pp. 1317. This approach accords with Burchard's suggestion that in the absence of a reliable critical text it is necessary 'sich an Philonenko zu halten und dessen Lücken aus Batiffol zu ergänzen' ('Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth" ', p. 30). See also Burchard, Der dreizehnte Zeuge, pp. 60-61: 'Batiffols Text, wiewohl bearbeitet, gibt einen Näherungswert für den ursprünglichen Stoffumfang, Philonenkos, wiewohl gekürzt, für den ursprünglichen Wortlaut'.

2. The Present State of Research

67

vast array of evidence that the difference in length between a and d is due largely to omissions by d rather than interpolations in a. He demonstrated further that in some places the wording of d is secondary to that of the other families and that a is generally closer to d than to b or c even though these latter two are supposed to have stood between d and a. Burchard concluded that the text of family b is to be preferred except where individual readings from the other groups clearly prove superior, as is usually the case when these other families preserve a fuller text. Burchard's understanding of the textual history of Joseph and Aseneth is by far the most cogent currently available.4 No defense of Philonenko's position is to be found in recent contributions,5 although, in the absence of an edition of the long text which is both more recent than Batiffol's and more accessible than the very preliminary mimeographed one published by Burchard, some have relied on Philonenko's text by default.6 As was indicated in Chapter l, Burchard's indefatigable labor on the textual tradition of Joseph and Aseneth for three decades has not yet issued in a major critical edition, and even the editio minor which he has promised for the Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece remains forthcoming. Complicating matters further are Burchard's own recent expressions of doubt about some of the particulars of his reconstruction. For example, he is less confident than he once was that the manuscripts of family b derive from a single ancestor.7 He also acknowledges the considerable span of time between the original composition and the 4. E.g. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, p. 271 n. 60, describes Burchard's argument supporting the originality of the longer text as 'convincing'. The German translation of Joseph and Aseneth in the JSHRZ series and the English translation in OT Pseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth) are both by Burchard and naturally are based upon his own textual reconstruction. 5. J.H. Charlesworth has indicated in private conversation that the specialists who participated in the seminar on Joseph and Aseneth at the 1982 meeting of the SNTS in Leuven were in unanimous agreement on this point. 6. So, e.g., the recent translations of Joseph and Aseneth into Dutch by M. de Goeij (Jozef en Aseneth, see Chapter 1 above) and English by D. Cook (in Sparks [ed.], Apocryphal OT, pp. 473-503; see Chapter 1 above) follow Philonenko's Greek text. Goeij does so without giving any rationale; in the introduction to the translation by Cook, Sparks writes: 'In spite of its limitations. ..it has been thought best to take Philonenko's text as the basis of the translation which follows' (p. 468). 7. 'Present State of Research', p. 34.

68

From Death to Life

common archetype of the four text families, even if such an archetype could be reconstructed confidently.8 In spite of such problems, the text of Joseph and Aseneth is as secure as that of most ancient writings with which scholars work. Much remains to be done, but it is clear at least that the work must proceed along the general lines mapped out by Burchard. Thus the provisional text with a few brief notes prepared by Burchard provides a satisfactory, if less than ideal, basis for the present investigation. Appreciable differences in wording between this text and Philonenko's edition of the short version will be taken into account since the latter, for all its deficiencies in content, often preserves relatively unimproved wording in the two-thirds of the document which it does include. Conversely, the old edition by Batiffol, though inferior in terms of precise wording, is for the most part reliable with regard to content and will be consulted regularly. In addition, the comprehensive textual data assembled by Burchard for a few sample passages9 will be employed, and the notes to his recent translations of Joseph and Aseneth in the Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistich-römischer Zeit edited by W.G. Kümmel and the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha edited by J.H. Charlesworth supply the relevant textual information on most significant variants. If Burchard's preliminary text, checked by these supplementary data, is not the final word on the text of Joseph and Aseneth, it at least brings us a giant step closer to the putative archetype of the textual tradition than was previously possible. With Burchard's text we can be confident of being reasonably close to the wording of the 8. 'Present State of Research', pp. 34-35. As was noted in Chapter 1, the recent study by J. Schwartz ('Recherches', pp. 273-85) raises doubts about whether such an archetype ever existed. Although this important study calls needed attention to the uncertainty that surrounds the origins of Joseph and Aseneth, the arguments advanced by Schwartz for his particular reconstruction of the compositional history of the work are unconvincing. Some of the instances of literary dependence which he cites are not conclusive, either of the fact or the direction of the borrowing, and even if these instances were clearer, they are only isolated passages which do not bear the weight of the larger thesis which Schwartz constructs upon them. The literary coherence of Joseph and Aseneth still seems to me to suggest composition by a single author, even if that author was dependent on various sources and traditions, and even if a dark period of uncertainty separates the original composition from the earliest form of the text which we can reconstruct. 9. Untersuchungen, pp. 45-90; and 'Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth" ', pp. 30-34.

2. The Present State of Research

69

archetype in most cases and to the general run of the text in almost all cases. Original Language That Greek is the original language of Joseph andAseneth is no longer a point of contention. The vast majority of those who have examined the work have in fact shared this conclusion, and although there were occasional dissenting voices among older scholars,10 the work of P. Riessler constitutes the only extensive case for a Hebrew original.11 Riessler cited several instances of mistranslation which he believed evidence a Hebrew original. For example, he suggested that the curious statement in 16.13 that sparks sprang from the angel's hand 'as from crowding iron' (œç ÔÎKTIV ai8r|po\) ôxtaxÇovtoç) resulted from a mistranslation of the Hebrew Jio which may indeed mean 'to be narrow' (hence oxtaxCovtoc, 'as from crowding iron') but may also mean 'to pour' (hence the more meaningful 'as from molten iron').12However, as Burchard has shown, the reading ôx^aÇovcoç, which had appeared in Batiffol's text and was the basis of Riessler's argument, is erroneous, and the reading Ko^XaÇovcoç, found in other Greek manuscripts, is to be preferred.13 In this case the text yields the quite sensible expression, 'sparks... as from (bubbling) melted iron', and there is no need to resort to a supposed mistranslation of Hebrew to make sense of the text. Equally inconclusive are Riessler's other attempts to resolve problems perceived in Batiffol's Greek text by claiming mistranslations from Hebrew.14 The only other significant argument supporting a Semitic original for Joseph and Aseneth is the word play on the name Aseneth in 15.7: 'And no longer will your name be Aseneth, but your name will be City of Refuge'. The fact that a kinship between the old and new names is not apparent in Greek, either phonetically or etymologically, has led to 10. E.g. P. Riessler, V. Aptowitzer and L. Ginzberg; see the survey of views in Chapter 1. 11. * Joseph und Asenath', pp. 1 -3. 12. 'Joseph und Asenath', p. 2. Brooks had departed from Batiffol's text and had translated the expression 'after the manner of red-hot iron', following the Syriac and Armenian. 13. Untersuchungen, p. 92. 14. See Burchard, Untersuchungen, p. 92.

70

From Death to Life

numerous efforts to explain the word play in Hebrew or Aramaic. Thus, Jerome related the name Aseneth to the Hebrew JION, 'ruins',15 which would provide a nice contrast with 'City of Refuge' even if there is no Hebrew term for City of Refuge which sounds like Aseneth. By a rearrangement of the letters, K. Kohler and P. Riessler related the name nsoK to no«] and hence to noj (noa), 'she fled', and to the noun DIM, 'flight' or 'place of refuge'.16 V. Aptowitzer proposed a hypothetical nson as the connecting link; though there is no such Semitic word known, it sounds like both the name Aseneth and the words non, 'to seek refuge', and ]on, 'to be strong'.17L. Ginzberg related PÜOK to the Hebrew root ]on, 'to be strong', and to the Aramaic woin, 'strength', or 'fortress'.18 The multiplicity of proposed solutions illustrates the uncertainty surrounding the word play in 15.7. It may well be that one of the above proposals embodies the correct solution, but even if this could be established it would not prove that the Greek Joseph and Aseneth translates a Semitic original. A Jewish author writing in Greek could very well have been aware of and played upon phonetic and etymological subtleties in the Semitic languages, just as such awareness is reflected in the onomástica of Jerome and others. Certainly Philo's acquaintance with the Hebrew etymology of certain terms19 is no proof that his works are translated from Hebrew. That the Greek tí Joseph and Aseneth has a strongly Semitic flavor is beyond all doubt. Expressions such as ml èyéveio (e.g. 3.1), Kai loot) (e.g. 10.16), etc TÖV aicova %povov (e.g. 4.8), ó Tcapaôeiaoç tfjç tpDcijc (16.14), è%apr| xapôcv jieycxÀTiv (e.g. 3.3), e(poßr|0T| (poßov jLiéyav (6.1), and ó àypoç TÎÎÇ KXrjpovojLuaç TIJICÛV (3.5 et passim with slight variations), to name but a few, make this abundantly clear. But all of these expressions except the last one are Septuagintal, and the influence of the Septuagint and of the Judaic heritage in general suffices to explain the Semitic character of the Greek in Joseph and Aseneth. There is no good reason to postulate a Semitic original to explain this phenomenon. 15. P. de Lagarde, Onomástica sacra (Göttingen: n.p., 2nd edn, 1887), p. 29. 16. Kohler, 'Asenath', p. 174; Riessler, 'Joseph und Asenath', p. 3. 17. 'Asenath', pp. 280-81. 18. Legends, V, p. 314 n. 432. 19. See H.A. Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity and Islam (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2 vols.; 1947), I, pp. 88-90.

2. The Present State of Research

71

On the positive side, there are strong reasons for concluding that Greek is the original language of Joseph and Aseneth. Some frequently used words, such as aOccvotaia and a(p0apaia, have no Semitic equivalents. Words such as 'all-beautiful' (rcayKocA,oc, 13.14), 'child-loving' (qnXcrceKvoc, 12.8), 'transient' (rcpoaKcxipoc, 12.15) and 'unutterable' (ocveicXaXriToc, 14.2); expressions such as 'it is not proper' (O\>K ecm rcpoafjKov or o\) rcpoaiiKev); ideas such as creation of 'things which exist and are seen out of those which are not seen and do not exist' (12.2); and constructions such as the passive voice with -ÜTIÓ, ana and rcocpa; are also strongly suggestive of a Greek original. As Burchard points out, these thoroughly Greek elements in Joseph and Aseneth prove that if there is a Semitic Vorlage, it has been reworked and not merely translated.20 Additional arguments for a Greek original include the heavy dependence upon the Septuagint, which has long been acknowledged but only recently documented and analyzed at length by G. Delling,21 and the fact that the extensive Palestinian haggadic materials about Aseneth in Hebrew and Aramaic nowhere reflect knowledge of the material in Joseph and Aseneth and in fact usually proceed from a set of premises which are irreconcilable with those of Joseph and Aseneth.22 The cumulative effect of the above considerations is to furnish a compelling case that Greek is the original language of Joseph and Aseneth. The consensus on this point is now virtually unanimous, and insofar as the present study is dependent upon a decision about the original language, we may safely proceed on the assumption that Joseph and Aseneth was written in Greek. Character The vast majority of scholars now agree that Joseph and Aseneth is Jewish and not Christian in character, though the consensus on this point does not approach the virtual unanimity which exists in the discussion of original language. As our Forschungsbericht indicates, many early contributions, most notably the influential work of P. Batiffol, are built upon the assumption that Joseph and Aseneth is a Christian composition. 20. 'Joseph and Aseneth', OTPseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth), II, p. 181. 21. 'Einwirkungen', pp. 29-56. 22. Thus, e.g., in these sources Aseneth is usually represented as Dinah's daughter and therefore does not need to convert to Judaism since she is already Jewish.

72

From Death to Life

Even among the most recent contributions are a few who maintain that Joseph and Aseneth was written by a Christian,23 but support for this view has steadily dwindled in the last two generations. The demise of the once predominant view that Joseph and Aseneth is a Christian work can be attributed to the crumbling of two major supporting pillars. The first is the assumption that the document must be interpreted allegorically. It was on such an assumption that Batiffol understood Joseph to represent Christ and Aseneth to represent Christian virginity.24 On a similar assumption, developed in a different way, H. Priebatsch detected in Aseneth's deliverance by Joseph the redemption of Sophia-Achamoth by Christ-Soter.25 Philonenko's defense of the Jewish character of Joseph and Aseneth while interpreting the work in terms of subtle allegorical patterns26 shows that assigning a Christian character to Joseph and Aseneth is not an inevitable corollary of an allegorical approach; yet, an allegorical approach has provided the basis for most interpretations of Joseph and Aseneth as a Christian work. In contrast to these thoroughgoing allegorical approaches, the current trend is toward the more restrained method of recognizing those elements of symbolism and allegory which are straightforward in the narrative rather than those supposed to be encoded deep within it. Thus, for example, Burchard acknowledges that Aseneth's conversion has a deeper meaning—Aseneth becomes a city of refuge for others who repent and turn to God as she did—but this is explicit in the narrative and it is metonymy, not allegory.27 The recognition now prevails that we should not see in Aseneth the ideal of virginity, since she does in fact marry and have children, since her virginity prior to marriage is attributed to her haughtiness rather than to an ascetic ideal, and since marriage is presupposed as common throughout the work (4.11; 8.5-7; 21.1-9). Likewise, the portrayal of Joseph is ill-suited as an allegorical representation of Christ or any redeemer-figure in spite of the exalted qualities attributed to him. As I shall emphasize in Chapter 4, Joseph is absent at the time of Aseneth's conversion, contributes nothing of 23. E.g. Sparks, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Sparks (ed.), Apocryphal OT, p. 469. 24. See Chapter 1 above. 25. See Chapter 1 above. 26. See Chapter 1 above. 27. * Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 189; and Untersuchungen, p. 117.

2. The Present State of Research

73

importance to it, and learns of it only after the fact (19.4-9). Neither do the intricate allegorical patterns discerned by Philonenko warrant acceptance, and in any case these would not be decisive in determining whether the work is Jewish or Christian. A second pillar of support for the Christian character of Joseph and Aseneth which has crumbled in recent years is the assumption that many ideas in the document are foreign to Jewish thought and can only be Christian. Most conspicuous in this category has been the perennial claim that the sacred meal in Joseph and Aseneth must be understood in light of the Christian Lord's Supper. Without entering here into the question of the interpretation of the difficult bread-cup-anointing passages, about which much more will be said below, we may dismiss as unfounded the assumption that only Christian sources describe a sacred meal pertinent for comparative analysis. The sacred meals of the Essenes and Therapeutae alone suffice to render this assumption obsolete. Other similar arguments, such as Brooks's claim that the emphasis on forgiveness in Joseph and Aseneth goes beyond what one should expect from a Jewish work,28 and Holtz's more recent arguments that the concept of rebirth and the exalted portrayal of Joseph, as well as the meal terminology, would not be possible in a Jewish work,29 simply are no longer tenable in view of the contemporary appreciation of the pluralism that characterized ancient Jewish belief, liturgy and practice. The current state of knowledge of early Judaism justifies Burchard's statement, 4es gibt, negativ gesprochen, in ihr keinen Satz, der nicht jüdisch sein könnte'.30 In addition to the increased recognition that all of Joseph and Aseneth can be Jewish are numerous indications that it is in fact Jewish and can scarcely be construed as Jewish-Christian. Many linguistic, formal and substantive elements in Joseph and Aseneth find their closest analogies in the Judaism of the Hellenistic diaspora. Thus the term Oeoaeßrjc, a technical term and common Jewish self-designation in both Joseph and Aseneth and Hellenistic Jewish sources, occurs in earliest Christian literature only in Jn 9.31 and 1 Clem. 17.3, both with reference to pious Jews.31 Moreover, the ethical demands of the Geoaeßric as defined in 28. Joseph andAsenath, p. xi. 29. 'Christliche Interpolationen', pp. 482-97. 30. Untersuchengen, p. 99.

31. Untersuchungen, p. 101; see also G. Bertram, 'öeoaeßric, öeoaeßeioc', row, ffl, pp. 123-28.

74

From Death to Life

Joseph andAseneth, while not peculiarly Jewish in content, have a great deal in common with the ethics articulated in Jewish sources of the Hellenistic period and lack any peculiarly Christian flavor.32 Similarly, as Burchard and Charlesworth have shown, Aseneth's soliloquies and prayer in chs. 11-13 have especially strong linguistic and thematic affinities with several Jewish apocryphal prayers, especially those in Judith, the Additions to Esther and the Prayer of Manasseh,33 and once again there are no distinctive Christian elements. The task of distinguishing between Jewish and Christian ideas is now recognized to be very difficult in view of the common soil in which both are rooted and the extensive shared ideas and mutual influences. The numerous and controversial efforts to distinguish the Jewish and Christian materials in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah, and the epistle of James, to name but a few, provide ample evidence of this fact. Nevertheless, the cumulative effect of numerous terms, motifs and ideas in Joseph andAseneth which have strong affinities in Hellenistic Judaism and which are devoid of any exclusively Christian traits, is telling. This is particularly apparent in connection with the theme of conversion, which is the topic of this study. As M. Philonenko notes, it is to the Jewish conscience that Joseph's marriage to Aseneth poses a problem requiring some sort of resolution.34 It is difficult to imagine that a Christian author would have represented conversion to Christianity in such general religious terms that its specifically Christian profile is lost. There is in the conversion story in Joseph and Aseneth no Christ, no redeemer figure of any sort, no historical salvation event, no baptism, and no talk of such Christian Hauptbegriffe as faith, love, justification, salvation and church. Even the ideas of forgiveness and ethical transformation play only a very minor role in the account of Aseneth's conversion, as we shall see in Chapter 4. When the language of sin and conversion in Joseph andAseneth does overlap with that in early Christian sources, it is often used differently. For example, Burchard points out that both Joseph andAseneth and the Septuagint use the dative case with ajiapTotvco to indicate the one toward whom or against whom sin is committed, while in the New

32. Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 101-102. 33. Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 104-106; and J.H. Charlesworth, 'Prayer of Manasseh', in Charlesworth (ed.), OTPseudepigrapha, II, p. 631. 34. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 101.

2. The Present State of Research

75

Testament the consistent pattern is ccjuaptávco etc with the accusative.35 All explicit indications are that Aseneth's conversion is to the faith of Israel, and there is not the slightest hint that the author more specifically has in mind conversion to Jewish Christianity. Expressions and conceptions which Joseph and Aseneth does share with the New Testament and early Christianity, such as the references to God as ó 0eoç TOÛ oùpocvoû (e.g. 11.9; Rev. 11.3), ó 0eoç ó iixj/icrcoc (e.g. 15.7; Mk 5.7), ó 0eöc ó Çœv (e.g. 8.5; Heb. 3.12), and o 0eöc ó ÇCOOTCOUDV TOC TKXVTOC (8.3; cf. l Tim. 6.13; Rom. 4.17), are part of the common heritage of Judaism and Jewish Christianity and lack distinctively Christian overtones. Titles such as ó 0eoç TOÎ> 'Icoarjç (6.6), ó 0eoç TOÎ> rcaipoç ILLOD 'Iapar|À, (8.9), ó KUpioç TOÎ> SWOCTOÎ) 'Icoar|9 Kai 0eoç (11.7), and ô 0eoç TCOV 'Eßpocicov (11.10) all could have been employed by a Christian but point more naturally to a Jewish author. Such names for God are rare in the New Testament (cf. Mt. 15.31; Lk. 1.68; Acts 5.30), where they are invariably spoken by or to Jews, but are more common in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (e.g. Add. Est. 4.17; Judt. 9.2; 12.8; 13.7; T. Jos. 12.3). In a Jewish Christian work one would expect these very Jewish titles to be accompanied by others more distinctively Christian, but such is not the case in Joseph and Aseneth. In his defense of the Jewish origin oí Joseph and Aseneth, Philonenko correctly observes that the author relies heavily upon the Septuagint but ignores the entire New Testament.36 However, the absence of any echoes of the New Testament is hardly a convincing argument for the Jewish character of Joseph and Aseneth, since the work could have been composed before the New Testament writings were known in the author's community, or even before they were written. Even so, the fact that Joseph and Aseneth is utterly steeped in Jewish thought and expression, including that of the Septuagint, while being devoid of any distinctively Christian thought or language, remains a telling argument. The data converge to provide a compelling case for the Jewish (as opposed to Jewish-Christian) character of Joseph and Aseneth. There is today a solid, though not unanimous, consensus to this effect.37 In this 35. Untersuchungen, p. 103 and n. 2. 36. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 101. 37. Participants in the seminar on Joseph and Aseneth at the 1982 meeting of the SNTS in Leuven agreed on the Jewish character of the work. See Charlesworth, OT Pseudepigrapha and NT, p. 137.

76

From Death to Life

study we may safely assume and build upon this point of consensus, although, as we shall note in the Introduction to Part III, conversion to Christianity as represented in early Christian sources cannot for that reason simply be dismissed as irrelevant, since these sources may preserve evidence of formal and conceptual features of conversion to Judaism that are relevant to Aseneth's case. Provenance The provenance of Joseph and Aseneth has never been thoroughly studied, but sufficient data exist to create a strong presumption in favor of the Egyptian origin of the work. Alternative suggestions have been few and feebly supported. Batiffol's idea that Joseph and Aseneth was written in upper Asia Minor38 never won acceptance and is completely unfounded. This idea rests solely on the supposed similarities between the role of the Lord's chief angel in Joseph and Aseneth 14-17 and that of the archangel Michael in certain Christian writings from Asia Minor.39 Not only does Batiffol here rest too much weight on a single criterion, and a minor one at that; he also greatly exaggerates the similarities and ignores the fact that Michael's mediatory functions are by no means peculiar to the literature of Asia Minor but are widely attested in Jewish and Christian sources. Brooks countered Batiffol's suggestion by proposing Syria as the place of writing: the Eastern character of the work makes it more natural to refer it to those Eastern countries in which it is first found, while the fact that it was written in Greek is strong evidence for a Syrian writer rather than a Mesopotamian origin.40

Unfortunately, Brooks never indicated the sense in which Joseph and Aseneth is of 'Eastern character'. Moreover, his contention that the Greek text of Joseph and Aseneth which was translated into Syriac c. 569 CE came originally from Beroea (Aleppo)41 is a very weak argument for the Syrian origin of the work. Not only is it uncertain 38. 39. 40. 41.

Prière d'Aseneth, pp. 31-34. Prière d*Aseneth, pp. 32-34. Joseph andAsenath, p. xviii. Joseph and Asenath, pp. viii, xvii-xviii.

2. The Present State of Research

77

whether the text actually came from Beroea (Aleppo),42 but the place from which a manuscript comes is a poor indicator of the place of original composition, especially if, as I shall argue below, the work was composed several centuries earlier.43 For these reasons Brooks's suggestion of a Syrian provenance has never won any support and may be dismissed as unfounded. Those few who have favored a Semitic original for Joseph and Aseneth, notably P. Riessler and V. Aptowitzer, have naturally also favored a Palestinian provenance,44 but the compelling evidence that Greek is the original language of Joseph and Aseneth undermines this line of reasoning. Aptowitzer's further argument that the numerous affinities with rabbinic traditions about Aseneth support the Palestinian origin of the work45 is unconvincing. As indicated above, there is no evidence of a direct relationship between Joseph and Aseneth and the Palestinian haggadic materials about Aseneth. Indeed, the two proceed from such divergent premises that it is difficult to imagine that the author(s) of one knew the other. Even if traditions common to Joseph and Aseneth and the Palestinian sources can be discerned on individual points—and this is not nearly as certain as Aptowitzer supposed—the Palestinian provenance of Joseph and Aseneth is not thereby confirmed unless we assume that such traditions could not have been known outside Palestine. The numerous 'parallels' which Aptowitzer amassed between Joseph and Aseneth and Palestinian Jewish sources do strongly confirm the Jewishness of Joseph and Aseneth but lack the degree of specificity and direct kinship that would be needed to confirm the 42. The letter to Moses of Ingila attached to the Syriac version in PseudoZacharias Rhetor's Historia ecclesiastica seems to indicate that the work was found at Reshaina in Mesopotamia, but since it was in the possession of a relative of some bishops called the family of Beth Berua', Brooks concludes that it was brought there from Berua', which he takes to be Beroea (Aleppo). 43. As was noted in Chapter 1, Brooks apparently leaned toward a fourth- or fifth-century date of composition for Joseph and Aseneth. Even on the assumption of such a late date, it is naive to suppose that the presence of a manuscript in Syria in the fifth or sixth century indicates that the work was composed there. Brooks's own acknowledgment that Joseph and Aseneth was found in Mesopotamia in 569 without having been written there is an admission that the work circulated far from its place of origin. 44. Riessler, 'Joseph und Asenath', pp. 4-13; and Aptowitzer, 'Asenath', pp. 299-306. 45. 'Asenath', pp. 305-306 et passim.

78

From Death to Life

Palestinian origin of the work. The Essene elements which have been discerned in Joseph andAseneth by Riessler and others would also support a Palestinian provenance, but the alleged Essene connection, which we shall assess further in Chapter 6, is itself unconvincing and cannot be said to strengthen the case for the composition of Joseph andAseneth in Palestine. With the few exceptions noted above, virtually all specialists who have commented on the provenance of Joseph and Aseneth have pointed to Egypt.46 There is good reason for this strong consensus even if the matter cannot be considered closed and the Egyptian provenance certain. The setting of the story in Leontopolis and its environs, the fundamental antithesis between Jews and Egyptians and between the God of Israel and the Egyptian gods, the belabored and graphic account of Aseneth's repudiation of the gods of Egypt to embrace the religion of Israel, the acknowledgement of Joseph's God even by Pharaoh and by an Egyptian priest and leading nobleman, and Aseneth's rejection of Pharaoh's son in order to marry an Israelite, are all emphasized in such a way as to suggest that the Egyptian setting of the story was determined not merely by the biblical verse which here receives midrashic expansion (Gen. 41.45) but also by the social and cultural context in which the author of Joseph and Aseneth and his or her community actually lived.47 This strong impression is confirmed by a number of individual motifs which seem to have Egyptian affinities. For example, even if Philonenko and others have exaggerated the extent to which Aseneth corresponds to the Egyptian goddess Neith,48 the suggested similarities are not without some foundation49 and do give to Aseneth something of an Egyptian profile to complement her more predominantly Jewish portrayal.50

46. Again, those who participated in the seminar on Joseph and Aseneth at the 1982 SNTS meeting in Leuven were in agreement on this point. See Charlesworth, OT Pseudepigrapha and NT, p. 137. 47. On the extent to which the tensions in the narrative mirror social reality in the author's community, see Chapter 3 below. 48. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 61 -79. 49. Pace Sänger, 'Bekehrung und Exodus', p. 33: 'Abgesehen von den Namen erinnert nichts an die grosse ägyptische Gottin... ' 50. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 217: 'The significance of the Egyptian symbolism is that Aseneth has at once both a Jewish and an Egyptian profile. She does not lose her Egyptian identity when she converts. It is because of

2. The Present State of Research

79

Likewise, Philonenko has certainly exaggerated the extent to which the author tí Joseph andAseneth was influenced by Egyptian theology and cosmology and inspired by Egyptian sources such as the tale of the Doomed Prince,51 but the suggested links cannot all be dismissed, and cumulatively they tend strongly to support, though not to prove, the Egyptian origin tí Joseph andAseneth. Aseneth's reference to Joseph as 'son of God' in a context in which his arrival is likened to a solar epiphany (6.3) is reminiscent of certain Egyptian texts in which Pharaoh is described as the son of the solar deity Re.52 As Nickelsburg has recognized, such a background for the imagery in Joseph andAseneth 5-6 helps explain the meaning and function of the passage: By describing Joseph in language appropriate for the Pharaoh's son she [Aseneth] is not only making a marital choice but also adumbrating her conversion from the gods of Egypt to the God of Joseph.53

From such considerations Nickelsburg concludes: 'if it was written in Egypt...its message would have a special bite'.54 Nothing militates against the idea that Joseph and Aseneth was written in Egypt, and the above considerations, while not amounting to proof, combine to create a strong probability that the work did in fact originate there. However, Philonenko's further inference that Joseph and Aseneth originated in the Egyptian chora rather than in Alexandria55 goes beyond the evidence. His sole argument—that the rapport between Jews and Gentiles and the openness to elements of Egyptian culture in Joseph and Aseneth contrast with the intransigence toward paganism which characterized Philo and the bourgeois Jews of Alexandria—rests upon an unwarranted caricature of the very large and diverse Alexandrian Jewish community. Neither can the opposite suggestion, that Alexandria is 'the most likely candidate for provenance',56 be substantiated. The alleged affinities with Philo lack sufficient her enduring Egyptian characteristics that she can remain an effective paradigm for proselytes.' 51. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 40-41, 106 et passim. See especially the reservations expressed by West, 'Joseph and Asenath', p. 79 and n. 1. 52. See J.B. Pritchard, ANET3, pp. 234, 254, 370-71; and Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, pp. 260 and 271 n. 64. 53. Jewish Literature, p. 260. 54. Jewish Literature, p. 263. 55. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 107. 56. Kee, 'Socio-Religious Setting', p. 190.

80

From Death to Life

specificity to support such a conclusion,57 and the theory of a connection with the Therapeutae is too weak to support any case for provenance.58 Alexandria is not at all an unlikely setting, but we know too little about Judaism in other locations in Lower Egypt to claim that they are less likely settings than Alexandria. The evidence supporting the Egyptian provenance of Joseph and Aseneth simply does not support attempts to localize the work within Egypt more precisely. Remaining to be examined in depth are the realia reflected in Joseph and Aseneth, such as the architecture, landscape, seasons, agriculture, clothing, furniture and hygiene. As Burchard notes, since Hellenistic romances exhibit a good deal of anachronistic realism in such matters, investigation into the realia in Joseph and Aseneth could shed considerable light on the provenance and date of the work.59 Unfortunately, at present this desideratum awaits careful investigation. In the meantime, such evidence as does exist allows us to posit as highly probable the Egyptian origin of Joseph and Aseneth. Date The date of Joseph and Aseneth remains quite uncertain, but broad parameters can be fixed with great confidence, and once again there is a solid consensus among contemporary scholars. A rough terminus post quern can be deduced from the direct and extensive dependence of Joseph and Aseneth upon the various parts of the Septuagint. This dependence, which has long been recognized but most fully documented and analyzed in a recent article by G. Celling,60 means that Joseph and Aseneth cannot have been written earlier than c. 100 BCE. The recognition that Joseph and Aseneth is a Jewish work enables us to fix a terminus ante quern by reference to certain crucial and datable events in the history of Judaism. Although it is doubtful that Joseph and 57. Most striking in this connection is the remarkable similarity between Philo's description of the social and familial ostracism of the proselyte and that in Joseph and Aseneth (on this see further Chapter 5 below); but such problems were not peculiar to Alexandrian or Egyptian Jewry. 58. See Chapter 6 below. 59. 'Joseph and Aseneth', OT Pseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth), II, p. 185. In the same connection, Orval Wintermute has suggested in private conversation that the vivid physical descriptions in Joseph and Aseneth also need to be examined and are potentially significant for dating and locating the work. 60. 'Einwirkungen', pp. 29-56.

2. The Present State of Research

81

Aseneth should be reckoned among the Missionsliteratur of Hellenistic Judaism, as we shall see below, the work certainly reflects an attitude of openness to Gentile converts and a period of time when there was some concern about and some realistic possibility of Gentile conversions to Judaism. Therefore, the measures against Judaism which Hadrian imposed at the time of the Second Revolt in 132-35 CE,61 and which repressed the missionary impulse of Judaism, provide a most likely terminus ante quern. If an Egyptian provenance for Joseph and Aseneth be assumed, and we have shown above that this is highly probable, a still earlier terminus ante quern can be set with great confidence at 115 CE, the first year of the great Jewish Revolt under Trajan which resulted in the virtual annihilation of Egyptian Jewry. Although one text among the Acts of the Alexandrian Martyrs reports that the Roman prefect of Egypt established a Jewish settlement just outside Alexandria soon after the devastating suppression of Jewish resistance in 117,62 the reliability of this source is very much in doubt,63 and in any case there is no evidence of the kind of thriving Jewish communities that flourished in Egypt before the revolt, much less of Jewish communities coexisting in such harmony with their Egyptian neighbors that there would be any likelihood of or concern for making converts. On the contrary, the evidence consistently indicates the virtual disapearance of Jews as a significant element of the population of Egypt after 117 CE.64 Thus the devastating Jewish revolt of 115-17 CE provides a firm terminus ante quern for the writing of a document such as Joseph and Aseneth in Egypt.65 61. On the problem of dating Hadrian's measures within this four-year period and the question whether they were a cause or a consequence of the Revolt, see E.M. Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule (SJLA, 20; Leiden: Brill, 1976), pp. 428-66. 62. V.A. Tcherikover with A. Fuks, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (3 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957-64), II, pp. 87-98. 63. See Tcherikover, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum, II, pp. 55-60, 87-98. 64. The abundance of papyri relating to Jews prior to 115 CE, the paucity of such papyri after 117 CE, and the devastation reflected in the extant papyri from the time of the revolt itself and soon thereafter, graphically illustrate this fact. See Tcherikover, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum, u, pp. 225-60; and IE, pp. 3-42. 65. For recent studies of this revolt, including discussion of the date of its outbreak, see M. Pucci ben Ze'ev, 'Greek Attacks against Alexandrian Jews during Emperor Trajan's Reign', JSJ 20 (1989), pp. 31-48; and T.D. Barnes, Trajan and the Jews', JJS 40 (1989), pp. 145-62.

82

From Death to Life

Burchard has deduced roughly the same termini from another, unrelated criterion. He argues that the reference in Jos. Asen. 1.8-9 to the betrothal of Pharaoh's son to the daughter of the King of Moab, which is explicitly contrasted with the proposed marriage to someone of lower status, presupposes the existence of a Moabite kingdom of sufficient eminence to furnish a suitable bride for the crown prince of Egypt. This, according to Burchard, points to the period between c. 110 BCE and 105/106 CE, when the Nabateans ruled Moab.66 As a sole criterion for dating Joseph and Aseneth this would be a very weak argument. We cannot be certain that the Moabite situation alluded to so briefly in Joseph and Aseneth is that of the author's own time rather than that which was supposed to have existed at some earlier time. Nevertheless, as a bit of corroborative evidence Burchard's suggestion does tend to support the same basic termini which have been established on other grounds. A more specific date within this broad range is difficult to determine. The conciliatory attitude toward Gentiles reflected in Joseph and Aseneth fits better before than after 70 CE, and in Egypt such an attitude fits better before than after the pogrom against Alexandrian Jews in 38 CE. The absence of reference to the Romans and the depiction of Egypt as an independent country with rulers favorably disposed toward Jews may push the date of composition even earlier. G.D. Kilpatrick, J. Jeremias, J.J. Collins and others cite these criteria to support a date for Joseph and Aseneth in the Ptolemaic period in Egypt before the Roman takeover in 30 BCE.67 The argument is suggestive, but less than conclusive, of a first century BCE date for Joseph and Aseneth. A favorable disposition of the government toward the Jews characterizes much of

66. Untersuchungen, pp. 144-46. 67. Kilpatrick, 'Last Supper', p. 5; Jeremias, 'Die missionarische Aufgabe', p. 255. See also West, 'Joseph and Asenath', p. 81: 'the general outlook surely reflects the relative security of the Ptolemaic period'. Bartlett, Jews in the Hellenistic World, pp. 5, 9, also dates Joseph and Aseneth to the late first century BCE, but without explanation other than that the work reflects a period when 'relationships between Jews and Greek citizens of Alexandria had deteriorated' (p. 5). Kilpatrick, Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy, pp. 59-60, correctly explains: 'The political conditions in the story would easily reflect the state of affairs in the last century of the rule of the Ptolemies before the Roman conquest under Augustus. Egypt has its own monarch and is beset with civil disorders in which Jews are involved. The later we place JA after this time, the more difficult it becomes to defend our dating.'

2. The Present State of Research

83

the early Roman period in Egypt as well as the Ptolemaic era.68 Moreover, we must not suppose that the author of Joseph and Aseneth could not have had some knowledge of the situation in Egypt in an earlier era, or that he or she could not have presented a more idealistic portrayal of the relations between the government and the Jews than actually existed at the time. Philonenko's observation that Hellenistic romances tend to reflect the conditions of the Persian epoch, and indeed that this is 'une loi du genre',69 further weakens any argument for the date of Joseph and Aseneth based upon the absence of reference to the Romans. A date in the first century BCE remains only slightly more likely than a date in the following century.70 Other criteria for dating Joseph and Aseneth are even less helpful. Datable events and practices in the history of Jewish proselytism afford no reliable criteria. J. Jeremias cites the absence of proselyte baptism as clear evidence of a pre-Christian date,71 but, as we shall see in Chapter 5, this argument rests on an untenable assumption regarding the universality and date of origin of proselyte baptism. V. Aptowitzer's suggestion that the conversion of Queen Helena of Adiabene in the midfirst century CE—the greatest triumph of Jewish proselytism—provided the specific occasion for the writing of Joseph and Aseneth12 is entirely conjectural and is of no help in dating the work. One could wish that Greek lexicographical considerations would be of some help, but this criterion is likewise inconclusive. Burchard has listed 68. J. Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), pp. 35-88, correctly points out the one-sidedness and exaggeration of the traditional picture of Roman opinion as overwhelmingly hostile toward Judaism. With the exception of including most Jews among the non-citizen residents of Egypt subject to the laographia, Augustan policy afforded Jews a very favorable position during the early Imperial period prior to the violence of 38^1 CE. 69. Joseph et Aseneth, $. 108. 70. In my review of Jews in the Hellenistic World, by J.R. Bartlett, in RSR 13 (1987), p. 171,1 am quoted as saying that Bartlett's dating of Joseph and Aseneth to the first century BCE is 'erroneous'. What I actually wrote was that Bartlett was 'overconfident' in assigning such a date, meaning that he simply stated it without qualification or argumentation. For some reason unknown to me, the editors substituted 'erroneous' for 'overconfident' and made other unfortunate changes as well (such as putting the First Revolt in 66 BCE!). 71. Infant Baptism, p. 33. 72. 'Asenath', pp. 299-305.

84

From Death to Life

a number of words in Joseph and Aseneth which are not elsewhere attested with certainty until the first century B CE or later,73 but, as Burchard himself recognizes, lexical chronology is too inexact a science to provide a reliable guide to the date tí Joseph and Aseneth. Alleged affinities with the Gospel of John and Ignatius are likewise unhelpful. K.G. Kühn has suggested that the similarities between the sacred meal in Joseph and Aseneth, the 'bread of life' in Jn 6 and the eucharistie 'medicine of immortality' in Ignatius (Eph. 20.2) point to a date for Joseph and Aseneth at least as early as these other sources, and perhaps even somewhat earlier.74 However, this suggestion rests on a dubious interpretation of the bread-cup-anointing passages in Joseph and Aseneth,15 and even if the premise of a close connection between Joseph and Aseneth and these other sources be assumed, it does not enable us to pinpoint a more precise date for Joseph and Aseneth than what is possible from other, more objective criteria. Philonenko's dating of Joseph and Aseneth to the early second century CE on the basis of affinities with other Greek romances76 is also unconvincing. Joseph and Aseneth has obvious affinities with this genre, but whether it is earlier or later than the other representatives of the genre is impossible to say,77 and the dating of these other works is itself quite uncertain.78 Finally, Sänger's recent case for a date of c. 38 CE79 is tenuous. Although Sänger is correct that the persons and events in Joseph and Aseneth reflect real social groupings and problems in the world of the author,80 his association of the story with the particular events of 38^U 73. Untersuchungen, pp. 148-51 ; and 'Joseph and Aseneth', OT Pseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth), II, p. 188. 74. 'The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', p. 76. 75. See further Chapter 4 below. 76. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 109. 77. West, 'Joseph and Asenath', p. 81: 'It is clearly debatable whether JA is a crude imitation of a genre already established as respectable, or typical of a class of popular narrative which stimulated Chariton and other literary men to more polished productions'. 78. See B.E. Perry, The Ancient Romances: A Literary-Historical Account of their Origins (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), pp. 96-98,173. 79. 'Erwägungen', pp. 86-106; see Chapter 1 above. 80. This much was argued independently in Chesnutt, 'Social Setting and Purpose', pp. 21-48, and is the premise of Chapter 3 below, although the conclusions there are somewhat different from those proposed by Sänger. Pace Sänger, the

2. The Present State of Research

85

CE goes beyond the evidence. There is no reason to think that the hostility of Pharaoh's son toward Joseph reflects the kind of anti-Judaism that led to the pogrom in 38 CE. No such anti-Jewish sentiments are found elsewhere in the apocryphon (except in Aseneth's own comments before she meets Joseph). The motive given in the text for the action of Pharaoh's son is not his anti-Judaism, but his passionate desire to have Aseneth for himself. It is true that the whole episode in chs. 22-29 illustrates the ever-present potential for conflict when Jews live in a Gentile environment,81 but specific links with the events of 38 CE are lacking. Other occasions of intense conflict punctuated the history of Judaism in Greco-Roman Egypt, even if the disturbances of 38-41 CE happen to be better known to us because of Philo's involvement in them. In fact, as I have suggested above, the conciliatory attitude toward Gentiles reflected in Joseph and Aseneth would be more likely before rather than during or soon after the bloody conflicts of 38-41 CE. To conclude, a date of composition for Joseph and Aseneth before 30 B CE is perhaps slightly preferable over a later date, but this is by no means certain. More defensible, but still far less than certain, is a date prior to 38 CE. The lack of evidence justifying an exact dating of the work means that only the broad range indicated above—between c. 100 BCE and 115 CE—can be affirmed with any confidence. Yet even this limited conclusion is significant. It excludes the very late dates assigned by many early interpreters of Joseph and Aseneth and places the document within that vast array of early Jewish literature which has generated such a renaissance of interest and research in recent years. This fact alone adds considerable significance to our investigation for all whose interest lies in the study of early Judaism and the origins of Christianity. Genre That Joseph and Aseneth belongs to the Hellenistic literary genre known as the 'novel' or 'romance' is generally acknowledged.82 Broadly tensions evidenced in Joseph and Aseneth allow us to reconstruct the general social climate, but not the specific historical events, that led to the writing of the work. 81. Again, I have argued the same independently in 'Social Setting and Purpose', pp. 21-48, the bulk of which is repeated in Chapter 3 below. 82. For purposes of this study the terms 'novel' and 'romance' are used interchangeably. On this practical if somewhat imprecise usage, see Perry, Ancient

86

From Death to Life

defined as stories of love and adventure in which two young people fall in love, undergo a series of threats or dangers, and finally prevail thanks to divine intervention,83 this generic category must surely include Joseph and Aseneth. On this point there is agreement even between scholars as divergent in their interpretations of Joseph and Aseneth as M. Philonenko and C. Burchard. Philonenko catalogs numerous individual motifs in Joseph and Aseneth which are familiar from the Greek romances,84 and Burchard offers a synopsis featuring the extensive parallels, not only of specific motifs but also of larger patterns of structure and plot, with such Latin and Greek romances as the tale of Cupid and Psyche in Books 4-6 of Apuleius' Metamorphoses, the adventures of Lucius in Metamorphoses 11, and the marriage of Habrocomes and Anthia in Xenophon's Ephesiaca*5 S. West has likewise emphasized the affinities of Joseph and Aseneth with the romantic genre and has appealed to classicists to take 'this Jewish novella' more fully into account in research on the Greek romances.86 H.C. Kee summarizes the consensus well: One conclusion concerning Joseph and Aseneth on which recent scholarly studies are in agreement is that the literary model for this fascinating work is the hellenistic romance. In both European and American analyses that assumption is evident.87

Beyond this broad consensus, however, scholarly views diverge sharply. Not only do specialists in the ancient novels disagree on the origins, Romances, p. 3. For attempts at more refined definitions, see T. Hägg, The Novel in Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), p. 4; G. Schmeling, Xenophon of Ephesus (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1980), pp. 104-11; N. Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957), pp. 33, 304-307; and R.I. Pervo, Profit with Delight: The Literary Genre of the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), p. 103 and n. 82. 83. G. Anderson, Ancient Fiction: The Novel in the Graeco-Roman World (Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble, 1984), p. 3. 84. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 43-48 et passim throughout the 'Notes'. 85. Der dreizehnte Zeuge, pp. 59-86; and idem, 'Joseph et Aseneth: Questions actuelles', pp. 84-96. 86. 'Joseph and Asenath', pp. 70-81. West notes, for example, that R. Merkelbach made no reference to Joseph and Aseneth in his important study of the connection between the ancient romances and the mystery religions (on which see further Chapter 7 below), and more generally that 'the standard modern books on the Greek romance altogether ignore this Jewish work' (p. 70). 87. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 394.

2. The Present State of Research

87

nature and function of the heterogeneous group of ancient writings included under this generic heading,88 but there is also considerable doubt about which, if any, subdivision of the genre provides a suitable analogy for Joseph andAseneth. This latter question in particular has received a variety of answers in the literature on Joseph andAseneth without generating any consensus. Thus G.D. Kilpatrick finds the Greek novel inadequate as an explanation of the literary antecedents of Joseph andAseneth and proposes: There is however another parallel, the series Ruth, Esther, Tobit and Judith. All are religious romances. Except in Judith they all involve a marriage and even there the principal male character, Holophernes, has designs on Judith. Except in Tobit the female character is dominant. They all involve contacts with the Gentiles and an exile is their background. Ruth herself is ostensibly a Gentile and Esther married to one. In Judith most Gentiles are bad but Achior who begins by expressing respect for the religion of Israel ends by becoming a Jew.89

Philonenko, as we have seen, points instead to the erotic novels as providing the analogy,90 and S. West agrees, calling Joseph andAseneth 'a Greek romance with Jewish subject matter'.91 T. Szepessy has sought an analogy in the apocryphal acts of the Apostles, especially the Acts of Paul and Thecla.92 R.I. Pervo recognizes the presence of elements from the erotic tradition but rejects the idea that Joseph and Aseneth is the Jewish equivalent of the Greek erotic romances. Instead he places the work within the tradition of the Jewish 'sapiential novel', representatives of which include Ahiqar, Tobit and Daniel 1-6.93 H.C. Kee offers the following paradigm of the Hellenistic romance and argues that Joseph andAseneth fits it perfectly: The work serves as propaganda for a cult. It depicts a conversion experience. Conversion leads to a sacred marriage. The literary style shifts between narrative and poetical or liturgical forms.

88. See the useful survey and critique of the secondary literature in Pervo, Profit with Delight, pp. 87-101. 89. Review of Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, by C. Burchard, and Joseph et Aseneth, by M. Philonenko, NovT 12 (1970), p. 234. 90. See Chapterl above. 91. 'Joseph and Asenath', p. 80; see Chapter 1 above. 92. See Chapter 1 above. 93. 'Joseph and Asenath and the Greek Novel', pp. 171-81.

88

From Death to Life The plot is moved along by inner and external conflicts of the hero or heroine, with deliverance accomplished by divine action. The climax of the story involves the death and rebirth of the hero or heroine, a theophany, and the self-dedication of the hero or heroine to the god.94

On this basis Kee concludes that Joseph and Aseneth is a Hellenistic romance which provides propaganda for a brand of Judaism heavily influenced by the mystery cults; just as participants in the Isis cult were promised immortality by their ritualistic re-enactment of the experiences of Isis and Osiris, so the story of Aseneth provided paradigmatic rituals by which the Jew or Jewish convert was assured immortality.95 These various proposals tend to cancel one another out and to raise doubts about the merits of associating Joseph and Aseneth too closely with any of the known or supposed species of the romantic genre. Joseph and Aseneth certainly has affinities with the erotic novel—motifs such as love at first sight, the surpassing beauty of the heroine, separation of the lovers because of travel, and a foiled plot by a rival suitor— but there are also major differences which justify R. Pervo's conclusion that 'Jos. and As. ought not to be studied solely as an imitation or example of the ancient erotic novel'.96 Joseph and Aseneth is considerably shorter than the erotic romances and it lacks the emphasis on love which is characteristic of those works, though love is certainly present. It also has a midrashic character, a strong component of wisdom material, and other features which are even more formative than the elements shared with the Greek romances. Moreover, the centrality of the religious message in Joseph and Aseneth and the symbolic character of parts of its narrative set it apart from the erotic romances, though the latter were by no means 'pure entertainment' devoid of religious messages as some earlier scholars maintained.97

94. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 398. 95. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 394-413. 96. 'Joseph and Asenath and the Greek Novel', p. 176. 97. The understanding of the novel as 'pure entertainment' written 'for its own sake' is largely a legacy of the classic work by E. Rohde, Der griechische Roman und seine Vorläufer (Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1960; first published in 1876), and is perpetuated to some extent in more recent studies such as Perry, Ancient Romances. Among others, B.P. Reardon, Courants littéraires grecs des Ile et Ule siècles (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1971), provides an important corrective by recognizing the importance of religious messages in the ancient novels.

2. The Present State of Research

89

Similarly, other species of the romantic genre which have been proposed as analogies for Joseph and Aseneth and which do offer certain parallels in literary techniques and motifs fail to provide a definable literary category into which Joseph and Aseneth should be placed. Thus, while there clearly are elements in common with Ruth, Esther, Tobit and Judith, it is scarcely helpful to follow Kilpatrick in associating Joseph and Aseneth with these works under the heading 'religious romances'. As West has noted, this classification reflects semantic confusion over the term 'romance' and centers undue attention on love and marriage when in fact these are not the principal features in the works mentioned.98 Pervo's placement of Joseph and Aseneth within the tradition of what he calls the 'sapiential novel', a tradition which includes Ahiqar, Tobit and Daniel 1-6, also has merit but focuses attention on one aspect of the work—the wisdom elements—and does not do justice to other equally formative elements. As R. Doran observes, the literary structure of Joseph and Aseneth has nothing in common with the court contests of Ahiqar and Daniel 1-6." Interesting similarities can be found also with the apocryphal acts—similarities which in fact deserve much further exploration—but this group of works is itself very disparate100 and hardly constitutes a satisfactory generic model for Joseph and Aseneth. Finally, Kee's case that Joseph and Aseneth is to be associated with those romances which provide propaganda for the mystery cults is unconvincing for several reasons to be discussed in detail in Chapter 7 below. The most careful students of the ancient novels have regularly and correctly insisted that genre classification requires more than a listing of motifs in common.101 One must rather consider values and ideals, 98. * Joseph and Asenath', p. 76. 99. 'Narrative Literature', p. 291. 100. Pervo, Profit with Delight, p. 86: '.. .the Apoc. Acts are too disparate a group to constitute an easily definable literary type. Differences in form, structure, and style are substantial, not to mention in theology and theme. Arrangement of books by titles does not exhaust the resources of form criticism. There is not one, unified (sub)genre of Christian Acts...' 'Methodologically, such a body of texts would be too small. One cannot account for the Apoc. Acts as internal developments within the group. Their diversity suggests responses to a variety of literary, cultural, and religious stimuli over a significant expanse of time and space.' Later Pervo writes that 'the extant Apoc. Acts are a theological smorgasbord* (p. 124). 101. E.g. Pervo, Profit with Delight, pp. 89-90: 'Any genre that can be described by a list of motifs is unworthy of serious evaluation, and the repeated insistence upon

90

From Death to Life

literary tone and style, cultural setting and function, and structure, as well as individual motifs.102 In this connection R. Doran points up a glaring deficiency in research on Joseph andAseneth: What urgently needs to be done is analysis of the literary structure of the work. It is not enough to point to motifs held in common between works. It is how the motifs are arranged and structured that is primary to understanding a work. The arrangement of motifs in the extant Greek romances and Joseph andAseneth is markedly different.103

Joseph andAseneth further resists neat classification by genre because it is actually two novels which are related but distinct—the narrative of Aseneth's conversion in chs. 1-21 and the story of the problems resulting from the couple's marriage in chs. 22-29. Affinities between the various kinds of Hellenistic romances and both parts of Joseph and Aseneth are real and must be considered, but the differences must also be noted, and genre analysis must not be restricted to mere comparison of motifs. Moreover, classification by genre is a descriptive and not prescriptive enterprise, as B.E. Perry rightly insists in his study of the origins of the romance. Rejecting the notion that literary genre is 'something that lies deep-seated in the nature of things' and 'predetermines the content of a given work', Perry writes, That which generates the new form, and at the same time identifies it, is a new purpose or ideal, which acts from without upon what is traditional... What the old form supplies is not motivation or causation, or inspiration, but only a loose structural pattern and building materials of one kind or another which may be used at will to a greater or less extent in the construction of a new thing.104 such requisite elements constitutes a form of ritualized ridicule. Even when applied to so minuscule a collection of texts as the Greek romantic novel of antiquity it is inadequate in regard to both content and function. One will not be able to understand any literary form so complex as the ancient novel by appeal to the presence or absence of any motif or motifs, however useful such catalogues may be as guides to similarity and diversity.' 102. The attempt by Pervo, Profit with Delight, pp. 102-14, to grapple with these various elements in their complexity is very insightful. On p. 114 Pervo writes, 'In conclusion, a novel, specifically the Greco-Roman novel, is not just content, style, or structure but the presentation of certain themes, motifs, and modes in culturally shaped ways. Expressed as a formula, the novel = material + manner + style + structure.' 103. 'Narrative Literature', p. 291. 104. Ancient Romances, pp. 18-19.

2. The Present State of Research

91

Perry correctly observes that 'form or genre, being only an expostfacto classification, does not determine anything about a particular text'.105 Thus the fact that Joseph and Aseneth has certain features in common with other literary works and can for convenience be classified with them under the the generic title 'Hellenistic romance' is no a priori indication of the purpose and function of the work. In view of the heteregeneous nature of the romantic genre, the uncertainty surrounding the particular species of the genre to which Joseph and Aseneth belongs, and the question of the extent to which such a classification should be allowed to govern the interpretation of the document, it seems wise to proceed in this study without any fixed answer to the question of genre beyond the loose classification of Joseph and Aseneth as a Hellenistic novel or romance. Affinities with the Hellenistic romances are numerous and must of course be taken into account, but Joseph and Aseneth needs to be read on its own terms rather than having its interpretation governed by the supposed genetic kinship with a literary genre which itself is very heterogeneous and is of uncertain origin and function. The present study will therefore focus on the social setting and purpose of Joseph and Aseneth as these are suggested by elements within the document itself, rather than allowing the approach to be unduly influenced at the outset by some decision about what the genre is and therefore what the nature and purpose of the document must be. Discussion of the genre of Joseph and Aseneth would be incomplete without some reference to the possibility of female authorship. Recent studies of the ancient novels have often noted the prominent role of female characters and the likelihood that a large portion of both the intended and actual readers were women.106 Not infrequently, the heroines are more perceptive, competent and effective than their male counterparts.107T. Hägg notes that the romantic novel may have been one of the first genres to receive its main support from women, since women had fewer opportunities than men for adventure and since there 105. Ancient Romances,]). 10. 106. Profit with Delight, pp. 83-84; and idem, 'Aseneth and her Sisters: Women in Jewish Narrative and in the Greek Novels', in 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman World (ed. A.-J. Levine; SCS, Early Judaism and its Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 145-60. 107. E.g. in addition to Aseneth, Callirhoe in Chariton's Chaireas and Callirhoe and Chariclea in Heliodorus' Ethiopica.

92

From Death to Life

was a dearth of heroic literature pertaining to their sex.108 The commendation of marriage in the novels may have served to support the position of women, who had little means of protection outside marriage.109 It is therefore not at all unlikely that women were among the authors of the ancient novels. Recent students of the genre have been quite open to this possibility but have had to acknowledge that there are no solid criteria by which to decide in the case of any individual work.110 In the case of Joseph and Aseneth, the obvious prominence and very positive portrayal of the leading woman, the fact that her conversion is narrated from her point of view, and the possibility that the author's purpose was to enhance the status not merely of the convert but of the female convert in particular and perhaps even of women generally, raise the very real possibility that the apocryphon was composed by a woman. However, as is true of the novels in general, there are no criteria by which to decide.111 In this study no presumption is made one way or the other. Retrospect and Prospect This chapter presents and supplies supporting evidence for the current consensus on six major questions in the study of Joseph and Aseneth where reasonably certain conclusions can be reached. While there is at 108. The Novel in Antiquity, pp. 95-96. 109. Pervo, Profit with Delight, p. 84. 110. E.g. Hägg, The Novel in Antiquity, pp. 95-96, astutely notes that the idea of a beautiful yet faithful and chaste woman is a typical male fantasy. See also now M.R. Lefkowitz, 'Did Ancient Women Write Novels?', in 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman World (A.-J. Levine; SCS, Early Judaism and its Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 199-219; and in the same volume, R.S. Kraemer, * Women's Authorship of Jewish and Christian Literature in the Greco-Roman Period', pp. 221-42. 111. Such also was the consensus of the panelists who discussed the topic, 'Testament of Job 46-53 and Joseph and Aseneth: The Possibility of Female Authorship and its Exegetical Implications', at the Hellenistic Judaism Group of the Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting in Boston in December, 1987. The panelists were R.S. Kraemer, M.R. Lefkowitz, A.-J. Levine and R.I. Pervo. R.S. Kraemer (' Women's Authorship', pp. 234-35; and Her Share of the Blessings: Women's Religions among Pagans, Jews, and Christians in the Greco-Roman World [New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992], pp. 110-13) contends that the short version of the text as edited by Philonenko is a much more likely candidate for female authorship or redaction than the long version as edited by Burchard.

2. The Present State of Research

93

least some dissenting opinion even on these matters, we have seen that there are adequate reasons for accepting as foundational for our study the consensus that the long version of Joseph and Aseneth represented in Burchard's edition lies closer to the original than the short recension edited by Philonenko, that Greek is the original language, that the work is Jewish and evidences no Christian redaction in its earliest attainable form, that the provenance is most likely Egypt, that the date of composition lies somewhere between 100 BCE and 115 CE, and that the work belongs to the broad generic category of the Hellenistic novel or romance. Even if the current state of research does not allow us to articulate a consensus on other matters of great importance for the understanding of Joseph and Aseneth, the points of consensus which are represented above themselves constitute a significant foundation on which to build a study of the single most controversial aspect of Joseph and Aseneth which remains—the nature and religions geschichtlich affinities of Aseneth's conversion and its function in the larger aim of the work. The consensus which has gradually emerged on the basic items discussed above both suggests that the subject of the present study is a timely one and inspires optimism that clarity may be brought to the discussion of this subject as well.

This page intentionally left blank

PARTE

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION TO PART II As a corrective to those approaches wherein illumination of various phenomena in Joseph and Aseneth is sought by reference to other ancient sources without prior examination of those phenomena in their own right within their own literary context, this part of our study presents an analysis of Aseneth's conversion within the literary context of Joseph and Aseneth. The social and religious tensions which permeate the narrative are given special attention as the most important formative influences on the account of Aseneth's conversion, and the formal and conceptual features of conversion which can be extrapolated from the story are analyzed. Only when the agenda has been set by means of this descriptive (/synchronie) analysis is it legitimate to proceed to comparative (/diachronic) analysis and ask whether other paradigms of converison and initiation from the Hellenistic era provide an interpretative frame for or shed light upon Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth.

Chapter 3

THE LITERARY CONTEXT SOCIAL TENSIONS IN THE NARRATIVE OF ASENETH'S CONVERSION The context of Aseneth's conversion, at least at the literary level, is one of deep-seated tensions among several groups of people. Since this complex social matrix is so pervasive in the narrative, it is necessary at the outset to examine its bearing on the account of Aseneth's conversion and to reckon with the possibility that it is not merely literary but echoes social reality in the author's community and betrays the very purpose of the work. Three principal frontiers of social distinction and conflict appear in the story: (1) that between Jews and Gentiles; (2) that within the Jewish community centering on the marriage of a convert and a born Jew; and (3) that between the convert to Judaism and the convert's Gentile family and former associates.1 We now consider each of these in turn as it is reflected in the narrative and suggests something about the form and function of Aseneth's conversion and the social setting and function of the work. Jews and Gentiles The most obvious and categorical of the distinctions mentioned above is that between Jew and Gentile. That the author proceeds on the assumption of, and in some sense is concerned with, this distinction and its 1. The terms 'Jew', 'Jewish' and 'Judaism' are obviously anachronistic in the patriarchal context and in fact are not used in Joseph and Aseneth. Nevertheless, because Joseph and Aseneth was written in an age when such designations and the socio-religious distinctions they represent were quite current, and because the author employed patriarchal characters and events to address the concerns of such an age, these terms have been used accommodatively in investigating the social tensions in the narrative and the social context and function of the document.

98

From Death to Life

ramifications is implicit already in the opening lines, according to which Aseneth 'bore no similarity to the virgins of the Egyptians but was in every way similar to the daughters of the Hebrews' (1.5). In her virulently anti-Judaic response to her father's suggestion that she marry Joseph, Aseneth herself voices from the Gentile point of view the kind of suspicion that underlies uneasy relations between Jews and Gentiles (4.912). The glorified portrayal of Joseph upon his arrival among his Gentile hosts (5.4-7), including something very close to an ascription of angelic status to him by the startled Aseneth (6.1-8), reinforces the reader's initial impression that the author wishes to set Joseph and his people qualitatively apart from all others and generates the expectation that the story will somehow revolve around this fundamental difference. This initial impression receives explicit confirmation in the narrative of Joseph's entry into the house of Pentephres and the explanation that the hosts 'set before him a table by itself, because Joseph would not eat with the Egyptians since this was an abomination to him' (7.1). In the same vein, when Aseneth comes forth to kiss Joseph, he refuses to allow it, saying, It is not proper for a man who worships God, who blesses with his mouth the living God and eats blessed bread of life and drinks a blessed cup of immortality and is anointed with blessed ointment of incorruption, to kiss a strange woman, who blesses with her mouth dead and dumb idols and eats from their table bread of strangling and drinks from their libation a cup of deceit and is anointed with ointment of destruction. Rather, the man who worships God will kiss his mother and the sister born of his mother and the sister from his tribe and kinsfolk and the wife who shares his bed, who bless with their mouths the living God. Likewise, it is not proper for a woman who worships God to kiss a strange man, because this is an abomination before the Lord God (8.5-7).

In this very important passage, which sets up the conflict to be resolved by the story of Aseneth's conversion, the contours of the dichotomy adumbrated earlier become clear. It is a fundamental dichotomy between those who worship God and those who worship idols. In terms which are anachronistic in the patriarchal context but descriptive of the author's own social world, it is a dichotomy between Jews and Gentiles. Even at this early stage in the story, the reader can scarcely fail to see that the 'man (woman) who worships God' is the Jew, that the 'strange man (woman) who worships dead and dumb idols' is the idolatrous Gentile, and that from the author's perspective there must be no intimacy between the two.

3. The Literary Context

99

Joseph's response to the proposed kiss by Aseneth follows a form attested with only slight variations several other times in Joseph and Aseneth: 'it is not proper for a man (woman) who worships God to... ' (8.5, 7; 21.1; 23.9, 12; 29.3). Closely related are several other passages which do not follow the expanded formula but nevertheless specify how 'the man (men) who worship(s) God' must behave in various situations (23.10; 28.5, 7). The author's repeated use of these stereotyped expressions to define the conduct befitting the people of God, especially in their dealings with Gentiles, suggests not only the importance of this concern in the shaping of the narrative, but also the actual existence of the situations addressed by the formulas in the real social world of Joseph and Aseneth. In its context in 8.5-7, the interdiction in the form 'it is not proper for the man (woman) who worships God to...' functions specifically to set the Jew apart from the non-Jew and to justify the social separation which the former must maintain from the latter. A fourfold series of antitheses expressed in relative clauses spells out the difference between the two classes of people: The man who worships God 1. Blesses with his mouth the living God 2. Eats blessed bread of life 3. Drinks a blessed cup of immortality 4. Is anointed with blessed ointment of incorruption

The strange woman 1. Blesses with her mouth dead and dumb idols 2. Eats bread of strangling from the table of idols 3. Drinks a cup of deceit from the libation of idols 4. Is anointed with ointment of destruction

The contrast is such that there can be no intimacy, and certainly no intermarriage, between the worshiper of God and the idol worshiper. Rather, the one whom the man of God kisses and marries must be from among his own people, those who 'bless with their mouths the living God' (8.6). Whether the language of bread, cup and ointment echoes some ritual meal is a question to be addressed at length below, but preoccupation with ritual form must not be allowed to obscure the primary function of that language within its context—namely, to set Jew apart from non-Jew and justify the social separation which the former must maintain from the latter. That the social concerns reflected here are not merely literary but are real ones in the author's community is decisively confirmed by 8.7:

100

From Death to Life

'Likewise, it is not proper for a woman who worships God to kiss a strange man, because this is an abomination before the Lord God'. This additional interdiction is different from what has preceded it in that nothing in the story line calls for it; there is no Jewish woman in the story for whom exogamy is a possibility. The generalization from the specific case at hand to a related situation beyond that actually represented in the narrative betrays a didactic interest in clarifying Jewish identity and appropriate Jewish conduct in a Gentile environment. The story is addressing vital social issues. The milieu of Joseph andAseneth evidently was one in which Jews lived in dynamic tension with Gentiles and struggled to maintain a distinctive Jewish identity. The polluting effect of intermarriage and of table fellowship with Gentiles was of grave concern to the author. The prayer of Joseph on Aseneth's behalf (8.9), which immediately follows the passage just examined, further heightens the contrast between existence as a pagan and existence as a member of God's elect people: the one is darkness, the other light; the one is error, the other truth; the one is death, the other life. Meal terminology makes its second appearance here,2 and, as in the first occurrence, the context is one in which a contrast between two categories of people, two realms of existence, is being drawn. Again deferring the question whether a ritual meal is in view, we may simply note that the language about eating the bread of life and drinking the cup of blessing is functionally parallel to that about being formed anew, entering God's rest, and living in eternal life; it expresses the unique blessings of the chosen people of God, by way of contrast to the darkness and death which is the lot of those outside the pale of God's elect. The most fundamental ground of distinction in Joseph and Aseneth between Jew and Gentile is that the former is a worshiper of God and the latter an idolater. This fact is evident already from the use of the stereotyped appelation 'one who worships God' as a standard Jewish self-designation. C. Burchard is quite right that in Joseph and Aseneth 0eoaeßt|c should not be translated 'religious' (which would dilute the true meaning) or 'god-fearing' (which would evoke false association 2. In this instance only the bread and cup are mentioned; the third item present in the earlier reference, the anointing with ointment, is absent. This difference should not be exaggerated, but Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 170, is correct that it should at least make us reticent to speak of a liturgically fixed formula, as many have done prematurely.

3. The Literary Context

101

with the (poßoujLievoi [aeßojLievoi] tóv 0eóv, 'God-fearers').3 It is rather a technical term denoting one who is God-fearing in the exclusive sense of a Jew who recognizes the only true God, as its usage in antithesis to various expressions for 'idol-worshiper' makes abundantly clear.4 This definitive feature of the Jewish self-understanding receives forceful narrative expression in the account of Aseneth's conversion and in the way she is described before and after her conversion. Aseneth is depicted graphically in the early chapters as one whose life is utterly bound up in idolatry: And within that room, fastened to the walls, were the gods of the Egyptians, innumerable gods of gold and silver. And Aseneth worshiped all of them and feared them and offered sacrifices to them daily (2.3).

On her elaborate jewelry and ornaments 'the names of the gods of the Egyptians were engraved e very where... and the faces of all the idols were carved on them' (3.6). The barrier that separated Aseneth from Joseph, Gentile from Jew, was nothing other than idolatry and the pollution associated with it, as Joseph states in a passage already quoted above: It is not proper for a man who worships God, who blesses with his mouth the living God and eats blessed bread of life and drinks a blessed cup of immortality and is anointed with blessed ointment of incorruption, to kiss a strange woman, who blesses with her mouth dead and dumb idols and eats 3. Among the numerous recent publications on this controversial subject, see F. Siegert, 'Gottesfürtige und Sympathisanten', JSJ 4 (1973), pp. 109-64; A.T. Kraabel, The Disappearance of the "God-Fearers'", Numen 28 (1981), pp. 113-26; M. Wilcox, The God-Fearers in Acts: A Reconsideration', JSNT 13 (1981), pp. 102-22; T.M. Finn, The God Fearers Reconsidered', CBQ 47 (1985), pp. 75-84; three articles in BARev 12 (1986): R.S. MacLennan and A.T. Kraabel, The God-Fearers—A Literary and Theological Invention', pp. 46-53, 64; R.F. Tannenbaum, 'Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of Aphrodite', pp. 54-57; and L.H. Feldman, The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers', pp. 58-69; J. Reynolds and R. Tannenbaum, Jews and God-Fearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society, 1987); JA. Overman, The God-Fearers: Some Neglected Features', JSNT 32 (1988), pp. 17-26; L.H. Feldman, 'Proselytes and "Sympathizers" in the Light of the New Inscriptions from Aphrodisias', REJ 148 (1989), pp. 265-305; and S.J.D. Cohen, 'Crossing the Boundary and Becoming a Jew', HTR 82 (1989), pp. 13-33. 4. 'Joseph and Aseneth', OT Pseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth), II, p. 206, n. m; and see further G. Bertram, 'öeoaeßfjc, Oeoaeßeux', TDNT, III, pp. 123-28, esp. pp. 124-26.

102

From Death to Life from their table bread of strangling and drinks from their libation a cup of deceit and is anointed with ointment of destruction (8.5).

This matter of idolatry represented such a fundamental a distinction between Gentile and Jew that the author takes pains to accentuate Aseneth's utter repudiation of the idols she had formerly worshiped. Not only is her smashing of the idols and disposal of the sacrifices and sacrificial vessels narrated in vivid detail (9.2; 10.12-13), including a note that she disposed of all of the sacrificial food in such a way that not even her dogs could eat it (10.13), but Aseneth goes on to reiterate this accomplishment and to express her contempt for the gods repeatedly in the remainder of the story (11.4-5; 12.12; 13.11). In her soliloquies, Aseneth links her reluctance to call upon God, as well as her alienation from Joseph and Judaism, directly to her former idolatry. And the Lord God of the powerful Joseph, the Most High, hates all those who worship idols, because he is a jealous and awesome God toward all who worship strange gods. For this reason he has come to hate me also, because I worshiped dead and dumb idols, and blessed them, and ate from their sacrifice, and my mouth is defiled from their table, and I do not have courage to call upon the Lord God of heaven, the Most High, the Mighty One of the powerful Joseph, because my mouth is defiled from the sacrifices of the idols (11.7-9). I am wretched and an orphan and desolate; my mouth is defiled from the sacrifices of the idols and from the blessings of the gods of the Egyptians (11.16).

Similarly, in her prayer Aseneth says, My mouth is defiled from the sacrifices of the idols and from the table of the gods of the Egyptians. I have sinned, Lord, before you I have sinned much in ignorance, and I have worshiped dead and dumb idols. And now I am not worthy to open my mouth to you, Lord(12.5a).

3. The Literary Context

103

Again, in the psalm in ch. 21 Aseneth confesses, I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. And I have worshiped strange gods who were innumerable, and I have eaten bread from their sacrifices. I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. Bread of strangling I have eaten, and a cup of deceit I have drunk from the table of death. I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. And I did not know the Lord God of heaven, nor did I trust in the Most High God of life (21.13-15; not in Philonenko's text).

Even Aseneth's announcement to Joseph that she has converted is expressed in terms of her having renounced idolatry: 'I am your maidservant Aseneth; and all the idols I have cast away from me and they have been destroyed' (19.5; not in Philonenko's text). It is clear that for the author of Joseph and Aseneth idolatry is what comprises the gulf separating Aseneth from Joseph, Gentile from Jew. The importance of this fact for our understanding of the nature, form and function of Aseneth's conversion can scarcely be overestimated. Jewish self-identity, the essence of Gentile existence as viewed from the Jewish standpoint, the predicament of Aseneth which the account of her conversion resolves, and the nature of conversion itself are all conceived in terms of idolatry and its opposite, the worship of the true God and dissociation from the defilement of idols. Only with great peril to the understanding of Joseph and Aseneth can this basic fact be ignored and hasty comparisons drawn with other texts or phenomena where the underlying concerns are quite different. The advantages of Jewish over non-Jewish existence are brought out clearly in chs. 14-17 in the narrative of the visit of the man from heaven. Even the physical description of this heavenly visitor betrays the Jewish bias of the narrator: he was 'in every way similar to Joseph' (14.9). The first recorded acts of the man from heaven are to command Aseneth to dress in a manner consonant with her new status (14.12) and to assure her that her name has been written in the book of the living in heaven (15.4). He further tells her that she will be 'renewed and refashioned and given new life' and that she will 'eat blessed bread of life and drink a blessed cup of immortality and be anointed with blessed

104

From Death to Life

ointment of incorruption' (15.5). This whole complex of expressions implies an unmistakable contrast with Aseneth's former existence. Already the table of idols in which Aseneth has participated has been declared to be the source of defilement and destruction. On the other hand, those whose names are written in the book of the living—and this group now includes Aseneth (15.4)—participate in life, immortality, incorruption. Whatever the origin of the meal terminology used to convey this contrast, the contrast itself between the end of the idolworshiper and that of the worshiper of God is plain: for the one it is wretchedness and defilement and destruction; for the other it is blessedness and renewal and immortality. Thus the same contrast seen earlier between the wretchedness of Aseneth's former (Gentile) existence and her newfound (Jewish) status is implicit here as well. The heavenly man next tells Aseneth that she is to be Joseph's bride (15.6)—a striking indication of her elevation in status since earlier as a 'strange woman' she could not even sit at table with Joseph or kiss him or have any association with him (7.1-6; 8.5-7). Aseneth is then informed that after her—indeed, in her—many other Gentiles will repent, be renewed, and find refuge in the God of the Hebrews (15.7-8). When the heavenly man has finished speaking, Aseneth herself graphically expresses the difference between Jewish and non-Jewish existence: in turning to the true God she has been rescued from the darkness and brought up from the foundations of the abyss (15.12). The incident involving the honeycomb in ch. 16 provides a further occasion for the author of Joseph and Aseneth, through the mouth of Aseneth's heavenly visitor, to articulate the blessings that accrue to the people of God. All those who penitently attach themselves to the true God eat from this comb and thereby eat the same immortal food as that eaten by the angels of God in paradise (16.12-13). This honeycomb is the spirit of life; everyone who eats from it will live forever; to perceive its true origin and nature is to know 'the ineffable mysteries of the Most High'; to eat it is to eat bread of life, drink a cup of immortality, and be anointed with ointment of incorruption (16.14-16; not in Philonenko's text). The possibility that ritual practice underlies the scene arises again, although the explicit equation of eating the honey with eating the bread, drinking the cup and being anointed with the ointment makes it unlikely that any particular ritual form is being promoted.5 In any case, both the 5. Similarly, Delling, 'Die Kunst des Gestaltens', p. 23, concludes from this equation that the eating, drinking and being anointed do not denote something

3. The Literary Context

105

eating of the honey and the triadic formula with which it is equated are part of a larger series of highly symbolic expressions used to describe the blessed status which Aseneth now enjoys as one of the people of God. The fifth passage in which bread-cup terminology appears is 19.5 (not in Philonenko's text): I am your maidservant Aseneth; and all the idols I have put away from myself and they have perished. And a man came to me from heaven today, and he gave me bread of life and I ate, and a cup of blessing and I drank...

These first words of Aseneth to Joseph upon his return to her on the eighth day presuppose that he is oblivious to all that has transpired in his absence. Indeed, he does not even recognize Aseneth because of her increased beauty. The obvious function of the introductory words placed on Aseneth's lips is therefore to identify her as a convert who now has the privileges and status of one who is Jewish. To this end Aseneth's idolatry is again treated as quite the essence of her heathen existence, and the whole of her conversion is epitomized in the one definitive act of repudiating idols. Once again we may defer the question whether the bread of life and cup of blessing6 refer to an initiatory meal; but it is important here to note that Aseneth has not eaten any such bread or drunk any cup anywhere in the preceding narrative. Instead she has eaten a piece of honeycomb and has been told that in so doing she has eaten bread of life, drunk a cup of immortality, and been anointed with ointment of incorruption (16.16; 19.5). At any rate, the language clearly serves to mark the difference between the Gentile and Jewish phases of Aseneth's life. In the psalm of Aseneth in ch. 21,7 bread-cup language is used one final time, and the pattern that has emerged in previous occurrences continues. In 21.14 Aseneth confesses to having eaten 'bread of strangling' and having drunk 'a cup of deceit from the table of death', so it is not surprising that in 21.21 she balances this with a reference to her having received 'bread of life' and 'a cup of wisdom'. Again the twofold form is used, and this time the cup is a 'cup of wisdom' instead of separate but mean the same thing as the eating of the honeycomb. 6. Again the twofold form is used. 7. Not in Philonenko's text; see the discussion of this textually corrupt section in Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', OT Pseudepigrapha (ed. Charles worth), II, p. 236, n. s; and the full apparatus in Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 76-90.

106

From Death to Life

the 'cup of immortality ' or 'cup of blessing' which we have seen earlier. In addition, this time Joseph is the one who is said to have given her the bread and cup, when in fact Joseph was absent when Aseneth received the honey which is equated with the bread of life, cup of immortality and ointment of incorruption. Joseph does kiss Aseneth upon their reunion, and from the three kisses Aseneth receives a spirit of life, a spirit of wisdom and a spirit of truth (19.11). The variety of actions to which the same or similar effects are ascribed tends once more to devalue the fixed ritual character of any one of them and to highlight what is common to them all—the expression of the blessings Aseneth now enjoys as a convert to Judaism that she did not formerly enjoy. The author's sense of the ever-present potential for conflict when Jews live in a Gentile environment is given its most emphatic narrative expression in chs. 22-29, where the attempt by Pharaoh's son to murder Joseph and abduct Aseneth is recounted. In the course of this narrative the formula 'it is not proper for the man who worships God to...', which was used earlier to prescribe proper Jewish behavior toward Gentiles (8.5, 7; 21.1), appears several more times for the same purpose (23.9, 12; 29.3). Other passages which do not follow the expanded formula nevertheless specify how 'men who worship God' must behave in various situations of conflict (23.10; 28.5, 7). The repeated use of these stereotyped expressions to define the proper ethic for the people of God in their dealings with Gentiles suggests both the importance of this concern in the shaping of the narrative and the existence of uneasy relations with Gentiles in the real social world of Joseph and Aseneth. Also in the final part of the story, the author's high estimation of Jews and Judaism is evidenced by the glorified portrayals of Jewish characters. Joseph himself again is described in exalted language: he is 'the mighty man of God' (18.1-2; 21.21), 'the firstborn son of God' (18.11; 21.4), a paragon of virtue (21.1; see also 4.7; 7.1; 8.1; 8.5-7; 8.8; 18.1; and the portrayal of Joseph in the Testament of Joseph as the ultimate paradigm of virtue). Jacob also receives a lofty description: he is like God (a god?) (22.3); though very old he is like a handsome young man; he has some of the qualities of an angel, others of a giant (22.7); he is a friend of God (23.10). Levi is portrayed as one especially gifted with prophetic insight into heavenly mysteries (22.13), ability to read people's minds (23.8), and perception of things happening far away (26.6; 28.17). He is also a meek and benevolent person, not in the least prone to

3. The Literary Context

107

hatred and subversion (23.10; 28.15-17; 29.5). Pharaoh himself recognizes these qualities and prostrates himself before Levi to bless him (29.6). Even young Benjamin is represented as far superior to his Gentile counterparts. Not only is he described as extremely handsome and as strong as a lion, but, in language obviously inspired by the biblical account of David and Goliath, he is also said to have killed Pharaoh's son and his fifty troops single-handedly with fifty-one stones (27.1-5). In addition to these glowing individual portraits, the Jewish people in general are rather favorably portrayed in these closing chapters vis-à-vis Gentile characters. Pharaoh's son acknowledges the Hebrews as 'mighty men above all men on the earth' (23.2; 24.3, 7). Even though in the context of the story this represents flattery employed by Pharaoh's son as he solicits the aid of Joseph's brothers for his plot, it also reflects the author's own sense of Jewish superiority and is even reinforced by a reference to a biblical episode illustrating the military superiority of Jacob's sons (23.2; Gen. 34). Later the author has Pharaoh's son tremble and fall on his face before Jacob's sons at the very sight of their swords—this time not in flattery but in genuine fear: And Pharaoh's son saw their swords drawn and he was greatly afraid and trembled over his whole body... And Pharaoh's son was full of fear and distress because he was afraid of Joseph's brothers (23.15-24.1).

Still later in the narrative, the ascendancy of Joseph's family is displayed when six of his brothers are able to kill two thousand of their opponents in battle (27.6). While giving unmistakable expression to a sense of Jewish supremacy, the author is careful to avoid leaving the impression that the Jews are vengeful people who take undue advantage of their superiority. They rather hold the ideal that 'it is not proper for us to repay evil for evil' (23.9; see also 28.5, 10, 14; 29.3), that 'it is not proper for a man who worships God to harm anyone in any way' (23.12), that 'men who worship God' respect every person (28.7). Although some of the sons of Jacob do become involved in the plot instigated by Pharaoh's son, the Jewish characters who are positively portrayed consistently reject any such subversive activity and denounce retaliation of any sort beyond what is necessary for defense. Indeed, Jewish characters on both sides of the conflict periodically articulate the principle of clemency toward offenders, which the author clearly wishes to convey as the Jewish ideal. The tension between Jews and Gentiles which permeates Joseph and Aseneth and which has been summarized briefly here is more than the

108

From Death to Life

literary backdrop for Aseneth's conversion to Judaism; it is programmatic for the way the narrative unfolds. The very predicament of Aseneth which her conversion story resolves is that she is a Gentile and a worshiper of idols, and the emphasis in the narrative of her conversion is therefore not upon ritual formalities but upon her renunciation of idols. The Jewish self-identity that emerges from the story is defined visa-vis the characteristic elements of heathenism, namely, idolatry and the defilement associated with it. The hostile action instigated by Pharaoh's son and narrated in chs. 22-29 pits Gentile against Jew. The ethical instruction which is sprinkled throughout the narrative has to do largely with Jewish relations with Gentiles, disallowing social interaction with Gentiles but urging respect and magnanimity toward them in situations of conflict. The pervasiveness of this tension, the expression of Jewish self-identity in terms of it, the narrative of Aseneth's conversion in the context of it, and the obvious concern to regulate Jewish conduct within it, make it difficult to resist the conclusion that the tension is not merely literary but echoes social reality in the community of Joseph and Aseneth. To the author's particular purposes within this social milieu we shall return in Chapter 8. Here it is sufficient to register the methodological point that the author's purpose should be seen as somehow bound up in the social tensions that permeate the story, the most obvious and acute of which is that between Jew and Gentile. Internal Jewish Dissension In addition to the tension between Jews and Gentiles, there is an obvious conflict among the Jewish characters in Joseph and Aseneth following the couple's marriage. This may be seen from the fact that the hostility these two encounter in chs. 22-29 comes not only from the son of Pharaoh but from some of the sons of Jacob as well. Even before Pharaoh's son proposes his plot against Joseph and Aseneth, we learn of a rift among the sons of Jacob over the way the couple is to be perceived.8 Simeon and Levi treat them cordially, 'but the sons of Zilpah 8. The fact that eight years have elapsed between the marriage of Joseph and Aseneth and this first hint of opposition from within the Israelite community (1.1; cf. 22.1-2) is of no consequence. This time frame is dictated, not by anything in the plot of Joseph and Aseneth itself, but by the inherited framework of biblical chronology. Given the chronological framework of the Genesis narrative, the seven years of plenty, which provided the occasion for Joseph's travels that first brought him together with

3. The Literary Context

109

and Bilhah, the maidservants of Leah and Rachel, did not accompany them because they were envious and hostile toward them' (22.11; see also 24.2). The variety of responses to the plot proposed by Pharaoh's son against Joseph and Aseneth illustrates the scope of the discord among the sons of Jacob over this matter. Simeon and Levi together refuse to have any part in such a plot and pledge their support for Joseph, but with divergent ideas about appropriate retaliation against the Gentile instigator. Simeon is inclined to take up the sword immediately against Pharaoh's son, while Levi counsels non-retaliation unless Pharaoh's son persists in his evil plan (23.6-17). Dan, Gad, Naphtali and Asher align themselves against Joseph and Aseneth, but there is at least some vacillation on the part of Naphtali and Asher. At one point these two even try to restrain Dan and Gad (25.5-6), and when those hostile to Joseph and Aseneth are mentioned by name, it is always 'Dan and Gad','the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah', and once 'Dan and Gad and their brothers', but never Naphtali and Asher by name. These latter two are consistently represented as more ambivalent and less aggressive in their opposition to Aseneth and Joseph. The remaining sons, Reuben, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun and Benjamin, all join Simeon and Levi in coming to the aid of Aseneth and Joseph, but again with varying notions of appropriate vengeance against the plotters (e.g. 29.1-5). By itself the hostility of some of the sons of Jacob toward Joseph and Aseneth in the last part of the story would not warrant the claim that real dissension existed within the author's Jewish community, much less the suggestion that such dissension centered upon the perception of the Gentile convert and the marriage of a convert and a born Jew. But the presence of bitter hostility in the Israelite community at the literary level combines with several recurrent motifs of a more subtle nature to suggest that problems of this very type did in fact exist in the author's community and that the work is designed in part to address them. The most elaborate such motif is the author's obvious concern to exalt Aseneth and establish the propriety of her marriage to Joseph. In spite of the distance at which Aseneth stands from the people of God as Aseneth, had to end before the couple could be represented as interacting with Joseph's family, since the latter did not come to Egypt until the seven-year period of famine. But in terms of the narrative flow within Joseph and Aseneth, the events follow one upon another; it is as if opposition arose immediately following the marriage.

110

From Death to Life

the story opens, she is also carefully portrayed in such a way that her worthiness to be Joseph's wife is affirmed. Thus the reader is informed already in 1.5 that Aseneth bore no likeness to Egyptian women but was 'in every way similar to the daughters of the Hebrews; and she was as tall as Sarah and as graceful as Rebecca and as beautiful as Rachel'. The author is even careful to portray Aseneth in terms which correspond in many specific ways to the portrayal of Joseph. For example, just as Joseph is depicted as an extremely handsome man who was the constant object of the desires and seductions of all the women of Egypt (7.3), so Aseneth is described as 'very tall and graceful and beautiful to behold more than all the virgins on the earth' (1.4); indeed, the fame of her beauty spread and there was great strife among those who competed for her hand (1.6). Yet, just as Joseph consistently rejected these annoying advances and remained a virgin (rcocpoévoç; 4.7; 8.1; see also 7.4-5), so Aseneth was 'a virgin (rcocpoévoç) hating every man' (7.8; see also 1.46; 2.1). Similarly, exalted attributes are ascribed to Joseph, as we have seen: he is 'the mighty man of God' (3.4; 4.7; 18.1-2; 21.21), 'the son of God' (6.3, 5; 18.11; 21.4); but even early in the story these exalted epithets find a counterpart in the description of Aseneth as one 'adorned as the bride of God' (4.1), and later, after she has converted to Judaism, Aseneth is called 'a daughter of the Most High' in the same context wherein Joseph is called 'the firstborn son of God' (21.4). The description of Joseph in 6.2-6 borders on an ascription of angelic status, but the same can be said of the descriptions of Aseneth in 18.9-11 and 20.6-7: she is likened to the sun just as Joseph is; heavenly beauty is ascribed to both; and both are said to radiate great light. When Joseph first arrives at the house of Pentephres, he is clad in an exquisite white tunic and a golden crown with precious stones and has a royal staff in his hand (5.5); later Aseneth too dresses in a radiant white garment and wears a golden crown with costly stones and has a scepter in her hand (14.12-15; 18.56). In the heat of the conflict among the sons of Jacob in the last part of the story, Joseph's brothers acknowledge that 'the Lord is guarding him [Joseph] like the apple of his eye' (25.5); soon thereafter Aseneth too is assured, 'the Lord is with you and he will guard you like the apple of his eye' (26.2). In the same context, the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah realize 'the Lord is fighting against us for Aseneth' (28.1), just as earlier they had warned each other, 'the angels of God will fight for him [Joseph] against you' (25.7). As R.C. Douglas has observed, 'Aseneth and Joseph

3. The Literary Context

111

are almost mirror images of each other'.9 In addition to the parallels between the portrayals of Aseneth and Joseph, there are significant parallels between the portrayals of Aseneth and Levi, who is highly esteemed in Joseph and Aseneth. Aseneth has access to 'the ineffable mysteries of the Most High' (16.14) just as Levi does (22.13); she ranks among 'those who devote themselves to the Most High God' (15.7; see also 16.14: 'all those who devote themselves to the Lord God') just as Levi is characterized as 'one who devoted himself to the Lord' (22.13); and she urges clemency toward enemies with the same magnanimous language used earlier by Levi for the same purpose (28.7, 10, 14; cf. 23.9-12; 29.3).10 That the author wishes the proselyte to be considered a full-fledged member of the Israelite community is also suggested by the affable reception which both Jacob and Joseph accord to the newly-converted Aseneth. Early in the story we are told of Jacob's attitude toward 'strange women': For Jacob used to say to his son Joseph and to all his sons, 'My children, be on strong guard against a strange woman so as to have no association with her, for association with her is destruction and corruption' (7.5).

However, later this same Jacob warmly receives the converted Aseneth as his daughter-in-law, blessing her, kissing her, and eating and drinking with her (22.8-9). Similarly, Joseph's own perception of Aseneth undergoes a radical volte-face. When she was a 'strange woman' he would have nothing to do with her and in fact articulated in no uncertain terms the most intransigent interdiction against intimacy between Jews and Gentiles (8.5-7), but he eagerly receives her as his wife following her conversion to Judaism (19.8-21.9). Far from violating the prohibition regarding 'strange women', Joseph's marriage to Aseneth and Jacob's full acceptance of her serve to show that Aseneth is no longer a 'strange woman'; by crossing over to the Jewish religion she has become Jewish; she is now one of the people of God. In every way the author seems intent upon portraying Aseneth as deserving of full acceptance into the Israelite community and as worthy to be the wife of the patriarch. The frequency and variety of means 9. 'Liminality and Conversion', p. 35. 10. Russell, OT Pseudepigmpha, p. 92, correctly notes that Aseneth 'shows qualities in her dealings with her would-be kidnappers that show her worthy to be Joseph's wife'.

112

From Death to Life

employed to verify this suggests the existence in the author's Jewish world of some less favorable opinions about the proselyte and especially about marriage to the proselyte. Again it seems that we are dealing with something which is not merely literary but indicative of real social tensions in the author's community which have had great impact on the narrative of Aseneth's conversion.11 Still other motifs in Joseph andAseneth corroborate this basic insight. Thus, for example, the detailed narrative of Aseneth's self-abasement, asceticism and repudiation of idolatry serve to confirm the sincerity and genuineness of her conversion. The emphasis that as a convert Aseneth was no longer a 'strange woman' but a legitimate member of the Israelite community and a legitimate mate for Joseph would have been undermined had the author left any room for doubt that her conversion was genuine; hence the extended narrative of Aseneth's destruction of her idols, bitter mourning in sackcloth and ashes, fasting, confession and prayer. No one tells Aseneth to do these things; they are rather represented as self-imposed acts of penitence; they are her personal response to what she has heard of the mercy of God (11.10-11). Moreover, when Aseneth does all this, she is fully aware of the ostracism from her family and friends that will result (11.4-6; 12.12-14; 13.1-2); she is under no illusion that worldly advantage will accrue to her; she has no ulterior motives. The stress on Aseneth's self-abasement, voluntary ascetic rigor, humiliation, and decisive abandonment of idolatry in full cognizance of the social consequences, together with the very biblical and Jewish flavor of the piety expressed in her soliloquy and prayer,12 leave little room for the reader to doubt that her repentance is sincere and her conversion genuine and complete. Indeed, within the narrative itself, Aseneth's affliction and acts of penitence are cited as signs of the genuineness of her conversion (e.g. 13.1-11; 15.2-3). In particular the visit of the man from heaven in chs. 14-17 serves to authenticate Aseneth's conversion by showing that her professed change corresponds to transcendent objective reality. In Chapter 4 evidence will be presented that Aseneth's conversion is already a fait accompli when the man from heaven arrives. His visit is neither the cause nor the 11. Anderson, Ancient Fiction, p. 81, correctly states that 'the point of the Hellenistic Jewish romance of Joseph and Asenath is to glorify the conversion of the pagan Egyptian noblewoman Asenath to the worship of Yahweh', but he does not discuss the social context or rhetorical function of this emphasis. 12. See the section entitled Tor Further Investigation' in Chapter 5 below.

3. The Literary Context

113

occasion of her conversion. Rather, as D. Sänger has perceived, the literary function of these chapters narrating the angel's visit is to provide heavenly confirmation of a conversion that has already taken place and to articulate the benefits of conversion to the true God and membership in the elect people of God.13 To these ends, the man from heaven says to Aseneth, among other things: that she should remove her garments of mourning and dress in a glorious garment consonant with her new status (14.12-13); that her humiliation and acts of repentance have been duly acknowledged (15.2-3); that her name has been written irrevocably in the heavenly book of the living (15.4);14 that henceforth she will be 'renewed and refashioned and given new life' (15.5); that she will participate in life, immortality and incorruption (15.5); that she has been given to Joseph for a bride and will be his wife forever (15.6, 9); that she will be a mother-city for all who will repent as she has (15.7-8; 16.16); that 'the ineffable mysteries of the Most High' have been revealed to her (16.14); and that in eating from the honeycomb she has eaten of the same food eaten by the angels of God and the chosen ones of God and has become a partaker of life, immortality and incorruption (16.14-16). This heavenly ratification of Aseneth's conversion expressed in such exalted language by God's chief angel—the veracity of whose words is itself confirmed by the miraculous appearance of the honeycomb as he has promised (17.1-2)—leaves no room for any perception of this convert as inferior or unworthy. That she qualified to receive the heavenly visitor and the many blessings announced by him is proof positive of the heavenly recognition of her conversion and her full status as one of the people of God. God's protection of Aseneth from her persecutors in the final chapters provides further proof of his regard for this proselyte and his disfavor toward any who would challenge her rightful place in the community of Israel. When Aseneth is the target of a murderous conspiracy at the hands of Jews, God intervenes more than once to deliver her, by such means as enabling the clairvoyant Levi to anticipate and foil the 13. 'Bekehrung und Exodus', pp. 29-30; and idem, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 156-57,182. 14. Because of the long-standing Jewish tradition regarding the inscribing of the names of the righteous in the book of life (e.g. see Exod. 32.32-33; Ps. 69.28; Dan. 12.1; Mai. 3.16-17; Jub. 30.22; 1 En. 47.3; 1QM 12.2; Lk. 10.20; Rev. 3.5; 13.8; 20.12, 15), Aseneth's enrollment in this book is especially expressive of her elevation to full standing as one of the people of God.

114

From Death to Life

plot (26.6) and causing the swords of the assailants to fall from their hands and disintegrate (27.11; 28.10). Joseph's words of assurance to Aseneth before the ambush thus prove true: 'the Lord is with you and he will guard you like the apple of his eye' (26.2). Even the sons of Jacob who had tried to kill Aseneth come to realize: 'the Lord is fighting against us for Aseneth' (28.1). Not only does the narrative clarify God's stance in this situation; it also incorporates more direct appeals for those 'men who worship God' to be indulgent and respectful in their treatment of their 'brothers.. .who worship God' (23.9-17; 25.5-7; 28.5-14). This ethical material is couched in the same stereotyped language used to define proper Jewish conduct in situations of conflict between Jews and Gentiles, and it is directed toward both the aggressors and those in a position to retaliate. Here again we have a strong indication that the tension within the Israelite community at the literary level reflects actual internal conflict in the author's Jewish community. The enigmatic episode involving the bees in 16.17-23 should also be mentioned at this point, though its interpretation is so uncertain that any conclusions drawn from it must be viewed as tentative. If, as seems likely, an allegorical meaning is intended in this scene, then the bees who die because they want to harm Aseneth probably represent her Israelite antagonists (Israelite because at least some continuity, if not absolute identity, is implied between the malicious bees here and those mentioned in 16.14), and the restoration of the dead bees to life represents the eventual restoration of those antagonists to good standing in the community of Israel. On such an interpretation the episode parallels the narrative of the plot against Aseneth by some of the sons of Jacob, who have the prospect of pardon in spite of their treachery (28.10-16). It should be emphasized, however, that this line of interpretation is uncertain15 and provides at best only corroborative evidence for the pattern of social conflict that has been deduced from other, less problematic passages. In any case, the presence of bees who wanted to sting Aseneth surely implies antagonism toward her from some quarter. The cumulative effect of the intertwined motifs discussed here is to suggest the existence in the author's Jewish community of some disharmony centering on the perception of the convert to Judaism and the Jew by birth who marries the convert. As in the case of the tension 15. See the equally inconclusive comments by Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in OT Pseudepigrapha (ed. Charlesworth), II, p. 230 n. h2.

3. The Literary Context

115

between Jews and Gentiles discussed earlier in this chapter, so also in the case of the internal Jewish discord treated here, we are dealing with social issues which had a decisive role in shaping the narrative of Aseneth's conversion and which therefore must be taken seriously into account in any credible analysis of the nature and function of conversion in Joseph andAseneth. Familial Ostracism of the Convert A third area of social tension evident in Joseph and Aseneth is that between the new convert to Judaism and the convert's former friends and family. Upon destroying her idols and turning to the God of Israel, Aseneth finds herself 'an orphan and desolate and abandoned and hated' (11.3). Even her parents have disowned her: 'and therefore my father and my mother and my whole family have come to hate me, and they have said, "Aseneth is not our daughter because she has destroyed our gods'" (11.5; see further 11.12-14; 12.5-12). Ostracized by family and friends, cut off from all familial and social support, Aseneth has reason to expect severe persecutions and can seek refuge only in God: Rescue me before I am captured by those who persecute me (12.7). For behold, the wild old lion persecutes me because he is the father of the gods of the Egyptians, and his children are the gods of the idol maniacs. And I have come to hate them because they are the children of the lion, and I have cast all of them away from me and destroyed them. And their father the lion viciously persecutes me (12.9-10). Rescue me, Lord, before all these things come upon me. Rescue me, Lord, the desolate and forsaken. For my father and my mother have renounced me and have said, 'Aseneth is not our daughter', for I have destroyed and crushed their gods, and I have come to hate them. And now I am an orphan and desolate, and I have no other hope except in you, Lord, nor any other refuge except your mercy, Lord. For you are the father of the orphans, and a protector of the persecuted,

116

From Death to Life and a helper of the afflicted. Have mercy upon me, Lord, the abandoned virgin and orphan, for you, Lord, are a kind and good and gentle father (12.12-14).

Even though this motif of familial and social ostracism runs throughout Aseneth's soliloquy and prayer, there is nothing corresponding to it in the story line itself, where Aseneth has only the most cordial relations with her parents. Whether this motif reflects a significant social conflict in the author's community is therefore difficult to judge. The motif is a traditional one, attested most clearly in Philo,16and it no doubt reflects the true plight of many Jewish proselytes in the Hellenistic world. But in Joseph and Aseneth this motif does not impact the plot in the way we might expect at those points where Aseneth and her parents actually interact, and it is doubtful that we should see in it a strong social current underlying and influencing the composition of Joseph and Aseneth in a major way. Why, then, does this motif figure so prominently in Aseneth's soliloquies and prayer, aside from the fact that it is traditional? It may be suggested that the literary function of this motif in Aseneth's soliloquies and prayer is to buttress the aforementioned case for the convert's sincerity and worthiness. That she was fully aware of the familial and social ostracism and persecution which often accompanies conversion to Judaism provides another link in the chain of arguments that she was sincere in embracing the God of Israel; she had no ulterior motives, no illusion that she stood to gain worldly advantage. Rather, she crossed over to Judaism in full awareness of the serious problems that would ensue. Thus it appears that the theme of the convert's severance from parents, kin and friends is not a programmatic social undercurrent in Joseph and Aseneth on the order of the other two areas of tension treated in the first two sections of this chapter. It seems rather to be subsidiary to the concern about the tension within the Jewish community in that it serves to enhance the perception of the convert among Jews who held divergent opinions about the convert's relative status. We have seen that the account of Aseneth's conversion is permeated by social and religious conflict which is not merely literary but which reflects to a significant degree the real social matrix out of which Joseph and Aseneth arose. The methodological consequences of this insight 16. See the references and discussion in Chapter 5 below.

3. The Literary Context

111

have been articulated intermittently throughout this chapter but may be reiterated briefly here. Since it is the sociological dimension of conversion to Judaism and generally of Jewish life in a Gentile world which is predominant and determinative in the shaping of the narrative, the formal features of conversion are secondary and allusive, and it seems unlikely that the document was written to promote some ritual of conversion. This does not exclude the possibility that such a ritual might be deduced from the narrative, but it does mean that any formal features of conversion in Joseph and Aseneth have to be extrapolated from a document whose determinative concerns lie elsewhere, and this requires greater caution and more careful attention to the literary context of Aseneth's conversion than has typified previous studies.

Chapter 4 FORMAL AND CONCEPTUAL FEATURES OF ASENETH'S CONVERSION Analysis of conversion as represented in Joseph andAseneth must operate under the methodological constraints imposed by our findings in Chapter 3. Since it is the social dimensions of conversion to Judaism that seem to have been central and determinative in shaping the narrative, information about the ritual formalities and theological understanding of conversion is allusive rather than direct. Extreme caution is therefore necessary in trying to extract a formal paradigm of conversion from the literary fabric of the work. Nevertheless, as a prerequisite to the comparative phase of this study, some sort of systematic description of conversion as it appears in Joseph andAseneth is necessary, and it is to this task that we now turn. In this chapter I shall be concerned to differentiate between those aspects of Aseneth's conversion which are constitutive, those attendant features which are not constitutive but nevertheless instructive with regard to Jewish life and thought in the world in which Joseph and Aseneth was written, and those elements which serve merely to accentuate points within the literary context and only dimly reflect anything about conversion or the milieu in which it took place. Every effort will be made to interpret the soteriological terms and conceptions within their literary context in Joseph and Aseneth and to avoid premature comparisons or contrasts with other paradigms of conversion and initiation in the Hellenistic world. Such attention to the literary context, to the function and interrelationship of various elements in it, and to the priority of descriptive over comparative analysis, should produce a firmer foundation than has hitherto been available for the comparative study of Aseneth's conversion.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

119

Elements of a Ritual Form! It is necessary first to ask whether formal elements of a fixed ritual of initiation are discernible in Joseph and Aseneth. Ten aspects of Aseneth's experience require consideration as possible elements of such a ritual form. Intercessory Prayer The prayer which Joseph utters on behalf of Aseneth in 8.9 follows immediately upon the crucial passage in which the contrast between Jews and Gentiles is drawn most vividly and the conflict to be resolved by Aseneth's conversion is introduced (8.5-7).1 The prayer itself further heightens the contrast between vain pagan existence and the blessed existence of God's elect people, generating the expectation that Aseneth will become a participant in the latter. The question whether Joseph's prayer also reflects a tradition in which some sort of intercessory prayer figured into the procedure for admitting converts hinges on the larger question of Joseph's role in Aseneth's conversion and especially those aspects of conversion mentioned in the prayer itself.2 In this connection it is significant that Joseph departs immediately after his prayer on Aseneth's behalf (9.3-10.1) and returns only after Aseneth's conversion is already complete. Indeed, when Joseph re-enters the picture in ch. 19, the conversion of Aseneth is announced to him as a fait accompli (19.5). Joseph clearly fills no sacerdotal or mystagogical role in Joseph and Aseneth3 but is absent when the decisive events occur. Even if one sees in the various images employed in the prayer elements of a formal ritual of initiation, Joseph plays no part in their accomplishment. Moreover, as I shall indicate in the ensuing discussion, these images have more to do with life as a Jew than with the process by which one converts to Judaism. Thus from the prayer of Joseph in 8.9 we learn nothing of the ritual 1. See the discussion of this in Chapter 3 above. 2. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 164, 185, notes that the significance of Joseph's prayer is especially bound up with the meaning and function of the 'meal formula' mentioned in it. See the section entitled 'Bread, Cup, Ointment and Honey' below in this chapter. 3. So also Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 165: 'Von einer soteriologischen Funktion Josephs ist in Jos As nichts zu spüren'. See further the section below on the significance of Joseph's kissing Aseneth in 19.10-11.

120

From Death to Life

formalities of conversion as conceived in Joseph andAseneth4 If some sort of intercessory prayer did figure into the process, it is impossible from this passage to infer by whom it was offered and how it functioned in relation to the larger process. Rejection of Idolatry Of prime importance in Aseneth's conversion is her repudiation of idols. As emphasized in Chapter 3, the most fundamental ground of distinction between Jew and Gentile in Joseph and Aseneth is that the one is a worshiper of God and the other a worshiper of idols. The Judaism represented in the text is strictly monotheistic, intransigent in the matter of intermarriage or table fellowship with idolaters or even of kissing one whose mouth is defiled from worshiping idols and eating their sacrifices.5 In her soliloquies and prayer, Aseneth herself links her reluctance to call upon God, as well as her alienation from Joseph and Judaism, directly to her idolatry.6 Accordingly, the repudiation of idols is Aseneth's first and most fundamental act in converting to Judaism and must be ranked among the constitutive elements of conversion as conceived in Joseph andAseneth. It is precisely this break with the worship of idols that is meant by the word jieTocvoeco in 9.2: 'And she wept with great and bitter weeping and turned away from her gods (jieievóei ano TCOV Oecov OCÙTTJÇ) which she had been worshiping, and spurned all the idols, and awaited the coming of evening'. Repentance here is the act of turning away from (netccvoéco arcó) idol worship which is requisite to acceptance by the true God.7 This obvious sense of juetavoioc in the pivotal report in 9.2, the detailed narrative of Aseneth's smashing of her idols and disposal of the sacrificial food and vessels which follows (10.12-23), the reiteration of this accomplishment and Aseneth's repeated expressions of contempt for the gods later in the story (e.g. 11.4-5; 12.12; 13.11), the 4. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 185, concludes similarly: 'von einer rituellen Bedeutung des Fürbittengebets Josephs kann man nicht sprechen'. 5. See esp. 8.5-7 and the discussion in Chapter 3 above. 6. See the references and discussion in Chapter 3 above. 7. The verb jLieiavoeco is not used elsewhere in Joseph and Aseneth except in 15.7, where Aseneth is declared to be the 'City of Refuge' for 'all who repent'. In the same passage, hypostatized neiavoia appears as an angel guarding those who repent, and in 16.14 jieiavoia is used in the expression 'all those who devote themselves to the Lord God in repentance'.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

121

reference to this act as Aseneth's way of announcing to Joseph that she has converted (19.5), and the use of the term Oeoaeßrjc, 'worshiper of God',8 as the standard Jewish self-designation in antithesis to various expressions for 'idol worshiper', all confirm the placement of the renunciation of idols at the constitutive center of conversion to Judaism as conceived in Joseph andAseneth. Of a particular form to be followed in rejecting idolatry we learn nothing from the story except that the act is decisive and complete. Indeed, so pivotal and critical in conversion is the rejection of idols that JJ. Collins is justified in raising the question whether there were any specific ritual requirements.9 To resolve this question is one of the principal burdens of this chapter. Asceticism and Prayer Between the repentance reported in 9.2 and the visit of the man from heaven in chs. 14-17 stands a detailed account not only of Aseneth's destruction of her idols but also of a seven-day period of fasting and mourning in sackcloth and ashes, followed by a lengthy prayer in which Aseneth confesses her sin of idolatry and appeals to God for refuge. The literary function of these acts to establish the genuineness of Aseneth's conversion has been treated in Chapter 3 above. The question must now be raised whether Aseneth's ascetic rigor and prayer also echo fixed procedures for conversion to Judaism in the time and place in which Joseph and Aseneth was written. Two observations weigh heavily against such an inference. First, it is apparent that Aseneth acts autonomously throughout the chapters in which her repentance and prayer are related. No one, not even Joseph in his interaction with her or his prayer on her behalf, suggests any course of action for her. There is no hint that in any of her acts of repentance she is following prescribed procedure. Rather, the text is explicit that Aseneth is alone and that her actions are autonomous; they are her personal response to what she has heard of the mercy of God (11.10-14). This does not, of course, exclude the possibility that her actions coincide with prescribed initiatory procedure, and Jewish readers 8. On the technical force of this term see Chapter 3 above. 9. Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 213: The question then arises whether conversion to Judaism was simply conceived as the rejection of idolatry or whether it still involved some ritual elements'. Elsewhere Collins writes, 'In fact, Aseneth's conversion is not marked by any rituals' ('Symbol of Otherness', p. 176).

122

From Death to Life

would have been able readily to detect such correspondence without explicit reminders from the narrator. Yet, it seems unlikely that the author would have allowed Aseneth's ascetic acts to stand as autonomous had prescribed formalities been involved. The author's concern to win full acceptance for the convert into an Israelite community where, as we have seen, some less accommodating opinions existed, suggests that there would have been reason to emphasize Aseneth's compliance with any formal requirements in effect. The fact that the author instead represents her as acting autonomously and cites her acts of selfabasement as confirmation of her sincerity and worthiness—rather than her conformity to prescribed ritual—renders it unlikely that any fixed initiatory ritual can be extrapolated from her actions. Secondly, the language in Aseneth's soliloquies and prayer does not support the characterization of these events as initiatory. In no sense do her words appear anticipatory of, preparatory for or instrumental in conversion; they rather presuppose that the decisive moment has passed. Thus when Aseneth ponders what she will do and to whom she will speak (11.3: TI 7coiT|aco...ii TÍVI JuxXriaco...;) now that she has renounced the family gods, there is no element of contingency, no contemplation of a future dilemma that is predicated upon an as yet unreal condition or a process yet to unfold. The condition already exists, as the verb tenses in 11.4-5 indicate: For all have come to hate (neuiafiKaai, pf.) me, and in addition to these my father and my mother, because I, too, have come to hate (usuíoriica, pf.) their gods, and I destroyed (arccoXeaa, aor.) them, and I gave them up (ëôœica, aor.) to be trampled underfoot by men. And therefore my father and my mother and all my family have come to hate (u£|iioriK(xai, pf.) me, and they have said (eîrcov, aor.), 'Aseneth is not our daughter because she destroyed (àrcobXeaev, aor.) our gods'.

This combination of verbs in the aorist and perfect tenses points unmistakably to a situation of social ostracism into which Aseneth considers herself to have already entered because of her rejection of idols. The climactic event is not anticipated but assumed.10 Her conversion is a fait 10. Sänger, 'Bekehrung und Exodus', pp. 31-32, draws a similar conclusion, but on the shaky grounds that the deliberative questions in 11.3 are framed in the future

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

123

accompli, at least in terms of its impact on the social relationships which are uppermost in the author's mind. The same perspective is evident in Aseneth's prayer in chs. 12 and 13. For example, in 13.1-9 Aseneth appeals to God for mercy and refuge on the basis of what she has already done: For behold, I fled from all things and to you I fled for refuge, Lord... Behold, I left all the good things of the earth, and to you I fled for refuge, Lord... Behold, I took off my royal linen robe... Behold, I loosened my golden girdle and threw it away from me... Behold, Lord, my royal dinner and the grain I gave to the strange dogs. And behold, seven days and seven nights I was fasting... Behold, therefore, all the gods which I formerly worshiped in ignorance; now I have come to recognize that they were dumb and dead idols, and I have given them to be trampled under foot by men... And to you I fled for refuge, Lord, my God.

The formulation of these premises in the aorist11 and perfect tenses points once again to the decisive break with the past by which Aseneth has made a new beginning and by which she has already been thrust into that matrix of social tensions with which the author of Joseph and Aseneth is so vitally concerned. That this social situation is contingent upon some further course of action on Aseneth's part is suggested by nothing in the prayer. Rather, the conversion already embodied in the word jietevoei in 9.2 and concretized in the repudiation of everything associated with Aseneth's idolatrous existence marks the decisive turning point for her. In Aseneth's soliloquies (11.7-14, 18) and prayer (12.8, 13-15), as well as later in the story (see especially 15.7; 16.14), God is depicted as a loving father ready to receive in mercy the one rather than the conditional and therefore assume a real rather than a potential situation. The distinction between the aorist subjunctive and the future indicative in deliberative questions was not so rigidly maintained in Hellenistic Greek as to provide a conclusive determinant for the reality or contingency of what is being deliberated (see E. de W. Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1894], pp. 36, 76-78; and J.H. Moulton, F.W. Howard and N. Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek [4 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1929-76], III, p. 98), and two of the four verbs are in fact in the aorist subjunctive rather than the future indicative (arcéAoo), KaTCMpúyco). 11. Sänger, 'Bekehrung und Exodus', p. 31, observes that most of these verbs are effective (resultative, culminative) aorists, emphasizing the past action from the point of view of its existing results, while some are ingressive (inceptive) aorists, viewing the past action from the standpoint of its beginning and marking the decisive beginning of Aseneth's new life.

124

From Death to Life

who turns to him humbly. This criterion Aseneth has already met. The pivotal moment in Aseneth's conversion—at least insofar as it gives rise to the sociological tension which is the author's principal concern—has at this point in the narrative already transpired. The possibility remains that a period of fasting and prayer regularly accompanied conversion to Judaism in the circles from which Joseph and Aseneth came. Indeed, such is not at all unlikely in view of the widespread attestation for these practices at critical moments of human experience in both Jewish and non-Jewish sources, and in the comparative phase of this study we shall keep an eye open to possible analogies at this point. However, Joseph and Aseneth itself affords no clear evidence that Aseneth's fasting and prayer represent part of a fixed ritual of initiation. Here these acts rather represent unprompted external manifestation and confirmation of the repentance reported in 9.2. Enrollment in the Book of the Living The visit of the man from heaven in Joseph and Aseneth 14-17 clearly represents a new phase in the story of Aseneth's conversion, and it is on these chapters that most have focused their search for elements of an initiatory ritual for history-of-religions comparisons. But before such comparisons are made, it is necessary to examine this section on its own terms and to reiterate its function in the larger narrative context. First, it must be asked whether the continuation of the theme of conversion in chs. 14-17 vitiates my earlier suggestion that Aseneth's conversion is in some sense already complete as this section begins. Although at first glance one might detect such a tension, closer inspection reveals that a different aspect of conversion is being treated in these chapters from that treated earlier, and therefore that there is no conflict between the apparent finality of Aseneth's conversion in the earlier material and the continuation of the discussion in chs. 14-17. There are, in fact, some features of the narrative in chs. 14-17 that do not merely accommodate, but strongly confirm, the conclusion that the critical moment in Aseneth's conversion has already been reached before this point. Most telling in this regard are the angel's words to Aseneth upon his arrival in her chamber. The first substantive thing he says to her, other than the command to replace her garments of mourning with a new linen robe,12 is that her name has been written (eypáípyn, aor.) in the book of the living in heaven and will never be 12. On this see 'Change of Clothing' below in this chapter.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

125

erased (15.4).13 From this it is clear that the visit of the man from heaven is in no sense the cause or the occasion of Aseneth's conversion. Rather, his word of assurance that Aseneth's name has been written in the heavenly book functions to confirm what has already taken place before his arrival and to specify its soteriological consequence.14 As we saw in Chapter 3, and as D. Sänger has also perceived, the literary function of Joseph and Aseneth 14-17 is to provide heavenly confirmation of Aseneth's conversion and to highlight the blessings that now accrue to her by virtue of her conversion to the true God and her membership in the elect people of God.15 The man from heaven verifies that the change in Aseneth's life on the earthly level corresponds to transcendent objective reality. Chapters 14-17 thus do not serve to narrate Aseneth's conversion or its ritual specifications, but to provide heavenly confirmation of a conversion that has already taken place. Moreover, the reason given in 15.3 for Aseneth's enrollment in the book of the living is the same as the ground on which she has based her appeal, namely, the repentance borne out by her seven days of humiliation and her confession and prayer. Neither in that prayer nor here in the heavenly announcement of its answer is there any hint of any further conditions which Aseneth must meet. Change of Clothing The clothing in which Aseneth dresses at various points in the narrative raises the question whether symbolic changing of clothes was a customary part of the initiatory procedure known to the author of Joseph and Aseneth. At the beginning of her seven days of fasting and mourning, Aseneth removes her elaborate royal attire and dresses in a black tunic of mourning and a girdle of sackcloth. At the command of the man from heaven in ch. 14, she removes the black mourning garment and dresses in a previously untouched white linen robe and a double girdle. Still later, again at the command of the man from heaven, she dresses in radiant bridal attire and ornaments in preparation for Joseph's return. This last change of clothes is explicitly related to 13. Variant readings with the verb ypacpco in the perfect tense (see Burchard, Untersuchungen, p. 47) do not alter this point. In either case the name has already been written in the book at the time of the angel's visit. 14. Pace Talbert, Reading Corinthians, p. 68, where Aseneth is described as 'a virgin converted to Judaism through the agency of an archangel'. 15. 'Bekehrung und Exodus', pp. 29-30; and idem, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 156-57,182.

126

From Death to Life

Aseneth's marriage to Joseph rather than her conversion (15.10; 18.5-6; 20.6) and need not concern us here.16 More pertinent to our inquiry is the white linen robe with which Aseneth replaces the black garment of mourning. As noted in Chapter 3, this symbolic gesture marks Aseneth's elevation to a status equal to that of Joseph, who is described earlier as wearing an exquisite white tunic (5.5). It is one of several parallels between the portrayals of Joseph and Aseneth by which the author labors to establish Aseneth's worthiness to be Joseph's wife and to be accepted fully into the community of Israel. Whether this literary device is merely literary or has some basis in actual practice is impossible to say. The determinative influence of the social tensions in the shaping of the narrative cautions against our assuming too readily that a literary device related so closely to those social tensions reflects contemporaneous initiatory procedure. Moreover, the fact that Aseneth's change of clothing follows that most decisive aspect of her conversion, as a result of which her name has already been recorded in the heavenly book of the living, reduces the likelihood that it echoes an initiatory rite. On the other hand, in changing clothes Aseneth is not acting autonomously, as in her previous actions, but at the command of the chief of the angels. Furthermore, the black garment of mourning may represent Aseneth's sojourn in the realm of death,17 and the change of clothing may therefore be related to the death-to-life symbolism which, as we shall see, is a significant element in the characterization of Aseneth's conversion. These considerations raise at least the suspicion that some sort of symbolic change of clothes figured into the process by which converts were received into the Jewish community and alerts us to the possibility that corroborative evidence may be found in the comparative phase of this investigation. To say more at this point would be to go beyond the evidence. Washing of the Face and Hands In 14.12-15, Aseneth follows the angel's instruction not only to change her clothing but also to wash her face and hands. In his recent study of 16. Of course, the two are not unrelated if iepoç yauoc is to be seen here, but this remains an unproved and unhelpful hypothesis which imports too much into the interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth from external sources. See Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 162. 17. So Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, p. 261; and idem, 'Stories', p. 68.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

127

water-spirit symbolism in ancient Judaism, F. Manns cites this as evidence of a ritual of proselyte conversion in which purification in water leads to renewal by the Spirit.18 However, such an interpretation is suggested by nothing in the text and is possible only if one allows a composite picture of water-spirit symbolism compiled from other sources to be imposed upon Joseph and Aseneth. Aseneth's washing of her face and hands is directly related neither to the Spirit nor to the imagery of renewal employed in Joseph and Aseneth, nor is any purificatory significance attached to this washing. Aseneth rather washes because she is dirty from having lain in ashes and mud for a week. As M. Delcor has commented, 'on ne trouve pas mentionnées beaucoup d'ablutions en dehors de celles nécessaires aux simples soins de propreté'.19 The water in which Aseneth washes is described as 'living water' (iiÔcop Çœv),20 and certainly at the literary level this language, like that describing the new garment she puts on, symbolizes her new status, but this is insufficient warrant for the claim that the water echoes an actual ritual or mediates Ccor| any more than do other items in Joseph and Aseneth to which such exalted qualifiers are attached. The fact that later in the story Aseneth prepares to wash her face in pure water (UScop KocOocpov) but decides not to do so lest she wash off her great beauty (18.8-10) further undermines any effort to place a high evaluation on washing in water as ritually significant in Joseph and Aseneth. Change of Name In view of the widely attested ancient practice of changing names at the time of religious conversion,21 the assigning of the name 'City of Refuge' to Aseneth by the man from heaven (15.7) raises the possibility that the process of conversion known to the author typically involved a renaming of the convert.22 However, insufficient evidence exists within 18. Le symbole eau-esprit dans le judaïsme ancien, pp. 170-71 ; so also Nauck, Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefs, p. 171. 19. 'Un roman d'amour', p. 23; see also p. 21. On the history of handwashing in ancient Judaism for hygienic, cultic and ethical reasons, see R.P. Booth, Jesus and the Laws of Purity: Tradition History and Legal History in Mark 7 (JSOTSup, 13; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986), pp. 117-223. 20. According to Burchard's text; other witnesses read 'pure water' (U6cop KttGapov), as in 18.8-10. 21. G.H.R. Horsley, 'Name Change as an Indication of Conversion in Antiquity', Numen 34 (1987), pp. 1-17. 22. Without any discussion, Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 179,

128

From Death to Life

Joseph andAseneth either to verify or to rule out this possibility. Within the context of the story, Aseneth's change of name has more to do with her special prototypical and matriarchal role than with her position as an individual proselyte,23 but the possibility remains that the scene mirrors a conventional practice whereby initiates took new names. Here we can only note this possibility and hold open the prospect that comparative investigation may prove illuminating. Bread, Cup, Ointment, and Honey Next it should be asked whether that aspect of Joseph and Aseneth which has attracted the greatest attention—the phenomenon of the bread, cup and ointment, and the closely related episode of the honeycomb—reflects a ritual meal associated with conversion to Judaism. As the history of research in Chapter 1 indicates, the formulaic references to the bread, cup and anointing have most often been taken as allusions to some sort of ritual meal, and on this assumption several history-ofreligions comparisons have been drawn.24 A minority have questioned this assumption, suggesting that the meal language refers not to a ritual meal but to the ordinary Jewish meal or to the entire Jewish way of life.25 J.H. Charles worth's recent reference to 'the sacred meal and honeycomb that have utterly defied our attempts to explain them'26 underscores the complexity of the problem. The patterns which emerge in the six passages in Joseph andAseneth employing the language under discussion are clarified in the following table:27 lists 'Umbenennung des Konvertiten' as one of the elements in the cultic EinfUhrungshandlung which he reconstructs from Joseph andAseneth. 23. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, p. 261: 'Aseneth becomes a very special person. The angelophany has its typical commissioning function. Michael announces Aseneth's change of name. As in parallel biblical epiphanies the name change denotes a change from individual to collective and matriarchal or foundational status. Aseneth, who sought refuge, will be a city of refuge (13.12; 15.7). The first proselyte is the prototype of future proselytes.' 24. E.g. see the contributions by Kilpatrick, Kühn, Delcor, Philonenko, Holtz, Smith, Kee and Beckwith described in Chapter 1. 25. So especially Jeremias, Burchard and Schnackenburg; and more recently, with some modifications, Sänger, Collins, Lindars and Chesnutt. See the history of research in Chapter 1. 26. OT Pseudepigrapha and NT, p. 25. 27. This table is based on Burchard's text. In the short recension edited by

4. Formal and Conceptual Features 8.5

blessed bread of life

blessed cup of immortality

8.9

bread of life

cup of blessing

15.5

blessed bread of life

blessed cup of immortality

blessed ointment of incorruption

16.16

bread of life

cup of immortality

ointment of incorruption

19.5

bread of life

cup of blessing

21.21

bread of life

cup of wisdom

129

blessed ointment of incorruption

The phenomenon represented in this table is triadic in three of its six occurrences and dyadic in the other three occurrences. In the dyadic form it is always the anointing that is absent. The cup is described three times as a 'cup of immortality', twice as a 'cup of blessing', and once as a 'cup of wisdom'. The only elements common to all six passages are the expression 'bread of life' (apToç Çcofjç) and the word 'cup' (TKornpiov). The similarities in form and language allow us to speak of a somewhat stereotyped expression even if Sänger is right that the variations do not allow us to speak of a liturgically fixed formula.28 The crucial question, then, is whether the somewhat stereotypical meal language refers to a cultic ritual or is to be explained another way. Here the above-stated method of giving priority to descriptive (/synchronie) analysis over comparative (/diachronic) analysis is essential. As was emphasized above in Chapter 3, the function of the meal language in its literary context is crucial for its interpretation. Thus, in 8.5 the bread-cup-anointing language functions to express the fundamental dichotomy between Jew and Gentile which the author tí Joseph and Aseneth is concerned to maintain: the one blesses the living God, the other dead and dumb idols; the one eats blessed bread of life, the other bread of strangling from the table of idols; the one drinks a blessed cup of immortality, the other a cup of deceit from the libation of idols; the one is anointed with blessed ointment of incorruption, the other with the ointment of destruction. Similarly, in 8.9 the life and blessing associated with the bread and cup represent the antithesis to the darkness and Philonenko, the number of passages employing this language is reduced to three: (1) 8.5: blessed bread of life, blessed cup of immortality, blessed ointment of incorruption; (2) 8.11: bread of life, cup of blessing; and (3) 15.4: bread of life, cup of immortality, ointment of incorruption. 28. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 170.

130

From Death to Life

death which is the lot of those outside the pale of God's elect. In Aseneth's psalm in ch. 21, the contrast again becomes explicit when Aseneth balances her admission to having eaten bread of strangling and a cup of deceit from the table of death (21.13-14) with the claim that she subsequently gained access to bread of life and a cup of wisdom (21.21). The recognition of this antithetical usage of meal terminology to epitomize a mode of existence diametrically opposite to the life of idolatry does not resolve with finality the question whether a Jewish cultic ritual underlies this means of expression, but it does suggest that the preoccupation with ritual form has pushed to the forefront what is at best allusive and has obscured what is the determining theme in the literary context, namely, the paradigmatic contrast between Jew and Gentile. Furthermore, even if the language employed to express this contrast was inspired by some Jewish ritual, it can hardly have been an initiatory ritual, since it is Joseph, and not Aseneth, who is characterized in 8.5 as one who eats bread of life, drinks a cup of immortality, and is anointed with ointment of incorruption. Here the language of eating, drinking and being anointed clearly refers to the continuing experience of those who worship God rather than to an initiatory act. As J.J. Collins has recognized, Since the eating, etc., is predicated of Joseph as a pious man it is evidently not, or at least not only, an initiation ritual. Rather, it is the habitual practice of the pious.29

That the language of eating and drinking refers to the ongoing conduct of life rather than merely to a single ritual is evident again in Aseneth's psalm in ch. 21. In 21.13-14 Aseneth condenses and expresses the whole of her former pagan way of life in terms of eating and drinking from the table of idols. It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that when she balances this in 21.21 with a reference to eating and drinking the bread of life and cup of wisdom, this latter eating and drinking also represents an entire way of life which stands over against heathen conduct—the life more judaico. In addition to the above considerations of literary context and function, from which it can be safely concluded that the bread-cup (-ointment) passages do not refer only, or even primarily, to an 29. Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 213; cf. Kilpatrick, Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy, p. 61: 'it is the occasion of initiation or admission to Judaism, and in this connection it is significant for Aseneth'.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

131

initiatory meal involving these elements, one further fact renders it unlikely that this language refers to a specific ritual at all. It is an extremely important but often overlooked fact that Aseneth never actually receives any bread, cup or ointment anywhere in the narrative. Instead she eats a piece of honeycomb and is then told by the man from heaven: 'Behold, you have eaten bread of life, drunk a cup of immortality, and been anointed with ointment of incorruption' (16.16; see also 19.5). This explicit equation of eating the honey with eating the bread, drinking the cup, and being anointed with the ointment makes it highly unlikely that allusion to a fixed ritual form is intended in either half of the equation.30 Rather, both express the privileged status to which Aseneth has been elevated by virtue of her conversion. As we have seen in Chapter 3, the author is concerned in chs. 14—17 to stress the blessings which accrue to Gentiles who turn to the God of Israel and thus to enhance the status of converts within the Jewish community. The scene in which Aseneth eats from the honeycomb is notoriously difficult, but it is clear at least that it advances the author's purpose in this larger literary context. The honey not only signifies manna31 but was a widely-known symbol of immortality in the ancient world.32 Here it is said to be the same food as that eaten by the angels of God in paradise (16.14). To eat it is therefore to participate in immortality as one of the people of God. This benefit is analogous to the life, immortality and incorruption associated regularly with the triadic formula and is yet another way of expressing the blessings that accrue to those who worship the God of Israel. By having Aseneth eat from the honeycomb, the author places this convert on a par with the Jew by birth, and indeed with the angels of God, who eat the same immortal food. Aseneth's eating of the honey and her full participation in the blessings of life and immortality symbolized thereby, all at the direct command of God's chief angel, function as proof that this convert is

30. Similarly, Delling, 'Die Kunst des Gestaltens', p. 23, concludes from this equation that the eating, drinking and being anointed do not denote something separate but mean the same thing as the eating of the honeycomb. 31. Exod. 16.31 and various postbiblical sources indicate that the manna tasted like honey. See Josephus Ant. 3.1.6; Codex Neofiti I; and Sib. Or., frag. 3.34-35, 46-49. 32. See A.H. Jones, Essenes: The Elect of Israel and the Priests of Artemis (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1985), pp. 65-83.

132

From Death to Life

worthy to be received fully into the community of Israel and to be married to the revered patriarch. The explanation that 'all the angels of God...and all the chosen ones of God and all the sons of the Most High' eat from the same honeycomb (16.14) suggests once again that a continual feeding of the people of God is in view and that any ritual practice underlying the scene is not exclusively initiatory in character. Moreover, the miraculous appearance and disappearance of the comb, the strange marking of the comb, and the mysterious appearance and behavior of millions of bees dressed in royal attire make it unlikely that any actual ritual practice is reflected here at all.33 If traces of an actual ritual meal are present in this enigmatic episode, they are so interwoven into the literary fabric of the narrative that their particular form and significance are no longer recoverable. Even though it is unlikely that the formulaic references to food, drink and ointment reflect a special ritual, and even if it is the representative function of this language as expressive of the entire life more judaico which stands out in Joseph and Aseneth, it is probably not without significance that the particular acts chosen as representative are eating, drinking and anointing. As Burchard and Philonenko have noted, this triad echoes the biblical formula 'grain, wine and oil',34and, like that formula, is a summary of the staples of life. It provides a representative expression for the Jewish way of life vis-à-vis Gentile existence. The proper acquisition, preparation and use of the staple commodities according to Jewish tradition, including the proper blessings said over them, stands over against the defiling food, drink and oil of the Gentile world. This repeated use of meal terminology to contrast Jewish and 33. These considerations make it extremely difficult to accept Sänger's suggestion that a cultic meal is envisioned in the triadic formula in 16.16 even though in its other occurrences the same language refers to the common Jewish meal as representative of the life more judaico (Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 16790). The notion that two distinct phenomena are to be seen in the several occurrences of language which is not only virtually identical in form, but also, as we have seen, consistent in function, is very strained, and requires stronger support than Sänger adduces. 34. Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 128-29; and Philonenko, Joseph etAseneth, p. 93. E.g. see Deut. 7.13; 12.17; 14.23; 18.4; 28.51; 2 Chron. 31.5; 32.8; Ezra 3.7; Neh. 5.11; Hos. 2.8, 22; Joel 2.19; Hag. 1.11; Ps. 104.14-15; see also Judt. 10.5; Jub. 13.26; 1QH 10.24; T. Jud. 9.8; Sib. Or. 3.243, 745; Josephus War 1.15.6; and Rev. 6.6.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

133

Gentile existence combines with the explicit concern for the maintenance of table fellowship in separation from Gentiles and from the pollution of idols (7.1; see also 8.5-7) to suggest that great significance was attached to meals and to table fellowship in the Jewish community behind Joseph andAseneth. J. Jeremias rightly emphasizes the solemnity attached even to the 'ordinary' daily Jewish meal where a blessing is pronounced.35 That Jews sometimes contrasted their blessed daily meals with pagan sacrifices is clear from Sib. Or. 4.24-30, and the prayer in Did. 9.3-4 seems to rest upon a Jewish prayer tradition in which everyday food was considered to be a heavenly gift conferring life and wisdom.36 It seems most likely that this high evaluation of the daily meal and the concern for the maintenance of purity in table fellowship is what gave rise to the representative use of meal language in Joseph andAseneth to express Jewish identity vis-à-vis Gentile existence. In such a setting it is not at all unlikely that the convert's first meal as a Jew assumed special importance,37 but Joseph and Aseneth affords no reason to posit a

35. 'Last Supper', pp. 91-92. 36. On the traditio-historical study of the liturgical material in Did. 9 and 10 and its Jewish antecedents, see J. W. Riggs, 'From Gracious Table to Sacramental Elements: The Tradition History of Didache 9 and 10', Second Century 4 (1984), pp. 83-101, and the works cited there. Of special interest in connection with our topic is the socalled UA)pov prayer found only in the Coptic version of 10.8. If this reading is included, and if the usual understanding of it is correct, then the Didache contains a blessing to be said over the ointment as well as blessings for the bread and cup. The parallel with the triad in Joseph and Aseneth would be striking, and Jewish roots would be at least arguable. However, the evidence is too problematic to sustain any such theory. While some have argued that the reading is original, others maintain that it is a late interpolation. Moreover, it has been argued that the Coptic word stinoufi does not mean 'ointment' but either denotes 'incense' or refers metaphorically to the 'fragrance' of the Spirit in Paradise. See the discussions in R.A. Kraft, Barnabas and Didache (Apostolic Fathers Series, 3; New York: Nelson, 1965), pp. 66, 165-69; A. Vööbus, Liturgical Traditions in the Didache (Stockholm: Estonian Theological Society in Exile, 1968), pp. 46-49; and S. Gero, 'The So-Called Ointment Prayer in the Coptic Version of the Didache: A Re-Evaluation', HTR 70 (1977), pp. 67-84. 37. In this connection Burchard, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', p. 658, correctly observes, 'Wenn sich Heiden und Juden wesentlich im Essen unterscheiden..., dann musste die erste jüdische Mahlzeit eines Konvertiten etwas Besonderes sein. Aber hier ist weitere Forschung nötig. Sie sollte nicht nur an Riten, sondern auch an Bräuche denken und als Rahmen nicht nur an die Synagoge mit versammelten Gemeinde.'

134

From Death to Life

special ritual meal (initiatory or otherwise) which was essentially different from other Jewish mealtimes. A possible objection to this line of interpretation lies in the inclusion of the oil of anointing in the triadic formula. Burchard correctly sees this as the 'Störenfried bei allen bisherigen Erklärungsversuchen'.38Oil was of course used in meals, but there is little if any evidence that an anointing with oil played a part in Jewish meals.39 However, as the biblical triad of grain, wine and oil itself attests, oil was a staple commodity in Jewish tradition and throughout the Near East. It served the basic human needs for light, heat, nourishment, medicine, condiments and perfume, and it figured prominently also in sacrifice and ritual, including the anointing of persons and vessels of special distinction. Moreover, as is welldocumented in Jewish sources, oil was regarded as especially susceptible to impurity, and pagan oil was often associated with idolatrous rites.40 Although liquids in general were regarded as sensitive conductors of contamination in both rabbinic and Qumranic tradition,41 oil was considered especially so. As Baumgarten observes, 'the avoidance of pagan oil was of concern even to those not likely to have been so scrupulous with regard to other sources of defilement'.42 In tannaitic halakah the defiling effect of the 'oil of Gentiles' was discussed along with that of the 'bread of Gentiles',43 and in the Babylonian Talmud, a formalized triad strikingly parallel to that in Joseph and Aseneth appears: 'the bread, wine and oil of heathens' are ranked among the famous 'eighteen 38. Untersuchungen, p. 28. 39. Jeremías, 'Last Supper', p. 91, cites only the anointing of the guest before the meal mentioned in Lk. 7.46; and Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 214, cites only a few rabbinic references to the use of oil for cleaning the hands after a meal. See b. Ber. 53b, 42a and 43b. 40. Josephus War 2.21.1; Ant. 12.3.1; Life 13. For a general survey of the uses and perception of oil in ancient Judaism, see S.B. Hoenig, 'Oil and Pagan Defilement', JQR 61 (1970-71), pp. 63-75. On the Essene avoidance of oil, see Josephus War 2.8.3; CD 12.15-17; and the discussion by J.M. Baumgarten, 'The Essene Avoidance of Oil and the Laws of Purity', RevQ 6 (1967), pp. 183-93; repr. with addendum in Studies in Qumran Law (SJLA, 24; Leiden: Brill, 1977), pp. 88-97. 41. E.g. see m. Par. 8.7; m. Maks. 1.1; 5.9; m. Toh. 2.6; m. Yad. 4.7; b. Sab. 14b; b. Ber. 52a; b. 'Abod. Zar. 36a; 37b; and 4QMisna. On this last reference see J.M Baumgarten, 'The Pharisaic-Sadducean Controversies about Purity and the Qumran Texts', JJS 31 (1980), pp. 163-64. 42. Studies in Qumran Law, p. 97. 43. See esp. m. 'Abod. Zar. 2.6.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

135

things' prohibited because of their association with idolatry.44 In view of these perceptions of oil in various strata of Jewish tradition, including even a prohibition of 'the bread, wine and oil of heathens' in talmudic tradition, and in view of the apparent concern of the author of Joseph andAseneth to maintain a distinctive Jewish identity vis-à-vis idolatrous paganism while being open to Gentile converts, it is not surprising to find oil ranked alongside food and drink in a triadic formula in which the uniquely Jewish use of these staple commodities is set over against their usage outside Judaism and employed as an expression for the entire life more judaico. To conclude, the possibility remains that the bread-cup-ointment passages in Joseph and Aseneth echo some otherwise unattested Jewish ritual meal. However, there is little in the document itself to suggest this, and in any case the nature and form of such a meal would be irrecoverable. On the other hand, if we cannot discern a special ritual meal in Joseph and Aseneth, neither should we conclude that the language is merely literary and symbolic. While the language of eating, drinking and being anointed expresses the whole Jewish way of life, it grows out of and represents something very concrete in the Jewish community—the effort to maintain a distinctively Jewish way of life in precisely those areas in which susceptibility to Gentile impurity was considered to be the greatest, namely, food, drink and oil contaminated by association with idolatry. So representative of Jewish identity in a Gentile environment is the peculiarly Jewish use of these three items that the entire life more judaico comes to be expressed in a triad or dyad so formulaic that it has been assumed—probably mistakenly and certainly too readily—to be a liturgical formula referring to a special ritual meal.

44. B. 'Abod. Zar. 36a-b; b. Sab. 17b; see also m. Sab. 1.4; and m. Ter. 6.1. The late date of the rabbinic triad is of course a problem, but there is earlier evidence that the use of these three items—individually and sometimes together—served as benchmarks by which to gauge one's Jewishness. Thus, when Judith went into the enemy camp, she avoided Gentile defilement by taking her own provisions of wine, oil, parched grain, figs and bread (Judt. 10.5). 1 IQTemple 47.5-7 specifies that everything which enters the holy city must be clean, namely, 'wine and oil and all food and drink'. According to Apoc. Abr. 9.7, Abraham was told to abstain from eating cooked food, drinking wine, and anointing himself with oil. See also Dan. 1.8; 10.3; Tob. 1.10-11; Cologne Mani Codex 87.16-25; Josephus Ant. 12.3.2; War 2.21.2; Life 13; T. Levi 8.4-5; ma Did. 13.5-6.

136

From Death to Life

Physical Transformation As a result of her encounter with the angelic visitor in chs. 14-17, Aseneth's appearance is noticeably altered. She is transformed to such an extent that she herself (18.10), her steward (18.11), her future husband (19.4) and her parents (20.6-7) all stand in amazement at her 'heavenly beauty'. From this account Kee deduces a Jewish pattern of initiation in which a 'revelatory experience' leads to a 'visual transformation' of the initiate: What is central is the epiphanic experience of the God of light, whose presence illumines the faithful seeker and transforms that individual, so that he (Joseph) or she (Aseneth), whether of Jewish or pagan origins, shares in the divine life.45

However, the legitimacy of extrapolating such a general practice from the singular case of Aseneth is highly questionable. Aseneth's conversion is by all estimates a special case. C. Burchard is quite correct in insisting: 'Freilich muss man von vorherein beachten, dass Aseneth nicht einfach für jedermann steht'.^Burchard continues: Zweitens wird Aseneth nicht einfach Jüdin, sondern eine 'Zufluchtsstadt' für alle, die sich wie sie bekehren (15,7; 16,16; 19,5.8), und die grundlegende Mittlerin des Lebensbrots (wenn man 16,19f. so verstehen darf). Sie erhält einen Rang, der sie Abraham (Jes 51,If.; AntBibl 23,4f.), Petrus (Mt 16,16-18) und den 'Säulen' Petrus, Jakobus, Johannes (Gal 2,9) vergleichbar macht, in bestimmter Hinsicht sogar Jesus. Alle folgenden Bekehrungen finden nicht nur in Analogie zu ihrer statt, sondern auch im Anschluss an sie, d.h. an die jüdische Gemeinde, deren Ahnfrau sie ist.47

G.W.E. Nickelsburg makes the same important methodological point: Aseneth's is no ordinary conversion... Aseneth, who sought refuge, will be a city of refuge (13.12; 15.7). The first proselyte is the prototype of future proselytes. She is both woman and city, proselyte and congregation of proselytes. The immortality she has gained is promised to all who follow her example and thereby become citizens of her city.48 In creating his myth the author portrays Joseph and Aseneth as largerthan-life figures with special characteristics that befit their archetypal status. The elaborate rituals may also function to underscore the special,

45. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 410. 46. 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', p. 656. 47. 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', p. 656. 48. Jewish Literature, p. 261.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

137

prototypical nature of Aseneth's conversion and need not imply that such rituals were employed in the author's community.49 I have stressed repeatedly that Aseneth's epiphanic experience does not constitute her conversion but functions to confirm a conversion that has already taken place. But the confirmation is not for Aseneth only; it is at the same time confirmation for all future converts, as well as for any who have doubts about the good standing of such converts. There is no suggestion that subsequent converts need such epiphanic confirmation or should expect an angelic revelation, a dramatic physical transformation, or the other supernatural phenomena experienced by Aseneth. The story of Aseneth itself supplies the needed revelation and confirmation for future converts. There is, to be sure, a premium on higher revelation in Joseph and Aseneth. Not only Aseneth, but also Levi and Joseph, receive revelations in some form (22.13; 23.8; 26.6; 28.15-17; 6.6; 19.9). But nothing in Joseph and Aseneth suggests that such a revelatory experience is an essential part of what E.P. Sanders calls 'the pattern of religion', that is, what it takes to get in and stay in.50 Others in the story besides those who receive special revelations are recognized to be otvôpeç Geoaeßeic, 'men who worship God' (23.9-12; 28.5-7; 29.3). Moreover, while Aseneth has the 'ineffable mysteries' revealed to her by the man from heaven (16.14), so do the readers of Aseneth's story. The revelation brought by the angel is not about the heavenly order in general but about how to obtain eternal life.51 The origin and nature of the honeycomb which conveys this life—which are the mysteries revealed to Aseneth—are plainly stated for the benefit of others who penitently turn to the Lord as well (16.14).52 Future converts need await no revelatory experience but already understand through Aseneth's story that to live faithfully as a Jew is to share the divine food and hence the immortality of angels in paradise. Thus it is extremely doubtful that we should extrapolate from the very special and prototypical case of Aseneth a pattern of Jewish conversion in which an epiphanic or revelatory experience results in a visible physical transformation. 49. Jewish Literature, p. 263. 50. Paul and Palestinian Judaism, p. 17. 51. Burchard, 'Present State of Research', pp. 41 -42. 52. This represents a sharp point of contrast with the revelatory experiences of initiates into the mystery religions, where the mysteries were guarded with the utmost stringency from all profanation. See Chapter 7 below.

138

From Death to Life

Three Kisses It remains to ask whether the threefold kiss by which, according to 19.10-11, Joseph imparts to Aseneth a spirit of life, a spirit of wisdom and a spirit of truth,53 represents a customary rite of initiation. The very brief reference to this incident in 19.10-11 justifies neither an affirmative nor an assured negative answer, and the question must be held open for possible clarification from comparative research. Nevertheless, two considerations from the text of Joseph and Aseneth itself create some doubt that a formal ritual lies behind this account. First, to ascribe ritual status to Joseph's kissing Aseneth is to assign to Joseph a priestly or mystagogical function not consonant with his role elsewhere in the text. As we have seen, following his prayer on Aseneth's behalf in 8.9, Joseph departs (9.3-10.1) and is absent throughout the eight-day period in which the narrator places Aseneth's conversion and its heavenly confirmation. Joseph does not re-enter the picture until the time of the incident under discussion, by which time the conversion is a fait accompli, as Aseneth herself reports to Joseph just prior to their embracing and kissing (19.5).54 Secondly, the kisses confer upon Aseneth nothing substantially different from what she already possesses.55 The honeycomb from which she has already eaten is called the 'spirit of life' and the 'comb of life' (16.14). By eating it Aseneth has become immortal (16.14). Similarly, the bread and cup from which she is said to have eaten and drunk already are the 'bread of life' and 'cup of immortality' ('cup of wisdom' according to 21.21). Aseneth's conversion has already been characterized as passage from error to truth (8.9). Already the 'ineffable mysteries of the Most High' have been revealed to her (16.14). Anyone inclined to see cultic reality in the various incidents in the narrative from which Aseneth is said to have attained these same blessings must 53. Not in Philonenko's text, which indicates only that the two embraced and greeted each other for a long time and received new life in their spirit (19.3). 54. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 181, avoids this objection by listing the ritual reflected in the threefold kiss not as a priestly function but as an act of the community members, presumably as a sign of their acceptance of the new convert. This accords nicely with the literary function of the passage in which Joseph and Aseneth are reunited (see on this Chapter 3 above), but external corroboration is needed; nothing in the text of Joseph and Aseneth itself points to an actual rite of this type. 55. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 165-66, 206-207, also Stresses this point.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

139

consider in what mutual relationship the supposed rituals stand. At the literary level it is not surprising that various means would be used to reiterate the principle that immortality is attained by adherence to the Jewish faith. On the other hand, in the context of liturgical reality it would be difficult to explain the interrelationships of the various rites conferring the same benefits.56 The variety of actions to which the same or similar effects are ascribed tends once again to devalue the fixed ritual character of any one of them and to highlight what is common to them all—the symbolic expression of the blessings which Aseneth has come to enjoy as a legitimate convert to Judaism that she did not formerly enjoy. Conceptual Features The Human Predicament The predicament of all those not belonging to the people of God, if a general conception of the human predicament can be deduced from the particular case of Aseneth, is simply that as worshipers of idols they are defiled and cut off from the living God and therefore exist in a state of darkness, death and destruction. We have seen in Chapter 3 that the early chapters of Joseph and Aseneth portray Aseneth as one whose life is utterly bound up in idolatry. We also observed there and again earlier in this chapter that the author takes pains to accentuate Aseneth's utter repudiation of idols as the decisive act of her conversion, not only by narrating her destruction of her idols and everything associated with idol worship, but also by reiterating this accomplishment and having Aseneth herself articulate her contempt for the gods repeatedly in the remainder of the story. In even more direct ways the author of Joseph and Aseneth attributes Aseneth's separation from God, from Joseph and from Judaism, directly to her idolatry. In the important words of Joseph in 8.5-7, to which we have had occasion to refer many times, the barrier separating Aseneth from Joseph and the people of God in matters of table fellowship, physical intimacy and marriage is defined solely in terms of idolatry and the defilement associated with it: 56. For this reason Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 166-67, suggests that interpreting the threefold kiss as a mystery ritual raises more problems than it solves. Nevertheless, Sänger does hypothesize that a kissing of the new convert by the community members was part of the Jewish cultic Einführungshandlung presupposed in Joseph and Aseneth.

140

From Death to Life It is not proper for a man who worships God, who blesses with his mouth the living God and eats blessed bread of life and drinks a blessed cup of immortality and is anointed with blessed ointment of incorruption, to kiss a strange woman, who blesses with her mouth dead and dumb idols and eats from their table bread of strangling and drinks from their libation a cup of deceit and is anointed with ointment of destruction. Rather, the man who worships God will kiss his mother and the sister born of his mother and the sister born of his clan and family and the wife who shares his bed, who all bless with their mouths the living God. Likewise, for a woman who worships God it is not proper to kiss a strange man, because this is an abomination before the Lord God.

In her soliloquies Aseneth herself attributes her alienation from God directly to her idolatry: And the Lord God of the powerful Joseph, the Most High, hates all those who worship idols, because he is a jealous and awesome God toward all who worship strange gods. For this reason he has come to hate me also, because I worshiped dead and dumb idols, and blessed them, and ate from their sacrifice, and my mouth is defiled from their table, and I do not have courage to call upon the Lord God of heaven the Most High, the Mighty One of the powerful Joseph, because my mouth is defiled from the sacrifices of the idols. I am wretched and an orphan and desolate, my mouth is defiled from the sacrifices of the idols and from the blessings of the gods of the Egyptians (11.7-9,16).

In the same vein are these words from Aseneth's prayer: My mouth is defiled from the sacrifices of the idols and from the table of the gods of the Egyptians. I have sinned, Lord, before you I have sinned much in ignorance, and I have worshiped dead and dumb idols. And now I am not worthy to open my mouth to you, Lord (12.5a).

Finally, in her psalm in ch. 21 Aseneth confesses, I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. And I have worshiped strange gods who were innumerable, and I have eaten bread from their sacrifices.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

141

I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. Bread of strangling I have eaten, and a cup of deceit I have drunk from the table of death. I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. And I did not know the Lord God of heaven, nor did I trust in the Most High God of life (21.13-15; not in Philonenko's text).

In these passages the human predicament is grounded directly and specifically, in the rejection of the true God by participation in the defiling worship of other gods. To be sure, Aseneth confesses her 'sins' (adaption; e.g. 11.11; 12.3) and 'lawless deeds' (¿évoluai; e.g. 11.17; 12.3), and in her psalm she repeats the refrain, 'I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much' (21.11-21);57 but when the character of her sin(s) is specified it almost invariably has to do with her involvement in and defilement from the cult of idols, as the excerpts quoted above illustrate. In confessing her sins Aseneth also mentions pride and arrogance (12.5; 21.12, 16, 19, 21), but it is the proud rejection of God, rather than pride per se, that is damning.58 Among the sins Aseneth confesses are also her blasphemous words against Joseph (13.13), but there is such a close connection in Joseph and Aseneth between the acknowledgment of God and membership in the people of God that even the blaspheming of Joseph is expressive of Aseneth's basic sin of non-acknowledgment of God. Blaspheming this son of God is tantamount to cutting oneself off from the people of God, the Jews, who alone acknowledge the true God. Thus, sin as conceived in Joseph and Aseneth is not so much individual acts as the single fault of worshiping idols rather than God, and the root of the human predicament lies precisely in this fundamental sin of idolatry and the defilement which is its necessary corollary (11.9,16). In addition to the vocabulary of sin and defilement, the term

57. See Burchard, * Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), O T Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 236, n. u, for a brief discussion of the textual problem concerning the repetition of this phrase. 58. As Burchard has noted in * Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, H, pp. 192-93, Aseneth's egotistical motivation in turning to God is not frowned upon. Neither her predicament nor her conversion is conceived in ethical terms.

142

From Death to Life

'ignorance' (ayvoicc) is used by Aseneth to describe her former existence apart from God. However, before comparative studies are allowed to invest this loaded term with meaning, it must be emphasized that oyvoia, like ájiapiía, has a rather specialized meaning in Joseph and Aseneth. It denotes ignorance of a particular kind, namely, the worship of the gods in ignorance of the true God, as the following occurrences make clear: I have sinned, Lord, before you I have sinned much in ignorance (èv ayvoiot) and have worshiped dead and dumb idols (12.5). Behold, now, all the gods whom I formerly worshiped in ignorance (àyvooûaa), I have now come to know (eyvcov) that they were dead and dumb idols... (13.11).

Closely related, though not using the yvcoaic-ywcbaKco word group, is 21.15: I have sinned, Lord, I have sinned; before you I have sinned much. And I did not know (O\>K floew) the Lord God of heaven, and I did not trust in the Most High God of life.

Thus it is once again the worship of idols and the non-acknowledgement of the true God that defines Aseneth's predicament prior to her conversion. The terminology of election is also used in Joseph and Aseneth (8.9; 16.14; 17.6), but it always denotes the chosen ones of God in general, never an individual. Aseneth's participation in the blessings in which 'the chosen ones of God' participate according to 16.14-16 proves that no exclusivistic sense is attached to this concept, and rules out any possibility of defining Aseneth's predicament in terms of predetermined categorical divisions wherein personal responsibility is eliminated or minimized. Birth determines one's initial placement among or outside 'those who worship God', but, as the whole story of Aseneth illustrates, that situation can be altered by individual choice.59 In summary, the root of the human predicament, as it can best be inferred from the particular case of Aseneth, lies not in philosophical 59. Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 191: 'election is not predestination; it certainly does not obliterate one's personal responsibility'.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

143

error, nor in inherited moral depravity, nor in violation of individual commandments, nor in primeval events recounted in a myth, nor in divine predestination to a condemned status, but precisely in the worship of idols instead of God. By worshiping other gods and failing to acknowledge the true God, one persists in a state of defilement which separates one both from God and from association with God's chosen ones who alone worship him. This godless existence is the antithesis of the blessed existence of light, truth, life and immortality associated with life as a Jew, and therefore such terms as darkness, error, death and destruction are used to describe it. The Nature of Salvation The soteriological concept most expressive of the blessings in which Aseneth participates by virtue of her conversion is áOocvccaíoc, immortality. The cup from which 'the worshiper of God' drinks is most often called a 'cup of immortality' (8.5; 15.5; 16.16). Closely related are the terms 'life' (Coori) and 'incorruption' (cccpOccpaicc), which are genitivally attached, respectively, to the bread and ointment which complete the triadic formula. All three of these terms denote immunity from the death, decay and destruction which, as we have seen, constitute the inevitable lot of those who worship idols rather than God. The honeycomb from which Aseneth eats in ch. 16 is also represented as food of immortality. Made from the 'roses of life that are in the paradise of God', it is imbued with the 'spirit of life'. As the 'comb of life', it is the food eaten not only by 'all those who devote themselves to the Lord God in repentance', but also by 'all the angels of God.. .and all the chosen ones of God and all the sons of the Most High'. The further explanation is given that 'everyone who eats of it will not die for ever and ever' (16.14). Once Aseneth has eaten some of this honeycomb, the angel tells her that she has eaten bread of life, drunk a cup of immortality, and been anointed with ointment of incorruption. He then assures her that she will flourish and grow strong with untiring powers and unending youth and beauty (16.16). This graphic representation of the supernatural life and vitality which Aseneth has attained and the indication that she and all the children of God share in the food of angels combine to suggest a soteriological understanding wherein the people of God lead a sort of angelic existence. This suggestion is confirmed in the following scenes leading up to and including Aseneth's reunion with Joseph, where the description of

144

From Death to Life

Aseneth's startling beauty approaches an ascription of angelic status (18.9-11; 20.6-7). These glowing descriptions provide one of the several parallels between the portrayals of Aseneth and Joseph by which Aseneth's parity with Joseph and worthiness to be his mate are established, since, as has been indicated earlier, the description of Joseph also borders at times on an ascription of angelic status (5.4-7; 6.2-6). In 22.7 Jacob is credited with many glorious qualities which are explicitly said to be 'as of an angel'. All of this suggests that in the perspective of the author of Joseph and Aseneth, the people of God, whether such by birth or conversion, enjoy an angelic sort of existence. If 'angelic existence' is too strong a term, it is clear at least that there is a close kinship between the angels in heaven and God's people on earth. The latter, whether as those born 'sons of the Most High' or as 'those (converts) who devote themselves to the Lord God in repentance', participate in the attribute par excellence of angels—immortality. Thus, upon the man from heaven's arrival in Aseneth's room, Aseneth is informed that her name has been indelibly inscribed in 'the book of the living in heaven'. Moreover, it is clear in Joseph and Aseneth that this sharing in the divine life is not merely, nor even primarily, an eschatological phenomenon, but has a decidedly 'realized' character. The angelic title 'son of God' has been used with regard to Joseph (6.3, 5; 18.11; 21.4), and now after her conversion Aseneth is called a 'daughter of the Most High' (21.4). The supernatural beauty and vitality of both Joseph and Aseneth, the similarity in appearance between Joseph and the angel (14.9), the explicit ascription of angelic qualities to Jacob (22.7), and the idea that those who worship God share the food (and hence the immortality) of angels in paradise (16.14), combine to suggest that the people of God on earth are already living a kind of angelic life.60 As H.C. Cavallin has written: The reception of a proselyte signifies her resurrection to new life, including a transformation and glorification which resembles the one expected for the righteous in the new world in the more futuristic eschatological texts.61

Other soteriological conceptions are less well developed and less indicative of the nature of salvation as conceived by the author of Joseph and Aseneth. That Aseneth longs for and finds 'refuge' (Katccceuycu, KaTacpuyri) in God is indicated frequently (11.3; 12.13; et passim), but 60. See Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 216. 61. Life after Death, p. 158; see also Talbert, Reading Corinthians, p. 102.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

145

this relates more to the social ostracism and persecution that results from Aseneth's conversion than to the basic human predicament that leads to her conversion. The same is true of several other terms used for God's deliverance of Aseneth. Among these are the following words and their cognates: 'protect' (ùrcepaamco; e.g. 11.13; 12.13), 'help' (ßotiGeo); e.g. 11.13; 12.13), 'rescue' (puojicci; e.g. 12.11-12; 27.10b; cf. 15.12 and 27.10a, where this word is used in a more theological sense), 'deliver' (è^ocipéco; e.g. 12.11), and 'guard' ((putaxaaco; e.g. 12.14). That the soteriological blessings envisioned in Joseph and Aseneth are not exclusively hic et nunc is indicated by the references to a place of rest (TOTIOÇ ócvarcaúaecoc, TÓTÜOC TTJÇ KaTOcrcaúaecoc) prepared by God (8.9; 15.7; 22.13)—clearly a heavenly and eschatological concept even if nothing is said about when and how the new existence will be brought about. Nevertheless, the emphasis in Joseph and Aseneth lies on the privileges that presently accompany divine childhood, and these are expressed in terms of an angelic sort of existence, the principal quality of which is immortality. The Terminology of Conversion Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth naturally is conceived as transition from the death, destruction and corruption which characterize the predicament of the godless, to the life, immortality and incorruption enjoyed by those who worship God. Accordingly, creation imagery is the language most often used to describe Aseneth's conversion. In his prayer on Aseneth's behalf in 8.9, Joseph first praises God as the creator 'who gave life to all things, and called them from darkness to light and from error to truth and from death to life'. That God's activity in conversion as well as in creation is envisioned here is suggested not only by the centrality of the former theme in the context but especially by the phrase 'from error to truth', which is hardly applicable to the physical creation. In any case, the address to God as the giver of life, the one who calls from darkness and death to light and life, provides the theological context for the appeal which immediately follows, where creation language in an augmented form is used with direct reference to Aseneth's conversion: Lord, bless this virgin, and renew (avocKociviaov) her by your spirit, and form her anew (ocvárctaxaov) by your hidden hand, and make her alive again (avaCcoojcoirioov) by your life (8.9).

146

From Death to Life

The fact that the other language in Joseph's prayer has to do with the consequences of conversion rather than its cause or means should make us reticent to see in the above quotation a reference to some action which is conceived as directly effecting some sort of re-creation. Final judgment on this question must be reserved until the additional occurrences of creation and new creation imagery in Joseph and Aseneth have been brought into view, but from 8.9 alone at least this much is clear: conversion is conceived, in analogy to creation, as passage from darkness to light, from nothingness to blessed existence. Similarly, in her confession and prayer Aseneth addresses God as the creator of life, the one who brings being out of non-being: Lord God of the ages, who created and gave life to all things, who gave the breath of life to all your creation, who brought the invisible things into the light, who made the things which exist and are seen out of those which are not seen and do not exist, who raised up the heaven and founded it on a firmament upon the back of the winds, who founded the earth upon the waters, who placed big stones upon the abyss of the water. And the stones will not be submerged but are like oak leaves on the top of the water, and they are living stones, and they hear your voice, Lord, and they keep your commandments which you commanded them, and your ordinances they do not transgress but do your will to the end. For you spoke, Lord, and they were brought to life, for your word, Lord, is life for all your creatures (12.1-2).

Given the prominence of conversion in Joseph and Aseneth, it is difficult once again to avoid the conclusion that not merely creation, but also conversion to Judaism, is being described in this passage. The last two lines of the above quotation, which provide the transition from the address of praise to the supplication which follows, confirm this suggestion. The author has Aseneth begin pouring out her supplication immediately after she rounds out the address of praise with a summarizing representation of God as the one who gives life to all his creatures. There is an obvious connection between the thought of God as one who brings things to life, who gives life to all his creatures, and the request which Aseneth lays before God. It is as the giver of life, the creator of

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

147

being out of non-being, that God is urged to resolve Aseneth's predicament. God's salvific activity is conceived as analogous to his creative activity.62 In the angel's announcement to Aseneth in 15.5, the imagery of creation is invoked again, and with a threefold expression similar to that used earlier in Joseph's prayer: 'Behold, from today you will be renewed and formed anew and made alive again'.63 Language such as this is naturally subject to overinterpretation and definition by analogy with other sources, but two contextual considerations establish some boundaries within which the proper interpretation must range. First, the presence in this context of other expressions which clearly make use of creation imagery to describe conversion suggests that we need not go beyond the analogy of creation to explain the origin and significance of the language under discussion. Only a few lines later Aseneth describes her conversion in terms of her having been rescued 'from the darkness' and brought up 'from the foundations of the abyss' (15.12).64 This is clearly creation language, as the terms in common with the earlier prayers praising God as creator demonstrate (8.9; 12.1-2), and conversion is thus represented as emergence from the darkness and depths of the abyss to a blessed existence. The undeniable presence of this vein of thought in the context of 15.5 suggests that the threefold concept of being renewed, formed anew, and made alive again, should be understood similarly. Confirming this is a second observation. In both of its occurrences this threefold expression falls in a context emphasizing the blessings of those 62. Sänger has argued at length that conversion is here conceived as an actualization of the Exodus: 'Cum grano salis darf man von einer Spiritualisierung des Exodusmotivs sprechen, bei der das historische Ereignis innersubjektiv gedeutet und actualisiert wurde' ('Bekehrung und Exodus', p. 28). But this understanding places too much weight on the presumed technical force of èÇayco. Exodus imagery, if present here at all, is greatly overshadowed by creation imagery as a way of bringing out the discontinuity between the two phases of Aseneth's existence. 63. The triadic form is not as well attested here as in 8.9 and may represent an assimilation of the wording of 8.9. See Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 226 n. i. This does not greatly affect the point made above since creation language is clearly being used, whether by means of one, two or three verbs. 64. The addition of the words 'into the light' to this quotation has some textual support and perhaps should be adopted. See Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, H, p. 227, n. a2.

148

From Death to Life

who worship God rather than the process by which this blessed status is brought about. Particularly in chs. 14-17, as we have seen, the emphasis is on the blessed and privileged status to which Aseneth has been elevated by virtue of her conversion, and this is true of the more immediate context of 15.7 as well as of the larger unit narrating the angel's visit. Nothing in Joseph and Aseneth suggests that Aseneth's conversion should be construed as a re-creation in a more theologically potent sense than that already indicated. There is nothing in the narrative of Aseneth's experience that warrants description as a re-creation, much less any action or rite to which such an effect could be ascribed. We cannot speak of an ethical re-creation. Even though Aseneth's arrogance at the beginning of the story contrasts with her meekness and magnanimity later, this change is not dwelt upon as though it represents the essence of her conversion or constitutes a re-creation. As C. Burchard has observed, 'ethics is an important concern of the author, although it is not preparatory to, instrumental in, or a consequence of salvation'.65 Certainly there is no hint of a psychological transformation by which Aseneth becomes disinclined to evil and predisposed to good. Neither do we find any suggestion of a fallen state of sinfulness out of which Aseneth is unable to rise except by divine rejuvenation. Aseneth confesses her sins and prays for forgiveness, but she is never told that her sins are forgiven; as we have seen, sin is construed in a rather specific way as idolatry and is overcome by the rejection of idols; there is no promotion from a state of sinfulness to a state of righteousness that would qualify to be called a re-creation. Neither is there any hint that the language relates to the re-enactment of some mythical resuscitation, nor any suggestion of a rebirth of the soul into some sort of incorporeal existence.66 Rather, in Joseph and Aseneth the language of renewal, refashioning and restoration to life simply denotes advancement from the nothingness of heathen existence to the glorious existence of the one who worships God, without any reference to an actual process of re-creation effecting this change. The change is one of status, not of essential nature. The 65. Burchard, * Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, Up. 193. 66. The promise to Aseneth in 27.10 that her VI/DXTI will live forever is insufficient to establish this latter view (pace Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, p. 215). Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, ÏÏ, p. 245 n. n, notes correctly that this terminology is compatible with other conceptions of afterlife.

4. Formal and Conceptual Features

149

emphasis is on the contrast between Aseneth's former status and her present status, and the contrast is so radical that it is best expressed with the language of re-creation. The same sense is evident in the remaining passages which employ creation imagery. In 20.7 (not in Philonenko's text) God's elevation of Aseneth to a glorious status approximating angelic existence is again expressed as God's giving of life to the dead. Finally, in her brief prayer in 27.10, Aseneth refers to her having been made alive again: Lord my God, who made me alive again (àvaÇqxmovnaaç) and rescued me from the idols and the corruption of death, who said to me, 'Your soul will live forever', rescue me from the hands of these wicked men.

The parallelism between the first two lines of this prayer suggests a meaning for being 'made alive again' that is consonant with the interpretation of this language which I have suggested already: it means advancement from the 'corruption of death' associated with idol worship to a participation in the divine life. To read more into the language of creation and construe it in terms of a ritual act or process which effects some sort of psychological or ontological transformation is to introduce ideas into Joseph and Aseneth for which there is no warrant in the text. Conclusion Our search has yielded little in Joseph and Aseneth that warrants description as part of a fixed ritual of initiation. Several features of the narrative which have been thought by some to represent elements of such a ritual have proved to be so inextricably interwoven into the literary fabric of Joseph and Aseneth as to be dubious witnesses to actual ritual practice. Other features of the story suggest themselves as possible elements of a ritual form but need corroboration from careful comparative study. In a text concerned to show the worthiness of a true convert to be accepted fully into the fellowship of God's people, the absence of clear references to formal rites observed by the convert is significant. It suggests that the process of admission presupposed by the author was less rigidly structured and more loosely conceived than many have assumed in their eagerness to locate parallels with the ritual formalities of other paradigms of conversion and initiation. The conceptual character of conversion in Joseph and Aseneth is

150

From Death to Life

more readily discernible than the ritual features, though this too must be extrapolated with great caution from its literary context. The human predicament as represented in Joseph andAseneth is a state of darkness, death and destruction associated with the worship of idols. The soteriological benefit of renouncing idolatry to worship the living God of Israel is conceived as blessed life and immortality and is described in terms which suggest that the people of God lead a kind of angelic existence. Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth is therefore conceived as transition from the death and destruction which characterize the predicament of the godless to the life and immortality enjoyed by those who worship the true God, and creation imagery is the descriptive language most often used. Appreciation of these conceptual features, regard for the literary context and function of those elements which may be thought to echo ritual form, and recognition that the sociological dimension rather than the formal complexion of conversion is uppermost in the author's mind, are all basic insights which must inform the comparative analysis to follow.

PARTIE

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION TO PART III Examined in this portion of the study are some of the paradigms of conversion and initiation in the Hellenistic era which are potentially significant for understanding Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth. The list of such models of conversion considered here is by no means exhaustive. Others merit attention but cannot be considered within the scope of the present study. For example, Christian conversion as represented in the New Testament writings and other early Christian sources is not treated here but could shed light on the account of Aseneth's conversion. In spite of the consensus that Joseph and Aseneth is a Jewish and not a Christian work—a consensus with which I have expressed strong agreement above—Christian conversion may nevertheless preserve formal and conceptual features of both Jewish and nonJewish models of conversion and initiation which bear on Aseneth's case. Other phenomena which warrant comparative analysis are mentioned under 'Desiderata' in Chapter 8. If the list of comparative studies undertaken here is not exhaustive, neither is it arbitrary. Included for consideration are those phenomena which have emerged from previous studies—by way of either positive claims of similarity or methodologically flawed assertions of dissimilarity—as having the greatest potential for illuminating Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth. Thus the following comparative analysis, if far from exhaustive, does include the most pressing priorities in the religionsgeschichtlich study of Aseneth's conversion and should also provide a methodological foundation for comparisons with other phenomena not treated herein.

Chapter 5

JEWISH PROSELYTISM Since Aseneth is portrayed as a Gentile who converts to the God of the Jews, it is appropriate to seek pertinent comparative material first in those ancient sources which deal with the embracing of Judaism by nonJews. This phenomenon, commonly represented under the generic rubric 'Jewish proselytism', is by no means monolithic, as we shall see. Yet the various sources on proselytism do share with Joseph and Aseneth the basic theme of Gentile conversion to Judaism, and for this reason they deserve pride of place in the comparative analysis of Aseneth's conversion.1 1. 'Proselytism' is used in this study to denote the process of becoming or the condition of being a Gentile convert to Judaism, and more generally to refer to the entire phenomenon of conversion to Judaism. This broad sense stands in contrast to the narrower usage of the term as synonymous with 'proselytizing', or the act of recruiting converts. The broader definition enables us to sidestep the difficult issue of whether there was an active proselytizing mission in early Judaism. For contrasting views on this, see Jeremias, Jesus' Promise to the Nations, pp. 11-19; and J. Munck, Paul and the Salvation of Mankind (trans. F. Clarke; London: SCM Press, 1959; repr., Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1977), pp. 264-71. Jeremias maintains that there was extensive, aggressive and successful Jewish missionary endeavor. Munck, on the other hand, contends that 'Judaism is not an evangelizing religion, even in New Testament times' (p. 264). The former view is assumed by many contemporary scholars. See, for example, L.H. Feldman, 'The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers', BARev 12 (1986), pp. 59-60; see also Feldman's forthcoming article, 'Jewish Proselytism', which he has kindly supplied to me in typescript. There are, however, significant dissenting voices. For example, M. Goodman, 'Proselytizing in Rabbinic Judaism', JJS 40 (1989), p. 181, writes, 'the rabbis often welcomed those who sought them out. But...a willingness to accept is quite different from a positive desire to acquire. I do not think that there is justification for the assumption, found quite widely in modern scholarship, that the existence of numerous converts in itself reveals a mission to win them.' S. McKnight, A Light among the Gentiles, pp. 116-17, likewise concludes, 'there is no evidence that could lead to the conclusion that Judaism was a

154

From Death to Life

As obvious a methodological priority as this seems to be, it has not been rigorously pursued. Indeed, of the various paradigms of conversion and initiation that merit examination in connection with Joseph and Aseneth, Jewish proselytism as known especially from Philo, Josephus, and the rabbinic literature, has received the least attention. Only V. Aptowitzer's article of 19242 represents an extensive investigation of the possible affinities, and that with such outdated methods and uncritical use of sources that it is of little value today. Instead the assumption has prevailed that Joseph and Aseneth is so divergent from the proselytism known from the classical sources that we may simply bypass these and look elsewhere for comparative material pertinent to Aseneth's case. This premise is usually tacit but is made explicit by H.C. Kee, who ignores the rabbinic materials in his study of the setting and aim of Joseph and Aseneth because 'the absence of reference to food laws, to circumcision, or to any specific precepts of the Law, make it unlikely that we are dealing here with traditional Jewish legal piety'.3 Kee comments further, 'the practices of circumcision and baptism are absent from the document, so that the standards of proselytism are not observed, or are not important'.4 Kee's reference to 'the standards of proselytism' smacks of the old assumption that there existed, in the centuries prior to the compilation of the Mishnah, a uniform, normative Judaism which provides a fixed standard of comparison. While this is not the place to enter into a detailed critique of this assumption, it must be insisted that it produces a false paradigm against which to examine the conversion reported in Joseph and Aseneth. The procedures for and conceptions surrounding proselytism cannot be considered immune to the rich diversity that we now know characterized virtually every phase of early Judaism. Hence, our approach must be to inquire into the degree of fixation and uniformity that characterized Jewish proselytism in the ancient period as well

"missionary religion" in the sense of aggressive attempts to convert Gentiles'. A mediating view is expressed by SJ.D. Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (LEG, 7; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987), p. 57: There is no evidence of an organized Jewish mission to the gentiles, but individuals seem to have engaged in this activity on their own'. 2. 'Aseneth', pp. 239-306. 3. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 399. 4. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 410.

5. Jewish Proselytism

155

as to assess the degree to which Aseneth's conversion is similar to or dissimilar from proselytism as we know it from other sources. Requirements for the Admission of Proselytes: Rabbinic Dicta The formal steps which evolved in rabbinic tradition as requirements for proselytes are enunciated in the following texts: 'And he shall be as one born in the land'. Even as the homeborn enters into the covenant in three ways, by circumcision, immersion and sacrifice, so, too, the proselyte enters into the covenant in three ways, by circumcision, immersion and sacrifice (Mek. R. Simeon 30).5 Rabbi says: 'Just as an Israelite enters the covenant in one of three ways only, namely, circumcision, immersion, and the propitiation of an offering, so proselytes fall under the same rule' (Sifre Num. 108.2). Just as Israel were initiated into the covenant by three precepts, so proselytes are initiated by circumcision, immersion, and a sacrifice (Gerim 2.5). As your forefathers entered into the Covenant only by circumcision, immersion and the sprinkling of the blood, so shall they enter the Covenant only by circumcision, immersion and the sprinkling of the blood (b. Ker. 9a, a baraita attributed to R. Judah). These texts specify three initiatory steps to be taken by proselytes: circumcision, immersion and the offering of a sacrifice in the Temple. The Silence of Joseph andAseneth concerning These Requirements A perusal of Joseph andAseneth soon reveals that Aseneth follows none of the above steps in her adoption of Judaism. As we have seen, this fact has led some to differentiate sharply between her conversion and the proselytism known from other sources, so that the latter are dismissed as irrelevant to the interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth except insofar as they demonstrate the deviation of the work from the supposed 'standards of proselytism'. But before such a rigid contrast is justified, we must ask how early and how widespread the three requirements were, and whether there are other possible reasons for their absence from Joseph andAseneth.6 5. As translated in W.G. Braude, Jewish Proselyting in the First Five Centuries of the Common Era: The Age of the Tannaim and Amoraim (Brown University Studies, 6; Providence, RI: Brown University, 1940), p. 74. 6. These three requirements are also discussed at length in the important recent

156

From Death to Life

Sacrifice The silence of Joseph and Aseneth concerning the third requirement occasions no surprise. Indeed, a reference to the Temple cult would be a surprising anachronism in a story set in the patriarchal era. Moreover, Tannaitic sources indicate that the requirement to present an offering was dropped soon after the destruction of the Temple, and the substitute requirement that a sum of money equivalent to the purchase price for the sacrifice be set aside was also discontinued eventually.7 It is doubtful whether the requirement to offer a sacrifice ever obtained in the diaspora anyway, and G.F. Moore even argued that the sacrifice was not actually a sine qua non for becoming a proselyte but only a condition precedent to exercising one of the rights of the proselyte, namely, participating in a sacrificial meal and eating consecrated food if one should go to Jerusalem.8 In any case, it is only the other two requirements—circumcision and immersion—that appear with any regularity in rabbinic halakah and haggadah regarding proselytes, so that the absence of the third obligation from Joseph and Aseneth is of no consequence for our understanding of conversion in that document. Immersion More problematic is the question whether immersion was an established ritual for the admission of proselytes in the period during which Joseph and Aseneth was written. Opinions on how early the practice of immersing proselytes originated have varied widely. Most have assumed a pre-Christian origin and have seen proselyte immersion as an influential antecedent of John's baptism and Christian baptism,9 but work by S. McKnight, A Light among the Gentiles. Although the manuscript of the present work was essentially complete before McKnight's monograph was published, the following pages cover much the same ground as McKnight's ch. 4: The Requirements for Proselytes' (pp. 78-89), and reach much the same conclusions. 7. See m. Ker. 2.1; t. Ker. 1.11; t. Sheq. 3.22; b. Ro$ Has. 31b; b. Ker. 8b-9a; Gerim 2.5; Sifre Zutta on Num. 15.15; and the discussion of the uncertain history of these developments in B.J. Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1939; repr., New York: KTAV, 1968), p. 57 n. 30. 8. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim (3 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927-30), I, p. 332; but cf. Bamberger, Proselytism, p. 45. Bamberger insists that a sacrifice was indeed essential, not merely incidental, to conversion. 9. This widely-held view has been defended most extensively by J. Jeremias:

5. Jewish Proselytism

157

others have insisted that the practice arose only shortly before 70 CE10 or even later.11 Still others have declined to speculate, admitting that 'we simply do not know why or how the rite of bathing as a means of conversion became established'.12 It is impossible here to review all the data and reach a firm conclusion, but a word must be said about the earliest texts bearing on this issue. The first such passage is m. Pes. 8.8,13 which reports a dispute between the Houses of Shammai and Hillel over whether a man who became a proselyte on the day before Passover could eat the paschal lamb the same evening. The House of Shammai allowed that upon being immersed (*?mtu) the proselyte could eat the paschal offering in the evening, while the House of Hillel insisted that the convert's uncleanness continued for seven days. Although many have cited this passage as proof that proselyte immersion was practiced during the period of the Second Temple,14 the evidence is not unambiguous. The passage does not necessarily take us back to the period when the paschal lamb was see his 'Der Ursprung der Johannestaufe', ZNW 28 (1929), pp. 312-20; 'Proselytentaufe und Neues Testament', TZ 5 (1949), pp. 418-28; Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries (trans. D. Cairns; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960), pp. 24-29; and The Origins of Infant Baptism (trans. D.M. Barton; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1968), pp. 27-28. See more recently L. Schiffman, Who was a Jew? Rabbinic and Halakhic Perspectives on the Jewish-Christian Schism (Hoboken, NJ: KTAV, 1985), pp. 25-30. 10. S. Zeitlin, The Halaka in the Gospels and its Relation to the Jewish Law at the Time of Jesus', HUCA 1 (1924) 357-73; and idem, 'A Note on Baptism for Proselytes', JBL 52 (1933), pp. 78-79. 11. T.M. Taylor, The Beginnings of Jewish Proselyte Baptism', NTS 2 ( 1956), pp. 193-98, suggests a late first- or early second-century CE date; so also J. Crehan, Early Christian Baptism and the Creed: A Study in Ante-Nicene Theology (London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1950), pp. 2-4. R. Bultmann cautiously writes, 'Certain testimony to the practice of proselyte baptism is not found before the end of the first century AD. It may have been older, but that cannot be proved' (Theology of the New Testament [2 vols.; trans. K. Grobel; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1955], I, p. 40). 12. L. Finkelstein, The Institution of Baptism for Proselytes', JBL 52 (1933), pp. 203-11. 13. See also the parallel passage in m. 'Ed. 5.2. 14. E.g. I. Abrahams, 'Pharisaic Baptism', Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1917; repr., New York: KTAV, 1967), first series, pp. 36-37; Moore, Judaism, III, pp. 109-10 n. 102; Jeremias, Infant Baptism, p. 28; and T.F. Torrance, 'Proselyte Baptism', ATO 1 (1954), p. 154.

158

From Death to Life

still being offered, but may merely represent scholastic exercise of a later period, as do many other halakic discussions which seem to presuppose the existence of the Temple but clearly derive from the post-destruction period. Moreover, it is unclear whether it is proselyte immersion as an initiatory rite that is alluded to in this passage, or simply the bath of purification required of any ceremonially unclean person before that person is eligible to eat consecrated food. tao and ¡fraa are ambiguous and can refer to either, but the context in this instance favors the latter since the question being addressed is not what one must do to become a proselyte, but how soon after conversion the proselyte is eligible to eat a Passover meal. Thus the passage in question affords no solid evidence for the practice of proselyte immersion prior to 70 CE. A baraita related to m. Pes. 8.8 is equally inconclusive. Both t. Pes. 7.14 and/ Pes. 8.8 cite the first generation Tanna R. Eleazar b. Jacob to sustain the Shammaite viewpoint on the eating of the paschal lamb by a new convert. According to the tradition attributed to R. Eleazar in these texts, some soldiers guarding the gates of Jerusalem who had been converted on the day before Passover and immersed (taiu) the same day took part in Passover that evening. Although this incident has been cited often to confirm the practice of immersing proselytes in the Second Temple period,15 the evidence is suspect on several counts. Once again the ambiguity of taco makes it questionable whether the initiatory rite of immersion is in view at all.16 Neither can the attribution to R. Eleazar be uncritically assumed to be reliable, and the idea that converts would have been found among those responsible for public order at Passover in the tumultuous years before 70 CE is historically problematic. These uncertainties combine to make it extremely precarious to base any conclusions regarding the antiquity of proselyte immersion on this problematic baraita. We arrive at surer footing when we come to the controversy between R. Eleazer b. Hyrcanus and R. Joshua b. Hananiah (second generation Tannaim) regarding the relative importance of circumcision and immersion in making proselytes. According to the version of this dispute preserved in b. Yeb. 46a, R. Eleazer held that circumcision without 15. E.g. Abrahams, 'Pharisaic Baptism', p. 37; and Jeremías, Infant Baptism, p. 28 and n. 1. 16. Pace Schiff man, Who was a Jew?, pp. 28-29. Schiffman maintains that the forms of ^no refer consistently to the conversion ceremony, and that forms of nt: would have been used to designate a purificatory washing.

5. Jewish Proselytism

159

immersion is sufficient to qualify a Gentile as a convert to Judaism, while R. Joshua maintained that immersion without circumcision is sufficient. The Sages ruled that one is not a convert until both ceremonies have been performed. According to the version iny. Qid. 3.12 (3.14, 64d), R. Joshua regarded both circumcision and immersion as indispensable, but the position attributed to R. Eleazer is the same as in the Babylonian Talmud, namely, that circumcision is the decisive rite, so that a Gentile who is circumcised but not immersed is a proper proselyte. Here for the first time we clearly are dealing with immersion as an initiatory ritual for the reception of Gentile converts. If the attributions to second-generation Tannaim can be trusted, we have here evidence that by the late first or early second century CE, immersion was a well known, though not universally acknowledged, initiatory requirement for proselytes. There is little reason in this instance to doubt that the evidence takes us back to the second generation of Tannaim, since it agrees with other evidence in the rabbinic sources for the practice of proselyte immersion in the second century.17 While the attributions to particular Tannaim may be disputed, the weight of multiple attestation in various strata of rabbinic tradition confirms that proselyte immersion as a rite of initiation was being widely practiced, discussed and regulated in the mid-second century CE.18 The Stoic philosopher Epictetus also witnesses to the practice early in the second century unless, as some have supposed, he is confusing Jews with Christians.19 By how long the origin of this practice antedates our earliest literary attestation for it is impossible to say. Fortunately for our purposes the crucial issue is not how early the immersion of proselytes originated, but how early it became the prevailing custom, an established sine qua non 17. B. Yeb. 46a-47b, 71a; b. Ber. 47b; Gerim 1.6; Mek. R. Simeon 30. 18. The criterion of authenticity described formally by J. Neusner as 'the verification of priority or posteriority on the basis of the correlation of attribution and logic' (The Use of the Mishnah for the History of Judaism Prior to the Time of the Mishnah: A Methodological Note', JSJ11 [1980], p. 181) comes into play here, since halakic discussions attributed to sages later in the second century and thereafter on the finer points of proselyte baptism presuppose that the rite itself was already standard practice. 19. Epictetus 2.9.19-21. See M. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84), I, pp. 542-44; and M. Whittaker, Jews and Christians: Graeco-Roman Views (Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, 6; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), p. 89.

160

From Death to Life

for the reception of Gentile converts throughout the Hellenistic world, one of what Kee calls 'the standards of proselytism'. Framed this way, the question is more easily resolved. If Joseph and Aseneth was written near the terminus ante quern of 115 CE, it is likely that proselyte immersion was being practiced by that time, but the probability declines proportionately as we assign an earlier date of composition. In any case, there is no evidence to suggest that at any time prior to 115 CE proselyte immersion was so uniformly and universally practiced that its absence from Joseph and Aseneth should cause us to dissociate the conversion reported in that document from Jewish proselytism as elsewhere attested. Most telling in this regard is the silence of Philo, Josephus, the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha on the subject of immersing proselytes.20 These sources are too voluminous and occasionally deal too directly with proselytes and proselytism for us to suppose with J. Jeremías that their silence on proselyte immersion is fortuitous.21 Josephus in particular had ample occasion to refer to the rite if it had 20. Some have seen allusions to proselyte baptism in a few passages in the Pseudepigrapha which refer to washing or purification (esp. Sib. Or. 4.162-70 and T. Levi 14.6; so Jeremias, Infant Baptism, pp. 24-29; and 'Proselytentaufe', p. 426), but in no instance is it clear, or even likely, that the allusion is to proselyte baptism in particular, as distinct from other types of washings, literal or figurative. The phrase in T. Levi 14.6 in which Jeremias detects an allusion to proselyte baptism is not only highly suspect textually (H.C. Kee's translation in Charlesworth [ed.], OT Pseudepigrapha, I, p. 793, omits it, following R.H. Charles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908], p. 57; but cf. M. de Jonge et al., The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text [PVTG, 1.2; Leiden: Brill, 1978], p. 42, where it is included), but also quite vague, referring to nothing more specific than 'an unlawful purification' (Ka8(xpia|icp rcapavouxp). The reference to washing in perennial rivers in Sib. Or. 4.165 is likewise vague, though it does appear in the context of an exhortation for the heathen to repent. But already in the Hebrew Bible sprinkling with water is a figurative expression for moral cleansing of the iolatrous (Ezek. 36.25), and there is no reason to assume that the exhortation in Sib. Or. 4.165 refers more specifically to proselyte baptism. Similar language is found in Sib. Or. 3.591-93, clearly with reference to daily Jewish purifications. 21. Infant Baptism, p. 28: 'the silence of Philo and Josephus must be judged accidental'. So also E. Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (5 vols.; trans. J. Macpherson et al.', Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897-98), div. 2, II, p. 323: 'the silence of Philo and Josephus...is of no consequence whatever'.

5. Jewish Proselytism

161

been customary in his time. Thus, for example, in his account of the conversion of King Izates of Adiabene, Josephus makes no reference to immersion even though he makes clear that the strictest requirements were urged upon the convert in this case.22 The silence of these sources seems inexplicable except on the grounds that immersion was not yet a customary, much less a universal, requirement for conversion to Judaism. Talmudic literature itself reflects some lingering disagreement on the necessity of immersing proselytes. The consensus reached by the Sages was that both circumcision and immersion are indispensable prerequisites, but, as we have seen, according to a minority view circumcision is the determining act and a Gentile who has been circumcised but not immersed is a legitimate proselyte.23 Even in the Amoraic period divergent opinions were rendered regarding the status of those who had been circumcised but for some reason had not yet been immersed. Some Amoraim affirmed the Jewish status of these converts, waiving the requirement of initiatory baptism and allowing that other ritual washings performed periodically following conversion, such as those necessitated by nocturnal emissions or menstrual impurity, are sufficient.24 Such opinions are clearly the exception rather than the rule by the late Amoraic period, but they combine with our previous observations to disallow any such sharp contrast as Kee draws between 'the standards of proselytism' and the conversion narrated in Joseph and Aseneth on the basis of the absence of any reference to immersion in the latter. Since there is no evidence that proselyte immersion was a prevailing practice as early as the writing of Joseph and Aseneth, the silence of this document regarding the practice provides no grounds for declaring Aseneth's conversion to be deviant from Gentile conversion to Judaism as it is known from other early Jewish sources.

22. Ant. 20.2.4. S. Zeitlin, 'Halaka in the Gospels', p. 305, is surely correct that 'had baptism at this time been required, Josephus would not be silent on this point'. 23. However, Schiffman, Who was a Jew?, pp. 35-36, following Bamberger, Proselytism, pp. 46-52, is probably correct that the issue here is not whether immersion is essential, but whether it is this rite or circumcision which represents the pivotal moment, after which the person converting may be considered a Jew. See further the discussion under 'Circumcision' below. 24. j.Qid.3.l2;b.Yeb.45b.

162

From Death to Life

Circumcision On the requirement of circumcision, the sources exhibit far greater uniformity than on immersion, though unanimity of belief and practice cannot be claimed even here. Certain works ostensibly addressed to Gentile readers, such as Books III and IV of the Sibylline Oracles, the Letter of Aristeas and the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, provide some specific indications of what Jews expected of Gentiles and yet do not mention circumcision.25 Nevertheless, the bulk of the evidence ranks circumcision as central both in Jewish identity and in the full adoption of Judaism by Gentiles. Thus, for example, Judt. 14.10 reports the conversion of the Ammonite general Achor to Judaism as follows: When Achior saw all that the God of Israel had done, he believed firmly in God. So he was circumcised, and joined the house of Israel, remaining so to this day.

The indication in Est. 8.17 that many residents of the Persian Empire 'professed to be Jews' (MT: Dirrinq is taken in the LXX to mean that the Gentiles 'were circumcised and became Jews' (rcepieTejiovTo Kai io\)ôaïÇov). Circumcision was so essential a component of Jewish identity that the Hasmonean requirement that conquered peoples follow Jewish laws meant first and foremost that they be circumcised.26 The Herods required that Gentiles be circumcised before they married into the family.27 Paul's opponents in Galatia assumed that circumcision was a prerequisite to membership in the people of God, and Paul himself acknowledged that circumcision signified submission to the Torah.28 In each of the six instances of male conversion to Judaism recorded in Josephus' Antiquities, circumcision is the crucial indicator of the new status.29 In addition to the Jewish sources, non-Jewish Greco-Roman sources consistently characterize both Jews and Gentiles who embrace Judaism as being circumcised; indeed, circumcision is treated as the distinguishing feature.30 25. See on this Collins, 'Symbol of Otherness', pp. 163-70. 26. JosephusAni. 13.9.1; 13.11.3. 27. Josephus Ant. 20.7.1; 20.7.3; see also 16.7.6. 28. Gal. 5.3; see also Acts 15.1. 29. 11.6.13; 13.9.1; 13.11.3; 20.2.3; 20.7.1; and 20.7.3. See on this Cohen, 'Respect for Judaism by Gentiles', pp. 420-21: 'For Josephus the expressions "to be circumcised" and "to adopt the customs of the Jews" are synonymous'. 30. See the numerous sources quoted by Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on

5. Jewish Proselytism

163

In spite of this impressive evidence, there are a few texts in which some discern significant exceptions. I have referred already to the opinion attributed to R. Joshua b. Hananiah that one who is immersed but not circumcised is a legitimate convert.31 To this can be added the well-known statement by Philo, 'he shows most clearly that he is a proselyte who is not circumcised in foreskin but in pleasures, desires and other passions of the sou I',32 and the advice given to King Izates of Adiabene by his Jewish teacher, Ananias. According to Josephus, Ananias urged the King not to alienate his subjects by being circumcised and insisted that the zealous intent to be *a devoted adherent of Judaism...counted more than circumcision' and would compensate for the non-performance of the rite.33 Some have found additional evidence for Jews who did not require physical circumcision in Ignatius' comment that 'it is better to hear Christianity from the circumcised than Judaism from the uncircumcised'.34 Although N.J. McEleney has recently appealed to such passages to document a stream of Jewish thought that had dispensed with the need for circumcision,35 the evidence must not be overstated. Bamberger is probably correct that not even R. Joshua dispensed with the requirement of circumcision but was only adjudicating the practical question of exactly when in the process of conversion one ceases to be a heathen and becomes a Jew. Whereas R. Eliezer declared that one has the legal status of a convert from the moment he is circumcised, R. Joshua held that the decisive moment is at immersion.36 Neither does the passage Jews and Judaism, I, pp. 169-70, 225, 300, 312, 325, 356,415,436,442-44, 525-26, 528; and Whittaker, Jews and Christians: Graeco-Roman Views, pp. 80-85. 31. B. Yeb. 46a; cf. the version in j. Qid. 3.12, where R. Joshua does not deny the necessity of circumcision but only insists that baptism is also indispensable. 32. Greek fragments of Questions and Answers on Exodus 2.2, fragment on Exodus 22.21, as translated in N.J. McEleney, 'Circumcision, Conversion and the Law', NTS 20 (1974), p. 329. 33. Ant. 20.2.4. 34. Phil 6.1. See C.K. Barrett, 'Jews and Judaizers in the Epistles of Ignatius', Jews, Greeks and Christians (ed. Hamerton-Kelly and Scroggs), pp. 234-42; and in the same volume, E. Schweizer, 'Christianity of the Circumcised and Judaism of the Uncircumcised: The Background of Matthew and Colossians', pp. 245-60. 35. 'Conversion, Circumcision and the Law', pp. 319-41; and idem, 'Orthodoxy in Judaism of the First Christian Century', JSJ9 (1978), pp. 83-88. 36. Bamberger, Proselytism, pp. 46-52; and see further J. Nolland, 'Uncircumcised Proselytes?', JSJ12 (1981), pp. 189-92, esp. p. 192: 'R. Joshua was all for circumcision but located the sacramental efficacy in the ablution'.

164

From Death to Life

from Philo eliminate the requirement of circumcision,37 but only employs the familiar device of denying the lesser in order to emphasize the greater. Elsewhere Philo makes explicit that the law of circumcision must be observed in its literal sense even if its symbolic meaning is also important.38 As to Ananias's advice that Izates not submit to circumcision, it is evident that political expediency was the sole motive and that both Ananias and Izates recognized the extreme irregularity of the suggestion. In any event, the countermand by another Jew, Eleazar of Galilee, won the day, and Izates was circumcised.39 Rabbinic literature refers to a few instances when the requirement of circumcision was waived, such as in the case of hemophiliacs,40 but the very fact that such rulings had to be issued allowing exceptions shows that circumcision was the recognized norm. Certainly Ignatius's brief reference to learning Christianity from the circumcised rather than Judaism from the uncircumcised is subject to more than one interpretation and affords no unequivocal evidence of a Jewish group that had dispensed with the requirement of circumcision. Thus, in spite of a few exceptional passages (in all of which there are factors vitiating the apparent downplaying of circumcision), the evidence leads to the solid presumption that circumcision would have been required of converts to Judaism in the time and place in which Joseph and Aseneth was written. Yet, for another reason the silence of Joseph andAseneth regarding circumcision fails to constitute a point of contrast between conversion as depicted in this text and Jewish proselytism as we know it from other sources. The reason is quite simply that Joseph and Aseneth narrates the conversion of a woman. Kee acknowledges this obvious fact but insists nonetheless that 'since circumcision was the 37. Pace McEleney, 'Conversion, Circumcision and the Law', p. 329. 38. Migr. Abr. 16. Even so, McEleney, 'Orthodoxy in Judaism', p. 88 n. 32, is likely correct in inferring from this passage that there were those among the Jewish allegorists of Alexandria who neglected the literal observance of the precept of circumcision because of their exclusive emphasis on its allegorical meaning. 39. On this whole episode, see L.H. Schiffman, The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabene in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources', in Josephus, Judaism, and Christianity (ed. L.H. Feldman and G. Hâta; Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987), pp. 293-312. 40. E.g. b. Pes. 96a; and b. Hul 4b; on these and related passages see further Nolland, 'Uncircumcised Proselytes?', pp. 182-88, who argues convincingly that McEleney greatly overstates the evidence for a stream of Judaism that had dispensed with circumcision.

5. Jewish Proselytism

165

major factor in the conversion process, it seems odd that all reference to this practice would be omitted in a story whose main aim was to portray conversion'.41 But this argument carries weight only if Joseph and Aseneth is a missionary document, and as I have maintained in Chapter 3 and will argue further Chapter 8, there are good reasons to doubt this common assumption regarding the purpose of the work. If, as I shall argue, Joseph and Aseneth was written primarily for Jewish readers or at least those who stood very close to Judaism, then the lack of reference to one of the entrance requirements is not surprising, especially since the story features a female convert and the entrance requirement in question pertains only to males. Therefore, the silence of Joseph and Aseneth regarding circumcision fails, as does also its silence regarding immersion, to provide any grounds for a differentiation between Aseneth's conversion and Jewish proselytism as otherwise attested in the Hellenistic period.42 4L 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 399. 42. An important study which appeared too late to be incorporated fully into the discussion here is S.J.D. Cohen, 'The Rabbinic Conversion Ceremony', JJS 41 (1990), pp. 177-203. Cohen argues convincingly that the rabbinic conversion ceremony which had evolved by the mid-second century CE was not an initiation ritual but 'a vehicle by which the rabbis attempted to regulate and formalize what until then had been an entirely personal and chaotic process' (p. 203). Only much later did it become 'less of a vehicle to ensure the compliance of legal norms and more of an initiation ritual' (p. 203). This nuanced understanding of the historical development of the conversion ceremony further undermines Kee's dissociation of Aseneth's case from 'the standards of proselytism'. Cohen points out (pp. 193, 199-200) that not even circumcision was a formal initiatory requirement in pre-rabbinic and early Tannaitic times. Circumcision was certainly essential in order for one to be considered a convert or a Jew, but it could be performed by anyone, Jew or non-Jew (Josephus Ant. 20.2.4), under any circumstances; even involuntary circumcision sufficed (Josephus Ant. 13.9.1; 13.11.3). Since there was no fixed ceremony or authorized person to perform it, circumcision should not be considered an initiation ritual at this early period. According to Cohen, Aseneth's case is still within the system of the Hebrew Bible: 'a woman "converts" by marrying an Israelite husband' (p. 194 n. 45; see also idem, 'The Origins of the Matrilineal Principle in Rabbinic Law', Association for Jewish Studies Review 10 [1985], pp. 19-53, esp. pp. 21-22, 53). With all but this last point I agree fully. In Joseph and Aseneth it seems clear that Aseneth's status as a convert is not a consequence but a. precondition of her marriage to Joseph. Joseph will have nothing to do with her prior to her conversion. In his absence she repents and is declared by the man from heaven to be enrolled in the book of the living as a full participant in all the blessings enjoyed by the people of God. Joseph returns to marry her only after she has converted and

166

From Death to Life

Points of Comparison We have seen that the rigid contrast sometimes drawn between 'the standards of proselytism' and the conversion story in Joseph and Aseneth is unjustified. The way is thus cleared for a fresh look at the available sources on Jewish proselytism in the Hellenistic world for their possible bearing on Joseph and Aseneth. But even if the absence of formal parallels is vitiated by our observations above so that it provides no valid grounds for a sharp contrast, neither does it invite a positive comparison. Are there, then, grounds for such a comparison? Here it is crucial to reiterate the methodological foundation laid in Chapter 3 above. As was emphasized in that chapter, conversion in Joseph and Aseneth is central not because of its formal features but because of the social tensions surrounding it. The Jew cannot marry the non-Jew; the monotheist who blesses the living God cannot kiss the pagan who blesses dead and deaf idols; the Jew, who eats bread of life and drinks a cup of immortality, cannot sit at table with the Gentile, who eats bread and drinks a cup defiled by idolatry; the convert to Judaism is both severed from former Gentile family ties and harassed from within the Jewish community. It is this complex social matrix which has been determinative in the shaping of the narrative, while the ritual aspects of conversion with which many previous studies have been preoccupied are at most allusive and secondary. It is imperative, therefore, that our net of comparison be cast widely enough to take in the non-ritual features as well, and especially the sociological dimension of conversion to Judaism. There follow a few of the points which invite comparison between Joseph and Aseneth and other sources on Jewish proselytism and which attenuate the sharp contrast sometimes drawn between the two. Familial and Social Ostracism of the Proselyte We may begin with a motif to which I have already called attention in Joseph and Aseneth and which recurs in other Jewish sources dealing with the conversion of Gentiles, namely, the severance from parents, kin and friends brought about by conversion to Judaism. Although this idea has received heavenly confirmation of her new status. Nevertheless, Cohen's study strongly confirms my contention that no conversion ritual was fixed early enough to warrant seeing Aseneth's conversion as deviant from the norm.

5. Jewish Proselytism

167

is found in rabbinic literature43 and Josephus,44 the closest affinities are with Philo. Prosélytes,45according to Philo, 'have left...their country, their kinsfolk and their friends' in crossing over to the Jewish religion.46 They are to be classified along with orphans and widows as those who have been cut off from their natural means of protection and support and who stand 'most helplessly in need' of God's pity and compassion.47 Having 'turned his kinsfolk...into mortal enemies',48 the convert has entered the most humble and desolate circumstances, an 'orphan-like desolate state'.49 Only in God can such a person hope to find a helper and a place of refuge.50 Aseneth's description of her lot in her soliloquies and prayer is remarkably similar to this. Having been disowned by her parents and hated by all her relatives, she finds herself 'an orphan and desolate and abandoned and hated' (11.3; see also 12.5). In her defenseless state of being humiliated and orphaned, she can only seek refuge in God, hoping that he will be her helper and will show pity and compassion (chs. 1113, passim). The collocation of ideas and words common to Joseph and Aseneth and Philo in these passages can be explained only partially by their common dependence upon the Septuagint51 and suggests that both

43. Num. R. 8.2 speaks of 'the proselyte who has left behind him his family and his father's house, aye, has left behind his people and all the other peoples of the world, and has chosen to come to us'. 44. Ant. 20.2.4. Here Josephus reports that the royal family of Adiabene, upon learning that King Izates had consummated his conversion to Judaism by being circumcised, 'were immediately seized with consternation and fear beyond measure that...the king would risk losing his throne...and that they themselves would be in jeopardy...' because of the nobility's disapproval. See further 20.4.1-2 on the reprisals following the conversion of Izates' brother, Monobazus. 45. Philo prefers znrfavc, èirnMrnç, and £7CTiX\)Toc over the less familiar term TcpooTjX'uToc, but also employs the latter in the passages under discussion here. 46. Spec. Leg. 1.9; see also Vin. 20: 'abandoning their kinsfolk by blood... ' 47. Spec. Leg. 1.9, 57; 4.34; Vin. 20. 48. Spec. Leg. 4.34. 49. Spec. Leg. 1.57; 4.34. 50. Spec. Leg. 1.9, 57; 4.34. 51. Most prominent among the verbal parallels are the following words or word pairs and related derivative forms: KaTa9\)yf|, ôp(pavoç, èp%oç, Tccrceivoç, ßorjGoc, and èX,ef||Licûv Kai oÍKTÍpuxov, not all of which can be traced to the biblical passages (e.g. Deut. 10.18; 16.11-14; 24.17-21; 27.19) on the sojourner, the orphan and the widow (MT: na, Dirr, mD^K; LXX: rcpoaf|AA)Toç, ôpcpavoç, %T|pa). All are

168

From Death to Life

drew on a traditional motif wherein the proselyte is put on a par with and described in the same language as the orphan because of the loss of familial support which both have experienced. Confirming the traditional character of this motif is the fact that the familial and social ostracism which Aseneth bemoans in her soliloquies and prayer is not called for by anything in the story line itself, where she has only the most cordial relations with her parents. The motif of repudiation by parents does not affect the plot and does not rank with the other social currents which, as we saw in Chapter 3, underlie and shape the narrative. The motif rather seems to be a traditional one which the author has incorporated to buttress the reader's sense of Aseneth's sincerity and her worthiness to be accepted fully into the community of Israel. Of course, it is not unusual for characters in ancient romances to find themselves in dire straits and to invoke the aid of the deity to whom they are, or eventually will be, devoted. This motif is in fact quite commonplace, as we shall see especially in the discussion of mystery initiation in Chapter 7. But in these sources the grip of fate or the vicissitudes of life in general for which people seek divine help lead to, and to some degree are alleviated by, but do not typically result from, a salvific encounter with a deity. What Aseneth's experience has in common with that of other Jewish proselytes is alienation and persecutions which stem directly from conversion to Judaism.52 Aseneth's sense of social and familial estrangement is not the cause but the result of her conversion, and the fact that she renounces her idols and embraces the God of Israel in full awareness of the social consequences proves her sincerity in converting. Not only so, but her lot is described in terms strikingly similar to Philo's description of the lot of the proselyte. Divine Protection of the Proselyte In both Joseph and Aseneth and our other ancient sources on conversion to Judaism, the obverse of human antipathy toward the convert is divine protection. The words of Boaz to Ruth, 'a full reward be given you by the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to take refuge' (Ruth 2.12), were applied by the rabbis to all who followed Ruth in adopting the faith of Israel. 'Coming (or being brought) good Septuagintal words; it is their usage in a cluster to deal with the same theme that is striking. 52. In this connection see also Chapter 6 below on Merkabah mysticism.

5. Jewish Proselytism

169

under the wings of the Shekinah' came to be a standard technical term for becoming a Jewish proselyte.53 Specific instances of God's intervention to protect the proselyte from the afflictions resulting from conversion are recorded in both rabbinic haggadah and Josephus concerning Izatesof Adiabene: Said R. Phinehas: When he went out to do battle a band of enemies attacked him, and an angel descended and rescued him (Gen. R. 46.10). For although Izates himself and his children were threatened with destruction, God preserved them, opening a path to safety from desperate straits. God thus demonstrated that those who fix their eyes on Him and trust in Him alone do not lose the reward of their piety (Ant. 20.2.4).54

Philo likewise acknowledges frequently that the one who renounces heathenism and converts to Judaism places himself under the protection of Israel's God.55 The same notion is prominent in Joseph and Aseneth, as we have seen. In her prayer Aseneth appeals to God as her only hope of refuge. She beseeches God to stretch forth his hands and deliver her from her persecutors as a father delivers his children (12.6-8). Even the language of refuge and security 'under your wings' is found in Joseph and Aseneth, though it is used of Aseneth in her representative role as the city of refuge for future converts and not directly of God himself (15.7). In the last part of the story, when Aseneth is the target of a murderous conspiracy, God repeatedly delivers her by such miraculous means as causing the swords of her assailants to fall from their hands and disintegrate (27.11). Joseph assures her, 'the Lord is with you and he will guard you like the apple of his eye' (26.2), and even her antagonists come to realize, 'the Lord is fighting against us for Aseneth' (28.1). Once again it should be acknowledged that the theme of being safeguarded by one's deity is widespread, but it should also be emphasized that the very reason Aseneth needs God's protection is that she has converted to Judaism and married Joseph. Her need for divine protection does not lead to, but results from, her conversion. In this respect Aseneth's situation is unlike that of the characters in Hellenistic 53. E.g. b. Yeb. 48b, where reference is made to Ruth 2.12 in connection with the expression. 54. Specific acts of deliverance wrought by God on Izates' behalf are narrated by Josephus in Ant. 20.3.4-20.4.2. 55. E.g. Spec. Leg. 1.57; 4.34.

170

From Death to Life

romances who devote themselves to some deity in order to gain his or her beneficent protection, but very much like that of the proselytes we know from Philo, Josephus and rabbinic literature. Parity of the Proselyte and the Jew by Birth In the matter of the convert's relative status within the Jewish community, the author of Joseph and Aseneth reflects sensitivity to a basic concern that also underlies the classical sources on proselytes. While Joseph and Aseneth does not explicitly affirm the parity of the convert and the Jew by birth, it certainly presents an exalted estimation of the convert. In Chapter 3 above are described the various literary devices used by the author to place Aseneth on a par with Joseph and establish her suitability as a mate for this representative of the Jewish community. From this carefully developed motif, from other elements in the exalted portrayal of Aseneth, and from the narrative of God's protection of Aseneth and judgment on her Israelite antagonists in the last part of the story, it appears that an important purpose of Joseph and Aseneth was to enhance the status of the convert vis-à-vis the Jew by birth and to counter any denigration of or hostility toward the convert. This apparent concern which the author addresses somewhat subtly in narrative form is addressed more directly in other sources on Jewish proselytism. It is well known that rabbinic estimations of proselytes varied considerably, ranging from friendly and sympathetic affirmations of equality to disparaging comments reflecting strong disfavor.56 As G.F. Moore has said, 'speaking generally the tone of the utterances about proselytes is friendly, though not unduly enthusiastic'.57 Yet, while the tone is generally friendly, the strongly favorable statements themselves betray a situation in which not all Jews were so accommodating, and the negative utterances, though far fewer in number, document a decided antipathy toward proselytes on the part of at least some Jews.58 Similarly, Philo's 56. For an anthology of rabbinic dicta of both kinds, along with various mixed opinions, see Bamberger, Proselytism, pp. 149-73. See also E. Urbach, The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs (2 vols.; trans. I. Abrahams; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1975), I, pp. 549-52. 57. Judaism, I, p. 342. 58. E. Urbach, 'Ger', Encyclopaedia Hebraica (32 vols.; Jerusalem, 1949-66), XI, col. 179, as translated in Bamberger, Proselytism, 'Introduction to the 1968 edn', pp. xx-xxi, quite rightly offers this caveat: The prevailing attitude to proselytes in the Talmud and Midrashim, as in the apocryphal literature, is generally positive. But students are not justified in their effort to deny completely or to obscure the testimony

5. Jewish Proselytism

171

repeated insistence on the parity of the proselyte with the native Jew and the obligation of the latter to honor and befriend the convert59 betrays a situation in which such high esteem did not always prevail. Thus, both rabbinic literature and Philo reveal the same kind of tension regarding the social position of the proselyte within Jewry that underlies Joseph and Aseneth. Moreover, both urge the kind of cordial acceptance of proselytes on the part of Jews by descent that we have found to be a concern in Joseph and Aseneth. Repudiation of Idolatry as the Quintessence of Conversion In Chapters 3 and 4 we have observed how the author of Joseph and Aseneth depicts Aseneth's life prior to her conversion as utterly bound up in idolatry. The barrier between Joseph and Aseneth, between Jew and Gentile, which dominates the first part of the story is nothing other than idolatry and the pollution resulting from it. Aseneth's reluctance to call upon God, as well as her alienation from Joseph and Judaism, is grounded in her idolatry. The very self-definition of Judaism that emerges from the story is formulated vis-à-vis idolatry and the things associated with idolatry. For this reason the author is careful in the central chapters of Joseph and Aseneth to accentuate Aseneth's utter repudiation of the idols she had formerly worshiped. Not only does he narrate in vivid detail her initial smashing of the idols and dumping of the sacrifices and sacrificial vessels; he also has Aseneth reiterate this accomplishment and express her contempt for the gods repeatedly in her soliloquies and prayer. Even her announcement to Joseph that she has converted is cast in the form of a report that she has destroyed her idols. For this author it is clearly the renunciation of idols that comprises the essence of conversion to Judaism.60 Similarly, in rabbinic thought idolatry was considered quite the of the sources to other attitudes prevailing among the sages, which express disfavor with converts and conversion.' 59. E.g. Virt. 33: 'So therefore all those who did not at the first acknowledge their duty to reverence the Father and Founder of all, yet afterwards embraced the creed of one instead of a multiplicity of sovereigns, must be held to be our dearest friends and closest kinsmen. They have shown the godliness of heart which above all leads up to friendship and affinity, and we must rejoice with them... ' See also Spec. Leg. 1.9; Virt. 34; and Praem. Poen. 26. See also Justin Martyr Dial Tryph. 123: 'a proselyte who is circumcised with the object of joining the people is like one who is native-born'. 60. See the references and discussion in Chapter 4 above.

172

From Death to Life

essence of heathenism and hence the characteristic difference between the Gentile and the Jew. Both the rabbis61 and Philo62 take it as axiomatic that one must properly dispose of all idols in order to become a proselyte to Judaism. A number of rabbinic statements even treat the repudiation of idolatry as tantamount to the full embracing of Judaism: Grave is idolatry in that he who denies it is as if he accepts the whole Torah (b. Hul. 5a). For anyone who repudiates idolatry is called 'a Jew', (b. Meg. 13a) .. .whoever confesses to belief in idolatry denies the Ten Commandments and rejects all of the commandments entrusted to Moses, the prophets, and the patriarchs. And whoever denies idolatry confesses to belief in the entirety of the Torah (Sifre Num. 111). Whoever confesses to idolatry denies the entire Torah, and whoever denies idolatry confesses to the entire Torah (Sifre Deut 54).

Here again Joseph andAseneth can be seen to be on common ground with our other sources on proselytism, with the obvious difference that Joseph and Aseneth does not speak of the embracing of Judaism in terms of the acceptance of the Torah. To be sure, emphasis on the oneness of God and the shunning of idols was part of the common heritage of the ancient Jewish people and tells us little more about Joseph and Aseneth than its kinship with this heritage in the most general terms. Yet, it is noteworthy that both Joseph and Aseneth and other sources on proselytism place the renunciation of idols at the constitutive center of conversion to Judaism and epitomize the whole of conversion in this one definitive act. Here we can at least claim a point of similarity on a very fundamental aspect of conversion to Judaism and a further attenuation of the rigid differentiation sometimes drawn between Aseneth's conversion and Jewish proselytism as otherwise attested. New Creation Imagery Twice in Joseph andAseneth the language of renewal, new creation and restoration to life is used with reference to Aseneth's conversion (8.9;

61. See esp. the tractate 'Abod. Zar. in the Mishnah, Tosefta and Talmuds. 62. Spec. Leg. 1.57; 4.34; Virt. 20; 33; 40. Concerning Philo's conception of repentance, J. Behm has written, To turn from the many false gods to the one true God is the first and most essential part of ^leTavoia' (J. Behm and E. Würthwein, 'u£TCtvoecu, U£Tavoia', TDNT, IV, p. 993).

5. Jewish Proselytism

173

15.563), and creation imagery is used also in other passages to express emergence from the darkness, death, destruction and corruptibility which constitute the lot of the godless, to the light, life, immortality and incorruptibility enjoyed by worshipers of God (12.1-2; 15.12; 20.7; 27.10). Against what background is this soteriological imagery to be understood? Once again we encounter resistance to the idea of any kinship with Jewish ideology. T. Holtz, for example, quickly dismisses the possibility of such a connection: Tür eine derartige Wertung des Übertritts gibt es nun aber im jüdischen Bereich keine wirklich entsprechende Parallele'.64 However, the language of new creation appears often enough in rabbinic sources in connection with proselytism to demand serious consideration in our attempt to illuminate Aseneth's conversion and the conceptual world it represents.65 The imagery of new creation is employed in several ways in Jewish literature.66 Most prominent are the cultic 'new creation' associated with forgiveness at the New Year Festival and the Day of Atonement67 and the eschatological 'new creation' of humanity and the cosmos which is envisioned already in the Hebrew Bible68 and widely attested in diverse Jewish sources of the Hellenistic period.69 God's forgiveness of the penitent person apart from the cultic context is also frequently described by the rabbis in terms of re-creation,70 as is God's deliverance of people out of various types of distress.71 Israel itself is said to have been created 63. On the textual uncertainty in the second reference, see Chapter 4 above. 64. 'Christliche Interpolationen', p. 485. 65. Philonenko, Joseph et Aséneth, p. 61, also acknowledged this point: 'On retrouve des doctrines comparables dans la littérature rabbinique'. 66. See G. Schneider, Neuschöpfung oder Wiederkehrt (Düsseldorf: PatmosVerlag, 1961), pp. 15-63; G. Lindeskog, Studien zum neutestamentlichen Schöpfungsgedanken (UUÂ, 11; Uppsala: A.-B. Lundequistska Bokhandeln, 1952), pp. 217-52; E. Sjöberg, 'Wiedergeburt und Neuschöpfung im palästinischen Judentum', ST4 (1951), pp. 44-85; and Mell, Neue Schöpfung, pp. 9-257. 67. E.g. see Lev. R. 29.12, where God says to Israel, in connection with the New Year's Festival, 'I will consider it as though you have this day been made before me, as though this day I had created you as a new being'; and similarly/ Ros Has. 4.8, 59c, as translated in Urbach, Sages, I, p. 471: 'I account it to you as though you were re-created'. See further E. Stein, 'Der Begriff der Palingenesie im talmudischen Schrifttum', MGWJ 83 (1939), pp. 194-205. 68. E.g. Isa. 65.17-25; 66.22. 69. See Str-B, HI, pp. 840-47. 70. E.g. see Lev. R. 30.3; and Str.-B., HI, p. 519. 71. See esp. Lev. R. 30.3.

174

From Death to Life

anew at Sinai,72 and God is represented as having said to Abraham at the time of his call, 'I have created thee as a new creation'.73 This last reference is especially noteworthy for our purposes in that Abraham was for the rabbis the prototypical proselyte. But the language of new creation is applied to proselytes even more directly. Gen. R. 39.4 reads: 'When one brings a heathen near,74 it is as if he had created him'. Similarly, Cant. R. 1.3.3 reads: 'Whoever brings a man under the wings of the Shekinah,75 it is to be considered as though he had created and formed and fashioned him'. The closely-related metaphor of new birth is also used occasionally by the rabbis in connection with conversion to Judaism. 'One who has become a proselyte', according to an often-repeated proposition, 'is like a child newly born'.76This principle is most often cited in halakic discussions to establish the legal position of the proselyte; since one is like a newborn child, he or she is neither accountable for former transgressions of the Law nor bound by former family ties. Legally the person has no prior existence. However, the juridical sense does not exhaust the meaning of the imagery. As Bamberger has noted, in some passages a religious sense predominates.77 Upon conversion to Judaism the proselyte enters into a new relationship with God and a totally new set of social relationships. Not merely legally, but in reality, one undergoes 'eine reale Veränderung seiner Lebenssituation'.78 These images provide substantial grist for the mill of exploring the linguistic and ideological affinities of Aseneth's conversion account. Although the rabbinic sources cited here date much later than Joseph 72. Cant. R. 8.5. 73. Gen. R. 39.11. 74. A technical expression for converting a Gentile to Judaism. 75. Another technical expression for converting a Gentile to Judaism. 76. E.g. b. Yeb. 22a; 48b; 62a; 97b; b. Ber. 47a; Gerim 2.6. 77. Bamberger, Proselytism, p. 63. Jeremías, Infant Baptism, pp. 32-33, is probably correct that the image was originally a religious one and that the juridical application was a later development. In any case it is clear that the principle is not exclusively juridical but has a fundamentally religious sense as well. So Sjöberg, 'Neushöpfung', pp. 48-49; but cf. K.G. Kühn, 'rcpoaritaxcoc', TDNT, VI, p. 739 n. 133: 'The principle that the proselyte is like a newborn child thus has a legal and not a religious sense'. 78. Sjöberg, 'Neuschöpfung', p. 49; see also F. Gavin, The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928; repr., New York: KTAV, 1969), p. 52.

5. Jewish Proselytism

175

and Aseneth, they cannot for that reason be dismissed as irrelevant. At the very least they show that the estimation of the convert as one newly created was not foreign to those very streams of Judaism with which Joseph and Aseneth is so often contrasted.79 Moreover, the closely related metaphor of the proselyte as a newborn seems to be somewhat older, and the metaphor of new creation itself in its general application to those whom God forgives or delivers, if not in its specific application to proselytes, dates much earlier than Joseph and Aseneth. It is also significant that these images are not peripheral or peculiar to a few individual teachers but are quite widespread. Thus Joseph and Aseneth cannot be sharply dissociated from rabbinic notions of proselytism on the basis of the application of such words as ocvocKcuviCco, avotTcXaaacu and àvccÇqmoiéco to Aseneth's conversion. But the affinity runs even deeper than the mere usage of common terminology might suggest. From E. Sjöberg's study of the ideas of recreation and rebirth in Palestinian Judaism, it seems clear that these images merely provide a comparison, an analogy, the proselyte is not considered to have undergone a process actually effecting some sort of re-creation; rather, he or she is to be reckoned as though created anew. The emphasis is on the creature (Geschöpf) rather than the creating (Schöpfung).™ Similarly, the comparison of the convert with the newborn child does not imply an actual process of rebirth; the analogy is not between conversion and birth but between the convert and the newborn.81 The tertium comparationis is the wholly new existence which the proselyte has in common with the newborn child, just as the people of Israel is said to have become 'like a new-born child' when it entered into its new relationship with God at Sinai.82 The language of re-creation is used similarly in Joseph and Aseneth. To reiterate a conclusion from Chapter 4 above, the terms in Joseph and Aseneth for renewal, new creation and restoration to life denote 79. Abrahams, 'Pharisaic Baptism', p. 43, makes the important methodological point that rabbinic parallels, even if too late to indicate the origin of an idea, may nevertheless be used 'in order to discriminate from specifically un-Jewish ideas'. 80. Sjöberg, 'Neuschöpfung', pp. 45, 54-55, 61-62. 81. Sjöberg, 'Neuschöpfung', pp. 45-50. Here I must take issue with D. Daube's assumption that in rabbinic thought the ritual of admission actually effected a new birth (The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism [London: Athlone Press, 1956], p. 113). 82. Cant. R. 8.2.

176

From Death to Life

advancement from the nothingness of heathen existence to the glorious existence of the one who worships God, without any implication of an actual process of re-creation effecting this change. The transformation is one of status, not of essential nature, and the emphasis is on the contrast between two realms of existence, not on some metaphysical process by which the transition from one to the other is brought about. In Aseneth's case, as in the rabbinic application of the imagery to proselytes, no particular act is conceived as directly effecting the change; there is no ethical, psychological or ontogical transformation implied. Rather, by renouncing idolatry and turning to God, Aseneth has broken with the past so decisively and has entered into a life so radically new that she can be considered newly created. Here we are very closely in touch with the rabbinic conception of the proselyte as one newly born or newly created. Table Fellowship We now ask whether the perennially problematic references to bread, cup and (sometimes) ointment have any counterpart in or receive any elucidation from the sources on proselytism which we are examining. Certainly these sources speak of no initiatory meal for proselytes, and even the assumption that the Pharisaic Haburoth commonly assembled for ritual meals now seems unfounded. Even though this assumption has been widely made, especially by students of eucharistie origins,83 the evidence for Haburah meals is highly inferential and predicated upon an 83. E.g. H. Lietzmann, Mass and Lord's Supper: A Study in the History of the Liturgy (trans. D.H.G. Reeve; Leiden: Brill, 1953), pp. 170-71, suggested that the early Christian love-feast 'corresponds exactly in its ritual to one of the Jewish meals, invested with religious solemnity, which might be held by a company of friends, moi, whenever they felt the need'. Similarly, R. Otto, The Kingdom of God and the Son of Man (trans. F.V. Filson and B. Lee-Woolf; Lutterworth Library, 9; London: Lutterworth Press, 2nd edn, 1943), p. 278, assigned the Last Supper to the category of 'the religious festive meal, a "cheber" or a "cheburah" with sacramental character and with ritualistic peculiarities'. G. Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy (Westminster: Dacre Press, 1945), pp. 50-51, likewise argued that 'the type to which it [the Last Supper] conforms is the formal supper of a chaburah\ and claimed further that 'the customs which governed such suppers are quite well known to us from rabbinic sources'. M. Black, The Scrolls and Christian Origins, p. 115, more cautiously noted that 'the Pharisees had also their religious meals in their Guilds or Haburoth, and raised the possibility 'that this type of common sectarian meal rather than the Passover was the prototype of the Eucharist'.

5. Jewish Proselytism

111

undue conflation of several discrete phenomena. Thus, for example, J. Jeremias has shown that b. Ros Has. 29a-b and b. Ber. 46a, in which some had found evidence for cultic meals, are actually concerned with the blessing said over the bread at ordinary daily meals.84 Similarly, questions addressed in the Mishnah regarding the observance of Passover by several Haburoth in the same hall (Pes. 7.13; see also 8.4; 9.10) pertain explicitly to Passover and supply a slender basis on which to build a case that these Haburoth held sectarian ritual meals.85 In view of these deficiencies in the evidence, Jeremias exaggerates only slightly when he describes the supposed Haburah meals as 'an ad hoc conjecture for which there is absolutely no evidence'.86!. Neusner also draws attention to the dearth of evidence: Nowhere in the rabbinic traditions about the Pharisees do we find a reference to ritual gatherings of the Pharisaic party, as a whole or in small groups, for table-fellowship...in the rabbinic traditions no sectarian ritual meal is ever mentioned.. .we find no stories of how the haverim gathered to eat... The editorial and redactional framework is silent about table fellowship. The narrative materials say nothing on the matter.87

As inescapable as this conclusion seems, it does lead to an anomaly. According to Neusner's calculations, a strikingly disproportionate twothirds of the rabbinic traditions about the Pharisees before 70 CE deal directly or indirectly with table fellowship.88 The halakoth preserve just such rules as would cover most aspects of a ritual meal even though no such meal is ever mentioned. Although some feel compelled on this basis to infer a custom of ritual gatherings for table fellowship even in the absence of direct evidence,89 Neusner is doubtless correct in resolving 84. The Eucharistie Words of Jesus (trans. N. Perrin; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 3rd edn, 1966), p. 30 n. 1. 85. J. Neusner, From Politics to Piety: The Emergence of Pharisaic Judaism (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973), p. 87; and idem, Two Pictures of the Pharisees: Philosophical Circle or Eating Club', ATR 64 (1982), pp. 534-35. 86. Eucharistie Words, p. 30. 87. Two Pictures', pp. 534-35. Similar caution had been expressed much earlier by A. Büchler, Der galiläische 'Am ha- 'Ares des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Vienna: A. Holder, 1906), p. 208 n. 2, who doubted whether the Jerusalem lay fellowships ever held community meals other than the Passover meal. 88. From Politics to Piety, p. 86; see further idem, The Rabbinic Traditions about the Pharisees Before 70 (3 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1971), ÏÏI, pp. 303-304. 89. E.g. A. Oppenheimer, The 'Am Ha-aretz: A Study in the Social History of the Jewish People in the Hellenistic-Roman Period (trans. I.H. Levine; ALGHJ, 8;

178

From Death to Life

the problem another way, one which is more sensitive to the essence of Pharisaism: These facts point to one conclusion: the Pharisaic groups did not conduct their table-fellowship meals as rituals. The table-fellowship laws pertained not to group life, but to ordinary, daily life lived quite apart from heightened, ritual occasions. The rules applied to the home, not merely to the cultic center, be it synagogue, Temple, or sectarian ritehouse (if such existed). While the early Christians gathered for ritual-meals and made of these ritual meals the high point of their group-life, the Pharisees apparently did not.90 Pharisaic table-fellowship thus exhibits a different quality from that of the Christians; it was of a quite ordinary, everyday character. The various fellowship rules had to be observed in a wholly routine circumstance, daily, for every meal, but without accompanying rites other than a benediction for the food.91

Thus even the indirect evidence cited in support of ritual meals among Pharisaic groups fails to establish the case. The food laws pertain rather to everyday life quite apart from sectarian gatherings or ritualized occasions. The persistent assumption that the Pharisaic Haburoth assembled for ritual meals remains precisely that—an assumption.92 If it appears that the crumbling of the old assumption regarding Haburah meals removes any basis for comparison with the meal language in Joseph andAseneth, quite the opposite is the case. Indeed, it is precisely the non-ritual character of Pharisaic table fellowship that justifies drawing a comparison with the meal terminology used in Joseph andAseneth. As was concluded in Chapter 4, the bread-cup (-ointment) passages refer not to a ritual meal but to the totality of Jewish eating in contrast to heathen meals defiled by idolatry, and more generally to the entire Jewish way of life in contrast to heathen conduct. The entire life more judaico is captured and condensed in the acts of eating, drinking and anointing, and is thereby contrasted with the heathen life style, which is synopsized antithetically in relation to these three particulars. Leiden: Brill, 1977), p. 136: 'Although there is no specific evidence of it in the halakah, the associations presumably had meals in common'. 90. 'Two Pictures', p. 535. 91. 'Two Pictures', pp. 535-36; see also idem, From Politics to Piety, pp. 86-90. 92. A generation ago C.W. Dugmore, Review of The Shape of the Liturgy, by G. Dix, JTS 47 (1946), p. 109, issued the timely warning: 'Constant repetition of the Haburah theme does not constitute proof.

5. Jewish Proselytism

179

When due attention is paid to the meaning and function of the meal language in Joseph and Aseneth within its literary and socio-religious context, the underlying conception is seen to bear a greater similarity to the thought of early rabbinic Judaism than has previously been recognized. In both there is a high evaluation of meals and a strong concern to avoid defilement in connection with them. Indeed, for both, Jewish self-identity seems to have been largely determined by this.93 Both rank meals, and the maintenance of purity in connection with them, among the quintessentials of Judaism, the consummate expressions of a whole way of life—a tendency attested in the one by the high proportion of halakoth pertaining in one way or another to food and by the profoundly religious quality inherent in even the 'ordinary' meal,94 and in the other by the explicit concern to maintain separateness from Gentiles and from the pollution of idols at mealtime, by the repeated use of meal terminology to express the rudiments of both Jewish and Gentile existence, by the use of exalted qualifiers (life, immortality, incorruptibility) and strongly disparaging qualifiers (strangulation, deceit, destruction) to distinguish the two kinds of food, drink and ointment, and by the use of meal language again in the honey episode to epitomize the benefits of belonging to the people of God. Moreover, in both, the context wherein these concerns were operative seems to have been ordinary meals and, more generally, routine daily conduct, rather than communal gatherings for ritual meals. Thus there is even greater reason for comparing the 'meal formula' in Joseph and Aseneth with the table fellowship tradition in Pharisaic circles than with other traditions where communal meals of a ritual or sacramental character appear. The similarity, of course, must not be exaggerated. Certainly we do not find in Joseph and Aseneth the kind of extensive halakoth regarding food and agriculture that we find in rabbinic tradition. Kee is therefore 93. G. Feeley-Harnik, The Lord's Table: Eucharist and Passover in Early Christianity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1981), pp. 95-96, has observed that 'food was one of the most important languages in which Jews expressed relations among human beings and between human beings and God'. Meals became the ground of social distinction between Jews and non-Jews, 'the means and end of distinguishing the chosen many or few from those who were not'. 94. On the profound significance of table fellowship and the solemnity of mealtime in ancient Judaism, see the brief comments by J. Jeremias, ' "This is My Body..." ') ExpT 83 (1972), pp. 196-203, esp. 196-97; and more recently FeeleyHarnik, The Lord's Table, p. 93: 'every Jewish home, every Jewish table, possessed the sanctity of the priest, the temple, the altar'.

180

From Death to Life

right in citing the absence of reference to the kosher laws in Joseph and Aseneth as one of his reasons for finding it 'unlikely that we are dealing here with traditional Jewish legal piety',95 though it is doubtful whether even a very traditional Jewish community in the diaspora would have observed the food laws current in Palestinian circles.96 In any case, this study has revealed that alongside this obvious difference there are also fundamental similarities which suggest that Joseph and Aseneth is not as remote as is commonly supposed from those very streams of Judaism with which it has been most sharply contrasted. Darkness-Light and Death-Life Antitheses In the descriptive analysis of Aseneth's conversion, we observed that conversion is conceived in Joseph and Aseneth as transition from darkness to light and from death to life.97 These two dualistic pairs are so widely attested in antiquity in such a variety of uses that their presence in Joseph and Aseneth affords no firm clue to the history-of-religions affinities of the work, but it is at least worthy of note that other Jewish sources also express conversion in terms of the darkness-light and death-life polarities. The conception of conversion as passage from darkness to light is found, for example, in Philo, who says concerning proselytes, 'though blind at first they had recovered their sight and had come from the deepest darkness to behold the most radiant light'.98 Philo also speaks of Abraham, the prototypical proselyte, as having been brought out of deep darkness into pure bright light when he came out of Chaldea." The introduction to the Hallel in the Passover Haggadah describes the exodus from Egypt in terms of God's having 'brought us out...from darkness to great light', and Melito of Sardis witnesses to the same notion within Judaism when, in material heavily dependent upon the Jewish passover liturgy, he speaks of God's having 'delivered us from 95. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 399. 96. Even Philo's knowledge of Palestinian traditions is debated. See S. Sandmel, Philo's Place in Judaism (New York: KTAV, rev. edn, 1971), pp. 1-29; BJ. Bamberger, Thilo and the Aggadah', HUCA 48 (1977), pp. 153-85; and G. Alón, Jews, Judaism and the Classical World (trans. I. Abrahams; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1977), pp. 89-137. 97. See The Terminology of Conversion' in Chapter 4 above.

98. Vin. 33. 99. Abr. 15.

5. Jewish Proselytism

181

slavery to liberty, from darkness to light, from death to life...'100 Other sources, including some rabbinic texts, refer more generally to the darkening effects of sin and the enlightenment of repentance.101 The representation of conversion to Judaism as passage from death to life is likewise found in rabbinic literature as well as in Joseph and Aseneth. To document this idea in rabbinic sources D. Daube and J. Jeremías cite m. Pes. 8.8: 'he that separates himself from his uncircumcision is as one that separates himself from a grave'.102 In context, however, this mishnah seems to mean that the proselyte is ritually unclean like one who has touched a corpse, and not, as Daube suggests, that by converting to Judaism the proselyte has passed from death to life.103 Nevertheless, Jeremias may be right that originally the principle had a 'purely religious sense' and was intended to represent the convert as a corpse raised to life.104 In any case, heathenism is depicted elsewhere in rabbinic literature as a state of death from which the proselyte has come forth,105 so that the conception of conversion as a transition from death to life cannot be said to be foreign to rabbinic thought, even if it is not so represented as directly and frequently as Daube argued. For Further Investigation On other points as well, Joseph and Aseneth deserves careful scrutiny in comparison with the tradition of Jewish proselytism known from Philo, Josephus, rabbinic literature and other sources. For example, rabbinic literature abounds with evidence of suspicion that some 100. Easter Homily, p. 68. On the relationship between Joseph and Aseneth, Melito, and the Passover Haggadah at this point, see S.G. Hall, 'Melito in the Light of the Passover Haggadah', JTS 22 (1971), pp. 29-46; S. Pines, 'From Darkness into Great Light', Immanuel 4 (1974), pp. 47-51; and D. Flusser, 'Some Notes on Easter and the Passover Haggadah', Immanuel 1 (1977), pp. 52-60. 101. T. Gad 5.7: 'repentance...puts darkness to flight, illumines the vision...' See also Gen. R. 11.2; b. 'Abod. Zar. 8a; and Justin, Dial. Tryph. 121-23. 102. Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, pp. 109-11; and Jeremias, Infant Baptism, p. 33. 103. But cf. Daube's defense of the latter view in The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, pp. 109-11. 104. Infant Baptism, p. 33; so also Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, p. 110: 'The levitical element was only used to give this idea clear and forceful expression'. 105. Qoh. R. on 8.10; and other references cited by Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, p. 111.

182

From Death to Life

professed proselytes were insincere or were prompted by ulterior motives.106 Does this same kind of suspicion underlie the strong emphasis in Joseph andAseneth on Aseneth's sincerity in converting? Rabbinic literature also preserves the standard assumption that a proselytess had committed fornication before her conversion;107 only if a girl converted before she was three years and one day old could she be presumed to be a virgin and therefore eligible to marry a priest.108 Is the stress on Aseneth's virginity in Joseph and Aseneth as a function of the larger concern to establish her suitability to marry Joseph in any way related to this rabbinic premise? Papyrological and inscriptional evidence suggests that many proselytes received new names upon crossing over to the Jewish religion.109 Has this tradition influenced the narrative of Aseneth's change of name in Joseph and Aseneth!110 Does the catechetical instruction which the Sages required of candidates for admission to Judaism111 shed any light on the instructions given to Aseneth by the man from heaven? Deserving of special investigation are the prayers in Joseph andAseneth (8.9; 12.1-13.15; 21.10-21). Do these prayers reflect liturgical patterns or motifs attested elsewhere in the now vast corpus of ancient Jewish prayers?112 These are only some of the 106. B. Yeb. 24b; 47a;;. Qid. 4.1,65b; Gerim 1.1; 1.7; and see further Bamberger, Proselytism, pp. 32-33; and Braude, Jewish Proselyting, pp. 45-46. 107. M. Yeb. 6.5', j. Yeb. 6.5,7c; b. Yeb. 60b; and Sifra Lev. 21.7 108. B. Yeb. 60b; SifreNum. 157; y. Bikk. 1.5,64a;y. Yeb. 8.2,9b;y. Qid. 4.6,66b; b. Qid. 78a-b. 109. See the references in Kühn, 'jipoaTiXvioc' TDNT, VI, p. 733. 110. See Chapter 4 above for the suggestion that Aseneth's change of name relates rather to her special prototypical and matriarchal role than to her position as an individual proselyte. Nevertheless, this phenomenon needs exploring. 111. See Gavin, The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments, pp. 33-35; and Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, pp. 106-40. A major problem here, of course, is the date of the rabbinic traditions. 112. In spite of several auspicious new critical studies, the scientific study of ancient Jewish prayers is yet in its infancy. On the rabbinic materials, see J. Heinemann, Prayer in the Talmud: Forms and Patterns (trans. R.S. Sarason; SJ, 9; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977); and J.J. Petuchowski, The Liturgy of the Synagogue: History, Structure, and Contents', in Approaches to Ancient Judaism (ed. W.S. Green; BJS, 27; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983), IV, pp. 1-64. On the nonrabbinic hymns and prayers, see Charlesworth, 'Prolegomenon', pp. 265-85; idem, 'Jewish Liturgies', pp. 411-36; and D. Flusser, 'Psalms, Hymns and Prayers', in Stone (ed.), Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, pp. 551-97. See also the flood of literature on the Hodayoth and other liturgical materials from Qumran. For a

5. Jewish Proselytism

183

unexplored areas wherein considerable potential exists for clarifying the account of Aseneth's conversion, perhaps by way of comparison as well as contrast. Conclusion Even though much remains to be done in the areas explored in a preliminary way in this chapter, enough has been said to demonstrate that the sharp distinction sometimes drawn between Jewish proselytism and the conversion story in Joseph andAseneth exaggerates both the degree of fixation and uniformity which the extant sources exhibit concerning proselytism and the degree to which Joseph andAseneth deviates from this supposed norm. The absence of what Kee calls 'the standards of proselytism' has been shown to be of no consequence; some of the unique features of Joseph andAseneth which have been thought to represent unparalleled ritual practices have been shown in previous chapters history of research on early Jewish liturgy with a methodological critique, see R.S. Sarason, 'The Modern Study of Jewish Liturgy', in The Study of Ancient Judaism (ed. J. Neusner; 2 vols.; New York: KTAV, 1981), pp. 107-79; and the sequel article in the same volume, idem, 'Recent Developments in the Study of Jewish Liturgy', pp. 180-87. Complicating factors include the fluidity and multiplicity now known to have characterized the prayers of the synagogue, beth ha-midrash, and other structured settings in the pre-Gaonic era, and the possibility that the private and nonstatutory prayers, such as those preserved in the Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha and rabbinic haggadah, are merely ad hoc literary improvisations which tell little about actual liturgical practice and private Jewish prayer life. These difficulties notwithstanding, several formal and substantive elements which are readily observable in the prayers in Joseph andAseneth are suggestive of the rich potential of comparative research in this area. Among these are the direct addresss to God followed by specific attributions of praise in the third person or participial form (8.9; 12.1-2; also a regular feature of berakoth in the statutory prayers; see Heinemann, Prayer in the Talmud, pp. 77, 86, 104; and Petuchowski, 'Liturgy of the Synagogue', p. 10), the conventional address of God as creator (8.9; 12.1-2; in addition to the numerous instances in the Hebrew Bible, see Pr. Man. 2; 2 Bar. 21.4-5; 1 En. 84.2-3; Jub. 12.19; Acts 4.24; and the berakoth before the morning and evening Shema'), the description of God as one who calls from darkness to light (8.9; 12.1; as in the introduction to the Hallel in the Passover Haggadah; see Chapter 4 above), and the strong verbal and thematic affinities with some of the apocryphal prayers, especially Add. Est. 14.3-19 and Pr. Man. 12. On Joseph andAseneth and the Prayer ofManasseh, see the preliminary observations by Charlesworth, 'Prayer ofManasseh', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 631.

184

From Death to Life

rather to be literary devices which are related to the particular purposes of Joseph andAseneth and which in any case address some of the same concerns which surface in other sources on proselytism; and other significant points of positive comparison which appear once the obsession with ritual form is overcome have also been noted. By no means does this imply that Aseneth's conversion is a paradigmatic case of that pattern of conversion which emerged in rabbinic tradition, nor indeed that the phenomenon to which I have referred under the generic rubric 'Jewish proselytism' was itself monolithic. By all estimates Joseph andAseneth is a very syncretistic work, and influences on the concept of conversion it reflects are likely to have come from many quarters. Yet, there are at least some features of Aseneth's conversion which may be illuminated by reference to the ancient sources on Jewish proselytism, and these sources must not be ignored as we continue the investigation of other paradigms of conversion and initiation which may also be instructive. C. Burchard has commented that Joseph and Aseneth may be more typical of Greek-speaking Judaism than scholars have previously imagined.113 To this general observation may be added the specific suggestion that Aseneth's conversion as reported in Joseph and Aseneth may be more representative of Jewish proselytism in the Hellenistic world than has previously been supposed.

113. 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OTPseudepigrapha, H, p. 194.

Chapter 6

INITIATION INTO GROUPS WITHIN JUDAISM: ESSENES, THERAPEUTAE, HABUROTH, GNOSTICS AND MERKAB AH MYSTICS The possibility that the type of Judaism represented in Joseph and Aseneth is closely akin to one or more of the known groups or subgroups within Judaism has long been noted.1 As our Forschungsbericht indicates, connections between Joseph and Aseneth and the Essenes, drawn long before the discovery of the Qumran scrolls, came to be amplified in the early aftermath of that discovery, and still find an occasional advocate today. Similarly, alleged affinities with Gnosticism have punctuated the study of Joseph and Aseneth from the earliest to the most recent contributions. The view that Joseph and Aseneth originated among the Therapeutae also has found several proponents in the past quarter-century, and close affinities with Merkabah mysticism have been suggested recently by one scholar. As in so many comparisons involving Joseph and Aseneth, 'parallels' with these groups have sometimes been superficial and prematurely drawn, major differences have been overlooked, fundamental methodological issues have not been satisfactorily addressed, and certain aspects of conversion which have surfaced in this investigation have not been given due attention. In addition, at least one other model of Jewish initiation which was current in the Hellenistic period and which has equally strong claim to consideration has been prematurely excluded

1. The terms 'sect* and 'sectarian' are avoided in this study whenever possible. When usage of them seems unavoidable, they are not meant to have any negative valence or any implication of deviation from some norm. They simply describe those Jewish groups who set themselves apart from Judaism at large by making special, or even exclusive, claims to truth and divine favor. See the helpful discussion by Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah, pp. 124-27.

186

From Death to Life

from the discussion on the basis of some assumptions which we have found in Chapter 5 to be untenable. In this chapter, therefore, methodological improvements over previous studies are sought as the possible affinities between Joseph and Aseneth and five Jewish circles or types of Judaism are assessed. To the extent that the primary sources allow, the procedures for initiation into these various groups form the focus of the inquiry, though of course the larger patterns of religion are considered as well.2 Every effort is made to treat the differences as well as the similarities; to explore the respective literary, theological and sociological contexts and functions of ideas and practices in which similarities seem to exist or have been alleged to exist; and to take fully into account the nature, date and limitations of the available sources. Essenes Our conclusions in Chapter 4 regarding the non-ritual nature of the meal terminology in Joseph and Aseneth undermines most cases for a close connection with the Essenes, since the supposed sacred meal has been the most commonly cited connecting link. Nevertheless, there are other similarities and differences to be taken into account besides the bread and cup, and the respective procedures for admission in particular need comparative analysis. These considerations, combined with the perennial claim of kinship between Joseph and Aseneth and the Essenes, necessitate some assessment of the possible affinities.3 L. Schiffman has argued convincingly that the meals described in the Qumran scrolls were not cultic or sacral in the sense of providing a 2. The use of 'initiation' rather than 'conversion' in this chapter and the following does not imply that the radical réorientation usually associated with 'conversion' could not also accompany 'initiation'. See the definitions in the Introduction above. McGuire, 'Conversion and Gnosis', pp. 338-42, correctly insists that genuine conversion can accompany intra-religious as well as inter-religious change. Segal assumes the same in Paul the Convert, passim-, Paul's change is no less a radical conversion experience because it led him 'from one variety of Judaism to another' (p. xii). 3. The group which inhabited Qumran and left behind the so-called Dead Sea Scrolls is here assumed to have been an Essene or Essene-like sect. The Scrolls are therefore taken as primary evidence for Essene belief and practice, but without the untenable assumption that the Qumran sect was coextensive with, or even typical of, Essenism.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

187

substitute for the sacrificial cult,4 but they surely were communal meals and were subject to fixed rules of order. 1QS 6.2-5 indicates that wherever members of the sect reside they are to eat together, that whenever ten members are together a priest must be present, that the members must sit before the priest according to their rank, and that the priest must stretch out his hand first to bless the first portion of bread or wine. The importance of these communal meals in the life and thought of the sect is illustrated in the lines following (6.13-23), where the stages of admission are defined in part according to the initiate's eligibility to come into contact with the pure food of the sect. The closely-related passage in IQSa 2.11-22 has not just one priest present for the meal, but a priestly leader (apparently the priestly Messiah expected by the sectarians) and a full complement of the priestly members of the sect. Also present are the 'Messiah of Israel' and the chiefs of the clans of Israel, all seated in the order of their rank.5 4. 'Communal Meals at Qumran', RevQ 10 (1979), pp. 45-56; idem, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls (BJS, 33; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983), pp. 191210; and most recently idem, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls (SBLMS, 38; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), pp. 56-67. So also M. Smith, ' "God's Begetting the Messiah" in IQSa', NTS 5 (1959), p. 219. J. van der Ploeg, 'The Meals of the Essenes', JSS 2 (1957), p. 171, likewise concluded that 'the writings of Philo and Josephus.. .do not give us sufficient arguments to say that the Essenes had sacred meals. They only speak of their common, communal meal... ' Others have assumed that the Essene communal meals were indeed sacral and were conceived as a replacement for the Temple cult. E.g. see Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness (trans. B. and C. Rabin; Oxford: University Press, 1962), p. 200; Kühn, 'The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', pp. 65-95; B. Gärtner, The Temple and the Community in Qumran and the New Testament (SNTSMS, 1; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), pp. 10-12; and M. Delcor, 'Repas cultuels Esséniens et Thérapeutes, Thiases et Haburoth', RevQ 6 (1968), pp. 401-25. To deny the sacral character of the communal meals at Qumran is not to deny that the Qumran sectarians conceived the community itself as a symbolic sanctuary and their life of of obedience to the Law as the true sacrifice. See on this Gartner, Temple and Community, pp. 16-46; and G. Klinzing, Die Umdeutung des Kultus in der Qumrangemeinde und in Neuen Testament (SUNT, 7; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971). 5. For the extensive literature on the two messianic figures of Qumran expectation, see J.A. Fitzmyer, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Major Publications and Tools for Study (Sources for Biblical Study, 8; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), pp. 11418. Among more recent studies, see M. de Jonge, The Earliest Christian Use of Christos: Some Suggestions', NTS 32 (1986), pp. 330-31; S. Talmon, 'Waiting for the Messiah: The Spiritual Universe of the Qumran Covenanters', in Judaisms

188

From Death to Life

According to this text the priest (priestly Messiah) recites the benediction first and takes the first portion of bread, the Messiah of Israel then takes bread, and finally all others present recite a benediction in the order of their rank. The meal under discussion in IQSa 2.11-22 is clearly the great messianic banquet of the days to come and therefore cannot simply be equated with the communal meals described in 1QS. Nevertheless, the communal meals known to us from 1QS have so much in common with the eschatological messianic banquet in IQSa that the former must be seen as integrally related to the eschatological expectations and the deepseated messianic consciousness of the Qumran sect.6 For this reason exclusion from the communal meals was a grave penalty. It meant that the offender was unable to participate in a ritual expressive of the central eschatological and messianic aspirations of the sect and was thus deprived of the privilege to prepare for the imminent end of days. Offenders thus banned from participation were allowed to return only upon repentance and repetition of the full progression of initiatory stages (1QS 7.18-21; 8.16-19). Of such regimen there is not the slightest hint in Joseph and Aseneth. Aseneth has immediate access to the benefits of the bread of life and cup of blessing upon her renunciation of idols and penitent turning to the God of Israel, and this advancement receives heavenly confirmation before she has any contact at all with any members of the Jewish community (other than her initial contact with Joseph at a time when she still regarded him with disdain). Even if it be assumed that some sort of communal meal lies behind the language of eating and drinking in Joseph and Aseneth, there is certainly no such concern to regulate eligibility and order as we find in the Qumran texts. In particular, the perception at Qumran that proselytes were inferior7 differs markedly and their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (ed. J. Neusner, W.S. Green and E. Frerichs; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 111-37; and the references cited there. 6. See G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective (Cleveland: Collins & World, 1978), p. 182; and the more detailed discussion in Schiffman, 'Communal Meals at Qumran', pp. 45-56; idem, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 191-210; and idem, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 53-67. 7. See 4QFlor, frags. 1-2, 1.4; 4QpNah, frags. 3-4, 2.9; CD 14.4-6; and the discussion in J.M. Baumgarten, 'The Exclusion of Netinim and Proselytes in 4QFlorilegium', RevQ 8 (1972), pp. 87-96; repr. with postscript in idem, Studies in

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

189

from the emphasis in Joseph and Aseneth that the convert is on a par with the person who is a member of the community of Israel by birth. Also absent from Joseph and Aseneth is the priestly emphasis characteristic of the Qumran sect and exhibited in the priority of the priest at mealtime. In Joseph and Aseneth Levi is esteemed not for his priestly, but for his prophetic qualities. Neither does the obsession with ritual purity that was such a definitive element of Qumran meal practice have any counterpart in Joseph and Aseneth other than the general concern shared by many Jews in the Hellenistic world to eat apart from Gentiles (7.1; cf. 20.5 and 21.8) and to avoid food contaminated by idolatry (8.5). Ritual washings such as those practiced regularly at Qumran have no place in the account of Aseneth's conversion.8 Neither does Joseph and Aseneth reflect anything of the sectarian outlook and monastic way of life represented in the Qumran scrolls. Moreover, the messianic and eschatological yearnings which were determinative for the Qumran sect and its communal meals are entirely lacking in Joseph and Aseneth, not only in the 'meal' passages but in the document in general. Indicated already in the discussion of the meal are some of the principal differences in the respective initiatory procedures, to which we now turn for more direct consideration. Admission into the Qumran sect, according to 1QS 6.13-23, took place in four stages as follows: 1. The aspirant was first examined by the community's Overseer (Tpa). If judged amenable to the discipline of the sect, he was then brought into the Covenant by means of a vow to turn to the truth and depart from all evil,9 and was instructed in the teachings of the sect for a period of unknown duration. 2. The novice was next brought to stand before the plenary assembly ('the Many', D'rnn), who examined him and voted on his acceptance or rejection. If accepted, he then underwent a novitiate of one Qumran Law (SJLA, 24; Leiden: Brill, 1977), pp. 75-87. 8. On Aseneth's washing of her face and hands (14.12-15) and the improbability that this reflects some sort of purificatory ritual, see the section entitled 'Washing of the Face and Hands' in Chapter 4 above. Even if some ritual washing is echoed here, it is unlike the purificatory rituals of the Essenes, which, according to the Qumran scrolls, the Damascus Document and Josephus, involved bodily immersion rather than merely washing the hands or other parts of the body. 9. No oath is mentioned expressly in 1QS 6.15, but a comparison of the language here with that in 5.7-11 shows that such an oath was a part of the initiatory process.

190

From Death to Life

year during which he could not touch the pure food10 of the sect nor merge his possessions with the communal property. 3. At the end of this year, the candidate was examined regarding his spirit and his deeds. If the 'priests and a majority of their associates' voted favorably, he was granted provisional membership. He was still excluded from the liquid food of the community (which implies that he was allowed access to the community's solid food), and his possessions and the earnings from his labor, though now officially registered by the Superintendent (ipna) were not yet added to the common pool nor spent for common purposes. 4. After a year in this provisional status, the candidate was again examined by the Many, and, if voted suitable for full admission by them, attained all the privileges of full membership. At this point he was assigned a numerical rank within the community, gained full access to the pure food of the sect (both liquid and solid foods), had his property merged with that of the community (and therefore made subject to communal use), and attained voting rights in the sectarian assembly. The absence of a ritual washing in the above scheme11 makes it unlikely that any of the ablutions practiced by the Qumran sect was

10. That mno refers to the pure food of the sect is now the view of most interpreters. See G. Venues, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 3rd edn, 1987), pp. 7-8; idem, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective, pp. 9596; Schiffman, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 162-63; H. Ringgren, The Faith of Qumran (trans. E.T. Sander; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963), p. 218; B.E. Thiering, 'Qumran Initiation and New Testament Baptism', NTS 27 (1981), pp. 617-19; and M. Newton, The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of Paul (SNTSMS, 53; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 21-26. For other views see H. Huppenbauer, 'Tie und mno in der Sektenregel von Qumran', TZ 13 (1957), pp. 350-51; P. Wernberg-M011er, The Manual of Discipline (STDJ, 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), p. 96 n. 52; S. Lieberman, 'The Discipline in the So-Called Dead Sea Manual of Discipline', JBL 71 (1952), p. 203; and A.R.C. Leaney, The Rule of Qumran and its Meaning (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1966), pp. 193-95. 11. Of course, if one follows Huppenbauer in interpreting mno as the bath through which purity is attained ('"ino und mno', pp. 35-51), then a ritual bath is implied in the second stage above. But this view is unconvincing to most. Ringgren (Faith of Qumran, p. 218) and others have correctly insisted that 1QS 5.13 clearly distinguishes between the bath of cleansing and the mno.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

191

exclusively, or even primarily, initiatory.12 However, the importance of purity and of purificatory washings among the Essenes makes it quite likely that the novice's first ablution was very special and had something of an initiatory character, marking a formal break with the corrupt world and signifying entry into the company of the purified.13 Variations of the above process which are found in CD 15.7-15 and Josephus War 2.8.7 pertain primarily to matters of detail. Thus, for example, Josephus specifies admission to the ritual baths as one of the stages in the initiatory process, and he indicates that novices wore white garments. Josephus also describes a one-year pre-novitiate, which would make the total process three years long, whereas 1QS speaks only of a two-year process plus an initial period of instruction for which no length is specified. In the passage in CD the official in charge is designated ~ip3Q rather than Tpa (see also 1QS 6.20),14 and only the first two of the four stages outlined above are described. ^Notwithstanding such differences, the procedures for admission described in the three sources are of kindred spirit and form. Even C. Rabin, who sought to minimize the similarities between the Qumran sect and the Essenes known from Josephus, conceded that the similarities in the procedures for admission 12. So J. Pryke, The Sacraments of Holy Baptism and Holy Communion in the Light of Ritual Washings and Sacred Meals at Qumran', RevQ 5 (1966), pp. 546-47: The washings of the sectarians, probably taken before every meal, were only a part of the ordered life of meticulous purity... They were not initiation ceremonies, admitting the candidate into the order... ' So also Newton, Concept of Purity, p. 29: 'we find no trace of baptismal initiation*. On the other hand, O. Betz, 'Die Proselytentaufe der Qumransekte und die Taufe im Neuen Testament', RevQ 1 (1958), p. 218, argues that there was an initiatory washing. 13. So J.A.T. Robinson, The Baptism of John and the Qumran Community', HTR 50 (1957), p. 182; B. Thiering, 'Inner and Outer Cleansing at Qumran as a Background to New Testament Baptism', NTS 26 (1980), pp. 269-70; and idem, 'Qumran Initiation', p. 620. 14. There is wide agreement that the two terms denote the same official. See, e.g., Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 2nd edn, pp. 19-20. But cf. the modifications of this view in Leaney, The Rule of Qumran, p. 196; J.F. Priest, 'Mebaqqer, Paqid, and the Messiah', JBL 81 (1962), p. 58; and P. Guilbert in J. Carmignac and P. Guilbert, Les textes de Qumran: Traduits et annotés (Paris: Letouzey & Ane, 1961), p. 47, n. 86 on 1QS 6.12. 15. This latter difference may imply that the passage in CD describes a community of novices, as G. Forkman has concluded (The Limits of Religious Community [ConBNT, 5; Lund: Gleerup, 1972], p. 64), or it may simply reflect the practices of an Essene settlement different from those at Qumran.

192

From Death to Life

'are certainly evidence of a general "mental climate" in which there was a recognized pattern of novitiate procedure'.16For our comparative purposes this 'general "mental climate'" and 'recognized pattern of novitiate procedure' is sufficient, even if there were geographical and chronological variations and other differences of detail among the various sources. The dissimilarity between the process described above and the conversion of Aseneth in Joseph and Aseneth is so marked as to overshadow the minor similarities which some have noted. Indeed, the alleged similarities themselves are more apparent than real. For example, W. Nauck has compared the consciousness of sin and of the need for forgiveness in 1QS 1.24-25 with that expressed by Aseneth in her prayer (Jos. Asen. 12.4), the light-darkness dualism of Jos. Asen. 8.9 and 12.1 with that characteristic of the Qumran scrolls, and the white clothing worn by Aseneth with that worn by Essene novices according to Josephus.17 However, the understanding of the human predicament at Qumran is radically different from that in Joseph and Aseneth even if there is a profound consciousness of sin and appeal for forgiveness in both. As we have seen in Chapter 4, sin and the human predicament are conceived very specifically in Joseph and Aseneth in terms of the worship of idols instead of the true God. The Qumran doctrine of the two spirits, rigid determinism, and emphasis on the wretchedness and utter depravity of humanity are all foreign to Joseph and Aseneth. In the latter, sin is simply non-acknowledgment of God, and the predicament of the godless is therefore alterable by human choice. The wearing of white garments by both Aseneth and the candidates for Essene initiation described by Josephus18 is a noteworthy similarity but hardly proof of a close relationship. This 'parallel' is vitiated both by the textual uncertainty in the description of Aseneth's robe in Jos. Asen. 14.12-1519 and by the fact that the use of white garments in ancient 16. Qumran Studies (Scripta Judaica, 2; Oxford: University Press, 1957), p. 11. 17. Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefs, p. 170. 18. War 2.8.7; see also 1QS 4.8. 19. In Batiffol's edition the robe is described as Xevicn, 'white' or 'radiant', but in the more recent edition by Burchard the adjective is instead Xivf), 'linen'. Philonenko's text reads taxujcpa, 'bright, shining'. In any case the obvious contrast between the black mourning garment which Aseneth removes and the radiant new garment which she puts on indicates that the author intended the latter to be envisioned as white.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

193

religions, including both Judaism and Christianity, is too widespread to provide evidence of a direct connection between Aseneth's actions and Essene practice.20 As S. Sandmel has written, 'it is the distinctive which is significant for identifying the particular, and not the broad areas in common with other Judaisms'.21 In Joseph and Aseneth, the white clothing worn by Aseneth parallels that worn by Joseph and shows that as a new convert she enjoys the same exalted status that he does. This status approximates angelic existence, as we have seen in Chapters 3 and 4, and therefore bears some similarity to the angelic sort of existence enjoyed by God's elect according to the Qumran scrolls.22 However, the portrayal of the righteous as angels is itself more widely attested than is commonly recognized, as J.H. Charlesworth and P.B. Decock have shown recently23 and as I shall further document below. Once again, therefore, we are dealing with a phenomenon common to many Jewish circles rather than with distinctive ideas indicating a direct relationship between Joseph and Aseneth and the Essenes. Nauck is right that Joseph and Aseneth shares with the Qumran scrolls the use of light-darkness dualism to describe initiation, but this dualism is not nearly as pervasive in Joseph and Aseneth, nor does it have the predestinarían character of the dualism described, for example, in 1QS 3.13-4.26. In the absence of distinctive features linking the lightdarkness motif in Joseph and Aseneth with that at Qumran, the presence of this virtually universal dualistic pair24 affords no evidence of kinship between the two.

20. See W. Michaelis, 'A,e\>KÓc, taumívco', TDNT, IV, pp. 241-50. To name but a few, the Therapeutae, Merkabah mystics, and devotees of the Isis cult—all of which are discussed below—wore white garments. 21. 'Parallelomania', JBL 81 (1962), p. 3. 22. See Charlesworth, 'The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel', pp. 135-36 and the references cited there. Charlesworth writes, 'It appears that the Scrolls contain the idea that a fully initiated Essene has transcended the human level and has started to become an angel' (p. 136). See further G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS, 26; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972), pp. 146-56. 23. Charlesworth, The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel', pp. 135-51; and Decock, 'Holy Ones, Sons of God, and the Transcendent Future of the Righteous in I Enoch and the New Testament', Neot 17 (1983), pp. 70-82. 24. See R. Bultmann, 'Zur Geschichte der Lichtsymbolik im Altertum', Philologus 97 (1948), pp. 1-36.

194

From Death to Life

The same may be said of the death-life polarity which, as Nickelsburg correctly observes, Joseph and Aseneth shares with the Qumran Hodayoth and with Therapeutic belief as described by Philo.25 This antithesis is by no means unique to the sources under consideration here, as we have seen in Chapter 5. In Joseph and Aseneth it is part of the creation imagery which the author employs to describe conversion,26 and there is no good reason to relate it directly to the Qumran scrolls, with which it has nothing distinctive in common. R.T. Beckwith's recent argument that calendrical concerns in Joseph and Aseneth corroborate the connection with the Essenes27 is likewise unconvincing. No such concerns are explicit in Joseph and Aseneth, and even the implicit pattern which Beckwith attempts to reconstruct from the temporal references in the work does not correspond to the Essene calendar attested at Qumran but only to a conjectural 'adapted Essene calendar'. Neither is there any support for the Essene hypothesis in Beckwith's proposed connection between the meal language in Joseph and Aseneth and the Essene firstfruits festivals. Even if one assumes the highly conjectural calendrical scheme upon which this proposed connection rests, only the marriage festivities in Joseph and Aseneth 21 are thereby associated with the Essene festival of the Firstfruits of Wine; nothing suggests that the bread-cup-ointment formula should be related to the Essene firstfruits festivals, and in fact the Essene avoidance of bodily contact with oil28 clashes with the prominence of anointing in the triadic formula in Joseph and Aseneth. The above considerations combine to suggest that the oft-repeated claim of kinship between Joseph and Aseneth and the Essenes is unfounded. Neither in belief and practice in general nor in the formal and conceptual features of initiation in particular do the two have anything in common beyond what is reasonable to expect from any two movements sharing any sort of Jewish heritage, and the differences are 25. Jewish Literature, p. 271 n. 67. See Jos. Asen. 15.4-5; 16.16; 1QH 3.19-23; 11.3-14; and Philo Vit. Com., p. 13. 26. See Chapter 4 above. 27. 'Solar Calendar', pp. 90-111. 28. Josephus War 2.8.3: 'Oil they consider defiling, and anyone who accidently comes in contact with it scours his person; for they make a point of keeping a dry skin and of always being dressed in white'. CD 12.15-17 also refers to oil as a carrier of impurity. See on this Baumgarten, Studies in Qumran Law, pp. 88-97; and see further 'Bread, Cup, Ointment and Honey' above in Chapter 4.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

195

so fundamental and so thoroughgoing as to rule out positive comparison on any level deeper than the surface. Joseph and Aseneth is not an Essene or significantly Essene-like work; Essene initiation affords no analogy to Aseneth's conversion as narrated in Joseph and Aseneth. Therapeutae All too little is known about the Therapeutae, that intriguing Egyptian Jewish sect for whose beliefs and customs our sole source of information is Philo's On the Contemplative Life (Vit. Cont.).29 However, as our Forschungsbericht shows, the limited information available has been sufficient to spawn the suggestion that Joseph and Aseneth has close affinities with the Therapeutae and even the claim that the work is of Therapeutic origin.30 Because of the close kinship between the Palestinian Essenes and the Egyptian Therapeutae,31 many of the conclusions reached in the previous section regarding the alleged Essene character of Joseph and Aseneth are also applicable, mutatis mutandis, to the question whether Joseph and Aseneth is to be associated with the Therapeutae, and these 29. Doubts expressed in the nineteenth century about the Philonic authenticity of Vit. Cont. and about the very existence of a Jewish sect of Therapeutae in Egypt in the first century CE have now largely disappeared. See the discussions in F.C. Conybeare, Philo about the Contemplative Life (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895); P. Wendland, Die Therapeuten und die philonische Schrift vom beschaulichen Leben (Jarbücher für classische Philologie, Supplemental Vol. 22; Leipzig: n.p., 1896), pp. 693-770; L Heinemann, Therapeutai', PW, LDC, pp. 2321-46; P. Geoltrain, 'Le traité de la vie contemplative de Philon d'Alexandrie', Sem 10 (1960), pp. 5-67; S. Wagner, Die Essener in der Wissenschaftlichen Diskussion (BZAW, 79; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1960), pp. 194-202; E. Schürer, History (ed. Vermes et al.), H, pp. 591-97; and most recently the helpful Forschungsbericht by J. Riaud, 'Les thérapeutes d'Alexandrie dans la tradition et dans la recherche critique jusqu'aux découvertes de Qumran', ANRW 2.20.2 (1987), pp. 1189-1295, with the extensive bibliography included there. 30. See especially the contributions by K.G. Kühn and M. Delcor described in Chapter 1 above. 31. The case is quite convincing that the two were very closely related even if full identity cannot be claimed. See the discussions in J.T. Milik, Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judea (trans. J. Strugnell; London: SCM Press, 1959), p. 92; G. Vermes, 'Essenes-Therapeutae-Qumran',Z)Mr/zam University Journal 21 (1960), pp. 97-115; idem, 'Essenes and Therapeutae', RevQ 3 (1962), pp. 495-504; repr. in idem, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies (SJLA, 8; Leiden: Brill, 1975), pp. 30-36; and Schürer, History (ed. Vermes et al), II, pp. 591-97.

196

From Death to Life

points need not be repeated here. Thus, for example, the contention that the bread-cup-ointment passages and Aseneth's white garment fail to establish a link with the Essenes holds good also for the Therapeutae. The concern in Joseph and Aseneth to place the new convert on a par with the established members of the community of Israel stands in contrast to the ranking of members practiced by both the Essenes and the Therapeutae.32 Similarly, the absence of reference in Joseph and Aseneth to any private communal existence and ordered life of piety contrasts with the Therapeutae as well as with the Essenes. Here it is necessary to examine only those peculiarities of the Therapeutae which afford additional arguments for and against a possible connection between Joseph and Aseneth and the Therapeutae. Calling for consideration first are those points at which the hypothesis that Joseph and Aseneth is Therapeutic has been thought to have some advantage over the Essene hypothesis. For example, M. Delcor supports his view that Joseph and Aseneth is 'plus thérapeute qu'essénien' by noting that the ritual washings regularly practiced by the Essenes but not mentioned in Joseph and Aseneth are also absent from Philo's description of the Therapeutae, that the place of women among the Therapeutae provides a better context for Aseneth's story than does the male predominance among the Essenes, that Aseneth's fasting is analogous to that practiced by the Therapeutae, and that Aseneth's disposal of her valuables finds an analogy in the relinquishment of worldly possessions by candidates for induction into the order of the Therapeutae.33 Closer inspection robs each of these alleged parallels of its force. The absence of reference to ritual washings both in Joseph and Aseneth and in Philo's description of the Therapeutae is a significant difference between the Qumran scrolls on the one hand and these two sources on the other, but it hardly provides any positive reason for associating these two. Neither are Aseneth's experiences in Joseph and Aseneth elucidated by the role of women among the Therapeutae; indeed, a fundamental difference is to be observed here. Although both sexes were represented among the Therapeutae, men and women worshiped in separate enclosures, participated in meals separately, and remained celibate.34 Most of the Therapeutic women, according to Philo, were 'aged virgins, who 32. Philo Vif. Com. 3.30; 8.67. 33. 'Un roman d'amour', pp. 21 -27. 34. Philo Vit. Com. 3.32-33; 9.68-69.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

197

have kept their chastity...of their own free will in their yearning for wisdom'.35 In Joseph and Aseneth, on the other hand, marriage is everywhere presupposed as normal (4.11; 8.5-7). Joseph and Aseneth themselves marry and have children (21.1-9). The virginity ascribed to both Joseph (4.7; 8.1; 7.4-5) and Aseneth (1.4-6; 2.1; 7.8) prior to their marriage is clearly not a lifelong disposition but serves, in Joseph's case, to emphasize an ethic of abstinence before marriage and refusal of sexual intimacy with non-Jews, and in Aseneth's case, to stress her suitability to marry Joseph and to be received fully into the community of Israel. The Therapeutic premium placed on virginity is quite foreign to Joseph and Aseneth. The Therapeutic ideal of poverty is also quite unlike what we find in Joseph and Aseneth. According to Philo the Therapeutae relinquished all their worldly possessions to their families or friends in order to devote themselves wholly to the life of contemplation.36 Aseneth, too, disposed of all her valuables, especially her idols and the related paraphernalia, by simply throwing them out her window (10.10-13). However, as we have seen, this act serves to accentuate Aseneth's utter repudiation of idolatry and her sincerity in turning to the God of Israel. That her divesting herself of these belongings does not grow out of any premium placed on poverty and simplicity such as characterized the Therapeutae is evidenced later in the story, when Aseneth dresses lavishly in precious ornaments from her chests and elegant clothes from her great coffer (18.5-6), and again when she participates in an elaborate wedding feast and seven-day banquet attended by 'all the chiefs of the land of Egypt and all the kings of the nations' (21.8; see also 20.6). Such fine clothing and opulent feasting stand in marked contrast to the ascetic lifestyle of the Therapeutae, who, according to Philo, wore only inexpensive clothing, ate only simple food and only enough to sustain life, and abstained from meat and wine.37 It should be noted also that Aseneth's fasting reported in connection with her initial penance in sackcloth and ashes is quite temporary and therefore scarcely comparable, pace Delcor, to the regular fasts observed by the Therapeutae.38 35. Vit. Cont. 9.68. This and all other quotations of Philo are from F.H. Colson and G.H. Whitaker, Philo (10 vols, with 2 suppl. vols.; LCL; London: Heinemann; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1929-53). 36. Vit. Com. 2.13,18. 37. Vit. Cont. 4.37-38; 9.73-74. 38. Vit. Cont. 4.34-35.

198

From Death to Life

Not only do the alleged parallels fail to establish a link between Joseph and Aseneth and the Therapeutae, but fundamental differences render any close kinship highly unlikely. Joseph and Aseneth knows nothing of the retreat from the bustle of life into the solitude of contemplation which is the definitive feature of the Therapeutae described by Philo. On the contrary, the ethic fostered by the formula 'it is not proper for the man (woman) who worships God to...' and by other attempts to define the conduct befitting 'those who worship God' presupposes life in the everyday world of ordinary social intercourse. Burchard has even observed in this connection that Aseneth, as she is introduced in Joseph and Aseneth, is an unlikely candidate for the kind of conversion envisioned in Philo's portrayal of the Therapeutae. Whereas, according to Philo's description, one left the hubbub and the temptations of daily life to pursue the superior life of meditation and solitude, Aseneth is secluded in her tower and not even subject to the vices and temptations of the outside world prior to her conversion. Although Philo tells us nothing specific about the process of induction into the Therapeutae, the portrayal of this group which he does provide makes it highly unlikely that such a person as Aseneth would be chosen to represent Therapeutic conversion.39 Moreover, upon her conversion Aseneth enters no communal order devoted to spiritual exercises of regular prayers, study of Scripture and philosophy, and composition and singing of hymns and psalms—all of which were definitive of Therapeutic life according to Philo.40 The practice of bodily and spiritual healing from which the Therapeutae derived their very name41 is also entirely lacking in Joseph and Aseneth. The inevitable conclusion from all of the above is that Philo's description of the Therapeutae sheds no significant light on Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth. Even when due allowance is made for the biases which colored our only account of the Therapeutae, the differences between this group and the Jewish community behind Joseph and Aseneth are sufficient to rule out any likelihood of a close relationship between the two, and the apparent similarities which some have noted fall far short of altering this assessment.

39. Burchard, Untersuchungen, pp. 108-109. 40. Vit. Conî. 3.25-29. 41. Vit. Conî. 1.2

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

199

Haburoth The conclusion in Chapter 5 that Joseph andAseneth is not as remote as is commonly supposed from those streams of Judaism that came to be regarded as normative raises the possibility that light may be shed on Aseneth's conversion by the procedures for admission into those religious associations known in rabbinic literature as Haburoth (niTon). As was indicated in Chapter 5, there is in both Joseph andAseneth and our sources on the Haburoth a high evaluation of meals and a strong concern to avoid defilement in connection with them. Indeed, the selfidentity of both groups seems to have been determined largely by this. Both ranked meals and the maintenance of purity in connection with meals among the quintessentials of Judaism, the consummate expressions of a whole way of life. The question must now be raised whether there is any similarity in terms of procedures for admission, and whether the one fundamental point of similarity mentioned above is so overshadowed by the more obvious and extensive differences as to nullify positive comparison. A strong initial presumption against any direct relationship in the procedures for admission lies in the fact that Aseneth is a Gentile who converts to Judaism, whereas only those who were already pious Jews were qualified to become Haberim. The very raison d'etre for the Haburoth was to foster among Jews the observance of the laws of tithing and of eating all food in a state of ritual purity. Such concerns, including especially the extensive halakoth governing the ritual fitness of food and the proper tithing and other offerings of food, are foreign to Joseph and Aseneth even if the latter reflects strong concern to avoid defilement in connection with food. As we saw in Chapters 3 and 4, food is contaminated in a particular way according to Joseph andAseneth—by association with the cult of idols. There is no hint that it contracts defilement in any of the numerous other ways described in rabbinic legislation governing the tithing, production, purchase and preparation of food. Even when we are told that 'Joseph did not eat with the Egyptians, for this was an abomination to him', we are left to wonder whether he had any qualms about eating food provided by his Gentile hosts, since the text says only that 'they set before him a table by itself (7.1). The procedures for admission into a Haburah fare no better than the food laws in terms of positive comparison with the experiences of Aseneth in Joseph and Aseneth. Our late and diverse halakic sources

200

From Death to Life

afford no precise and uniform picture of the conditions of admission into a Haburah, but the following description is not far wide of the mark even if individual details are of debatable order and significance and were subject to variation from one time and place to another.42 A person who wished to enter the Haburah had to declare this intention before the association or its representatives.43 Following this was a probationary period in which the candidate learned the obligations of the Haberim and passed through three stages of affiliation as follows:44 1.

2.

Reliability. The newcomer undertook to be a 'reliable person' (]QK2) by giving all required tithes and heave-offerings from any produce owned unless there was no question that these had been given previously.45 Initiation. The candidate began to observe the laws of eating food in ritual purity, first, with regard to 'wings' (i.e.,

42. Whatever the particulars of the process, the very existence of relatively fixed procedures for admission into the Haburoth, as distinct from Pharisaism at large, suffices to dispel L. Finkelstein's assumption that the terms denote the same group (see L. Finkelstein, The Pharisees: The Sociological Background of their Faith [2 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1938], I, pp. 74-76). J. Bowker, Jesus and the Pharisees (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), p. 35, more accurately describes the Haburoth as 'a movement within a movement, a kind of extreme deduction, drawn from the basic Hakamic vision (that holiness should be possible for all men), which emphasized the progress possible in attaining the further degrees of holiness by its careful rules and ranks'. 43. According to t. Dem. 2.14, this declaration was made before the Haburah as a whole; according to b. Bek. 30b, it could be made in the presence of three Haberim. 44. The outline here is deduced from m. Dem. 2.2-3, t. Dem. 2.2-3.15 J. Dem. 22d-23a and b. Bek. 30b-31a, and basically follows the reconstruction by J. Neusner, 'The Fellowship (rrran) in the Second Jewish Commonwealth', HTR 53 (1960), pp. 129-36; see also Rabin, Qumran Studies, pp. 11-20. J.M. Baumgarten, 'Qumran Studies', JBL 77 (1958), pp. 250-51, and Oppenheimer, 'Am Ha-aretz\ pp. 129-30, agree that admission was a gradual process but caution against artificial divisions of the process into neat stages. 45. Baumgarten, 'Qumran Studies', p. 251, argues against the notion that ]Q«] denotes a pre-novitiate stage, since the term is also used in the sources to refer to a full-fledged member of the Haburah. Oppenheimer, 'Am Ha-aretz, pp. 151-56, argues that ]DW denotes not a candidate for admission to the Haburah but one who observed the tithing laws so that the Haber could trade with him without any misgiving. Rabin, Qumran Studies, pp. 16-18; and Neusner, 'The Fellowship', pp. 132-34, on the other hand, suggest that acceptance as a pro was a preparatory stage. The issue is of no major consequence for the present investigation.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

3.

201

apparently, cleanness of hands46), and, secondly, with regard to preserving the purity of both consecrated food and ordinary food which they prepared and ate. Novitiate. The candidate began to guard all food whether it was consumed it or not, from ritual contamination both at home and in commerce, and to keep all garments from defilement. After this novitiate (which lasted thirty days in regard to the purity of liquids and twelve months in regard to the purity of clothing according to the school of Shammai, and thirty days in both cases according to the school of Hillel47), one attained full membership and was considered trustworthy in regard to the purity of both dry foods and liquids and the purity of garments.

The differences between this process and the conversion of Aseneth in Joseph and Aseneth are too readily apparent to require elaboration here. Aseneth undergoes no probationary period, novitiate, or affiliation by stages. The mere announcement that she has renounced idolatry and has become a partaker in the bread of life and cup of blessing suffices to win Joseph's full acceptance of her (19.5-11). The halakic concerns which dominate the procedure for becoming a Haber are absent in Aseneth's case. Her conversion is not contingent upon any human agent or group decision but in fact takes place in solitude. It is from the Jewish community at large, and not from any private association, that the author seeks acceptance for the Gentile convert, and in any case this acceptance by the community is a desired result, not a condition, of conversion. The unqualified notice in 20.5 that Joseph and Aseneth 'ate and drank and celebrated', presumably along with Pentephres and Aseneth's whole family, and the participation of Joseph and his newlyconverted bride in the elaborate feast given by Pharaoh, with numerous Gentile guests (21.8), graphically illustrate the great gulf that exists between the mind-set that characterized the Haburoth and the concerns reflected in the account of Aseneth's conversion. We must conclude that the procedures for admission into the 46. So Lieberman, Tosefta Kipshuta (2 vols.; New York: Rabinowitz Research Institute, 1955), I, pp. 215-16; idem, 'Manual of Discipline', p. 201 n. 25; and most others. 47. T. Dem. 2.11-12; cf. the version in b. Bek. 30b and the discussion of the discrepancy in Oppenheimer, 'Am Ha-aretz, pp. 121-22 n. 11.

202

From Death to Life

Haburoth as we know them from rabbinic literature furnish no analogy for or elucidation upon the process by which Aseneth converts to Judaism in Joseph and Aseneth. There is in Joseph and Aseneth a concern to preserve table fellowship in separation from Gentiles and from the contamination of idolatry, but this concern was the common property of many Jews48 and does not indicate a direct relationship with those Jewish groups whose definitive raison d'etre was the all-encompassing and regimented effort to ensure the ritual cleanliness of food and of those who ate it. Gnostics That there were Jewish circles which can be labeled 'gnostic' or 'gnosticizing' and which existed prior to and contemporaneously with the various forms of Christian Gnosticism is now widely recognized by specialists in gnostic studies.49 Unfortunately, the information on these Jewish groups is too scanty and indirect to allow us to reconstruct a paradigm of conversion or initiation for comparison with that in Joseph and Aseneth. Nevertheless, the persistent claim that gnosticizing elements are to be found in Joseph and Aseneth50 requires that we give some attention to this hypothesis, and the features common to most Jewish, Christian and other forms of gnosis afford ample criteria at least 48. See Dan. 1.1-16; Add. Est. 4.17; Jub. 22.16; 1 Mace. 1.62-63; 2 Mace. 6.18-21; 7.1; 3 Mace. 3.4-7; Ep. Arist. 128-42; Sib. Or. 4.24-30; Gal. 2.11-14; Acts 10-11. 49. See, among many others, G.W. MacRae, 'The Jewish Background of the Gnostic Sophia Myth', NovT 12 (1970), pp. 86-101; R.M. Wilson, '"Jewish Gnosis" and Gnostic Origins: A Survey', HUCA 45 (1974), pp. 177-89; R. van den Broek, 'The Present State of Gnostic Studies', VC 37 (1983), pp. 56-61; K. Rudolph, Die Gnosis: Wesen und Geschichte einer spätantiken Religion (Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang, 1977 [ET: Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism (trans. R.M. Wilson; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983)]); and the numerous publications by B.A. Pearson, including 'Jewish Elements in Gnosticism and the Development of Gnostic Self-Definition', in Jewish and Christian Self-Definition. I. The Shaping of Christianity in the Second and Third Centuries (ed. E.P. Sanders; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), pp. 151-60; 'Jewish Sources in Gnostic Literature', in Stone (ed.), Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, pp. 443-81; and 'The Problem of "Jewish Gnostic" Literature', in Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity (ed. C.W. Hedrick and R. Hodgson, Jr; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1986), pp. 15-35. 50. See Chapter 1 above.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

203

for a preliminary judgment on whether further research into the possible gnostic affinities of Joseph andAseneth is likely to prove fruitful. The study of Gnosticism, perhaps more than the study of any other phenomenon in late antiquity, is a methodological and terminological Babel. Attempts to refine terminology, such as the now-popular distinction between gnosis and Gnosticism, alleviate the problem only slightly. According to this distinction, 'Gnosticism' is reserved for the Christian heresy of the second century, while 'gnosis' is used of the wider movement characterized by affinities with Gnosticism proper.51 The danger inherent in thinking of gnosis in this broad, phenomenological sense is articulated well by A. McGuire: it creates the impression that 'Gnosis', or any religious phenomenon, can be separated from its particular, concrete forms and social contexts....the attempt to illustrate the common features of all varieties of Gnosis, even with repeated reference to its 'manifold diversity', leads to grand generalizations in which one element, found perhaps in one or two texts, suddenly becomes characteristic of 'Gnosis' as a whole. Almost invariably, this method obscures the historical particularity and distinctiveness of the texts, figures, and communities that constitute the phenomenon.52

H. Koester offers a similar caveat: Gnostic religion in its origin and development cannot be understood through the reconstruction of a general system in mythological and philosophical terms, but only in the Gnostic interpretation of the traditions of myth and cult in specific religious communities.53

These caveats provide a much-needed corrective, but in view of the modest goal of our inquiry—to determine whether any of the common features of gnosis (that is, of gnostic or gnosticizing ideology) figure 51. So, e.g., Wilson, '"Jewish Gnosis'", pp. 180-81; and idem, 'Slippery Words II: Gnosis, Gnostic, Gnosticism', ExpT 89 (1978), p. 298. Cf. S. Arai, 'Zur Definition der Gnosis in Rücksicht auf die Frage nach ihrem Ursprung', in Le Origini dello Gnosticismo (ed. U. Bianchi; Leiden: Brill, 1967), pp. 181-87. 52. Review of Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism, by K. Rudolph, Second Century 5 (1985-86), p. 48. McGuire's comment is in response to Rudolph's analysis of the 'Nature [Wesen] and Structure' of gnosis. Rudolph had assumed that this task 'can only be done in a phenomenological survey, in which the historical, chronological, and sociological problems can be for the moment set aside' (p. 59). 53. 'The History-of-Religions School, Gnosis, and Gospel of John', ST 40 (1986), p. 132.

204

From Death to Life

significantly in the account of Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth—it is unnecessary to delve deeply into the multiplicity of historical manifestations of this phenomenon. Naturally, if our preliminary line of inquiry should yield positive results, it would be necessary to advance beyond phenomenological description and pursue a more discriminating historical method in which the affinities of Joseph and Aseneth with particular gnostic systems would be assessed.54 Common to the various gnostic groups in the Hellenistic world is an emphasis on salvation by means of a special kind of yvcoaic, 'knowledge'.55 Thus it is significant that no such ideas of 'knowledge' are found in Joseph and Aseneth. The word yvcbaic never actually appears, though Aseneth does use the noun cxyvoia, the verb àyvoéco, and negated forms of the verbs yivcoaicco and oîôoc to describe in retrospect her predicament prior to her conversion (12.5; 13.11; 21.15). However, as was indicated in Chapter 4, these terms have a specialized 54. Elsewhere McGuire herself acknowledges the legitimacy of such an approach. In 'Conversion and Gnosis in the "Gospel of Truth" ', NovT 28 (1986), pp. 342-43, she writes, 'Recognizing the circular nature of delimiting the phenomenon, the body of evidence, and its characteristics, the historian may set forward a list of features exhibited in a delimited body of evidence as the distinguishing characteristics of the phenomenon'. After offering her own brief list of such features, which are essentially the same as those employed for comparative purposes in the present study, McGuire continues: 'While these are not the only characteristics that one might take to represent the distinguishing features of Gnosticism, they are sufficiently broad to gather a variety of religious phenomena under the category of Gnosticism, sufficiently narrow to set that group of phenomena apart from other phenomena, and they do correspond to a delimited body of evidence'. Other helpful methodological essays are M. Smith, 'The History of the Term Gnostikos', in The Rediscovery of Gnosticism: Proceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut, March 28-31, 1978 (ed. B. Layton; 2 vols.; SHR, Supplements to Numen, 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980-81), II, pp. 796-807; and the dated but still helpful article by H.J.W. Drijvers, 'The Origins of Gnosticism as a Religious and Historical Problem', NedTTs 22 (1967-68), pp. 321-51. 55. See, e.g., Gos. Truth 29.32-30.16 et passim', and Clement of Alexandria Excerpts from Theodotus 78.2, as cited by H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon Press, 2nd edn, 1963), p. 45: 'What liberates is the knowledge of who we were, what we became; where we were, whereinto we have been thrown; whereto we speed, wherefrom we are redeemed; what birth is, and what rebirth'. For examples of soteriological systems in which this fundamental tenet is developed, see, from the Nag Hammadi library, Hypostasis of the Archons, Gospel of Truth, and Apocryphon of John', and from the Hermetic Corpus, Poimandres.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

205

meaning in Joseph and Aseneth; they denote the non-acknowledgment of the true God and the worship of idols instead. In no instance do they imply ignorance in the gnostic sense of unawareness of the soul's divine origin, subsequent imprisonment in the world of matter, and potential for return to its native abode. Indeed, nothing in Joseph and Aseneth reflects such conceptions. Aseneth's predicament is not reversed by any such supranatural revelation or illumination as is intended in the gnostic usage of yvcoaic. She turns to God merely on the basis of what she has heard of his mercy (11.10-14), independently from any revelatory experience, secret lore or divine intermediary. Obviously the world is not viewed so pessimistically in Joseph and Aseneth that—as in most gnostic systems—ignorance is the very essence of mundane existence and the transcendent God is unknown and unknowable except through supramundane revelation.56 From the foregoing it is already evident that the human predicament, conversion, and salvation are all conceived quite differently in Joseph and Aseneth than in gnostic thought. In spite of the arguments advanced long ago by H. Priebatsch and more recently by M. de Goeij that Joseph and Aseneth echoes the kind of redeemer myth found also in Valentinian Gnosticism,57 the man from heaven in Joseph and Aseneth 14-17 plays a quite different role from that of a gnostic redeemer who descends through the spheres, awakens people's spirits from earthly slumber by imparting saving gnosis, and leads them back to the realm of light.58 Indeed, as I have emphasized repeatedly, Aseneth's conversion and change of status are already accomplished facts when the man from heaven arrives; he is in no sense her savior, but comes to provide heavenly confirmation of a conversion that has already taken place. Moreover, nowhere in the account of that conversion do we find the kind of cosmological and anthropological presuppositions and speculations that characterize gnostic myths of redemption.59 D. Sänger is 56. Even in Poimandres, where the narrator is already searching for a world beyond the material one when the redeemer appears to him, he cannot find it on his own but must await revelatory guidance (Poim. 1-4). 57. See the Forschungsbericht in Chapter 1 above. 58. See, e.g., Cos. Truth 28.32-32.4. 59. E.g. see Hypostasis of the Archons and the analysis of it by I.S. Gilhus, The Nature of the Archons: A Study in the So te rio logy of a Gnostic Treatise from Nag Hammadi (CG, II.4; Studies in Oriental Religions, 12; Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1985); see also the helpful study by G.A.G. Stroumsa, Another Seed: Studies in Gnostic Mythology (NHS, 24; Leiden: Brill, 1984).

206

From Death to Life

therefore right in rejecting H. Priebatsch's case for the Valentinian gnostic character of Joseph andAseneth: M. E. ist vom gnostischen und speziell von dem im Valentinianismus überlieferten Sophia-Mythos kein Zugang zum Verständnis von JosAs zu gewinnen.60

The other-worldly goal of salvation related to the gnostic contempt for mundane existence is also quite foreign to Joseph and Aseneth. As we have seen, Aseneth's conversion makes her one of the people of God who already in this life on earth share the food (and hence the immortality) of angels and lead a blessed kind of angelic existence. In marked contrast to the common gnostic assumption that the creation is the product of an evil being and that salvation consists in the liberation of the divine pneuma (or nous) from the prison of the created order,61 the creation of the world and of humankind is viewed quite positively in Joseph and Aseneth. Indeed, it is precisely as creator that God is most highly praised by Aseneth, and creation imagery is the language most often employed in Joseph andAseneth to describe conversion. Also important in terms of how the human predicament and the soteriological ideal are understood is the fact that Aseneth's conversion, unlike gnostic conversion, is nowhere construed as restoration to a status formerly enjoyed or return to a native realm.62 As D. Sänger has observed, the narrative of Aseneth's conversion discloses 'nicht wer sie immer schon war, sondern wer sie ab jetzt.. .ist'.63 In her confession and prayer Aseneth defines her predicament in terms of her idolatry and the familial and social ostracism resulting from her repudiation of idolatry, and not in terms of her forfeiture of some divine status of which she has now become aware and which she wishes to regain. 60. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 37. 61. In Poimandres, unlike most gnostic thought, the Demiurge is not himself evil. However, the material world created by the Demiurge is evil, and salvation is conceived as a process of stripping off the material casings and extricating the pure immaterial self (Poim. 25-26). 62. E.g. the soteriological goal according to Poimandres is union with God. But because humankind descended from the Primal Human, who is in turn an emanation from God, this union is actually a reunion, a restoration of the original oneness of humanity with God (Poim. 26). A similar myth is expressed allegorically in the Hymn of the Pearl in the Acts of Thomas. 63. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 41. See esp. Jos. Asen. 15.5: arco TTJç crnu£pov.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

207

Yet another difference lies in the fact that in Joseph andAseneth there is no separation of people into mutually exclusive groups based upon the amount of gnosis they possess or upon any other criteria. There is instead, as we have seen, a great deal of emphasis on parity among the members of the community of Israel, including the new convert. There are, of course, dualisms of light-darkness and death-life in Joseph and Aseneth, but gnostics had no monopoly on such modes of expression, and the usage of these dualistic pairs in Joseph andAseneth does not reflect the radical cosmological dualism characteristic of gnostic usage. As J.H. Charlesworth has written, it is not the presence of such terms as light, darkness, truth, sleep, knowledge, etc., which characterizes Gnosticism; rather it is the interpretation of these terms and the metaphysical framework in which they are given expression which is uniquely gnostic!64

Such a 'metaphysical framework' or larger complex of thought investing these terms with a gnostic meaning is completely lacking in Joseph andAseneth. From this brief discussion it is clear how little Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth has in common with gnostic conversion even on the surface, and how fundamentally different the two are in terms of definitive underlying conceptions. Gnosis can safely be deleted from the list of paradigms of conversion and initiation which have great potential for providing an interpretative frame for Aseneth's conversion. Merkabah Mystics The presence of features in the story of Aseneth's conversion which can be described as 'mystical', 'esoteric' or 'epiphanic' is unmistakable. This much is clear from the descriptions of Joseph's chariot (5.4); the visit of the man from heaven (chs. 14-17) and the description of his chariot (17.7-8); the radiant appearance of Joseph (5.5), of the man from heaven (14.9), and of Aseneth (18.9); the revelation of ineffable mysteries to Aseneth (16.14); and the supernatural insight of Levi (22.13; 23.8; 26.6; 28.15-17) and Joseph (6.6; 19.9). The question for consideration here is

64.

The Odes of Solomon—Not Gnostic', CBQ 31 (1969), p. 365.

208

From Death to Life

whether we can go beyond the recognition of this mystical strain in Joseph and Aseneth and claim, as H.C. Kee has recently affirmed, a particular connection between Aseneth's conversion and the Merkabah mystical tradition.65 The study of Merkabah mysticism, much like the study of Gnosticism, is notoriously difficult because of the imprecision of nomenclature, the late date of the extant sources, the problem of distinguishing tradition and redaction in these sources, and the ever-present tendency to create out of very diverse and fluid literary materials an artificial construct which existed only much later than the period under consideration if ever at all.66 There is considerable doubt that Merkabah mysticism as it is known from the Hekhaloth literature existed at all in the Tannaitic period, though many of its constituent elements are found in earlier sources, including certain portions of the Hebrew Bible (especially the visions in Isaiah, Ezekiel and Daniel) as well as the apocalyptic writings now collected in the Pseudepigrapha (especially the works in the Enoch cycle, the Testament of Job, the Apocalypse of Abraham, the Testament of Abraham, the Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah, the Testament of Levi, 3 Baruch, and the Apocalypse of Zephaniah).61 The fact that at least many of the major tributaries that flowed into the stream of Merkabah mysticism existed at the time Joseph and Aseneth was written makes it legitimate for us to ask whether some of the same tributaries fed into the account of Aseneth's conversion. If so, it is possible that Merkabah mysticism, even in spite of its late attestation, could shed light on Aseneth's conversion by witnessing to a type of Judaism which, in its early stages, if not in its later, more fully developed forms, is closely related to the type of Judaism which produced Joseph and Aseneth. 65. 'Socio-Religious Setting', pp. 183-92; and 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 394-413. 66. See the following methodological discussions: P. Schäfer, 'Tradition and Redaction in Hekhaloth Literature', JSJ 14 (1983), pp. 172-81, repr. in idem, Hekhalot-Studien (TSAJ, 19; Tübingen: Mohr, 1988), pp. 8-16; idem, 'Merkavah Mysticism and Rabbinic Judaism', JAOS 104 (1984), pp. 537-41; and P.S. Alexander, 'Comparing Merkavah Mysticism and Gnosticism', JJS 35 (1984), pp. 1-18. 67. See D.J. Halperin, The Merkabah in Rabbinic Literature (AOS, 62; New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1980); idem, The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel's Vision (TSAJ, 16; Tübingen: Mohr, 1988); and M. Himmelfarb, 'Heavenly Ascent and the Relationship of the Apocalypses and the Hekhalot Literature', HUCA 59 (1988), pp. 73-100.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

209

The individualistic and private nature of mystical experience makes it difficult to follow our pattern of focusing on the process by which the individual was inducted into the group. Nevertheless, as G. Scholem68 and especially I. Chernus69 have shown, the mystical tendencies represented in at least some of the Merkabah texts led to the formation of new social groupings and communities. It is therefore legitimate to treat the Merkabah mystical experience described in these texts as an initiation into such circles. In addition to the general mystical traits mentioned above, H.C. Kee cites the following specific points of contact between Aseneth's experience and that of the Merkabah mystics: (1) the hymnic response of the mystai to the revelation that is received; (2) the halakic nature and intent of the revelation; (3) the transforming revelatory experience; and (4) the trials which follow the revelatory experience.70 In keeping with the methodology employed elsewhere in this study, we must ask how the various elements listed above function in Joseph andAseneth and in the literature of Merkabah mysticism. Are the context and function of Aseneth's experiences and those of the Merkabah mystics so similar as to suggest that the one should be understood in terms of the other? Are there significant differences which should be considered alongside the supposed similarities and which would weaken or nullify positive comparison? Are the elements wherein similarities have been drawn peculiar to or distinctive of the two phenomena being compared, or are they more widely attested? When the net of comparison is cast beyond the similarities noted by Kee to include these broader questions, the case for close kinship between Joseph and Aseneth and Merkabah mysticism is greatly diluted. It should be emphasized first that some of the elements in Joseph and Aseneth that are supposedly paralleled in Merkabah mysticism are not related to the thought world of Merkabah mysticism in spite of superficial resemblance. Thus, for example, even if hymnic response characterizes both Aseneth's conversion and the experience of the Merkabah mystics, the Merkabah hymns function quite differently from 68. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (London: Thames & Hudson, 3rd edn, 1955), pp. 18,47. 69. Individual and Community in the Redaction of the Hekhalot Literature', HUCA 52 (1981), pp. 253-74. 70. 'Socio-Religious Setting', pp. 185-86; and 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 404-408.

210

From Death to Life

the hymnic prayers in Joseph and Aseneth. The hymns and prayers in the Merkabah tradition serve a theurgical function; the singing of hymns, the reciting of magical names and incantations, and the use of charms and magical seals, are all techniques by which the mystic protects himself from the dangers of the mystical experience,71 whether that experience be ascent (or descent) through the celestial spheres to the heavenly Merkabah, or the descent of angels to earth to reveal heavenly secrets.72 Thus Hekhaloth Rabbati begins with the question, 'What are the incantations which should be recited by him who wants to behold the vision of the Merkavah, to descend safely and to ascend safely?'73 In response to this question the work provides a sort of manual describing at length what should be done in order to achieve the desired mystical experience and to overcome the perils that stand in the way. The prayers in Joseph and Aseneth obviously have no such theurgical quality. Aseneth's prayers reiterate her renunciation of idolatry, highlight her sincere repentance, and appeal for God's forgiveness and favor, but there is no hint that they represent a tradition wherein ecstasy is induced or a mystical or revelatory experience is sought or enhanced by means of prayer. 71. E.g. see Hekhaloth Zutreti 407-409, Hekhaloth Rabbati 204-51,258-59, and Ma'aseh Merkabah 544-55, 586-91. The system of enumeration employed here and in other references to the Hekhaloth literature follows that of P. Schäfer, Synopse zur Hekhaloth-LiteratuT (TSAJ, 2; Tübingen: Mohr, 1981). I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (AGJU, 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980), p. 103, notes that the theurgical function of the Merkabah hymns is the 'real function' even when it is not made explicit (p. 103). Even when the hymns are sung by angels and appear to be merely songs of praise, the recording of them in the Hekhaloth literature has as its primary function that of providing the mystic with the theurgical means of achieving his goals without harm. See, e.g., Hekhaloth Rabbati, pp. 94-106. See further Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism, pp. 150-73; G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1960), p. 20; and J. Maier, 'Das Gefährdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise in der jüdischen Apokalyptik und "Gnosis" ', Kairos 5 (1963) 18-40. 72. From Merkabah Rabbah and Ma'aseh Merkabah it is clear that the same kinds of theurgical means used for achieving mystical transport to the Merkabah are used for adjuring angels to descend to earth and reveal their secrets. See on this Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism, pp. 109, 174-80; and P. Schäfer, 'Engel und Menschen in der Hekhalot-Literatur', Kairos 22 (1980), pp. 201-25. 73. Hekhaloth Rabbati 81, as translated in Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism, p. 150.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

211

Also common to Aseneth's conversion and the mystical experiences reported in certain writings associated with Merkabah mysticism is the symbolic changing of clothes and the donning of special garments and crowns. However, such actions are by no means peculiar to Merkabah mysticism.74 Indeed, it is highly doubtful whether two of the writings cited to document this practice—namely, 2 Enoch and the Ascension of Isaiah—represent what can properly be called Merkabah mysticism, though they certainly have some significant elements in common with Merkabah mysticism in its developed forms.75 Joseph andAseneth does share with Merkabah mysticism the ascription of angelic status (or something approaching very close to it) to the people of God, and the wearing of white garments and crowns in Joseph andAseneth probably signifies this angelic sort of existence. However, the representation of the righteous as angels is not peculiar to the Merkabah tradition but is much more widespread, as I have indicated above.76 I. Chernus has even shown that the whole complex of ideas under discussion here—the special radiant clothing and crown, the imagery of fire and light, and the angelic status of the people of Israel—is found in exoteric Tannaitic midrashim regarding Israel at Sinai.77 Similar imagery is to be found also in the Odes of Solomon™ The widespread attestation for such ideas and the absence of distinctive features linking their usage in Joseph and Aseneth with that in Merkabah mysticism robs them of any significance as evidence of direct kinship between Aseneth's conversion and the experience of Merkabah mystics. Kee appeals to the imagery of the chariot in Jos. Asen. 5.4 and 17.7-8 74. See under 'Essenes' above in this chapter. 75. Revelations of permanent heavenly realities as a dynamic for coping with the vicissitudes of life in this transitory world are a well-known feature of Jewish apocalyptic and are by no means peculiar to Merkabah mysticism. Specialists in the Pseudepigrapha are not inclined currently to place such works as 1 Enoch, 2 Enoch, the Testament of Job and the Apocalypse of Abraham in the tradition of Merkabah mysticism. See Himmelfarb, 'Heavenly Ascent', pp. 73-100; and the relevant sections in Charlesworth, OT Pseudepigrapha, and Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature. 76. See under 'Essenes' above in this chapter. 77. Mysticism in Rabbinic Judaism: Studies in the History ofMidrash (SJ, 11 ; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1982), pp. 6-12. 78. See esp. Odes 1.1-4; 5.12; 9.8, 11; 11.11; 15.2; 17.1, 4; 20.7-8; 21.3; and 28.7. J.H. Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon (SBLTT, 13; Pseudepigrapha Series, 7; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977), p. 28 n. 15, comments that the crown frequently found in the Odes 'symbolizes the presence of salvation'.

212

From Death to Life

as representative of the divine throne and the mystical experience of God, insisting that this epiphanic experience is central for Aseneth just as it is in Merkabah mysticism: The interpreter of J&A is obligated, therefore, to consider the significance of the image of the chariot as it figures so prominently in the narrative of that document.79 What is central is the epiphanic experience of the God of light, whose presence illumines the faithful seeker and transforms that individual, so that he (Joseph) or she (Aseneth), whether of Jewish or pagan origins, shares in the divine life.80 the crucial criterion for participation was to have shared in the divine selfdisclosure which enabled the beholder to share in the divine light and life.81

Two observations vitiate Kee's argument. First, the use of imagery involving chariots or their wheels to symbolize the presence of God and to denote a mode of mystical transport is so much a part of the biblical and Judaic heritage shared by the author of Joseph and Aseneth and the Merkabah Mystics82 that it affords no evidence of a more direct relationship between the two. Similarly, the imagery of fire, lightning and brilliant light which is found in the chariot scenes in both the Merkabah texts and Joseph and Aseneth is found also in various types of epiphanies in the Hebrew Bible,83 in Jewish apocalyptic literature outside the Hebrew Bible,84 in the Qumran Sabbath Songs,85 and in exoteric rab79. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 408. 80. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 410. 81. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 411. 82. E.g. see such diverse sources as 2 Kgs 2.11-12; 1 Chron. 28.18; Ezek. 1; Sir. 49.8; 1 En. 14.18-23; T. Job 33.9; and 4QShirShab 12 (=4Q405 20 ii-21-22 614; continued in 4Q405 23 i; and HQShir Shab 5-6). This last text, published initially as the second of two excerpts from the angelic liturgy by J. Strugnell, 'The Angelic Liturgy at Qumran, 4Q Serek Sîrôt 'Olat HaSSabat', in Congress Volume, Oxford 1959 (ed. J.A. Emerton et al\ VTSup, 7; Leiden: Brill, 1960), pp. 318-45, is the twelfth of the thirteen Sabbath Songs discerned by C. Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition (HSS, 27; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). See also now C. Newsom, 'Merkabah Exegesis in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot', JJS 38 (1987), pp. 11-30. 83. E.g. Isa. 6; Ezek. 1, 8, 10; Exod. 19.16-18; 24.16-17; Deut. 5.22-27; 2 Kgs 2.11-12; and Dan. 7.9-10. 84. 1 En. 14, 71; 2 En. 22; Apoc. Abr. 15-29; Asc. Isa. 9; LAE 25; Apoc. Mos. 33; and Lad. Jac.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

213

binic traditions regarding the epiphany at Sinai.86 Secondly, the epiphanies recounted by means of chariot imagery in Joseph andAseneth are not nearly as central to Aseneth's conversion as Kee has supposed. At the time of the arrival of Joseph in his glorious chariot in 5.4-5, Aseneth is still actively resistant to Joseph and his God. At the news of Joseph's coming she retreats to her room and observes only from a distance, refusing to prostrate herself before Joseph as Pentephres and the rest of the family do. This is quite unlike the visions of the Merkabah described in the Hekhaloth literature, which presuppose not only aspiration to such an experience but also specific and extensive preparatory procedures.87 By the time of the second effulgent appearance of a heavenly figure, in this case the 'chief of the house of the Most High', the pivotal phase of Aseneth's conversion experience has already passed. Thus the mystical features in Joseph and Aseneth, including especially the epiphanies described by means of chariot imagery, are not central to or constitutive of Aseneth's conversion in the way that they are in Merkabah mysticism. Almost all religions in antiquity had esoteric and mystical dimensions, including secret information accessible only to insiders and ineffable experiences in which those secrets were disclosed or apprehended.88 This much Joseph andAseneth shares with Merkabah mysticism and with many other Jewish and non-Jewish circles. What is distinctive of Merkabah mysticism but lacking in Joseph andAseneth is a revelatory experience which is the center of the salvific experience, the very essence of salvation. In Aseneth's conversion, as shown in Chapter 4, the penitent abandonment of idols to worship the God of Israel is what is central. The angelophany in chs. 14-17 is not constitutive of, but subsidiary to, Aseneth's conversion in that it presupposes that conversion, provides dramatic heavenly confirmation of it, articulates its soteriological benefits, and deals with its sociological ramifications. It is difficult to know the sense in which Kee understands 'the nature 85. 4QShirShab 12; see also the references cited above in this section. 86. See the references cited by Chernus, Mysticism in Rabbinic Judaism, pp. 6-8. 87. E.g. see Hekhalot Zutreti 413-19; Hekhaloth Rabbau 204-511; and the Ozhayah fragment (from the Cairo Geniza) 2a-2b; and see further Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, pp. 47-50; and Himmelfarb, 'Heavenly Ascent', pp. 80-82. 88. This mystical sensibility was by no means unique to Judaism but characterized many religious phenomena in the Hellenistic period. See E.R. Dodds, Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), passim.

214

From Death to Life

and intent of the revelation—what Scholem has called the "halakic character of Hekhaloth mysticism" ', to be a 'major element shared by Jewish mysticism and JA'.89 If by this language Kee means to refer to the openness and non-secretiveness regarding the mystical revelations in the Merkabah tradition, in contrast to the private nature of mystical disclosure in other mystical traditions, then comparison with the lack of secrecy about the 'ineffable mysteries' revealed to Aseneth and the open attitude toward penitent outsiders in Joseph and Aseneth is perhaps legitimate. However, this would not qualify as a 'major element shared by Jewish mysticism and JA' evidencing a close relationship between the two. The chapter in Scholem's work to which Kee refers emphasizes Merkabah mysticism's 'strict conformity, even in the most minute detail, to halakhic Judaism and its prescriptions'.90 But—as Kee himself insists—aside from the concern to avoid the pollution of idols in table fellowship, such conformity is not found in Joseph and Aseneth. Kee also attaches great significance to the trials and dangers through which Aseneth passes in chs. 22-29, drawing a close parallel between this and the time of trial which follows the revelatory experience in Merkabah mysticism.91 But the motif of difficulties following conversion is by no means unique to Merkabah mysticism, as has been documented in Chapter 5, and the usage of the motif in Joseph and Aseneth shares nothing distinctive with that in the Merkabah tradition. Not only do the elements of Aseneth's conversion allegedly paralleled by Merkabah mysticism prove, on closer inspection, to function differently from their supposed counterparts or to be so widely attested as to be inconclusive evidence of direct kinship, but some of the most characteristic features of Merkabah mysticism have no counterpart at all in Joseph and Aseneth. Reference has been made already to the magical and theurgical objects and techniques which were such a significant aspect of the mystical experience described in the Hekhaloth texts but which are lacking in Joseph and Aseneth. The cosmological and theosophical speculation reflected in the detailed descriptions of the heavenly spheres and stages through which the mystic must pass is another pervasive feature of the Hekhaloth tradition which is not found in Joseph and Aseneth. Neither do we find the elaborate ritual washings, moral prerequisites, physiognomic and Chiromantie criteria, and other 89. 'Socio-Religious Setting', p. 186. 90. Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, p. 10. 91. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 405-406.

6. Initiation into Groups within Judaism

215

preliminaries to the mystical experience stipulated in the literature of Merkabah mysticism.92 When the superficial similarities are set aside and the major differences recognized, we are left without any significant grounds for postulating a close kinship between Joseph and Aseneth and Merkabah mysticism. While there are certain generic features which Joseph and Aseneth shares with other Jewish texts as well as with those of Merkabah mysticism, there are no such distinctive features of Merkabah mysticism found in Joseph and Aseneth as would be necessary to justify our interpreting Aseneth's conversion in light of that tradition. Even aside from the chronological problem stemming from the very late attestation for Merkabah mysticism, the similarities between this phenomenon and Joseph and Aseneth are too slight, and the differences too pronounced, for us to conclude that Merkabah mysticism provides an analogy to Aseneth's conversion. Conclusion Without claiming to have exhausted the list of identifiable groups and subgroups within early Judaism, I have considered those groups in which affinities with Joseph and Aseneth have allegedly been found and whose patterns of initiation are well enough known to justify comparative investigation. The results have been negative. Although similarities have been found on individual points, none of the paradigms of initiation considered has proved analogous in its essential features to the conversion of Aseneth. The possibility remains, of course, that Aseneth's story represents initiation into an otherwise unknown Jewish group every bit as distinctive as those considered here. However, this seems unlikely in view of the lack of any separatistic, exclusivistic or sectarian outlook in Joseph and Aseneth. The author is concerned to distinguish between Jews and Gentiles, but not to make categorical distinctions within Jewry.93 Recognition 92. See Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, pp. 47-50; and Gruenwald, Apocalyptic andMerkavah Mysticism, pp. 99-109. 93. Similarly, Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 218, observes 'the strong interest in the conversion of gentiles, but not of Jews', concluding that this weighs against 'a sectarian origin' for Joseph and Aseneth. Likewise, N. Walter, 'Judisch-hellenistische Literatur', p. 105, writes: 'Doch zielt diese Empfehlung des Judentums nicht auf eine bestimmte Sonderform, etwa die Essener oder Therapeuten,

216

From Death to Life

of significant tensions within the Jewish community in Chapter 3 is not at odds with this. Even in the context of that tension, the author regards the Jewish antagonists of Joseph and Aseneth as ocvSpec öeoaeßeic, 'men who worship God'. The attitude toward all Jews is unitive and conciliatory rather than divisive and disparaging. The Judaism represented by Joseph and Aseneth naturally had its own character; we must not suppose with M. Goodman that 'the ideas expressed would be perfectly possible for any Jew'.94Nevertheless, there is no evidence that the author tí Joseph and Aseneth wished to define a special community over against Judaism at large, or even that such divisions within Jewry were a part of the author's consciousness. All of this suggests that comparative material pertinent to Aseneth's conversion is more logically sought in paradigms of Gentile conversion to Judaism than in paradigms of initiation into intra muros Jewish groups. In our final comparative probe we consider an originally nonJewish model of initiation which influenced conceptions of Gentile conversion to Judaism in at least some quarters and which may shed light on the account of Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth.

wie einige Forscher gemeint haben; die Besonderheiten dieser Gruppen, z.B. in ritueller Hinsicht, speilen keine Rolle. Vielmehr stellt sich den Lesern des kleinen Romans ein frommes, weltoffenes, von tiefer Innerlichkeit und der Fähigkeit zu verzeihender Güte geprägtes hellenistisches Judentum vor.' 94. Schürer History (ed. Vermes et al\ ffl, pp. 548-49.

Chapter 7 MYSTERY INITIATION In the pivotal article in which G.D. Kilpatrick introduced Joseph and Aseneth into the study of Christian origins by suggesting the significance of the document for understanding the Last Supper, he made another seminal suggestion as well. Joseph and Aseneth, he argued, is designed to attract converts to Judaism by representing 'conversion to Judaism under the guise of initiation into a mystery'.1 As our Forschungsbericht shows, this idea has been taken up and developed by several others, including M. Philonenko and more recently E.W. Smith, Jr, and H.C. Kee.2 Especially close affinities have been detected between the conversion of Aseneth and initiation into the cult of Isis, as the following excerpts from Kee's study illustrate: The ascetic preparation through which Aseneth passes, including her donning the garb symbolic of death (the black tunic) and her break with family and religious heritage, matches well with the preparations of Lucius for initiation into the Isis cult. Similarly, the giving of a new name to Aseneth, with its symbolic significance, City of Refuge, corresponds to the experience of those devoting themselves to the Isis cult.3 Although one cannot speak of a direct cause-and-effect relationship of the Isis cult and J&A, it is the changing image of Isis which seems to have developed in ways that shed light on the portrait of Aseneth and her conversion in our document.4

1. 'Last Supper', pp. 4-6. Earlier Reitzenstein, Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen (3rd edn), p. 248, had cited Joseph and Aseneth as an example of 'die Einwirkung ägyptisch-hellenistischer Mysterienvorstellungen auf das Judentum'. 2. See Chapter I above. 3. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 400. 4. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 409.

218

From Death to Life

That the significance of the mystery religions for interpreting Joseph and Aseneth is still very much an open question is evidenced by the 'lively debate' between C. Burchard and H.C. Kee at the Pseudepigrapha Seminar of the SNTS in Leuven in 19825 and by the divergent views expressed by D. Sänger and H.C. Kee in recent publications.6 The task of assessing the relationship between Aseneth's conversion and mystery initiation is complicated by the incomplete and unclear picture that we have of the mystery religions. Data are extensive but diffuse and complex, methodologies are ill-defined and problematic, and understandings by specialists vary widely. Therefore, it is necessary to give considerable attention to methodology and to the development of a suitable model of mystery initiation before proceeding to comparative analysis. Method The Mystery Religions and Modern Research: Problems and Caveats Our access to an understanding of the mystery religions in the time during which Joseph and Aseneth was written is impeded by several obstacles which should be acknowledged at the outset. The first is suggested by the term |i\)OTf|piov itself. As this term implies, at the very heart of the mystery religions was something secretive, something which could not be divulged. Although it is not always clear to which aspects of the mysteries the obligation of silence on the part of devotees extends, certainly the sacred objects and central initiatory rites are regularly included among those elements to be guarded with the utmost stringency from all profanation.7 The unfortunate effect of this secrecy is that relatively little inside information has survived regarding initiation into the mysteries. Thus our knowledge of mystery initiation is at best partial and indirect, and this limitation in the evidence must be respected as we undertake to compare this phenomenon with Aseneth's conversion. A second obstacle is the fragmentary and diffuse character of the data 5. Charlesworth, OT Pseudepigraha and NT, p. 137. 6. See Chapter 1 above. 7. See G. Bornkamm, 'nAxrcíipiov, u/uécû', TDNT, IV, pp. 806-808 and the many references cited there. Even Apuleius, in our sole firsthand literary account of a mystery initiation, breaks off his detailed description and becomes tantalizingly allusive when he reaches the decisive initiatory event.

7. Mystery Initiation

219

which we do have concerning the mysteries. Sources range from artifacts such as statues, altars, inscriptions, mosaics and sacrificial instruments, which are primary sources of the first rank but are exceedingly difficult to interpret in the absence of connected literary accounts, to the virulent polemic of the Christian apologists, which naturally highlights and stereotypes the most repulsive aspects of the mysteries in order to present them in the worst possible light. The patristic sources in particular have been used far too uncritically, as R. Duthoy has emphasized in a study of the taurobolium.8 The amalgamation of heterogeneous elements drawn uncritically from diffuse sources of uneven value is a methodological fallacy noted long ago by A. Schweitzer, whose perceptive words unfortunately have not always been heeded: those who are engaged in making these comparisons [i.e. between Pauline Christianity and the mysteries] are rather apt to give the Mystery-religions a greater definiteness and articulation of thought than they really possess, and do not always give sufficient prominence to the distinction between their own hypothetical reconstruction and the medley of statements on which it is based... They manufacture out of the various fragments of information a kind of universal Mystery-religion which never actually existed, least of all in Paul's day.9

Schweitzer's words also point up a third difficulty. Not only are the sources diverse, but the phenomena that we lump together under the heading 'mystery religions' are themselves richly varied. In addition to the differences between one mystery religion and another, there were great variations within each mystery—variations from one location to another as well as considerable change and evolution from one period of time to another.10 This recognition of diversity and flux among the mystery religions 8. The Taurobolium: Its Evolution and Terminology (EPROER, 10; Leiden: Brill, 1969), pp. 1-4 et passim. 9. Paul and his Interpreters: A Critical History (trans. W. Montgomery; London: A. & C. Black, 1912; repr. 1948), pp. 192-93. 10. Thus, e.g., S. Laeuchli, Mithraism in Ostia: Mystery Religion and Christianity in the Port of Rome (Evanston, DL: Northwestern University Press, 1967), p. 88: 'Mithraism in the second century BC is not necessarily the same as Mithraism in the third century AD. In 200 years a religion can change radically—not its myth or its apparent lines of thought, but its concrete place in the world, its real theological beliefs, and its social structure. Metamorphosis exists not only in explicit changes of mythological language, but in the subtle and hidden shifts behind a seemingly unchangeable mythological facade.'

220

From Death to Life

and even within a given mystery religion speaks against the approach— commonly employed in the heydey of the religionsgeschichtliche Schule and not rare even today—wherein the various mysteries are blended together to create a sort of composite mystery religion and a universal mystery theology. Schweitzer is quite right that such a 'universal Mystery-religion.. .never actually existed'.11 Common tendencies can of course be discerned,12 so that the category 'mystery religions' remains a legitimate one, but treatment of the mysteries en masse as a homogeneous entity is methodologically untenable. Neither can we follow the all-too-common assumption of R. Reitzenstein and the history-of-religions school that a phenomenon documented at one point in the history of the mysteries—perhaps even in obscure, ambiguous or tendentious testimony—also existed in the same form centuries earlier or later.13 The mystery religions simply were too diverse, too fluid, too syncretistic, for such methodology to be legitimate. Isiac Initiation as a Model The demise of the generalized concept of a mystery religion and a composite mystery theology makes it difficult to discover an appropriate paradigm of mystery initiation with which to compare the conversion of Aseneth. The method employed in this study is to take Isiac initiation, particularly as known from Book 11 of the Metamorphoses of Apuleius, as the model for comparison. Three considerations justify this seemingly myopic approach. First, those who have found parallels to Aseneth's story in the mystery religions have consistently found them in the cult of Isis. Aside from general features which several mysteries held in common (such as the cultic meals), when a particular mystery is named as providing an analogy to some aspect of Joseph and Aseneth it is almost always the cult of Isis. Thus M. Philonenko has argued that the portrait of Aseneth 11. Paul and his Interpreters, pp. 192-93. 12. Convenient discussions of these common features are found in Bornkamm, 'uAxrajpiov, ui)eco', pp. 803-808; and D.H. Wiens, 'Mystery Concepts in Primitive Christianity and in its Environment', ANRW 2.23.2, p. 1251. 13. A classic example is an inscription from 376 CE in which the Roman aristocrat Aedesius boasts of his numerous initiations and claims on this account to have been in aeternum renatus, 'born again to eternal life'. From this single late inscription many scholars have extrapolated a prevailing conception of the mystery initiate as in aeternum renatus. For a critique of this assumption, see Wiens, 'Mystery Concepts', p. 1267; and Duthoy, Taurobolium, p. 3.

7. Mystery Initiation

221

corresponds 'trait pour trait' to that of the goddess Neith, who had become assimilated to Isis,14 and H.C. Kee finds close analogies between the conversion of Aseneth and Lucius' initiation into the Isiac mysteries as related by Apuleius.15 The only extensive discussion of the relationship between Joseph and Aseneth and the mystery religions is that by D. Sänger, who also focuses on Isiac initiation on the correct premise that if a significant analogy to Aseneth's conversion is to be found in the mystery religions it will most likely be found in the Isiac mysteries.16 Secondly, Apuleius' description of Lucius' initiation into the mysteries of Isis affords us our only firsthand account of initiation into an ancient mystery religion, and that by an author who had undergone not only Isiac initiation but other mystery initiations as well.17 To be sure, Apuleius' account presents difficulties of its own, not the least of which is that of extrapolating the ritual praxis of initiation from the literary fabric and Tendenzen of a Hellenistic romance; yet, compared with the usual difficulty of reconstructing a coherent picture of mystery initiation from scant and diffuse literary and material remains, the problems in this 14. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 79. 15. See the quotations earlier in this chapter. 16. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 89,118-90. Others who have noted points of similarity between Aseneth's conversion and mystery initiation, usually only by way of passing allusion with no discussion, include H. Conzelmann, 'Die Mutter der Weisheit', in Zeit und Geschichte: Dankesgabe an Rudolf Bultmann zum 80. Geburstag (ed. E. Dinkier; Tübingen: Mohr, 1964), p. 228 n. 25 (ET: The Mother of Wisdom', The Future of our Religious Past: Essays in Honour of Rudolf Bultmann [trans. C.E. Carlston and R.P. Scharlemann; New York: Harper & Row, 1971], p. 234 n. 25): 'It is not yet recognized that Isis is also disguised in the story of Joseph and Asenath'; Thyen, Studien zur Sündenvergebung im Neuen Testament, p. 126 and n. 3; and M. Hengel, 'Anonymität, Pseudepigraphie, und "Literarische Fälschung" in der jüdisch-hellenistischen Literatur', in Pseudepigrapha. l.Pseudopythagorica, lettres de Platon, littérature pseudépigraphie juive (ed. K. von Fritz; Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique, 18; Geneva: Fondation Hardt, 1972), p. 258 n. 1. 17. In addition to his Isiac and Osirian initiations reported in Metam. 11, see Apology 55: T have been initiated into a large number of mysteries in Greece; and of these I preserve most carefully certain symbols and mementoes that I received from the priests.. .1 familiarized myself with various kinds of mysteries, very many rituals and diverse religious proceedings' (as translated in F. Solmsen, Isis among the Greeks and Romans [Martin Classical Lectures, 25; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979], p. 106). On the autobiographical element in Apuleius' account of Lucius' Isiac initiation, see J.G. Griffiths, Apuleius of Madauros: The Isis-Book (Metamorphoses, Book XI) (EPROER, 39; Leiden: Brill, 1975), pp. 1-7.

222

From Death to Life

case are relatively minor. Thus Isiac initiation as documented by Apuleius, even if sketchy and complex itself, provides a singular glimpse into mystery initiation and the most apt basis for comparison with the conversion narrated in Joseph andAseneth. Thirdly, the cult of Isis was highly absorbent and incorporated many elements of other mystery religions, especially the Eleusinian mysteries of Demeter.18Thus, while we cannot think in terms of a composite mystery religion, neither should we view the mysteries of Isis as a solitary phenomenon fundamentally unlike other mysteries. Because of its syncretistic nature, the cult of Isis had much in common with other mystery religions, and we are not out of touch with the many as we concentrate on the one. The Hypotheses ofK. Kerényi, R. Merkelbach and E.R. Goodenough Two important hypotheses, one advanced by specialists in the Hellenistic romances (K. Kerényi and R. Merkelbach) and the other by an authority in Hellenistic Judaism (E.R. Goodenough), require consideration here. Either or both of these hypotheses, if accepted, would create some presumption in favor of a connection between Joseph and Aseneth and the mystery religions, and for this reason it is necessary to assess them before proceeding to the comparative phase of our study. K. Kerényi and R. Merkelbach have argued that there is an inherent connection between the romantic genre and the mystery religions. Kerényi maintained that the erotic romances had their origin in the myth of Isis and Osiris and were designed specifically as propaganda for various mystery religions, especially the cult of Isis.19 Merkelbach pushed this idea further and argued that the erotic romances were romans à clef, that is, veiled representations of the actual cultic rites of the mysteries.20 These hypotheses have obvious bearing on our study, since Joseph and Aseneth is clearly a Hellenistic romance and has at least 18. Solmsen, Isis among the Greeks and Romans, pp. 23-51 et passim; and Nock, Conversion, pp. 150-52. Apuleius himself describes Isis as 'the single form that fuses all gods and goddesses' (Metam. 11.5). This and all subsequent quotations from the Metamorphoses of Apuleius follow Griffiths, Isis-Book, unless otherwise noted. 19. Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur in religions geschichtlicher Beleuchtung (Tübingen: Mohr, 1927; 2nd edn, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1962). 20. Roman und Mysterium in der Antike (Munich: Beck, 1962).

7. Mystery Initiation

223

some erotic elements even if it cannot accurately be classified as an 'erotic romance'.21 However, the views of Kerényi and Merkelbach have been sharply criticized as reductionistic and have won little support.22 Moreover, even if some of the ancient romances were designed as propaganda for a cult, such a design cannot be assumed in the case of Joseph and Aseneth unless there are indications of this in the text itself. As was stressed in Chapter 2, classification by genre is descriptive and not prescriptive. Literary form or genre is not a straightjacket which determines the meaning of a text, but a convenient expostfacto classification.23 Thus the generic affinities of Joseph and Aseneth with other literary works classified as 'Hellenistic romances' is no proof that it was written as propaganda for a mystery cult. The views of Kerényi and Merkelbach create no presumption in favor of a connection between Joseph and Aseneth and the mystery religions. Another hypothesis which is potentially significant for our inquiry is that associated with the name of E.R. Goodenough. Arguing from the writings of Philo and from a vast array of Jewish art which had not previously been brought together, Goodenough posited a widespread mystical Judaism in the Hellenistic world.24 Goodenough wrote: There is much that is uncertain about Hellenistic Judaism. Yet the fact is, it seems to me, that by Philo's time, and long before, Judaism in the 21. Accordingly, Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, p. 47 et passim, often cites Merkelbach and especially Kerényi and interprets Joseph and Aseneth in such a way as to lend support to their views. 22. See especially A.D. Nock, Review of Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur, by K. Kerényi, in Gnomon 4 (1928), pp. 485-92; R. Turcan, 'Le roman "initiatique": A propos d'un livre recent', RHR 163 (1963), pp. 149-99; M. Smith, Review of Roman und Mysterium in der Antike, by R. Merkelbach, in Classical World 57 (1964), p. 378; and Perry, Ancient Romances, p. 336 n. 17. Perry describes the views of Kerényi and Merkelbach as 'nonsense'. As Hägg, The Novel in Antiquity, p. 103, writes, The parallels between life, myth, mystery ritual, and novel are explicable in a simpler way: human life and man's experience of life provide the basic pattern of myth and ritual as well as the novel'. 23. Perry, Ancient Romances, pp. 18-19,26; see further Chapter 2 above. 24. By Light, Light', and Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period (13 vols.; Bollingen Series, 37; New York: Pantheon Books, 1953-68). See also now the collection of essays by Goodenough in E.S. Frerichs and J. Neusner (eds.), Goodenough on the History of Religion and on Judaism (BJS, 121; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986).

224

From Death to Life Greek-speaking world, especially in Egypt, had been transformed into a Mystery.25

In conscious emulation of the Hellenistic mystery religions, diaspora Jews developed 'a great mystic conception of Judaism and of life'.26 This 'Jewish Mystery' had its own mystic liturgy, probably including cultic rites of initiation and a sacred meal.27 There is today a general appreciation of Goodenough's emphasis on the mystical dimension in Philo's thought28 and especially of his compilation of an enormous wealth of data on the hellenization of Judaism. However, his life-long contention that Hellenistic Judaism transformed itself into cultic mystery groups, not only under the influence of Philo but throughout the diaspora and even before Philo's time, has not won support and is simply unconvincing.29 Even in Philo's writings it is not always clear that the allusions to rites, mysteries, food and drink point to actual cultic practices; in at least some cases they seem rather to be only metaphorical.30 Outside Philo the interpretation of the data which Goodenough marshals is based largely on surmise and is inconclusive. Goodenough himself conceded that the evidence for a liturgy of initiation into the Jewish mystery and for a sacred meal from which the uninitiated were excluded is 'unsatisfactory, because scanty and not in agreement'.31 The following statements by G. Lease represent the current state of the discussion: 25. By Light, Light, p. 7. 26. By Light, Light, pp. 7-10. 27. By Light, Light, pp. 7-10, 260-61, 306-58 et passim; and idem, Jewish Symbols, passim. 28. See D. Winston, 'Was Philo a Mystic?', in SBLSP1978 (ed. P.J. Achtemeier; 2 vols.; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978), I, pp. 161-80. H.A. Wolfson, Philo (2 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1947), I, pp. 36-55, surely underestimated this mystical dimension by claiming that the mystery language in Philo is only a thin veneer over a predominantly Torah-centered religion. 29. See the important reviews by A.D. Nock, Review of By Light, Light, in Gnomon 13 (1937), pp. 156-65; idem, Review of Jewish Symbols, vols. 1-4, in Gnomon 27 (1955), pp. 558-72; M. Smith, 'Goodenough's Jewish Symbols in Retrospect', JBL 86 (1967), pp. 53-68; idem, 'The Image of God: Notes on the Hellenization of Judaism with Especial Reference to Goodenough's Work on Jewish Symbols', BJRL 40 (1958), pp. 473-512; and the study by G. Lease, 'Jewish Mystery Cults since Goodenough', ANRW2.20.2 (1987), pp. 858-80. 30. E.g. see Goodenough, By Light, Light, pp. 260-61. 31. By Light, Light, p.S.

7. Mystery Initiation

225

neither Philo nor other elements of the materials which Goodenough collected over his long career in any way substantiates his contention that in Diaspora Judaism a specific Jewish mystery cult grew and developed... the existence of a peculiarly Jewish mystery cult, conceptualized and patterned after the Hellenistic mystery cults, is without evidence and unsupportable.32

If we should find that Aseneth's conversion is indeed analogous to mystery initiation, then significant support for Goodenough's hypothesis will have been discovered, but Goodenough's understanding of Hellenistic Judaism as 'the Jewish Mystery' affords no a priori reason to interpret Joseph and Aseneth along these lines, any more than do the hypotheses of Kerényi and Merkelbach. If Aseneth's conversion is to be seen as a mystery initiation, that fact must be established from the text of Joseph and Aseneth and from careful comparative study rather than decided a priori by unproved and dubious hypotheses. Isiac Initiation: A Descriptive Analysis Formal Rites The extreme caution necessary in attempting to extract the ritual praxis of Isiac initiation from the literary fabric of Apuleius' Metamorphoses has been duly acknowledged above. Nevertheless, such an attempt is requisite to our investigation, and the principal formal and conceptual features can be reconstructed in broad outline, if not in all particulars, with reasonable confidence. Following is an outline of the ritual sequence that emerges from Metam. 11.21-24. The steps are not all equally weighted, but for our comparative purposes it is important to include not only the central rite of initiation but also those steps that are preparatory or otherwise ancillary to the main event. 1. 2.

3.

32.

Preparatory abstinence from 'unhallowed and unlawful foods'. Nocturnal call to initiation in which Isis herself specifies the expenses to be incurred and names the priest in charge of the rites. Appearance of the candidate before the priest, who reads the preparations necessary for the initiation from sacred books which are undecipherable to the profane. 'Jewish Mystery Cults since Goodenough', p. 874.

226

From Death to Life 4.

5.

6. 7.

8. 9. 10.

Following the purchase of the objects necessary for the rites, a procession of the priest, the candidate, and an escort of Isiac devotees to nearby baths, where the candidate experiences an ablution, a prayer for forgiveness by the priest, and a purificatory sprinkling also administered by the priest. Return to the temple and disclosure there by the priest of certain secret instructions and of the requirement to abstain from meat and wine for ten days. After the ten day fast, a showering of the candidate with gifts by crowds of Isis worshipers. Dismissal of the uninitiated and placement of an unworn linen garment on the candidate, who is then led into the innermost sanctuary to undergo a secret nocturnal ritual involving a descent to the realm of the dead, journey through the elements, vision of the glaring sun, and worship of the gods face to face. Emergence of the lavishly adorned initiate for presentation to the admiring crowds before the statue of Isis. Festive banquets celebrating the birthday of the initiate. Consummation of the initiation on the third day by means of a sacred meal.

As indicated already, the steps listed here are not all of equal importance, and it is necessary to distinguish among those which constitute the essence of Isiac initiation, those which are necessary but ancillary rather than decisive, and those which are merely attendant.33 Thus the partial fast listed as step 1 is anticipatory rather than constitutive of the decisive rites, though it cannot for that reason be omitted from the required ritual or considered insignificant; it is ordered by the priest and is explicitly ascribed an important preparatory function: 'so that I might the better make my own way to the hidden mysteries of the purest faith' (Metam. 11.21). Similarly, the second step cannot be ranked with the pivotal initiatory acts which follow but is nevertheless an indispensable prerequisite. Even if the customary form of the divine call to initiation cannot be extrapolated from the particular case of Lucius, it is clear that some sort of divine summons was requisite to Isiac initiation—a fact 33. A salutary feature of Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, is the recognition of the differentiated rank of individual elements in the Initiationsgesehen and the attempt to relate individual elements to what he calls their Interaktionszusammenhangen (see esp. pp. 123-24).

7. Mystery Initiation

227

to which Pausanius also bears witness.34 To proceed on one's own initiative, or even on the invitation of a priest, was considered extremely hazardous.35 The prospective initiate could only abstain from 'unhallowed and unlawful foods' and await the call of Isis herself (Metam. 11.21). With steps 3, 4 and 5, we pass to the constitutive, though not yet the central, phase of the initiatory process. That the formal ritual properly begins with step 3 is suggested by the aura of secrecy that surrounds the hidden books and the concealment of their instructions from the profane, and by the fact that the prospective initiate now remains alone in the temple with the priest, who functions as mystagogue.36 The 'customary ablution' and sprinkling included under step 4 are not explained by Apuleius37 but are clearly represented as standard initiatory procedure. There is nothing to suggest sacramental efficacy in the sense that these rites already effect the decisive change; rather, they are purificatory acts which, together with the intervening priestly prayer, serve as a prelude to the central nocturnal ritual to follow.38 Similarly, the priest's conveying of 'certain secret instructions too holy to be uttered' (step 5) must be considered a part of the initiatory ritual, though the substance of the instructions (apart from the requirement of abstinence from meat and wine) is unknown. The fact that no 34. Description of Greece 10.32.13: 'no one may enter the shrine except those whom Isis herself has honored by inviting them in dreams'. See also 10.32.17-18. 35. Metam. 11.21 : 'Nor was there anyone...so abandoned in mind or indeed so given over to death as to undergo a hazardous and sacrilegious discipline, thus incurring a sin worth of death, unless the sovereign mistress had expressly commanded him'. 36. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 124-25. 37. Some have even questioned whether two separate rites are meant (e.g. J. Dey, naXiyyeveaíoc: Ein Beitrag zur Klärung der religionsgeschichtlichen Bedeutung von Tit. 3,5 [NTAbh, 17.5; Münster: Aschendorff, 1937], p. 87 n. 5), but the text scarcely leaves room for doubt about this, as Reitzenstein (Hellenistic Mystery-Religions, pp. 41,275), Griffiths (Isis-Book, p. 287) and most others rightly recognize. 38. So Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 125-27; and see further Griffiths, Isis-Book, pp. 286-90; and R.A., Wild, Water in the Cultic Worship of Isis and Serapis (EPROER, 87; Leiden: Brill, 1981), esp. pp. 143-48. A.-J. Festugière, Personal Religion among the Greeks (Sather Classical Lectures, 26; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1954), p. 79; and Griffiths, Isis-Book, p. 287, note the subsidiary role of ritual purity here as contrasted with its far more crucial role in the Eleusinian mysteries. There is no support in the text for the suggestion by Reitzenstein, Hellenistic Mystery-Religions, pp. 274-78, that these lustrations represent a death and revivification.

228

From Death to Life

further secretive acts are performed until step 7 suggests that the 'secret instructions' here pertain at least in part to that nocturnal ceremony. The significance of the fifth step lies once again in its anticipation of the main event yet to come. The relative significance of step 6 is uncertain. R. Reitzenstein supposed a period of seclusion and sexual abstinence as well as fasting,39 but D. Sänger maintains that such ideas are imported from other mysteries and that even the fasting is devalued in its ritual significance here by general references to fasting elsewhere in the story.40 Similarly, the showering of the initiate with gifts 'after the ancient rite' may have been an integral and highly symbolic part of the ceremony, as many scholars have assumed,41 or only an informality, as D. Sänger has argued.42 By all estimates the high point of Isiac initiation as represented by Apuleius is the nocturnal ritual listed as step 7 above, although, in keeping with the character of the event as a 'mystery', little is known of its form. In a seminal article in 1917, M. Dibelius argued that Apuleius' allusion to this rite preserved a fixed cultic formula akin to the a\)v0Tmaia, or passwords, known from the mysteries of Eleusis and Attis, and further that it encoded objective cultic rituals and not merely subjective experiences in the form of a dream or trance. Thus the descent to the realm of the dead was enacted by entry into an underground chamber, and the ascent to the heavenly realm and the vision of the sun and of the gods were enacted in a special room with dazzling lighting effects.43 While many have disputed Dibelius' contention that Metam. 11.23

39. Hellenistic Mystery Religions, pp. 241,251-52; see also Griffiths, Isis-Book, p. 290. 40. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 129-30,145. 41. E.g. S. Eitrem, 'Die vier Elemente in der Mysterien weihe', Symbolae Osloenses 4 (1926), p. 52, regards the gifts as Todesgaben, rejecting the opinion of those who see them as birthday gifts. 42. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 130-31,145. 43. M. Dibelius, The Isis Initiation in Apuleius and Related Initiatory Rites', in Conflict at Colossae (trans, and ed. P.O. Francis and W.A. Meeks; Sources for Biblical Study, 4; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1973), pp. 63-82. The German original was published in 1917. See Plutarch's reference to subterranean rooms in Egyptian temples in Isis and Osiris 20; and see further CJ. Bleeker, 'Initiation in Ancient Egypt', in idem (ed.), Initiation (Supplements to Numen, SHR, 10; Leiden Brill, 1965), pp. 50-51.

7. Mystery Initiation

229

preserves a stylized 'Isis formula' inherited by Apuleius,44 there is a consensus that the items enumerated by Apuleius do in fact represent objective external rituals rather than subjective visionary experiences. Indeed, based upon the skeletal description in Metam. 11.23, many have fleshed out rather elaborate accounts of these rituals by bringing in elements from other mysteries, especially Osirian rites (which themselves have to be reconstructed from disparate sources), and from Egyptian funerary rites.45 Others, however, have resisted the approach of inserting elements from Osirian and other mysteries to fill in the gaps in Apuleius' story of Isiac initiation.46 This diversity of views underscores the difficulty of recovering the precise form and symbolism of the nocturnal ritual. Apuleius' own comment is sufficient reminder of our limited insight: 'Behold, I have related things about which you must remain in ignorance, though you have heard them' (Metam. 11.23). Nevertheless, for our purposes it is necessary to explore at least the leading conceptual aspects of this central initiatory event. To this we shall return. The eighth step, the presentation of the initiate in radiant splendor before crowds of Isis worshipers, is anticlimactic in the sense that it follows and celebrates the effects of the central nocturnal event. Yet, it is couched in symbolism which is significant for our understanding of the whole. Once again, the complex symbolism has evoked diverse interpretations.47 It is clear at least that the public display of the initiate in radiant splendor functions to demonstrate to the crowds the change that has taken place in him and to symbolize his new existence. The nature of that change and the significance of the symbols by which it is expressed we shall examine below. The festive banquet listed as step 9 clearly belongs on our list of the ritual proceedings, but the character of these festivities as a celebration of the initiate's 'birthday' indicates that the decisive moment in the process is already past. The apparent presence of the populus also suggests that these festivities lack cultic significance and should not be accorded equal rank with the crucial events preceding. 44. So esp. H. Krämer, 'Die Isisformel des Apuleius (Met. XI,23,7)—Eine Anmerkung zur Methode der Mysterienforschung', WD 12 (1973), pp. 91-104. 45. E.g. see the detailed commentary on the passage in Griffiths, Isis-Book, pp. 294-308, and the numerous sources, both primary and secondary, cited there. 46. So esp. Dey, riaXiyyeveaía, pp. 91-92 et passim. 47. See Griffiths, Isis-Book, pp. 308-17.

230

From Death to Life

Of somewhat greater importance is the sacred meal listed as step 10, which forms the proper conclusion of the initiation. That this meal was a discrete part of the initiatory ritual is assured by its temporal separation from the other feasts mentioned, by its designation as an ientaculum religiosum, and by Apuleius' own indication that by it the initiation was 'duly consummated' (Metam. 11.24). The significance of the meal is not specified, but its position in the narrative suggests that it functions rather to enhance the bond of the initiate with the religiosa cohors than actually to effect a change of status.48 The latter has already been accomplished and festively celebrated. Underlying Conceptions With the ritual sequence now outlined, the soteriological conceptions represented in it must be clarified. Lucius' Isiac initiation has commonly been understood in connection with the myth of Osiris: by re-enacting the mythical death and resuscitation of Osiris, the initiate participates in the destiny of the god and in fact becomes a god.49 However, in spite of the popularity of this view, there is nothing in Apuleius' account to suggest a connection with Osirian myth or ritual.50 Only later in the 48. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 14-43; and see further J.P. Kane, 'The Mithraic Cult Meal in its Greek and Roman Environment', in Mithraic Studies: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies (ed. J.R. Hinnells; 2 vols.; Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1975), II, p. 334: 'Nowhere is there any hint that these meals are sacraments conveying grace or power, uniting him to the goddess or bestowing immortality upon him. They are clearly solemn and special moments, but the very brief mention of them in comparison with the description of other experiences (chs. xxiii-xxv of book XI) marks for us their relative insignificance.' 49. Among many others, see W. Wittmann, Das Isisbuch des Apuleius: Untersuchungen zur Geiste sge schichte des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Forshcungen zur Kirchen und Geistesgeschichte, 12; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1938), p. 114; and more recently R.E. Witt, Isis in the Graeco-Roman World (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1971), pp. 162-63; and Griffiths, Isis-Book, pp. 296-308 and the many references cited there. On the origin and development of the Osiris myth and cult, see J.G. Griffiths, The Origins of Osiris and his Cult (Supplements to Numen, SHR, 40; Leiden: Brill, 1980). 50. This point was emphasized already by Dibelius, 'Isis Initiation', p. 77, and has been reiterated by others (e.g. Dey, DaXiYYeveoía, pp. 91-92; G. Wagner, Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries [trans. J.P. Smith; Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1967], pp. 104-106; D. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 127, 139-40; and A.J.M. Wedderburn, 'The Soteriology of the Mysteries and Pauline

7. Mystery Initiation

231

story and in another city does Lucius undergo Osirian initiation, and that by means of rites which Apuleius declares to be markedly different from those of the Isiac mysteries.51 Thus it is appropriate to follow G. Wagner's advice to interpret Lucius' Isiac initiation on the basis of what Apuleius actually says and not to impose Osirian myth or ritual upon it.52 The most important clue given by Apuleius himself for the interpretation of the Isiac initiation which he recounts comes in Metam. 11.21, before the ritual begins: 'the very rite of dedication itself was performed in the manner of a voluntary death and of a life obtained by grace'. From this proleptic description and the brief and guarded reference to the secret rites in Metam. 11.23 (step 7 above), it is clear that some sort of journey to and return from the realm of the dead was the essence of Isiac initiation as known to Apuleius, and Dibelius' argument that this journey entailed objective rituals and not merely inward experiences is cogent.53 If the precise form of these rituals is irrecoverable, at least their soteriological significance seems evident. They represent Lucius' triumph over the powers of the cosmos by the superior power of Isis. That Lucius can journey unharmed to the realm of the dead, through the regions of the elements, and even into the realm of the gods, is proof of his protection by the supreme goddess who rules over these realms. For anyone who has not received a divine call, the descent into Proserpine's realm would bring death; the journey through the elements, destruction; the vision of the gods, sudden annihilation. But Isis is ruler in all these regions,54 and at her gracious bidding Lucius traverses the whole circle Baptismal Theology', NovT 19 [1987], pp. 58-59), but is still not taken seriously enough by many interpreters. 51. Metam. 11.27: 'For although the principle of the deity himself [Osiris] and of his faith was associated, and indeed was at one, with that of Isis, yet a very great distinction was made in the rites of initiation'. 52. Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries, p. 106. 53. 'Isis Initiation', pp. 74-82, esp. pp. 75-76. Dibelius points out that since Lucius had already received various revelations of the visionary or ecstatic type, it is incredible that the decisive initiatory act awaited with such passion and suspense would simply be another psychological experience. He further argues convincingly that the verbs of 'leading', 'going', 'approaching' and 'entering' must be taken literally and thus exclude a merely subjective experience. 54. See Metam. 11.5, where Isis is characterized as 'the mother of the universe, the mistress of all the elements, the first offspring of time, the highest of deities, the queen of the dead, foremost of heavenly beings'.

232

From Death to Life

of creation unharmed, thereby proving himself charmed against infernal, terrestrial and celestial powers. The otherwise perilous encounter with the powers of death and fate is anticipated and cancelled by a voluntary entry into their spheres of power. Thus the initiate has nothing further to fear from those cosmic powers but is assured of a long and happy life under the favor and protection of Isis and even of the continued presence and rule of the goddess hereafter in the realm of the dead. For Lucius, freedom from the hostile powers of the cosmos means that he is delivered from the cruel dominion of Fortune. Upon his first encounter with the priest of Isis, Lucius had been assured that 'after enduring many different troubles and after being driven by the wildest storms of Fortune and her heaviest gales', he had come at last to 'the haven of Rest and the altar of Mercy'. Though 'the blindness of Fortune' had previously tortured him 'with the worst of dangers... hostile fate has no power over those whose lives have been claimed by the majesty of our goddess'. The devotee of Isis is under 'the protection of a Fortune who is not blind, but sees, and who illumines other gods too with the radiance of her light' (Metam. 11.15). This most aptly describes the soteriological substance of Lucius' nocturnal experience. For this initiate the rule of the cosmic powers and the blind Fortune represented by them is broken and replaced by the rule of Isis, the gracious Fortuna videns (Fortune who sees), to whom those powers are subject. This understanding of what is clearly the central initiatory event provides the interpretative framework for the soteriological terms employed by Apuleius. Thus salus, salvation, may be defined simply as the security made possible by Isis from the blindness and malice of Fortune, as the contexts in which this word and related forms appear in Metam. 11.1,5, 12, 21, and 22 clearly show.55 The language of rebirth in Metam. 11.21 has been variously understood, with interpretations varying according to the degree to which Osirian conceptions are allowed to color the perception of the Isiac ritual. Once Osirian myth and ritual are admitted as evidence, the sense of renatus naturally follows: the initiate relives the divine saga of Osiris' death and resuscitation, undergoing an imaginary death in order to be born again immortal. However, if we adhere to our method of 55. So also Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 137: 'Salus meint nicht das verheissene Ziel eines mystischen Sterbens und Wiederauflebens. Vielmehr steht salus für die Befreiung vom verhängnisvollen Bestimmtsein durch dei Heimarmene, die Fortunae caecitas, XI15,2.'

7. Mystery Initiation

233

understanding Isiac initiation on its own terms and resisting the imposition of conceptions from Osirian or other mysteries, the basis for such an understanding of renatus disappears. That Apuleius intended the image of rebirth metaphorically is indicated by the very qualifiers he attached to renatus. According to Metam. 11.21, initiates are quodam modo renatus, 'in some way born again', or 'reborn in a sense', just as earlier Lucius is described as renatus quodam modo, 'as it were, reborn', when he is restored to human form after having been a donkey (Metam. 11.16). There is nothing in the text to offset this very cautious use of new birth language and to suggest that the language should be taken more literally to denote a mystical rebirth.56 The juxtaposition of the terms salus and renatus in the important proleptic description of initiation in Metam. 11.21 shows that the concepts of salvation and rebirth are very similar and that the latter simply refers to the new course of life which the initiate begins by entering the service of Isis and gaining her protective care. Nor can the idea of a mystical rebirth be inferred from the use of the word natalis to designate the day after the nocturnal ritual. J, Dey points out that this word does not necessarily refer to a 'birthday' but could as well merely denote the initiate's first day in the service of Isis.57 W.L. Knox rightly concludes, 'it is difficult to see that the description of his initiation as a "birthday" implies that the rite was habitually interpreted as a "new birth'".58 The soteriological implications of Lucius' public display 'adorned like the sun' (Metam. 11.24, step 8 above) are uncertain, and once again the matter has been subjected to over-interpretation and unwarranted fusion with Osirian ideas. The scene has often been explained in terms of 56. The same conclusion is reached by Festugière, Personal Religion Among the Greeks, p. 164 n. 45; Wagner, Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries, p. 113 and n. 116; M.P. Nilsson, Geschichte der Griechischen Religion (2 vols.; Munich: Beck, 2nd edn, 1955-61), II, pp. 636-37; W.L. Knox, Some Hellenistic Elements in Primitive Christianity (London: Milford, 1944), p. 91; Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 131, 136-38; and M.W. Meyer, The Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook. Sacred Texts of the Mystery Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean World (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987), p. 158. 57. Ilatayyeveata, p. 100. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 141, states this conclusion even more strongly: 'Natalis heisst einfach erster Tag im Dienste Isis' und es gibt keinen Grund, dieses Wort anders als in seiner eigentlichen Bedeutung verstehen zu sollen'. 58. Hellenistic Elements, p. 91.

234

From Death to Life

apotheosis,59 but nothing in the text of Apuleius suggests that Lucius is here deified. He is indeed a changed person, but he is still & person.60 As AJ.M. Wedderburn observes: His experience...involves communion with the gods for he is close to them, but not yet deification for he worships them.. .this change should be seen as one of status rather than a transformation of his nature; his salvation remains...dependent upon the gracious and benevolent will of his protectress.61

J. Dey correctly insists that the radiant adorning is a sign of some sort of distinction, of the initiate's being set apart, but not necessarily of identification with deity.62 Nor does the expression in aspectum populus justify our reading apotheosis into this celebration; the expression implies, not veneration, but the astonished stare of the people.63 As in the earlier stages of the ritual, here again there is no warrant for bringing Osiris into the context; solar symbolism became popular in Osirian contexts in the Hellenistic era,64 but of course it was widely employed in other circles as well.65 However important the idea of apotheosis may have been in other mystery cults, there is no evidence that it figures in the soteriology of the Isiac mysteries as Apuleius knew and experienced them. Neither is immortalization an apt term for the soteriological essence of Isiac initiation, though some have seen this as a corollary to apotheosis in the account of Lucius' radiant adorning and presentation to the crowds.66 What Isis promises to her devotee according to Metam. 11.6 is not immortality but that his life on earth will be prolonged beyond the span allotted by fate and that he will live happily under her favor and protection throughout his life and in the Elysian fields hereafter. Conspicuously absent from this enumeration of gifts, as well as from 59. E.g. see Wittmann, Isisbuch, pp. 116-17; Witt, Isis in the Graeco-Roman World, p. 91; and Griffiths, Isis-Book, pp. 314-17. 60. Sänger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 140. 61. 'Soteriology of the Mysteries', p. 59. 62. naXiyyeveoía, p. 97. 63. Wagner, Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries, p. 119. 64. See Griffiths, Isis-Book, p. 315; and idem, Origins of Osiris, pp. 99-107. 65. Wagner, Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries, p. 105; and Nilsson, Geschichte, E, p. 690. 66. See Dibelius, 'Isis Initiation', p. 63: 'The whole event is an arcaoavriafioc (immortalization)'.

7. Mystery Initiation

235

other early descriptions of the soteriological benefits of worshiping Isis, is the conferring of immortality.67 Mac Initiation and the Conversion ofAseneth: Comparisons and Contrasts Preliminary Considerations Aseneth's conversion is not a case of Isiac initiation; indeed, the blatant syncretism and polytheism characteristic of the Isis cult and of other mysteries would have been abhorrent to the author of Joseph and Aseneth. However, such sweeping contrasts by no means exclude or minimize the possibility that Isiac initiation exerted significant influence on the account of Aseneth's conversion. The growing appreciation of the pervasive influence of Hellenism upon Judaism, even upon those Jews considered both by themselves and by modern scholars as most isolated from the inroads of Hellenism, has opened our eyes to the subtle and diverse ways in which Hellenistic culture influenced Jewish faith and its expression.68 Moreover, Aseneth's conversion would not have to be like Isiac initiation in all particulars in order to justify the claim that the latter has influenced the story in Joseph and Aseneth. Allowance must be made for the 'prism effect' of an author's mind upon inherited traditions;69 elements borrowed from the author's milieu, consciously or unconsciously, directly or indirectly, inevitably would have been filtered through his or her mind and reshaped in the process. Thus the author of Joseph and Aseneth could have been influenced by mystery initiation

67. See Nilsson, Geschichte, II, p. 636. It has been observed often that the concept of immortality is also absent from the early Isis aretologies. See P. Roussel, 'Un nouvel hymne à Isis', REG 42 (1929), pp. 166-68; and A.-J. Festugière, 'A propos des aretologies d'Isis', HTR 42 (1949), p. 233. 68. See especially the monumental work of M. Hengel, Judentum und Hellenismus: Studien zu ihrer Begegnung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Palästinas (WUNT, 10; Tübingen: Mohr, 2nd edn, 1973); El: Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (2 vols.; trans. J. Bowden; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974). 69. The imagery is borrowed from J.H. Charlesworth, 'A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in 1QS III, 13-IV, 26 and the "Dualism" Contained in the Fourth Gospel', NTS 15 (1969), p. 416; repr. in J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), John and Qumran (London: G. Chapman, 1972), p. 104.

236

From Death to Life

without endorsing the polytheism or other aspects of the mysteries offensive to Jews. Affinities between Aseneth's conversion and the mysteries should be acknowledged neither as freely as M. Philonenko claims them nor as reluctantly as D. Sänger concedes them. As we have seen, Philonenko's conviction that the portrayal of Aseneth encodes the Egyptian goddess Neith (who had become assimilated to Isis) and therefore that Joseph and Aseneth is designed to attract devotees of the mysteries, especially the worshipers of Isis, rests upon intricate allegorical patterns which have been greatly exaggerated even if they are not without some basis.70 The fact that the figure of Neith may stand behind the portrait of Aseneth and give her something of an Egyptian profile is no indication that an appeal to adherents of the mysteries is being made in Joseph and Aseneth and certainly no justification for seeing elements of Isiac or other mystery ritual in the Aseneth's conversion. At the other extreme, D. Sänger defines too narrowly the conditions under which it would be legitimate to suppose that Joseph and Aseneth was influenced by the mysteries: Erst wenn Struktur und inhaltliche Ausrichtung beider analysierter Texte sich als einander entsprechende und somit vergleichbare Initiationsriten begreifen lassen, also formgeschichtlich gesagt, den gleichen Sitz-imLeben haben, können wir, ohne in Gefahr zu geraten, extrapolieren zu wollen, von JosAs als von einer in einem Roman abgebildeten Mysterienhandlung, genauer Initiationspraxis, sprechen. Und erst dann ist es statthaft, diese für Met. XI 21-24 berechtigte Nomenklatur auch zur Charakterisierung der religionsgeschichtlichen Eigenart von JosAs zu verwenden.71

Sänger is right that we must not abstract individual motifs from what he calls their Interaktionszusammenhangen and draw superficial parallels. To this extent his approach is a salutary corrective to the 'parallelomania'72 which has characterized many studies. But surely we must leave room for the possibility that mystery initiation influenced the representation of Aseneth's conversion at some points without determining the structure and content of the whole. Indeed, major differences between the two are to be expected and do not diminish the potential

70. See Chapter 2 above. 71. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 89-90. 72. The term is borrowed from Sandmel, Tarallelomania'.

7. Mystery Initiation

237

for positive comparison on individual points. The question for consideration, then, is whether significant similarities exist alongside the differences to warrant the claim that the conversion story in Joseph and Aseneth is influenced in any way by Isiac initiation. To specific data bearing on this question we now turn. Conceptual Features The Human Predicament. We have seen that the predicament from which Lucius seeks deliverance in the cult of Isis is the cruel dominion of Fortune. By the wildest storms and heaviest gales of Fortune he had been driven through many dangerous experiences and torturous encounters with the hostile powers of the cosmos, including even being changed into a donkey and undergoing a long series of misadventures in that form. That such an understanding of the human predicament is more typical of the Isiac tradition than the singular experiences of Apuleius might suggest is confirmed by the representation of Isis in the aretological tradition as the omnipotent one who overcomes the cosmic forces of fate.73 The difference between this conception of the human predicament and that in Joseph and Aseneth is manifest. In the latter, as I have shown in Chapter 4, the predicament of Aseneth is that by her idolatry she is cut off from the living God and therefore exists in a state of darkness, death and destruction. She is not bound by fate, but defiled by idolatry. In one section in her prayer, Aseneth does speak of her persecution by a supramundane hostile force (12.9-11), but this mythological language clearly describes a situation resulting from her conversion rather than leading to it.74 There is nothing here corresponding to the dreadful grip of fate for which Isiac initiation offered a solution. The Nature of Salvation. The soteriological benefits of Isiac initiation naturally are expressed by Apuleius as the resolution of Lucius' predicament of cruel bondage to fate. Thus the priest of Isis assures Lucius that 'hostile fate has no power over those whose lives have been claimed by the majesty of our goddess' (Metam. 11.15). In his tearful last visit to the temple of Isis after his initiation but before his departure 73. Witt, Isis in the Graeco-Roman World, pp. 100-110. 74. The idea seems to be that the devil tries to take revenge on the one who has escaped his dominion. So Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OT Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 221 n. c2.

238

From Death to Life

for home, Lucius praises the goddess for her deliverance of mortals from the 'threads of fate', the 'gales of Fortune', the 'baleful movements of the stars' (Metam. 11.26). Salus, 'salvation', as conceived in Metam. 11, consists precisely in freedom from the cruel bonds of Fortune.75 Such conceptions are once again quite dissimilar to those in Joseph and Aseneth, where the soteriological ideal is a blessed sort of existence in which the worshiper of God already in this life on earth shares the food and hence the immortality of angels in paradise. The concept of a6avccaia, 'immortality', is central to the soteriology of Joseph and Aseneth16 but conspicuously absent from the story of Lucius, as has been indicated already. In the Hellenistic period, salvation by Isis is in the material order, as F. Dunand indicates, elle vient en aide aux combattants, aux marins, aux prisonniers, aux malades, dans toutes les circonstances difficiles de leur vie; mais elle n'apparaît aucune façon comme la garante d'une bienheureuse immortalité.77

However, the contrast with Joseph and Aseneth must not be overdrawn, since in the early imperial period the cult of Isis, under the influence of other mysteries, did promise immortality.78 Aseneth and Lucius both enjoy the beneficent protection of their respective deities as one of the benefits of conversion, but this shared motif is quite generic, as we have indicated already.79 Moreover, the similarity is only a superficial one in view of the fundamental difference between the hostile forces from which Lucius seeks security and the enemies who threaten Aseneth. In neither Lucius' nor Aseneth's conversion is apotheosis an apt soteriological category, though both undergo a transformation which is visually evidenced by their radiant appearance in bright adornment. Both are expressly likened to the sun in vivid imagery which conveys, if not apotheosis, at least elevation of the convert to an exalted status. This

75. See 'Underlying Conceptions' above in this chapter. 76. See 'The Nature of Salvation' in Chapter 4 above. 77. Le culte d'Isis dans le bassin oriental de la Méditerranée (3 vols.; EPROER, 26; Leiden: Brill, 1973), m, pp. 244-45. 78. Dunand, Le culte d'Isis, pp. 244-45, 250-51; and Kee, 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 403-404 and nn. 46,48. 79. See 'Divine Protection of the Proselyte' in Chapter 5 above.

7. Mystery Initiation

239

is a noteworthy similarity even if it is not by itself proof of a direct relationship, and we shall return to it below for further consideration. The Terminology of Conversion. H.C. Kee correctly calls attention to the death-to-life symbolism which lies at the heart of the conversion stories of Aseneth and Lucius.80 However, the concepts represented by this symbolism in the two sources are poles apart even if the language is somewhat similar. According to Apuleius, 'the very rite of dedication itself was performed in the manner of a voluntary death and of a life obtained by grace' (Metam. 11.21). As we have seen, this language suggests that in his initiatory experience Lucius somehow gained the upper hand over the powers of death and fate by a voluntary journey to and safe return from their spheres of their power. In Joseph and Aseneth, on the other hand, the death-to-life symbolism is a function of the creation imagery employed by the author to represent conversion. As shown in Chapter 4, it is on the basis of the analogy to creation that Aseneth's conversion is expressed in terms of passage from darkness to light, from non-being to being, from death to life. Thus the death-to-life imagery in Joseph and Aseneth does not imply that Aseneth undergoes any sort of symbolic death and rebirth. The contrast is even more pronounced if those scholars who interpret Isiac initiation in the light of the myth of Osiris are correct. In this case one is initiated into the cult of Isis by a re-enactment of the mythical death and resurrection of Osiris. However, there is no evidence whatever that this or any such myth is presupposed in Joseph and Aseneth, and, as indicated above, the reasons are inadequate for reading the concept of a mystical rebirth even into the story of Lucius. A parallel is sometimes drawn between the reformatio of Lucius and the altered appearance of Aseneth after she is visited by the man from heaven.81 During his initiation Lucius indeed undergoes a transformation which invites comparison with the experience of Aseneth. But his earlier reformatio from the form of a donkey to human form is distinct from this change and should not be conflated with it. Not only does Lucius' reformatio have no counterpart in Joseph and Aseneth; it is not even a part of Isiac initiation as represented in Metam. 11 but is related to the trappings of Lucius' particular story of frivolous dabbling in magic and the consequences thereof. This reformatio falls well outside the 80. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 399. 81. E.g. Kee, 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 403.

240

From Death to Life

framework of Lucius' initiation and reveals nothing about the soteriological essence of Isiac initiation or the terminology used to describe it.82 Formal Features Repentance and Ritual. One general observation which should be made before we proceed to consider specific acts is that Lucius' initiation as represented in Metam. 11 consists in the proper completion of prescribed rituals, whereas Aseneth's conversion as reported in Joseph andAseneth is accomplished by self-imposed repentance. When Lucius prays to Isis, he is informed of the rites in which he must participate in order to receive the desired help, and soon after his restoration to human form he is recognized by the devotees of Isis as one who has 'pledged himself to service in the sacred rites' (Metam. 11.16). The remainder of the story details his completion of well-defined and carefully regulated rites of initiation. On the other hand, when Aseneth prays, nothing appears contingent on the fulfilment of any ritual; the climactic event is not anticipated but assumed. As we have seen in Chapter 4, the conversion already reported by the word iieievOEi in Jos. Asen. 9.2 and concretized in the repudiation of idolatry marks the decisive turning point for Aseneth. We hear of no further formal requirements, no temple, no priest. When the man from heaven arrives, he informs Aseneth that because of her penitent turning to God her name has been written in the book of the living in heaven (15.4). Whatever ritual acts may be discerned in Aseneth's experiences, it is clearly repentance, and not ritual, that constitutes the essence of her conversion. On similar grounds D. Sänger rejects the notion that a mystery initiation can be found in Joseph andAseneth: Nichts wird deshalb von dem Erfüllen bestimmter Riten abhängig gemacht und damit in die Zukunft verlagert. Vollends ausgeschlossen wird die Möglichkeit, in JosAs ein regelrechtes Initiationsgeschehen im originär mysterienhaften Sinn zu erblicken, vergleicht man es mit der Initiation in die Isismysterien.83 82. It is significant in this connection that most of the parallels which Burchard discerns between the literary structure of Joseph andAseneth and that of Metam. 11 have to do with Lucius' metamorphosis back into human form and not with his later initiation into the cult of Isis. See Burchard, Der dreizehnte Zeuge, pp. 59-86. 83. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 176. Two unpublished dissertations

7. Mystery Initiation

241

In view of the differences we have observed, Sänger is doubtless correct that 'ein regelrechtes Initiationsgeschehen im originär mysterienhaften Sinn' is not to be found in Joseph andAseneth. The possibility remains, nevertheless, that at individual points the account of Aseneth's experiences is influenced by or even modeled upon contemporaneous mystery rituals and conceptions. Autonomy and Mystagogy. Another general difference is to be noted between the autonomous actions of Aseneth as she turns from her idols to the God of Israel, and the stringent requirement that Lucius do nothing except as he is directed by Isis herself or by his mystagogue, the priest Mithras. The overly-zealous Lucius is in fact warned of the grave danger of premature or self-directed action (Metam. 11.21), and the testimony of Pausanius to the same principle in his discussion of Isiac initiation84 shows that this idea was not merely a peculiarity of the Isiac circles known to Apuleius. In contrast, Aseneth acts autonomously throughout the early chapters in which her repentance, fasting and prayer are narrated. No one, not even Joseph in his interaction with her or his prayer on her behalf, suggests any course of action for her. The man from heaven does give Aseneth some directions in chs. 14-17, but all after the decisive phase of her conversion has already passed. In the earlier chapters which narrate her prayer, asceticism and acts of penitence, the text is explicit that Aseneth's actions are her personal and spontaneous response to what she has heard of the mercy of God (11.10); they are all self-imposed.85 It in Germany draw similar conclusions (according to Burchard, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', pp. 657-58; non vidï). Burchard represents both W.D. Berner, Initiationsriten in Mysterienreligionen, in Gnostizismus und im antiken Judentum (Göttingen Dissertation, 1972), pp. 156-72; and S. Anandakumara, The Gentile Reactions to the Christ-Kerygma: The Problems Involved in the Reception of the Christ-Kerygma in the Young Gentile Christianity in the New Testament (Hamburg Dissertation, 1975), pp. 29-91, 316-35, as deducing from Joseph and Aseneth some sort of ritual scheme for proselyte initiation but denying its Mysteriencharakter. 84. Description of Greece 10.32.13, 17-18. 85. According to Burchard, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', p. 657, S. Anandakumara, Gentile Reactions (non vidï), maintains that while the role of the Jewish priest or synagogue ruler is played by Joseph in the preparatory phase of Aseneth's conversion (ch. 8) and by the angel and Pharaoh in the final phase when Aseneth is received into the Jewish community (chs. 14-21),

242

From Death to Life

is entirely possible, of course, that voluntary action on Aseneth's part could echo the prescribed procedures of a mystery ritual. However, it is difficult to reconcile the idea that conversion to Judaism is being presented in the guise of initiation into the mysteries of Isis with the fact that the author has Aseneth act autonomously and thus quite out of keeping with Isiac initiation as we know it elsewhere. Intercessory Prayer. As we have seen in Chapter 4, there is no internal evidence that Joseph's prayer for Aseneth in Jos. Asen. 8.9 betokens a formal process of initiation which included a ritual prayer of intercession. The question must now be asked whether the prayer offered by the priest of Isis on behalf of Lucius in Metam. 11.23 provides an analogy which would affect this assessment. The content of the Isiac priest's prayer for Lucius is not given; Apuleius says only that it was a prayer for 'the forgiveness of the gods'. Therefore the place and function of the prayers for Aseneth and Lucius within their respective literary contexts and patterns of initiation provide our only grounds for comparing them and for determining whether Joseph's prayer in Joseph and Aseneth is part of an initiatory ritual after the manner of Isiac initiation. Two considerations weigh against such a connection. First, it is Joseph, and not the man from heaven, who offers the intercessory prayer in Joseph and Aseneth. But Joseph, as we have seen, fills no sacerdotal or mystagogical role in Joseph and Aseneth', except for the prayer, he does nothing for Aseneth pertaining to her conversion. Instead, he departs soon after the prayer and returns only after Aseneth's conversion is a/ait accompli (9.3-10.1; 19.5). D. Sänger correctly insists that if a counterpart to the Isiac priest who assisted Lucius is to be found in Joseph and Aseneth, it must be found not in Joseph but in the man from heaven, who guides Aseneth through at least part of her experiences.86 However, we have seen that not even the man from heaven qualifies as Aseneth's mystagogue in any sense analogous to Lucius' priestly mystagogue. Secondly, the prayer of the high priest for Lucius clearly occupies a significant place in the ritual sequence; it follows a procession from the temple to the nearby baths with a group of devotees of Isis and is positioned between 'the customary ablution' and a purificatory sprinkling administered by the priest. On the other hand, Joseph's prayer for Aseneth acts alone in the crucial phase during which she repents (chs. 9-13). 86. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 164.

7. Mystery Initiation

243

Aseneth stands outside the framework of those events which comprise Aseneth's conversion and revelatory experience; indeed, the prayer is offered before Aseneth displays any desire or intent to convert. While these differences do not render it impossible that Joseph's prayer represents some sort of counterpart to the high priestly prayer of intercession in Lucius' Isiac initiation, neither do they leave us with any reason for drawing such a connection. Fasting. In Chapter 4 the possibility was held open that Aseneth's ascetic rigor reported in Joseph and Aseneth 10 conforms to prescribed ritual paralleled by other paradigms of conversion and initiation. We now ask whether Lucius' fasting as reported by Apuleius constitutes such a parallel. It is of no consequence in this connection that Aseneth's fast is total and lasts seven days (Jos. Asen. 10.17) whereas that of Lucius involves abstention from only meat and wine and lasts ten days (Metam. 11.23). Far more significant is the relative function and position of fasting in the respective stories of conversion. Lucius' ten-day fast occupies a welldefined place in the ritual scheme of Isiac initiation. Preceded by the revealing of 'certain secrets too holy to be uttered', the command to fast is given by the priest in the temple before the statue of Isis and in the presence of witnesses. Immediately after the ten days of fasting comes the climactic nocturnal ritual. The purpose of fasting in the Isiac scheme known to Apuleius, if we can judge from the descriptions in Metam. 11.21 and 23, is to hasten the beginning of the initiatory rites and to avert any harm to the initiate during those dangerous rites.87 By contrast, Aseneth's fasting is self-imposed and bears no obvious relation to any larger ritual scheme. It falls far outside the revelatory experience narrated in Joseph and Aseneth 14-17 wherein the alleged evidence of a mystery ritual has most often been discerned. Moreover, whereas the fasting required of Lucius is expressly anticipatory of and preparatory for the decisive initiatory event yet to come, Aseneth's self-imposed fast functions to prove the genuineness of the pivotal jneTOVoicc already credited to her in Jos. Asen. 9.2. Since fasting at critical moments of human experience is so widely attested in Jewish tradition,88 the similarity between the fasting reported 87. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 159. 88. E.g. Burchard, 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), O T Pseudepigrapha, II, p. 217 n. h2, cites the seven-day periods of fasting and mourning

244

From Death to Life

in Joseph and Aseneth and that in Metam. 11 would have to be marked in order to support the claim that the actions attributed to Aseneth are modeled, consciously or unconsciously, on Isiac initiation. But this level of similarity is lacking, and in fact the differences are quite pronounced. Petitionary Prayer. A prayer of petition is placed on the lips of both Lucius and Aseneth in their respective stories of conversion. Lucius prays to the 'Queen of Heaven,...whoever thou art', to appeal for 'respite and peace after the endurance of dire ills' (Metam. 11.2), and Aseneth prays a lengthy prayer in which she petitions God for mercy and refuge (Jos. Asen. 12-13). Aside from this very general similarity, the petitionary prayers of Lucius and Aseneth have little in common. Lucius' prayer comes long before his initiation begins and cannot be reckoned a part of the initiatory process. He does not even know the identity of the goddess he is addressing; indeed, he is still in the form of a donkey when he prays. Aseneth, on the other hand, prays as one already converted to the God of Israel; her words do not anticipate but assume her new beginning. Moreover, as emphasized above, the distress from which she seeks refuge is unlike that reflected in Lucius' prayer. The possibility remains that a prayer of confession and petition such as that attributed to Aseneth was a regular part of the process of conversion to Judaism known to the author of Joseph and Aseneth. However, the prayer of Lucius in Metam. 11.2 is too dissimilar to provide any confirmation of this,89 much less any evidence that this part of Aseneth's story was modeled after a mystery ritual. Physical Transformation. Both Lucius and Aseneth undergo revelatory experiences by which their appearance is noticeably altered. When he emerges from his close encounter with the gods in 'the secret rites of in preparation for prayer or revelation in 4 Ezra 5.13 et al.\ 2 Bar. 9.2 et al\ LAB 30.4-5; and similar periods of varying duration connected with conversion in Dan. 4.33a-b (LXX); 4QPrNab 1.3; and Acts 9.9. On fasting in connection with the visionary experiences reported in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, see J.H. Charlesworth, The Triumphant Majority as Seen by a Dwindled Minority: The Outsider according to the Insider of the Jewish Apocalypses, 70-130', in To See Ourselves as Others See Us: Christians, Jews, 'Others' in Late Antiquity (ed. J. Neusner and E.S. Frerichs; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985), pp. 285-315. 89. Even more remote is Lucius' prayer of praise and thanksgiving to Isis several days after the consummation of his initiation (Metam. 11.25).

7. Mystery Initiation

245

the holy night' (Metam. 11.21), Lucius' radiant appearance attracts the astonished gaze of the crowds (Metam. 11.24). Similarly, Aseneth has an encounter with a divine being in which 'the ineffable mysteries of the Most High' are revealed to her (Jos. Asen. 16.14), and thereafter her appearance is transformed to such an extent that Aseneth herself (18.10), her steward (18.11), her future husband (19.4), and her parents (20.6-7) all stand in amazement at her 'heavenly beauty'. Solar and astral imagery is used in the description of both converts, and in both cases radiant adornment marks the change. In view of these similarities, it is not surprising that Kee refers repeatedly to 'the revelatory experience' and the resulting 'visual transformation' in the course of his argument that Isiac ritual has heavily influenced the account of Aseneth's conversion.90 Indeed, this is the most noteworthy similarity we have seen thus far. Even so, there are appreciable differences which should also be noted. First, Aseneth's epiphanic experience is not central to or constitutive of her conversion in the way that Lucius' encounter with the gods 'face to face' is central to his Isiac initiation. As we have seen, the nocturnal event in which Lucius comes face to face with the gods is quite the essence of his initiation. In the case of Aseneth, on the other hand, the divine visitor comes after the decisive event and confirms what has already taken place. There is, to be sure, a premium placed on higher revelation in Joseph and Aseneth. Not only Aseneth, but also Levi and Joseph, receive revelations in some form (22.13; 23.8; 26.6; 28.15-17; 6.6; 19.9). But nothing in Joseph and Aseneth suggests that such a revelatory experience is an essential part of what E.P. Sanders calls 'the pattern of religion', that is, what it takes to get in and stay in.91 Others in the story besides those who receive special revelations are recognized to be ocvSpec Geoaeßeic, 'men who worship God' (23.912; 28.5-7; 29.3). For this reason I cannot agree with Kee that 'what is central is the epiphanic experience of the God of light, whose presence illumines the faithful seeker and transforms that individual'.92 As was emphasized in Chapter 4, Aseneth's conversion is a very special case; the experiences recounted to underscore the special, prototypical nature

90. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 399-400,404,410. 91. Paul and Palestinian Judaism, p. 17. 92. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', p. 410.

246

From Death to Life

of her conversion 'need not imply that such rituals were employed in the author's community'.93 Moreover, the 'mysteries' made known to Lucius and those revealed to Aseneth are of quite different nature and function. From certain sacred books with undecipherable writing, Lucius is informed of the necessary preparations for the secret rite of initiation (Metam. 11.22). Later he is given other 'secret instructions too holy to be uttered' (11.23). When the narrative reaches the climactic moment of the initiation, Apuleius preserves the secrecy of the event by recounting 'only what can be communicated without guilt to the understanding of the uninitiated' (11.23). Although the language of jiixmipiov is used in Joseph and Aseneth, the sense is quite different. In Jos. Asen. 16.14 the man from heaven tells Aseneth that the 'ineffable mysteries' have been revealed to her, but, as D. Sänger notes, 'im folgenden werden die uDGTÍipia geradezu zu den Xeyojieva'.94 The origin and nature of the honeycomb, which are the mysteries revealed to Aseneth, are revealed to the readers as well. Unlike the secrets of the mystery religions, which were guarded with the utmost stringency from all profanation, the substance of the mysteries revealed to Aseneth is plainly stated for the benefit of others who turn to the Lord in repentance (16.14). Future converts need await no revelatory experience but already understand through Aseneth's story that to live faithfully as a Jew is to share the divine food and hence the immortality of angels in paradise. This openness toward penitent outsiders and non-secretiveness about the mysteries would be unthinkable in a mystery religion, the peculiarity of which would be lost if the definitive secrets were made known. The noticeably changed appearance of both Lucius and Aseneth following their revelatory experiences remains a significant similarity. Joseph and Aseneth reports no formal presentation of Aseneth such as Metam. 11.24 reports in the case of Lucius, but Aseneth's transformed appearance is evident to all who see her, is described in solar and astral imagery just as is Lucius' appearance in radiant splendor, and marks her new and exalted status just as Lucius' presentation before the admiring crowds symbolizes his new life. Thus, while the analogy between the transforming revelatory experiences of Lucius and Aseneth is not perfect, enough similarity exists to raise the possibility of some connection. 93. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, p. 263. 94. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 189.

7. Mystery Initiation

247

The significance of this similarity can be assessed only in the light of all the data bearing on the question of similarity and dissimilarity. Symbolic Clothing. Both Aseneth and Lucius wear garments which are symbolic of important phases in their respective conversion experiences. The question therefore arises whether the clothing symbolism evidences a connection between Aseneth's conversion and Isiac initiation, and in fact alleged analogies in this area rank among the most frequently cited evidences of such a connection. The data from Joseph and Aseneth may be summarized as follows: 1.

2.

3.

4.

To greet her parents as they return from the field, Aseneth dresses in a linen robe interwoven with violet and gold, a golden girdle, and many precious ornaments (3.6). Upon retiring to her room after meeting Joseph, Aseneth removes her royal attire and puts on a black tunic of mourning and a girdle of sackcloth (10.6-15). At the command of the man from heaven, Aseneth takes off the black tunic and the sackcloth and puts on a new linen robe and the double girdle of her virginity. She also covers her head with a new linen veil but is told by the man from heaven to remove this (14.12-15.2). To prepare for Joseph's second visit, Aseneth follows the command of the man from heaven and dresses in a wedding robe 'like lightning in appearance', a golden girdle, many precious ornaments, and a bridal veil (15.10; 18.5-6).

In the case of Lucius the following changes of clothing occur: 1.

2.

3.

Upon being restored to human form from the form of a donkey, Lucius is clothed in white linen and joins with other worshipers of Isis, who are also 'shining in the immaculate whiteness of linen raiment', in a solemn procession to a navigation festival (Metam. 11.10-15). Prior to his being led into the innermost shrine for the climactic nocturnal ritual, Lucius is dressed in a new linen garment (11.23). Upon completing the solemn rites, Lucius emerges into public view wearing twelve robes, a lavishly embroidered tunic, and a precious cloak, all decorated with colorful animal designs (11.24).

248

From Death to Life

Not part of Lucius' experience but perhaps significant for our purposes is the black cloak worn by Isis herself to mourn the death and dismemberment of her brother and husband, Osiris.95 At two points in particular the schemes outlined above have been thought to bear such similarity as to suggest that the account of Aseneth's conversion in Joseph and Aseneth was modeled upon the practices of the cult of Isis. First, in the description of Aseneth's garment of mourning as a 'black and somber tunic', Philonenko sees 'une expression très voisine' to the black cloak worn by Isis to mourn for Osiris, and thus finds evidence of a mystery initiation in Joseph and Aseneth.96 In the description of Lucius' initiation I indicated strong doubts that the mythical death and resuscitation of Osiris underlies and determines the pattern of initiation into the mysteries of Isis. In any case, the mere presence of a 'black and somber tunic' is certainly no grounds for reading this construct into Joseph and Aseneth. The wearing of black as a sign of repentance or mourning is widely attested in antiquity, including many Jewish sources,97 and the girdle of sackcloth which Aseneth wears along with the black tunic is also a standard garment of mourning and penitence in the ancient Near East and in the biblical and Judaic heritage.98 There is no indication in Joseph and Aseneth that we should go beyond this conventional symbolism and find mythical overtones in Aseneth's black tunic. The wearing of white linen garments by both Lucius and Aseneth is an obvious similarity which several have cited as evidence of Isiac influence on the story of Aseneth's conversion.99 Since the wearing of white garments is not limited to the two phenomena under consideration but is much more widely attested,100 we must ask whether the particular symbolism and function of the clothing are enough alike in the two cases to suggest a direct relationship. Lucius dons white clothes immediately upon his restoration to human form after spending some time as a donkey, and again before being taken into the innermost part of the 95. Metam. 11.3; and Plutarch, Isis and Osiris 52. See also Griffiths, Isis-Book, pp. 128-29. 96. Joseph et Aseneth, p. 163. 97. W. Michaelis, 'uétaxç', TDNT, IV, pp. 549-51 and the references cited there. 98. G. Stählin, 'aaiocoç', TDNT, VII, pp. 56-64, esp. pp 58-60. 99. E.g. Thyen, Studien zur Sündenvergebung in Neuen Testament, p. 126; and Kee, 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 402-403. 100. See the discussion under 'Essenes' and 'Merkabah Mystics' in Chapter 6 above.

7. Mystery Initiation

249

temple for the decisive rite of initiation. When he emerges from this latter experience, he is wearing other clothing which will be discussed later. Thus Lucius' wearing of white clothing is in both instances preliminary to the decisive initiatory event, though Me tarn. 11.10 specifies that those who are already devotees of Isis also wear white clothing in the procession to the navigation festival. Aseneth, on the other hand, puts on white clothes only after her conversion has been accomplished and has received heavenly ratification. Indeed, the very function of her changing clothes is to symbolize her new and exalted status. By having her put on a new linen robe the author places her on a par with Joseph, who has been described earlier as wearing an exquisite white tunic. The fact that Lucius' wearing of white anticipates the decisive event whereas Aseneth's harks back to it and symbolizes the resulting elevation in status does not cancel out all positive comparison, especially since there is some indication that those who are already worshipers of the respective deities wear white garments in both Joseph and Aseneth and in Metam. 11. Nevertheless, with only this generic element in common, the evidence proves inadequate to establish any sort of connection. With regard to the remaining articles of clothing worn by Lucius and Aseneth, there is nothing approximating one-for-one correspondence, but there is a broad functional similarity between certain aspects of the clothing symbolism in the two sources. Thus the linen robe which Aseneth puts on at the command of the angel to replace her garment of mourning finds a functional counterpart, not in the white garments worn by Lucius before his initiation, but in the elaborate and colorful twelvefold robe in which Lucius emerges into public view following his initiation. This robe is an external symbol of the transformation that has taken place in him and the new status he now enjoys, just as Aseneth's linen garment symbolizes her new status. Similarly, the solar imagery used to describe Lucius' appearance in his twelve-fold robe before the astonished crowd is paralleled most closely in Aseneth's experience, not by the description of the new linen robe which she first puts on, but by the description of her transformed appearance later when she puts on her wedding dress. From such considerations D. Sänger correctly concludes that it is impossible to draw direct correspondences between the clothing symbolism in Joseph and Aseneth and that in Isiac tradition.101 101. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 159-63.

250

From Death to Life

Symbolic changing of clothes was widely practiced in the mystery cults of the Hellenistic era,102 and it is quite possible that this tradition has influenced the clothing symbolism in Joseph and Aseneth in a general way. However, such symbolism was by no means unique to the mystery cults,103 and we have found no evidence that the clothing symbolism in Joseph and Aseneth was influenced directly and specifically by that in the Isiac mysteries. Purificatory Washing. Washing in water figures prominently in the story of Lucius. While still in the form of a donkey, he purifies himself by plunging his head under the waves of the Saronic Gulf seven times before invoking the aid of the unknown 'Queen of Heaven' (Metam. 11.2). Later, as a formal part of his initiation, he is led from the temple to the nearby baths for 'the customary ablution' and a purificatory sprinkling administered by the priest (11.23). Such washings or sprinklings, which are found in almost all of the mystery religions, whether Greek, Oriental or Egyptian in origin,104 are lacking in Joseph and Aseneth. There Aseneth washes her face and hands once (14.12-15), but only because she has been lying in ashes and mud for a week; no purificatory significance is suggested.105 Later in the story it is stated expressly that Aseneth did not wash her face even after preparing to do so (18.8-10). From the silence of Joseph and Aseneth about purificatory washings, no sweeping conclusions regarding the religionsgeschichtlich affinities of Aseneth's conversion are possible. Yet it is difficult to reconcile this conspicuous silence with the idea that conversion to Judaism is being represented in Joseph and Aseneth in the guise of initiation into a mystery. Sacred Meal. D. Sänger correctly observes that 'in der Debatte um den Problemkomplex "JosAs und Kultmysterien" den sogenannten Mahlformeln ein erheblicher, wenn nicht sogar entscheidender 102. See Reitzenstein, Hellenistic Mystery-Religions, p. 334: 'The outward symbol of this transfiguratio in every cult is the garment'. 103. See Chapter 6 above. 104. See Wild, Water in the Cultic Worship of Isis and Sarapis, passim. As is noted above in this chapter, ritual purity figures even more prominently in certain other mysteries than in the Isis cult. 105. Delcor, 'Un roman d'amour', p. 23; see the discussion in 'Washing of the Face and Hands' in Chapter 4 above.

7. Mystery Initiation

251

Stellenwert zukommt'.106 M. Philonenko, in particular, developed the notion that the bread, cup and ointment in Joseph and Aseneth represent a sacramental meal comparable to those of the cults of Attis, Cybele, Mithra and Isis; by providing the same promise of immortality offered in those cultic meals, the author of Joseph and Aseneth hoped to attract his readers to the Jewish mystery cult.107 Several more recent publications reflect similar views. H. Thyen points to the meal language as 'das eindeutige Zeugnis eines Mysterienmahles aus der jüdishen Gemeinde',108 and E.W. Smith, Jr, has endorsed Philonenko's view that the bread-cup-ointment formula is part of the evidence for an initiation liturgy in Joseph and Aseneth comparable to that of the mystery religions and is designed to show that conversion to Judaism confers the benefits offered by the mysteries.109 H.C. Kee likewise appeals to Aseneth's participation in a sacred meal as evidence that the story of her conversion is modeled after Isiac initiation.110 Our conclusions in Chapters 3 and 4 regarding the nature and function of the meal language in Joseph and Aseneth seriously undermine these views. The bread-cup-ointment language is expressive of the Jewish way of life vis-à-vis the life of idolatry, but it likely does not imply a Jewish cult meal involving bread, cup and ointment. Even if Philonenko and Smith are right that Joseph and Aseneth represents Judaism as conferring the benefits of the mysteries, it would not necessarily be by means of a sacred meal that Judaism confers those benefits. The possibility remains that the representation of life as a Jew in terms of the bread-cup-ointment triad was influenced in part by the use of these items in pagan cults, including the mystery religions. In this case the sacred meals of the mysteries could have influenced Joseph and Aseneth, if only by way of providing the language with which the Jewish way of life is expressed in the form of antithetically corresponding expressions. However, in view of the representative function of the bread-cup-ointment triad to express the life more judaico, it is also quite possible that this triad was shaped primarily by the biblical formula 106. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 167. 107. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 63-64 et passim', and 'Initiation et mystère', pp. 147-53. 108. Studien zur Sündenvergebung in Neuen Testament, p. 127. 109. 'Joseph andAsenath ' and Early Christian Literature, pp. 23-26, 32. 110. 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 399,403.

252

From Death to Life

which summarizes the staples of life in terms of grain, wine and oil, and by the use of the metaphor of eating in Jewish wisdom tradition, rather than by some non-Jewish ritual actually employing these three elements. In any case, it is ordinary food which has been sacrificed to idols, and not the food of cultic meals—mystery or otherwise—with which the Jewish diet is explicitly contrasted in Joseph andAseneth (see 7.1; 8.5; 10.13; 11.9,16; 12.5; 21.13-14). Aside from the question whether a ritual meal underlies the bread, cup and ointment in Joseph and Aseneth, it must be emphasized that the phenomenon represented by this formula plays a far more significant role in Aseneth's conversion than the sacred meal ofMetam. 11.24 does in Isiac initiation. The sacred meal in which Lucius participates comes three days after the decisive initiatory event. It is not for that reason insignificant; Apuleius himself calls it a 'sacred meal' (ientaculum religioswri) and says that by it Lucius' initiation was 'duly consummated'. However, the passing reference to this meal and its position in the narrative suggest that it functions rather to enhance the bond of the initiate with the religiosa cohors than actually to effect the initiate's change of status.111 This change has already been accomplished, recognized by crowds of admirers, and festively celebrated before the sacred meal takes place. In Joseph and Aseneth, on the other hand, the phenomenon represented by the bread, cup and ointment is quite the definitive feature of Jewish self-identity. It is by eating the bread, drinking the cup and being anointed with the ointment—whatever these actions imply—that one participates in life, immortality and incorruption. Bread, cup and ointment are expressive of the very essence of the life more judaico, as distinct from Gentile existence. Thus, even if it be assumed that this language refers to a special ritual meal, it is scarcely comparable to the sacred meal mentioned in Metam. 11.24. The bread-cup-ointment language in Joseph andAseneth is no counterpart to the sacred meal of the cult of Isis. Conclusion Our investigation points inevitably to the conclusion that Aseneth's conversion was not shaped by mystery initiation, at least as we know the latter from the Isiac tradition embodied in the Metamorphoses of 111. See the discussion under 'Formal Rites' above in this chapter.

7. Mystery Initiation

253

Apuleius. D. Sänger is right that 'die charakteristische Strukturierung einer Mysterieninitiation liegt in Joseph and Aseneth nicht vor'.112 Whether there are more subtle influences and borrowings at individual points is difficult to judge, but this is quite possible, especially in the case of the transforming revelatory experience. Joseph and Aseneth clearly was written in a milieu permeated by polytheistic cults, and there is an a priori likelihood that the mystery cults formed a part of that milieu; but our search has produced no clear evidence from Joseph and Aseneth itself that Aseneth's conversion was shaped appreciably by mystery initiation or that the Judaism reflected in the work was influenced on any large scale by the mystery religions.

112. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 188. So also W.D. Berner, S. Anandakumara, and C. Burchard, 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', p. 658.

Chapter 8 CONCLUSIONS It remains to summarize the results of this investigation and assess their bearing on the larger issues in the interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth. Of special importance is the impact of our study on the complex issues of the audience for which Joseph and Aseneth was intended and the purpose for which the work was written. Before bringing our findings to bear on these difficult questions, it is appropriate to reiterate the major conclusions reached thus far. Conclusions regarding the Conversion of Aseneth The principal conclusions emerging from the foregoing analysis of Aseneth's conversion may be summarized in the following seven points. 1. Foundational for the study have been the following answers to the basic questions of the text, original language, character, provenance, date and genre of Joseph and Aseneth'. (a) the long version published by C. Burchard lies closer to the original than the short recension edited and defended by M. Philonenko; (b) Greek is the original language; (c) the work is Jewish and evidences no Christian redaction in its earliest attainable form; (d) the provenance is most likely Egypt; (e) the date of composition lies between c. 100 BCE and 115 CE; and (f) the literary genre is the Hellenistic novel or romance. 2. The account of Aseneth's conversion is permeated by social and religious conflict which is not merely literary but which mirrors to a significant degree the real milieu in which Joseph and Aseneth was written. That milieu was one in which Jews lived in dynamic tension with Gentiles and struggled to maintain a distinctive Jewish identity; one in which table fellowship and intermarriage with Gentiles, including even marriage between a convert to Judaism and a born Jew, were live issues; and one in which there was some discord centering on the perception of

8. Conclusions

255

the Gentile convert in the Jewish community. Since it is not the ritual but the sociological dimension of conversion to Judaism and generally of Jewish life in a Gentile environment which is predominant and determinative in the narrative, the formal features of conversion must be extrapolated with far greater caution than is typically exercised by those eager to draw religionsgeschichtlich parallels. 3. There is little if any evidence that Aseneth's story preserves a fixed ritual of initiation, though the possibility must be held open that further comparative research could alter this assessment. Since Aseneth's experiences are narrated to address certain concerns relating to the sociological dimension of conversion to Judaism, it should not be assumed that her actions reflect rites of initiation regularly practiced in the author's community. The process of admission seems to have been less rigidly structured and more loosely conceived than many have supposed in their alleged analogies with the ritual formalities of other paradigms of conversion and initiation. In particular, the meal language in Joseph and Aseneth has been subject to over-interpretation and premature comparison with sacred meals attested in other circles. The language of eating, drinking and being anointed seems to refer to the ongoing life of the people of God rather than to an initiatory meal or other sacred ritual. The possibility remains that the language was inspired by some unknown Jewish ritual employing bread, cup and ointment, but it seems more likely that it was inspired by the Jewish concern to maintain table fellowship in separation from Gentiles and by the uniquely Jewish use of the staple commodities of food, drink and oil, vis-à-vis the usage of these items outside Judaism and their defilement by association with idols. 4. The conceptual character of conversion in Joseph and Aseneth is more readily discernible than the ritual features, though this too must be extrapolated with great caution from its literary context. To live apart from God, according to Joseph and Aseneth, is to exist in a state of corruption and death associated with the worship of idols. To renounce idolatry, worship the God of Israel, and live faithfully as a Jew, is to partake of the food of angels in paradise and thereby to gain immortality and enjoy an angelic sort of existence. Aseneth's conversion is conceived as transition from death to life, from darkness to light, from nothingness to a blessed existence. Creation imagery is the language most often used to describe the change. 5. The conversion of Aseneth as reported in Joseph and Aseneth is probably more representative of Jewish proselytism in the Hellenistic

256

From Death to Life

world than has previously been supposed. The sharp distinction sometimes drawn between Jewish proselytism and Aseneth's conversion story exaggerates both the degree of fixation and uniformity which the extant sources exhibit concerning proselytism and the degree to which Aseneth's conversion deviates from the supposed norm. Some aspects of Aseneth's experience thought to represent ritual practices divergent from 'the standards of proselytism' prove instead to be literary devices which are related to the particular purposes of Joseph and Aseneth and which in any case address some of the same concerns which surface in other sources on Jewish proselytism. Significant points of positive comparison, especially in connection with the sociological dimension of conversion to Judaism, also appear once the obsession with ritual form is overcome. 6. It seems unlikely that Aseneth's conversion is to any Jewish 'sect', that is, to a Jewish group which distinguished itself from Judaism at large and made special or exclusive claims to divine favor. There is no separatistic, exclusivistic or sectarian outlook toward other Jews in Joseph and Aseneth. The author is concerned to distinguish between Jews and Gentiles, but not to make categorical distinctions within Jewry. Even those Jews who oppose Joseph and Aseneth in the story are recognized as otvÔpeç Geoaeßeic, 'men who worship God'. 7. In none of the comparative studies undertaken has a paradigm of conversion or initiation been found which is analogous in its essential features to the conversion of Aseneth. Similarities have been found on individual points, and there is no doubt that the author and community that produced Joseph and Aseneth shared many ideas and traditions with some—perhaps all—of the other groups considered in this study, however direct or indirect the lines of influence may have been. Yet, no paradigm of conversion or initiation has been found which provides an analogy to Aseneth's conversion as a whole or which has shaped the latter to an appreciable degree. The Conversion of Aseneth and the Readership and Purpose of Joseph and Aseneth The move from studying Aseneth's conversion to analyzing the author's purpose for narrating it is a quantum leap. Yet, the centrality of conversion in Joseph and Aseneth suggests that our findings regarding this theme are potentially very significant for the larger issues in the interpretation of the work, and it is appropriate here to offer some account of

8. Conclusions

257

the intended readership and purpose of Joseph and Aseneth which is informed by the foregoing investigation. We may first dismiss several purposes which have been assigned to Joseph and Aseneth but for which the work seems ill-suited in light of our findings. The views that Joseph and Aseneth is designed to advance the ideal of Christian virginity or to encode the Valentinian myth of Sophia-Achamoth's separation from the Pleroma and redemption by Christ-Soter have been criticized above and need not be considered further here. Also undermined by our investigation is the notion that Joseph and Aseneth was written to attract converts to Judaism by representing conversion in the guise of initiation into a mystery. Without excluding the possibility that the mystery religions, especially the cult of Isis, influenced the account of Aseneth's conversion at some points, I have found no evidence that mystery initiation was the decisive factor in shaping the conversion story in Joseph and Aseneth or even that it has left a major imprint. If the evidence fails to establish that Aseneth's conversion is modeled after mystery initiation in a positive way, neither does it suggest that conversion to Judaism and its benefits are defined by way of contrast to the mysteries. In the bread-cup-ointment formula in Joseph and Aseneth, the benefits of being Jewish are set over against the defilement and death resulting from eating food tainted by association with idolatry in general, but there is no reason to think that the mysteries in particular formed the backdrop for this language. The contrast is with everyday food which has been sacrificed to idols, and not with the sacred meals of the mysteries or any other cultic meals. The most common understanding of the purpose of Joseph and Aseneth has been that it is missionary propaganda designed to win Gentiles to the Jewish faith.1 While this possibility cannot be excluded, it is not the one which accords best with our conclusions above, and there are other aspects of the text which suggest that the work is not wellsuited for missionary purposes. For one thing, the author presupposes too much by assuming throughout that the readers are familiar not only 1. Among many others, see Kohler, 'Aseneth', p. 176; Aptowitzer, 'Asenath', pp. 305-306; Kilpatrick, 'Last Supper', pp. 4-8; idem, Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy, p. 60; Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 106-107; and Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, p. 262. Obviously the view that Joseph and Aseneth is designed to attract converts to Judaism by presenting conversion as a mystery initiation is one particular form of this broader viewpoint.

258

From Death to Life

with the biblical story of Joseph (e.g. 1.1; 4.9-10; 22.1-5; 24.1-9), but with other patriarchal narratives as well (e.g. see 1.5; 23.2, 14). These biblical references, at least in the case of the story of Joseph, are not incidental but are central to the narrative and crucial for a full appreciation of it. Moreover, the repeated formula 'it is not proper for a man (woman) who worships God to...' (8.5, 7; 21.1; 23.9, 12; 29.3) and the other attempts to define the conduct befitting 'those who worship God' (e.g. 23.10; 28.5, 7) are clearly directed inward, to Jews, and not outward. The very problem in Scripture for which Joseph and Aseneth furnishes a midrashic solution—namely, the marriage of the patriarch Joseph to the daughter of a pagan priest (Gen. 41.45, 50; 46.20)—is a problem to the Jewish conscience. Such considerations support G. Delling's comment that 'der Erzähler denkt also an jüdische Leser seiner Geschichte (oder zumindest an dem Judentum sehr nahestehende)'.2 G.W.E. Nickelsburg cites two factors which, in his judgment, tip the scales in favor of the opposite conclusion—that the author of Joseph and Aseneth had a Gentile readership in mind. First, 'the story is written from Aseneth's viewpoint... The author has recounted a proselyte's progress from the point of view of the proselyte.^ While the premise is true that Aseneth is the central figure whose thoughts and emotions are described in detail, this perspective is not surprising in the genre of the Hellenistic romance, where a woman's point of view is regularly featured.4 Moreover, the literary function of this perspective seems to be that of establishing in the Jewish mind the worthiness of the true convert to be accepted fully into the community of Israel and to marry a born Jew. Chapter 3 presents considerable evidence of dissension in the author's Jewish community about the perception of the Gentile convert and the marriage of a convert and a born Jew. Thus the detailed description of Aseneth's self-castigation, asceticism and prayer—though certainly recounted from Aseneth's viewpoint in the sense that she is alone and is the only one whose thoughts, words and actions are described—seems 2. 'Die Kunst des Gestaltend, p. 5. 3. Jewish Literature, p. 262 (emphasis his). 4. See Hägg, The Novel in Antiquity, pp. 95-96; Pervo, Profit with Delight, pp. 83-84; and idem, 'Aseneth and her Sisters', pp. 145-60. Indeed, the prominent roles of women in the Hellenistic romances has led some to suggest female authorship; see the section on 'Genre' in Chapter 2 above.

8. Conclusions

259

designed to respond to intramural Jewish questions about the worthiness of the convert. Other indications of the same include the numerous parallels between the portrayals of Aseneth and Joseph, those between the portrayals of Aseneth and Levi, the volte-face in the way Aseneth is perceived by both Jacob and Joseph following her conversion, the heavenly endorsement of Aseneth's marriage to Joseph and other indications by the man from heaven of her full status as one of the people of God, and the divine protection of Joseph and Aseneth from the hostility of some of Jacob's sons.5 The author seems intent upon emphasizing Aseneth's worthiness to be accepted fully into the community of Israel and the propriety of her marriage to Joseph. These motifs seem well-suited to address internal Jewish concerns about exogamy and about the status of the convert, but remarkably ill-suited to introduce or otherwise commend Judaism to Gentiles. Nickelsburg points secondly to the narrative's 'blatant religious syncretism' as an indication that the book is directed to Gentiles: 'Judaism is made attractive and understandable through the use of motifs and elements to which Gentiles are accustomed'.6The premise of this argument is correct, but the conclusion is debatable. That Joseph and Aseneth is quite syncretistic is beyond dispute, in spite of the author's vehement opposition to the corrupting influence of paganism.7 However, we must not suppose that only Gentiles would have been accustomed to and attracted by motifs drawn from Hellenistic and Egyptian culture and that Jews living in that cultural milieu could not have appreciated the expression of their faith in such terms. If the Jewish author of Joseph and Aseneth was open to the influences of Hellenistic religion and culture, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the Jewish community from which the text springs was as well. Thus the syncretism of Joseph and Aseneth is consistent with either a Gentile or a Jewish audience and affords no exclusive support for either view. 5. See Chapter 3 above. 6. Jewish Literature, p. 262. 7. Kee, 'Socio-Religious Setting', p. 188, correctly observes that the community behind Joseph and Aseneth 'regarded itself as able to maintain its own integrity and its own distinct Jewish identity... This is not a syncretistic movement, at least not consciously, since the goal is to bring "aliens" into the household of Israel's faith rather than to create an amalgam of religions' (emphasis supplied). Yet Kee would agree, and indeed emphasizes, that the Jewish community reflected in Joseph and Aseneth was heavily syncretistic in the sense that it was open (at least unconsciously) to many aspects of Hellenistic culture.

260

From Death to Life

Not even the fact that Joseph and Aseneth polemicizes so strongly against idolatry suggests that the work was written for Gentiles, any more than the polemic against idolatry in the Hebrew Bible indicates that these writings were directed to non-Israelites. Jews themselves needed to be reminded of their distinctiveness vis-à-vis Gentiles and of the danger of assimilation to Gentile culture. Indeed it is precisely 'the one who worships God'—that is, the Jew—whose proper attitude toward exogamy and the corruption of idolatry is clarified in the formulaic ethical instruction in 8.5-7 and elsewhere. Moreover, Jews who were not accommodating toward proselytes and who had reservations about the propriety of marriage to them—and I have argued above that such concerns did in fact exist in the Jewish community behind the work— needed reassurance that conversions entailed the utter repudiation of idols and everything associated with idols, and therefore that marriage to a convert was no concession to paganism. Such intramural concerns seem best to account for the detailed narrative of Aseneth's renunciation of her idols; there is no reason to think that the polemic against idolatry is propaganda calculated to attract outsiders. Similarly, the exalted opinion of Jews and of Jewish tradition permeating Joseph and Aseneth and expressed in explicit contrast with Gentile life and worship is no indication of a Gentile readership. V. Tcherikover correctly insisted that Jews themselves needed to hear their religion praised and that they found it easier to cling to Judaism as long as they were assured that the Jewish way of life stood on an equal level with or was superior to Hellenistic civilization.8 In Joseph and Aseneth, the extolling of Jews and Judaism is juxtaposed with an obvious interest in clarifying Jewish identity and defining appropriate Jewish attitudes and conduct (8.5-7; 21.1; 23.9-12; 28.5-7; 29.3) in such a way as to suggest that the author envisioned a primarily Jewish readership. We must not, of course, distinguish too rigidly between writings designed for an intramural readership and those directed to outsiders. The words of P. Dalbert are apposite: Es ist oft nicht leicht zu entscheiden, welche Schriften als missionarische anzusehen sind. Die Grenzen sind fliessend. Auch eine Apologie kann zugleich Mission sein. Häufig sind werbende und verteidigende Tendenzen nicht voneinander zu trennen. Ebenso schwierig ist es zuweilen, die Grenze zwischen Mission und Erbauung zu ziehen. Einige Schriften können wohl

8.

'Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered', Eos 48 (1956), p. 180.

8. Conclusions

261

mit ebenso guten Gründen der einen wie der ändern Literaturgattung zugeweisen werden.9

For this reason the possibility should not be excluded that a given work served both purposes. Perhaps JJ. Collins is right that Joseph and Aseneth is 'addressed to all interested parties, both Jew and Gentile'.10 But in view of the considerations above, it remains likely that any Gentile readers envisioned by the author were indeed already 'interested parties' standing very close to Judaism, and unlikely that Joseph and Aseneth was designed to support any zealous missionary enterprise. The Jewish community represented in the narrative itself certainly reflects no such missionary impulse. Joseph does not attempt to proselytize Aseneth, and in fact when he first sees her he urges that she be sent away (7.2, 6); later he prays for her conversion only after her parents have taken the initiative to bring the couple together (7.7-8), and following the prayer he leaves and does nothing more for her. As C. Burchard observes: Joseph wirbt nicht für seinen Glauben oder sein Volk.. .Er betet dann für ihre Bekehrung (8,9)...Aber die positive Richtung gibt ihr, was sie über die Barmherzigkeit des Gottes der Hebräer 'viele sagen hörte' (11,10), doch wohl nicht in Missionspredigten.11

Neither does Joseph show any interest in converting Aseneth's family, and even the narrator seems unconcerned with the conversion of Pharaoh or Pentephres in spite of the fact that both are favorably disposed toward Judaism and its God (3.3-4; 4.7-8; 7.7-8; 20.6-7; 21.4-6). This disinterest seems incompatible with the view that one of the document's primary purposes is to proselytize Gentiles. Joseph and Aseneth certainly reflects openness to converts and a high opinion of them, but not an active desire to seek them.12 9. Die Theologie der hellenistisch-jüdischen Missionsliteratur unter Ausschluss von Philo undJosephus (TF, 4; Hamburg: H. Reich, 1954), p. 7; so also C.F.D. Moule, The Birth of the New Testament (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 3rd edn, 1982), p. 44; and Collins, 'Symbol of Otherness', p. 144. 10. Between Athens and Jerusalem, p. 218. M. Goodman writes similarly: 'it may well have been intended to convey different messages to Jewish and to gentile readers; both audiences were probably intended' (Schürer, History [ed. Vermes et al] p. 548). So also Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 106-107; and Kee, 'SocioCultural Setting', p. 410. 11. 'Der jüdische Asenethroman und siene Nachwirkung', p. 655. 12. Burchard draws the same distinction and further suggests that Aseneth's

262

From Death to Life

In summary, the author's assumption of familiarity with the biblical tradition on the part of the audience, the apparent concern to counter Jewish suspicions about Gentile converts, the explicit interest in regulating Jewish attitudes and conduct, and the absence of any missionary impulse in the story make a missionary aim unlikely. Among the purposes of the document, or among its actual functions, may have been the influencing of those Gentiles who already stood very close to Judaism, but any broader sense of the term Missionsschrift seems inappropriate. Many of the particular concerns which led to the writing of Joseph and Aseneth have been mentioned or intimated already, but it is appropriate now to speak more directly of the purpose of the work. The variety of social and religious tensions underlying and influencing the narrative makes it unwise to think of a single overarching purpose. Yet, these tensions as described in Chapter 3 above reflect a few fundamental and related concerns that provide our most reliable guide to the major purpose(s) of Joseph and Aseneth. Central to the author's purpose seems to be the clarification of proper Jewish attitudes and conduct on two fronts: (1) in relations with Gentiles outside the Jewish community; and (2) in relations with Gentile converts to Judaism. From the former group the Jew is to maintain rigid separation. Physical intimacy, intermarriage and table fellowship with Gentiles are expressly forbidden because of the contamination of idolatry. Nevertheless, Gentiles are to be treated with magnanimity and respect, even in situations of conflict; they are not to be repaid evil for evil. The second group, converts to Judaism, are also to be treated with respect. They are beneficiaries of all the blessings and privileges appertaining to those who are Jews by birth, and as such they are to be received fully into the community of Israel. Having renounced idols, they—no less than Jews by birth—are worshipers of God and are therefore suitable mates for Jews. The responses to the two areas of tension isolated here do not case is typical of the way many proselytes were drawn to Judaism: 'Vermutlich spiegelt sich hier ein Muster, nach dem viele Bekehrungen in der Umwelt zustande kamen. Die Begegnung mit lebendigen Juden wirkte anziehend, ihre Denk- und Lebensformen vermittelten sich eher durch Osmose als durch Propaganda, und der förmliche Übertritt, der folgenschwer war, weil er die bisherige Lebensgemeinschaft zerriss, wurde von jüdischer Seite gern akzeptiert, aber nicht evangelistisch beschleunigt' ('Der jüdische Asenethroman und siene Nachwirkung', pp. 655-56).

8. Conclusions

263

constitute two separate purposes but are integrally related and mutually inclusive. The emphasis on separation from Gentiles naturally raises the question of the status of the Gentile who has converted to Judaism: Is marriage to such a person forbidden by the prohibition of exogamy? What is the relative status of the proselyte within the Jewish community? In turn, the emphasis on the worthiness of the true convert to be accepted fully into the community of Israel raises the whole issue of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles: Is not such openness to Gentiles a threat to Jewish monotheism, a concession to pagan idolatry and its corrupting effect? Does it not detract from the unique blessings and privileges of being Jewish? Does not exogamy lead inevitably to the loss of Jewish identity? Whether one of the two sets of concerns described above is primary and the other subsidiary is difficult to say. If such a distinction is to be made, it seems most likely that the primary purpose is to enhance the status of the convert within the Jewish community and that a derivative purpose is to emphasize the privileged status of Jews and to clarify appropriate Jewish conduct in a Gentile environment. The variety of means by which the author of Joseph and Aseneth labors to establish the worthiness of the true convert to be accepted fully into the Jewish community and to be married to a Jew suggests the central importance of this theme. But in responding to the possible inferences from this theme—namely, compromise with idolatry and loss of distinctive Jewish identity and blessings—the author emphasizes Jewish monotheism, Jewish privilege and Jewish responsibility, so that these, too, become thematic. Aseneth's conversion and marriage to Joseph are narrated in such a way as to maintain the paradigmatic distinction between Jews and Gentiles. Joseph refuses table fellowship with Gentiles (7.1) and expresses stern opposition to intimacy or intermarriage between a 'man (woman) who worships God' and an outsider corrupted by idolatry (8.57). Only after her conversion is Aseneth acceptable as a mate for Joseph, and—lest there be any doubt about the legitimacy of that conversion— the author takes pains to narrate in vivid detail her utter repudiation of idolatry and everything associated with it, her genuine repentance in full cognizance of the familial and social ostracism that could result, and even the heavenly endorsement of her marriage to Joseph and her full recognition as one of the people of God by God's own chief angel. There is no concession to idolatry here; Aseneth has renounced idolatry. The opposition to exogamy is not abandoned but confirmed in this

264

From Death to Life

story; Aseneth can marry a 'son of God' only because she has become a 'daughter of the Most High' (21.4). There is in Aseneth's story no diminution of the blessed status enjoyed by Jews as the people of God; these blessings are in fact affirmed and articulated at great length, but with the emphasis that the Jew by conversion participates in them every bit as fully as the Jew by birth. Membership in the people of God according to this author is not determined by ethnic descent but by acknowledgment of the true God and is characterized by 'proper' conduct; thus genuine converts are on equal footing with Jews by birth, and the latter must themselves avoid the contamination of idols and engage in 'proper' conduct in order to retain God's favor. Thus it appears that the concern to enhance the status of Gentile converts in the Jewish community was the central purpose of Joseph and Aseneth even if there were important subsidiary purposes, including especially the reminder to Jews (born or converted) of their privileged status and their appropriate behavior in the context of tensions both within the Jewish community and with outsiders. Such an understanding of the purpose seems best to accord with the social tensions discussed Chapter 3 above and the data examined elsewhere in this study. Explanations of the purpose of Joseph and Aseneth offered in previous studies overlap with that offered here but have differently placed emphases and varying assessments of the interrelationships among the several concerns reflected in the work. Thus M. Philonenko, in addition to seeing Joseph and Aseneth as a missionary appeal to Gentiles, correctly describes the apocryphon as an apology for the marriage of a born Jew to a proselyte.13 However, he does not see this latter purpose as part of a larger concern to clarify and enhance the status of proselytes within a Jewish community divided over the issue of how converts were to be regarded. H.C. Kee perceptively acknowledges the problem of exogamy and the related issue of the admission of proselytes as 'central concerns' for the author of Joseph and Aseneth.14 However, in describing that which is most characteristic of the work and most definitive of the Jewish community from which it originated, Kee focuses instead on the supposed affinities with Merkabah mysticism and especially with the cult of Isis.15 C. Burchard maintains, as I have also 13. Joseph et Aseneth, pp. 106-107. 14. 'Socio-Religious Setting', p. 187. 15. 'Socio-Religious Setting', pp. 185-90; and 'Socio-Cultural Setting', pp. 399-411.

8. Conclusions

265

argued, that Joseph and Aseneth is not Missionsliteratur designed to entice Gentiles to convert; he suggests instead that the purpose was to remind Jews of the privileges they had always enjoyed and to articulate for proselytes the blessings they had gained by crossing over to Judaism.16 However, Burchard does not relate this to the author's apparent purpose of redressing the less favorable estimations of converts that seem to have existed in the Jewish community behind Joseph and Aseneth. What is proposed in the present study is that the exalted estimation of converts in Joseph and Aseneth was designed not so much for the converts themselves as for Jews who did not hold converts in such high esteem, and that even the reminder to Jews of their privileged status and responsibilities was designed for a community in which the perception of converts was the basic issue which brought these other issues to the fore. Desiderata A study of this type inevitably raises more issues than it can resolve or even address, and it is appropriate to conclude by referring to some of the issues which have surfaced in the foregoing investigation of Aseneth's conversion but which must be reserved for further study. In addition to the obvious need to clarify the complex textual history of Joseph and Aseneth and generate a critical edition, ten desiderata relating to the interpretation of the text and its significance for early Judaism and Christian origins deserve brief mention here. 1. The probable Egyptian provenance of Joseph and Aseneth needs to be investigated further, and, if substantiated, needs to be taken more fully into account in the interpretation of the work. As is indicated in Chapter 2, the realia in Joseph and Aseneth which have such an obvious bearing on the question of provenance have not been studied thoroughly. If the Egyptian provenance which seems likely on other 16. 'Joseph and Aseneth', in Charlesworth (ed.), OTPseudepigrapha, II, p. 195. Burchard, Untersuchungen, p. 142 and n. 5, uses the term Missionsschrift, but only 'in einem weiten Sinn, ohne damit sagen zu wollen, dass JA speziell für Heiden geschreiben wäre'. More recently Burchard has written, 'Dabei scheint das Judentum, das sich in JosAs darstellt, nicht eigentlich missionarisch zu sein und das Buch insoweit auch keine "Missionsschrift", obwohl es oft so genannt wird' ('Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung', p. 655).

266

From Death to Life

grounds should be confirmed by such a study, the way would be opened for an attempt to coordinate the Judaism reflected in Joseph and Aseneth with the religious, social, cultural and political life of Egyptian Jewry attested in a now vast array of data which has yet to be synthesized. The numerous inscriptions, ostraca and papyri,17 the several apocrypha and pseudepigrapha in addition to Joseph and Aseneth which are of certain or probable Egyptian provenance,18 the works of Philo, together with the indirect evidence of the earliest Christian communities in Egypt,19 combine to provide more evidence on Egyptian Jewry than is sometimes supposed. These data need to be assembled and appreciated in their fulness.20 As patterns become discernible, individual pieces of the puzzle such as Joseph and Aseneth need to be fitted into the larger picture of Judaism in Egypt. In this way Joseph and Aseneth could be better used both to inform, and to be informed by, our understanding of Judaism in Egypt. 2. The likelihood that Joseph and Aseneth was written in Egypt suggests the need not only to explore other data on Judaism in Egypt, but also to examine Egyptian myth and ritual in the Ptolemaic and early Roman periods for possible illumination of Aseneth's conversion and other aspects oí Joseph and Aseneth. Philonenko is the only specialist to have undertaken this task on a significant scale, and, as we have seen, the exaggerated allegorical patterns which he discerns in Joseph and Aseneth render his comparisons specious. However, the task is a valid one and needs to be undertaken on an even larger scale than that which Philonenko attempts. The rich potential of such an investigation is suggested by the possibility that Joseph's description as 'son of God' and the use of solar imagery in the account of his arrival in the house of Pentephres were influenced by the Egyptian tradition wherein Pharaoh 17. Many of these are collected in Tcherikover, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarwn. 18. E.g. Books III and V of the Sibylline Oracles, the Letter of Aristeas, 3 Maccabees, the Additions to Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, 2 Enoch, and the Treatise ofShem. 19. See B.A. Pearson, 'Christians and Jews in First Century Alexandria', HTR 79 (1986), pp. 206-16; idem, 'Earliest Christianity in Egypt: Some Observations', in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B.A. Pearson and I.E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), pp. 132-56; and in the same volume, A.FJ. Klijn, 'Jewish Christianity in Egypt', pp. 161-75. 20. Important recent studies include A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt: The Struggle for Equal Rights (Tübingen: Mohr, 1985).

8. Conclusions

267

is described as the son of Re, the solar deity, and by the likelihood that the portrayal of Aseneth in Joseph and Aseneth was influenced in at least some places by contemporaneous perceptions of the Egyptian goddess Neith. The significant advances which have been made in the last two decades in the study of Egyptian religion21 make further study along these lines all the more imperative. 3. The phenomenon of induction into the numerous philosophical schools and private religious associations in the Hellenistic era needs exploring for its possible bearing on the account of Aseneth's conversion. Recent publications by A. Malherbe have opened the door for such a study by discussing, among other matters of obvious significance for the understanding of Aseneth's conversion, the redefining of social relationships that resulted from conversion to various philosophical groups.22 4. The enigmatic episode involving the bees and the honeycomb in Jos. Asen. 16.17-23 needs careful examination from a religionsgeschichtlich point of view. Although one must be careful not to impose upon this incident an interpretation that is foreign to it, any illumination from comparative research would be welcome for a passage which is so 21. See D.M. Parrot, 'Gnosticism and Egyptian Religion', NovT 29 (1987), pp. 77-78 and n. 17, and the references cited there. Parrot writes, 'Within the last two decades fresh translations of long-known texts have become available (based on much-improved knowledge of the Egyptian language), translations of less well-known texts have been published, and a thoroughgoing re-examination of our understanding of Egyptian religion has been carried out' (p. 77). 22. Moral Exhortation: A Greco-Roman Sourcebook (LEG, 4; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986); Paul and the Thessalonians: A Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987); and Paul and the Popular Philosophers (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989). See also M. Weinfeld, The Organizational Pattern and the Penal Code of the Qumran Sect: A Comparison with Guilds and Religious Associations of the Hellenistic-Roman Period (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, 2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). Weinfeld argues that the Qumran organizational pattern and penal code, including the procedures for admitting new members, are patterned after those common in Hellenistic guilds and religious associations. The 'parallels', which had been noted by others also (see, among others, the references given by Weinfeld, p. 7 n. 1), are in my view greatly exaggerated. Nevertheless, Weinfeld's study provides a fresh reminder of the range of possibilities that exists for comparison with Jewish conversion or initiation in general and Aseneth's case in particular.

268

From Death to Life

obscure and yet so obviously significant for understanding Aseneth's conversion. Perhaps a thorough study of the symbolic connotations of bees in the ancient world, with special reference to Egyptian tradition, would provide the key which would unlock this door to a better understanding of Joseph andAseneth. 5. The affinities of Joseph andAseneth with the Jewish wisdom tradition need exploring. Although to read Joseph andAseneth as 4an allegory of the search for wisdom'23 is surely to exaggerate this dimension of the work, there is a sense in which Aseneth's story represents a quest for religious truth, and certain specific motifs are surely subject to elucidation from the wisdom tradition in Judaism. These include the motif of receiving divine wisdom by means of eating a heavenly substance, and the ascription to Joseph, a son of God, of qualities often attributed to wisdom in Jewish wisdom theology. D. Sänger has made preliminary probes into these and other wisdom motifs in Joseph and Aseneth24 but he too recognizes the need for much more work along these lines.25 6. As is suggested in Chapter 5, the prayers in Joseph andAseneth need investigating for their possible formal and substantive affinities with the now vast corpus of extant early Jewish hymns and prayers. Although the need for research in this area has been recognized by others and suggestive preliminary observations have been made,26 the topic has yet to be explored in depth, and its rich potential for illuminating the type of Judaism represented by Joseph andAseneth remains unrealized. 7. The central role of a woman in the narrative suggests that Joseph and Aseneth should be exploited more fully for its light on the roles and status of Jewish women in the Greco-Roman period. Aseneth serves not only as the prototypical proselyte, but also as a recipient of divine revelation, a model of conduct in the face of hostility, and a spokesperson for 23. The language is that of M. Goodman in Schürer, History (ed. Vermes et a/.), HI. 1, p. 548. 24. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, pp. 191-208; and idem, 'Judischhellenistische Missionsliteratur und die Weisheit', pp. 231-42. 25. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien, p. 191: 'Eine umfassende traditionsgeschtliche Analyse von JosAs erfordert mehr als nur eine Arbeit'. 26. See the references in Chapter 5 above.

8. Conclusions

269

the author's ethical ideals. Indeed, by comparison with Joseph she is so prominent in the narrative that the title most commonly used for the work must be judged a misnomer. The task of extrapolating the actual social status of women from literary fiction is of course problematic, but Joseph and Aseneth deserves more serious attention than it has hitherto received as one important source on this topic of intense contemporary interest.27 8. The much-discussed subject of early Jewish and Christian use of the Old Testament, now properly set in the broader context of the phenomenon of intertextuality, provides yet another avenue along which productive study of Joseph and Aseneth could well proceed. That Joseph and Aseneth is heavily dependent on the Septuagint is clear,28 but the nature and function of the biblical materials echoed merits further study. The hymnic portions of the work, including Aseneth's soliloquies (ch. 11), prayer (chs. 12-13) and psalm (ch. 21), are especially fertile ground for the exploration of how biblical traditions and imagery were adapted and used in early Judaism. 9. The use of Joseph and Aseneth to illuminate the New Testament and Christian origins is subject to the very kind of 'parallelomania' that has been resisted in this study. Yet Joseph and Aseneth is a significant Jewish writing roughly contemporaneous with the origins of Christianity, and as such it deserves the serious attention of New Testament scholars as well as specialists in early Judaism. Such study is important not only in a general way for the language of the New Testament and the thought world of early Christianity, but also for illuminating specific 27. I have made a preliminary inquiry along these lines in 'Revelatory Experiences Attributed to Biblical Women in Early Jewish Literature', in 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman World (ed. A.J. Levine; SCS, Studies in Early Jewish Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 107-25. See also in the same volume, Pervo, 'Aseneth and her Sisters', pp. 145-60; Lefkowitz, 'Did Ancient Women Write Novels?', pp. 199-219; and Kraemer, 'Women's Authorship', pp. 221-42, esp. pp. 234-35. In this last article and in Her Share of the Blessings, pp. 110-13, Kraemer correctly notes that the text's significance for the study of ancient women is intertwined with the text-critical problem: the story as it appears in Burchard's edition is more androcentric, whereas Philonenko's short text presents a far more autonomous Aseneth whose character is not denigrated by the sexually explicit language of the long version. 28. Belling, 'Einwirkungen', pp. 29-56.

270

From Death to Life

ideas and themes in the New Testament. The numerous recent applications of Joseph and Aseneth to New Testament study itemized in Chapter 1 represent only a few of the topics where comparative analysis is appropriate. Certain areas of common ground commend themselves as especially significant. Thus, for example, Paul's contrast between 'the cup of blessing which we bless' and the cup of demons in 1 Cor. 10.1422 may be indebted to the kind of ideas which underlie the meal terminology in Joseph and Aseneth. Not only is there a striking verbal parallel (1 Cor. 10.16: TO rcorripiov ifjç eû^oyiocç; Jos. Asen. 8.9: 7ioif|piov eùXoyiccç), but in both cases the argument centers on the incompatibility between partaking of blessed food and drink and partaking of food and drink contaminated by idolatry. Moreover, in both cases there is an essential connection between the manna eaten by Israel in the wilderness and the blessed food and drink (see especially 1 Cor. 10.3-4), even if in Joseph and Aseneth the anachronism of making this connection explicit is avoided.29 Since conversion has been the focus of our study, it is natural also to suggest that the concept of conversion in the New Testament and other early Christian sources is subject to elucidation from Joseph and Aseneth. Potentially significant areas of comparison include the soteriological and eschatological dimensions of conversion in Joseph and Aseneth and in early Christianity, the familial and social ostracism that sometimes accompanied conversion to Christianity as well as to Judaism, and the literary form of the conversion story in Joseph and Aseneth and those in the book of Acts (especially the accounts of Paul's conversion30) and in other early Christian literature. 10. Finally, it may be suggested that the whole subject of Jewish proselytism in the Hellenistic period needs investigating afresh. The classic works on the subject by B.J. Bamberger and W.G. Braude are now over a generation old and therefore antedate both the methodological revolution that has taken place recently in the study of rabbinic literature and the increased availability and appreciation of relevant data other than the rabbinic materials. Among these data are numerous inscriptions and other archeological discoveries, allusions in non-Jewish sources, and Jewish literary sources, including especially Joseph and Aseneth. The nature and extent of Jewish proselytizing activities, the questions whether and how literary propaganda was used to support this 29. See Chesnutt, 'Bread of Life', pp. 11-16. 30. See Burchard's discussion in Der dreizehnte Zeuge, pp. 59-91.

8. Conclusions

271

enterprise, the phenomenon of attachment to Judaism by Gentiles who stopped short of formal conversion,31 and especially the social tensions surrounding conversion to Judaism, are only a few of the aspects of the subject which need exploring anew in light of the data, perspectives and methods now available.32 The consensus which has emerged in recent years on at least some basic matters in the study of Joseph and Aseneth, and which is perhaps augmented in a small way by the present contribution, inspires optimism that clarity may be forthcoming to the above-mentioned desiderata as well, and that these combined insights may lead to a fuller appreciation of this important but neglected and misunderstood apocryphon.

31. See Chapter 3 above for references to some of the important recent studies of the controversial category (categories?) 'God-fearers' and 'sympathizers'. 32. The recent monograph by S. McKnight (A Light among the Gentiles) and the forthcoming volume of essays edited by A.-J. Levine reflect the renewed interest in this subject.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrahams, L, 'Pharisaic Baptism', Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1917; repr., New York: KTAV, 1967. First Series), pp. 36-46. Akibon, R., Die Testamente der zwölf Patriarchen, der Söhne Jakobs, und die Geschichte der Aseneth, der Frau Josephs (Kassel: n.p., 1850). [R. Akibon is a pseudonym for L. Noack.] Alexander, P.S., 'Comparing Merkavah Mysticism and Gnosticism', JJS 35 (1984), pp. 1-18. Alón, G., Jews, Judaism and the Classical World (trans. I. Abrahams; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1977). Alsup, I.E., The Post-Resurrestion Appearance Stories of the Gospel Tradition (Calwer Theologische Monographien, 5; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1975). Anandakumara, S., The Gentile Reactions to the Christ-Kerygma: The Problems Involved in the Reception of the Christ-Kerygma in the Young Gentile Christianity in the New Testament (Hamburg Dissertation, 1975). Anderson, G., Ancient Fiction: The Novel in the Graeco-Roman World (Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble, 1989). Aptowitzer, V., 'Asenath, the Wife of Joseph: A Haggadic Literary-Historical Study', HUCA 1 (1924), pp. 239-306. Arai, S., 'Zur Definition der Gnosis in Rücksicht auf die Frage nach ihrem Ursprung', Le Origini dello Gnosticismo (ed. U. Bianchi; Leiden: Brill, 1967), pp. 181-87. Babbitt, F.C., et al., Plutarch's Moralia (16 vols.; LCL; London: Heinemann, 1927-). Bamberger, B.J., 'Philo and the Aggadah', HUCA 48 (1977), pp. 153-85. —Proselytism in the Talmudic Period (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1939; repr., New York: KTAV, 1968). Barnes. T.D., 'Trajan and the Jews', JJS 40 (1989), pp. 145-62. Barrett, C.K., 'Jews and Judaizers in the Epistles of Ignatius', Jews, Greeks and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity. Essays in Honor of W.D. Davies (ed. R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs; SJLA, 21; Leiden: Brill, 1976), pp. 22044. Bartlett, J.R., Jews in the Hellenistic World (Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, no. 1, pt. 1; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). Batiffol, P., 'Apocryphes (Livres)', Dictionnaire de la Bible (5 vols.; ed. F. Vigouroux; Paris: Letouzey & Ane, 1895-1912), I, cols. 767-72. —Le Livre de la Prière d'Aseneth (Studia Patrística: Etudes d'ancienne littérature chrétienne, 1-2; Paris: Leroux, 1889-90), pp. 1-115. —Review of Apocrypha Anécdota II, by M.R. James; RB 1 (1898), pp. 302-304.

Bibliography

273

Baumgarten, J.M., The Book of Elkesai and Merkabah Mysticism', JSJ 17 (1986), pp. 212-23. —'The Essene Avoidance of Oil and the Laws of Purity', RevQ 6 (1967), pp. 183-93; repr. with addendum in idem, Studies in Qumran Law (SJLA, 24; Leiden: Brill, 1977), pp. 88-97. —The Exclusion of Netinim and Proselytes in 4QFlorilegium', RevQ, 8 (1972), pp. 87-96; repr. with postscript in idem, Studies in Qumran Law, SJLA, 24 (Leiden: Brill, 1977), pp. 75-87. —The Pharisaic-Sadducean Controversies about Purity and the Qumran Texts', JJS 31 (1980), pp. 157-70. — 'Qumran Studies', JBL11 (1958), pp. 249-57. Becker, J., Untersuchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Testamente der zwölf Patriarchen (AGAJU, 8; Leiden: Brill, 1970). Beckwith, R.T., The Solar Calendar of Joseph and Asenath: A Suggestion', JSJ 15 (1984), pp. 90-111. Beer, G., 'Joseph und Aseneth', RGG2, III, col. 379. Behm, J. and E. Wurthwein, 'uetocvoeco, U^KXVOKX', TDNT, IV, pp. 975-1008. Berger, K., 'Almosen für Israel: Zum historischen Kontext der Paulinischen Kollekte', NTS 23 (1977), pp. 180-204. — Die Auferstehung des Propheten und die Erhöhung des Menschensohnes: Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Deutung des Geschickes Jesu in frühchristlichen Texten (SUNT, 13; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976). —Die Gesetzesauslegung Jesu: Ihr historischer Hintergrund im Judentum und im Alten Testament. I. Markus und Parallelen (WMANT, 40; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1972). —'Jüdisch-hellenistische Missionsliteratur und apokryphe Apostelakten', Kairos 17 (1975), pp. 232-48. —'Die Traditionsgeschichtlichen Hintergrund Christologischer Hoheitstitel', NTS 17 (1971), pp. 391-425. —'Zum Problem der Messianität Jesu', ZTK 71 (1974), pp. 1-30. Bergman, J., ' "I Overcome Fate, Fate Harkens to Me": Some Observations on Isis as a Goddess of Fate', Fatalistic Beliefs in Religion, Folklore, and Literature (ed. H. Ringgren; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1967), pp. 35-51. Bergmeier, R., Glaube als Gabe nach Johannes: Religions- und theologiegeschichtliche Studien zum prädestinatiansischen Dualismus im vierten Evangelium, (BWANT, 112; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1980. Berner, W.D., Initiationsriten in Mysterienreligionen, in Gnostizismus und im antiken Judentum (Göttingen Dissertation, 1972). Bertram, G., 'Oeoaeßric, Geoaeßeux', TDNT, III, pp. 123-28. Best, E., A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (HNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1972). Betz, O., 'Die Proselytentaufe der Qumransekte und die Taufe im Neuen Testament', RevQ 1 (1958), pp. 213-34. Black, M., The Scrolls and Christian Origins: Studies in the Jewish Background of the New Testament (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1961). Blackman, P., Mishnayoth (7 vols; New York: Judaica Press, 1964). Bleeker, C.J., 'Initiation in Ancient Eygpt', in Initiation (ed. C.J. Bleeker; Supplements to Numen, SHR, 10; Leiden: Brill, 1965), pp. 49-58.

274

From Death to Life

Booth, R.P., Jesus and the Laws of Purity: Tradition History and Legal History in Mark 7 (JSNTSup, 13; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986). Borgen, P., Bread from Heaven: An Exegetical Study of the Concept of Manna in the Gospel of John and the Writings ofPhilo (NovTSup, 10; Leiden: Brill, 1965). —'The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue', ST 37 (1983), pp. 55-78; repr. in idem, Paul Preaches Circumcision and Pleases Men and other Essays on Christian Origins (Trondheim: Tapir, 1983), pp. 55-77. —'Some Observations on the Midrashic Character of John 6', ZNW 54 (1963), pp. 232-40. Bornkamm, G., 'uAxmipiov, UDÉCÛ', TDNT, IV, pp. 802-28. Bousset, W., Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter (ed. H. Gressmann; HNT, 21; Tübingen: Mohr, 1926). —Die Religion des Judentums in neutestamentlicher Zeitalter (Berlin: Reuther & Reichard, 1903). Bowker, J., Jesus and the Pharisees (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973). Brandenburger, E., 'Die Auferstehung der Glaubenden als historisches und theologisches Problem', Wort und Dieust, 9 (1967), pp. 16-33. —Fleisch und Geist: Paulus und die dualistiche Weisheit (WMANT, 29; NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1968). Braude, W.G., Jewish Proselyting in the First Five Centuries of the Commom Era: The Age of the Tannaim and Amoraim (Brown University Studies, 6; Providence, RI: Brown University Press, 1940). Brock, S., Review of Joseph et Aséneth: Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes, by M. Philonenko, JTS 20 (1969), pp. 588-91. Broek, R. van den, 'The Present State of Gnostic Studies', VC 37 (1983), pp. 56-61. Brooks, E.W., Historia ecclesiastica Zachariae Rhetori vulgo adscripta (2 vols.; CSCO, 83-84; Scriptores Syri 38-39; Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1919; repr. 1953). —Historia ecclesiastica Zachariae Rhetori vulgo adscripta (CSCO, 87-88; Scriptores Syri 41-42; Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1924; repr. 1953). —Joseph and Asenath (TED, 2; London: SPCK, 1918). Brunei, G., Dictionnaire des Apocryphes (ed. J.P. Migne; Paris: n.p., 1856-58). Büchler, A., Der galiläische 'Am-ha-'Ares des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Vienna: A. Holder, 1906). Bultmann, R., 'Zur Geschichte der Lichtsybolik im Altertum', Philologus 97 (1948), pp. 1-36. —Theology of the New Testament (2 vols.; trans. K. Grobel; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1955). Burchard, C., 'Das doppelte Liebesgebot in der frühen christlichen Überlieferung', Der Ruf Jesu und die Antwort der Gemeinde: Exegetische Untersuchungen Joachim Jeremías zum 70. Geburstag gewidmet von seinen Schülern (ed. E. Lohse; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970), pp. 39-62. —Der dreizehnte Zeuge: Traditions- und kompositionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Lukas' Darstellung der Frühzeit des Paulus (FRLANT, 103; Tübingen: Mohr, 1970). —'The Importance of Joseph and Aseneth for the Study of the New Testament: A General Survey and a Fresh Look at the Lord's Supper', NTS 33 (1987), pp. 102-34. —'Joseph und Aseneth neugriechisch', NTS 24 (1977), pp. 64-84.

Bibliography

275

—'Joseph and Aseneth', The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; éd. J.H. Charlesworth; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983-85), II, pp. 177-247. —'Joseph and Aseneth', Outside the Old Testament (ed. M. de Jonge; Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, 4; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 92-110. —'Joseph et Aseneth: Questions actuelles', La littérature juive entre Tenach et Mischna: Quelques problèmes (éd. W.C. van Unnik; RechBib, 9; Leiden: Brill, 1974), pp. 77-100. —'Joseph und Aseneth serbisch-kirchenslawisch. Text und Varianten', DB AT 15 (1980), pp. 3-46. —'Joseph und Aseneth', TRE, XVII, pp. 246-49. —'Joseph und Aseneth 25-29 Armenisch', JSJ 10 (1979), pp. 1-10. —'Der jüdische Asenethroman und seine Nachwirkung. Von Egeria zu Anna Katharina Emmerick oder von Moses aus Aggel zu Karl Kerényi', ANRW 2.20.1 (1987), pp. 543-667. —'A Note on 'PHMA in JosAs 17.1.; Luke 2.15, 17; Acts 10.37', NovT 27 (1985), pp. 281-95. —'The Present State of Research on Joseph and Aseneth', Religion, Literature, and Society in Ancient Israel, Formative Christianity and Judaism (2 vols.; ed. J. Neusner et al; Langham, MD: University Press of America, 1987), II, pp. 3152. —Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth: Überlieferung-Ortsbestimmung (WUNT, 8; Tübingen: Mohr, 1965). — Unterweisung in erzahlender Form: Joseph und Aseneth (JSHRZ, 2.4; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1983) —'Verbesserungen zum vorläufigen Text von Joseph und Aseneth', DBAT 16 (1982), pp. 37-39. —'Versuch, das Thema der Bergpredigt zu finden', Jesus Christus in Historie und Theologie: Neutestamentliche Festschrift für Hans Conzelmann zum 60. Geburstag (ed. G. Strecker; Tübingen: Mohr, 1975), pp. 409-32. —'Ein vorläufiger griechischer Text von Joseph und Aseneth', DB AT 14 (1979), pp. 2-53. —'Zum Text von "Joseph und Aseneth"', JSJ l (1970), pp. 3-34. —'Zur armenischen Übersetzung von Joseph und Aseneth', Revue des Etudes Arméniennes 17 (1983), pp. 207-40. —'l Korinther 15.39-41', ZNW 75 (1984), pp. 233-58. —'Ei nach einem Ausdruck des Wissens oder Nichtwissens Joh 9.25, Act 19.2, I Cor 1.16, 7.16', ZNW 52 (1961), pp. 73-82. Burton, E. de W., Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1894). Bussmann, C., Themen der paulinischen Missionspredigt auf dem Hintergrund der spätjüdisch-hellenistischen Missionsliteratur (Europäische Hochschulschriften, 23.3; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1971). Butler, H.E., The Metamorphoses or Golden Ass of Apuleius of Madaura (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910). Byrne, B., 'Sons of God'—'Seed of Abraham': A Study in the Sonship of God of All Christians in Paul against the Jewish Background (AnBib, 83; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1979).

276

From Death to Life

Cameron, R., and A.J. Dewey, The Cologne Mani Codex: Concerning the Origin of His Body (Texts and Translations, 15; Early Christian Literature Series, 3; Missoula: MT: Scholars Press, 1979). Carmignac, J., and P. Guilbert, Les textes de Qumran: traduits et annotés (Paris: Letouzey & Ane, 1961). Carrière, A., 'Une version arménienne de l'Histoire d'Asséneth', Nouveaux Mélanges Orientaux (Publications de l'Ecole des Langues Orientales Vivantes, 2.19; Paris: n.p., 1886). Cavalli, M., Storia del bellissimo Guiseppe e délia sua sposa Aseneth (Palermo: Sellerio Editore, 1983). Cavallin, H.C.C., Life after Death: Paul's Argument for the Resurrection of the Dead in I Cor 15. I. An Inquiry into the Jewish Background (ConBNT, 7.1; Lund: Gleerup, 1974). Charles, R.H., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1913). —A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St John (2 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920). —The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Oxford: Clarendon, 1908). Charlesworth, J.H., 'A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in IQS III, 13-IV, 26 and the "Dualism" Contained in the Fourth Gospel', NTS 15 (1969), pp. 389-418; repr. in John and Qumran (ed. J.H. Charlesworth; London: G. Chapman, 1972), pp. 76-106. —'Jewish Hymns, Odes, and Prayers (167 BCE-135 CE)', Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters (ed. R.A. Kraft and G.W.E. Nickelsburg; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986), pp. 411-36. —The Odes of Solomon—Not Gnostic', CBQ 31 (1969), pp. 357-69. —The Odes of Solomon (SBLTT, 13, Pseudepigrapha Series, 7; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977). Charlesworth, J.H. (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983-85). —The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament: Prolegomena for the Study of Christian Origins (SNTSMS, 54; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). —'The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel', Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism (ed. JJ. Collins and G.W.E. Nickelsburg; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980), pp. 13551. —'Prayer of Manasseh', The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; éd. J.H. Charlesworth; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983-85), II, pp. 625-37. —'A Prolegomenon to a New Study of the Jewish Background of the Hymns and Prayers in the New Testament', JJS 33 (1982), pp. 265-85. —'Pseudepigrapha', Harper's Bible Dictionary (ed. P.J. Achtemeier; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), p. 839. —The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research (SCS, 7; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976). —The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research (SCS, 7s; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981).

Bibliography

211

—The Triumphant Majority as Seen by a Dwindled Minority: The Outsider according to the Insider of the Jewish Apocalypses, 70-130', To See Ourselves As Others See Us: Christians, Jews, 'Others' in Late Antiquity (ed. J. Neusner and E.S. Frerichs; Chico, CA; Scholars Press, 1985), pp. 285-315. Chernus, L, Mysticism in Rabbinic Judaism: Studies in the History of Midrash (SJ, 11; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1982). —'Individual and Community in the Redaction of the Hekhalot Literatur', HUCA 52 (1981), pp. 253-74. Chesnutt, R.D., 'Bread of Life in Joseph and Aseneth and in John 6', Johannine Studies in Honor of Frank Pack (ed. J.E. Priest; Malibu, CA: Pepperdine University Press, 1989), pp. 1-16. —'Joseph and Aseneth', Anchor Bible Dictionary (6 vols.; éd. D.N. Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992), III, pp. 969-71. —'Revelatory Experiences Attributed to Biblical Women in Early Jewish Literature', 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in The Greco-Roman World (ed. A.J. Levine; SCS, Studies in Early Jewish Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 107-25. —Review of Jews in the Hellenistic World: Josephus, Aristeas, the Sibylline Oracles, Eupolemus, by J.R. Bartlett, Religious Studies Review 13 (1987), p. 171. —'The Social Setting and Purpose of Joseph and Aseneth', JSP 2 (1988), pp. 21-48. Cohen, A., The Minor Tractates of the Talmud (2 vols.; London: Soncino Press, 1965). Cohen, S.J.D., 'Crossing the Boundary and Becoming a Jew', HTR 82 (1989), pp. 1333. —From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (LEC, 7; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987). —The Origins of the Matrilineal Principle in Rabbinic Law', Association for Jewish Studies Review 10 (1985), pp. 19-53. —The Rabbinic Conversion Ceremony', JJS 41 (1990), pp. 177-203. —'Respect for Judaism by Gentiles according to Josephus', HTR, 80 (1987), pp. 40930. Collins, J.J., Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983). —The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS, 13; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974). —'A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century', To See Ourselves As Others See Us: Christians, Jews, 'Others' in Late Antiquity (ed. J. Neusner and E.S. Frerichs; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985), pp. 163-86. Colson, F.H., and G.H. Whitaker., Philo (10 vols, with 2 suppl. vols.; LCL; London: Heinemann; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1929-53). Conybeare, F.C., Philo about the Contemplative Life (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895). Conzelmann, H., 'Die Mutter der Weisheit', Zeit und Geschichte: Dankesgabe an Rudolf Bultmann zum 80. Geburtstag (ed. E. Dinkier; Tübingen: Mohr, 1964), pp. 225-34 (ET: The Mother of Wisdom', The Future of our Religious Past: Essays in Honour of Rudolf Bultmann [trans. C.E. Carlston and R.P. Scharlemann; New York: Harper & Row, 1971], pp. 230-43). Cook, D., 'Joseph and Aseneth', The Apocryphal Old Testament (ed. H.F.D. Sparks; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), pp. 465-503.

278

From Death to Life

Crehan, J., Early Christian Baptism and the Creed: A Study in Ante-Nicene Theology (London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1950). Dalbert, P., Die Theologie der hellenistisch-jüdischen Missionsliteratur unter Ausschluss von Philo und Josephus (TF, 4; Hamburg: H. Reich, 1954). Danby, H., The Mishnah (London: Oxford University Press, 1933). Daube, D., The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (London: Athlone Press, 1956). Decock, P.B., 'Holy Ones, Sons of God, and the Transcendent Future of the Righteous in I Enoch and the New Testament', Neot 17 (1983), pp. 70-82. DeLange, N., Apocrypha: Jewish Literature in the Hellenistic Age (New York: Viking Press, 1978). Delcor, M., 'The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Hellenistic Period', The Cambridge History of Judaism (4 vols.; ed. W.D. Davies and L. Finkelstein; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984-). —'José y Asénet, Historia de', Enciclopedia de la Biblia (6 vols.; Barcelona: Ediciones Garriga, 1963), IV, col. 638. —'Repas cultuels Esséniens et Thérapeutes, Thiases et Haburoth', RevQ 6 (1968), pp. 401-25. —Review of Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, by C. Burchard, RevQ, 5 (1966), pp. 590-96. —'Un roman d'amour d'origine thérapeute: Le Livre de Joseph et Asénath', BLE 63 (1962), pp. 3-27. Delling, G., Die Bewältigung der Diasporasituation durch das hellenistische Judentum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1987). —'Die Bezeichnung "Söhne Gottes" in der judischen Literatur der hellenistischrömischen Zeit', God's Christ and his People: Studies in Honour of Nils Alstrup Dahl (ed. J. Jervell and W.A. Meeks; Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1977), pp. 18-28. —'Einwirkungen der Sprache der Septuaginta in "Joseph und Aseneth"', JSJ 9 (1978), pp. 29-56. —'Die Kunst des Gestaltens in "Joseph und Aseneth'", NovT 26 (1984), pp. 1-42. —'Partizipiale Gottesprädikationen in den Briefen des Neuen Testaments', ST 11 (1963), pp. 1-59. Denis, A.-M., Concordance grecque des pseudépigraphes d'Ancien Testament (Louvain: Université Catholique de Louvain, 1987). —Introduction aux pseudépigraphes grecs d'Ancien Testament (SVTP, 1; Leiden: Brill, 1970). Dey, J., naX-iyyeveaia: Ein Beitrag zur Klärung der religionsgeschichtlichen Bedeutung von Tit. 3,5 (NTAbh, 17.5; Münster: Aschendorff, 1937). Dibelius, M., 'The Isis Initiation in Apuleius and Related Initiatory Rites', Conflict at Colossae (trans, and ed. P.O. Francis and W.A. Meeks; SBS, 4; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1973), pp. 61-121. Dillman, A., 'Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments', Real-Encyclopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche (22 vols.; ed. J.J. Herzog; Hamburg: R. Besser, 1854-68). Dix, G., The Shape of the Liturgy (Westminster: Dacre Press, 1945). Dodds, E.R., Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965). Doran, R., 'Narrative Literature', in Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters (ed. R.A. Kraft and G.W.E. Nickelsburg; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986), pp. 287-310.

Bibliography

279

Douglas, R.C., 'Liminality and Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth', JSP 3 (1988), pp. 31-42. Drijvers, H.J.W., The Origins of Gnosticism as a Religious and Historical Problem', NTT 22 (1967-68), pp. 321-51. Dubois, J.-D., 'Joseph et la vertu, dans le judaïsme hellénistique et le christianisme ancien', Foi et Vie 86 (1987), pp. 25-33. Duchesne, L., Review of Le Livre de la Prière d'Aseneth, by P. Batiffol, Bulletin Critique 10 (1889), pp. 461-66. Düsterdieck, F.H.C., Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Offenbarung Johannis (MeyerK, 16; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1859). Dugmore, C.W., Review of The Shape of the Liturgy, by G. Dix, JTS 47 (1946), pp. 107-13. Dunand, F., Le culte d'Isis dans le bassin oriental de la Méditerranée (3 vols.; EPROER, 26; Leiden: Brill, 1973). Duthoy, R., The Taurobolium: Its Evolution and Terminology, EPROER, 10 (Leiden: Brill, 1969). Dwyer, R.A., 'Asenath of Egypt in Middle English', Medium Aevum 39 (1970), pp. 118-22. Eitrem, S., 'Die vier Elemente in der Mysterien weihe', Symbolae Osloenses 4 (1926), pp. 39-59. Eliade, M., Birth and Rebirth: The Religious Meanings of Initiation in Human Culture (trans. W.R. Trask; Library of Religion and Culture; New York: Harper & Brothers, 1958). Eliade, M. (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Religion (16 vols.; New York: Macmillan, 1987). —'Initiation', ER, VII, pp. 224-29. Enermaln-Owaga, A., Un langage de prière juif en grec: Le témoignage des deux premiers livres des Maccabees (ConBNT, 17; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987). Epstein, I., The Babylonian Talmud (18 vols.; London: Soncino Press, 1948). Fabricius, J.A., Codex Pseudepigraphus Veteris Testamenti (2 vols.; Hamburg: Sumptu Christiani Liebezeit, 1713 [vol. 1]; Sumptu Theodori Christolpf Felgeineri, 1923 [vol. 2]). Feeley-Harnik, G., The Lord's Table: Eucharist and Passover in Early Christianity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1981). Feldman, L.H., The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers', BARev 12 (1986), pp. 58-69. —'Proselytes and "Sympathizers" in the Light of the New Inscriptions from Aphrodisias', REJ 148 (1989), pp. 265-305. Festugière, A.-J., 'A propos des arétalogies d'Isis', HTR 42 (1949), pp. 209-34. —Personal Religion among the Greeks (Sather Classical Lectures 26; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1954). Fiebig, P., 'Pseudepigraphen des ATs', RGG1, (5 vols.; ed. F.M. Schiele and L. Zscharnack; Tübingen: Mohr, 1909-1913), IV, pp. 1952-64. Finkelstein, L., The Institution of Baptism for Proselytes', JBL 52 (1933), pp. 203-11. —The Pharisees: The Sociological Background of their Faith (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1938). Finn, T.M., The God-Fearers Reconsidered', CBQ 47 (1985), pp. 75-84. Fischer, G., Die himmlischen Wohnungen: Untersuchungen zu Joh 14.2f. (Europäische Hochschulschriften, 23.38; Bern: H. Lang; Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 1975).

280

From Death to Life

Fischer, U., Eschatologie und Jenseitserwartung im hellenistischen Diasporajudentum (BZNW, 44; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978). Fitzmyer, J.A., The Dead Sea Scrolls: Major Publications and Tools for Study (SBS, 8; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975). Flusser, D., 'Psalms, Hymns and Prayers', Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (ed. M.E. Stone; CRINT, 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1984), pp. 551-77. —'Some Notes on Easter and the Passover Haggadah', Immanuel 1 (1977), pp. 52-60. Forkman, G., The Limits of Religious Community (ConBNT, 5; Lund: Gleerup, 1972). Freedman, H. and M. Simon., Midrash Kabbah (10 vols.; London: Soncino Press, 1939). Frenzel, E., 'Joseph in Ägypten', Stoffe der Weltliteratur: Ein Lexicon dichtungsgeschichtlicher Längsschnitte (Stuttgart: Kröner, 1963), p. 321. Frerichs, E.S. and J. Neusner (eds)., Goodenough on the History of Religion and on Judaism (BJS, 121; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986). Frye, N., Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957). Gärtner, B., The Temple and the Community in Qumran and the New Testament (SNTSMS, 1; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965). Gager, J., The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983). Gaventa, B.R., From Darkness to Light: Aspects of Conversion in the New Testament, (Overtures to Biblical Theology, 20; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986). Gavin, F., The Jewish Antecedents of the Christian Sacraments (London: SPCK, 1928; repr., New York: KTAV, 1969). Geoltrain, P., 'Le traité de la Vie contemplative de Philon d'Alexandrie', Sem 10 (1960), pp. 5-67. Georgi, D., Die Gegner des Paulus im 2. Korintherbrief: Studien zur religiösen Propaganda in Spätantike (WMANT, 11; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1964 [ET: The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986)]). Gero, S., The So-Called Ointment Prayer in the Coptic Version of the Didache: A Reevaluation', HTR 70 (1977), pp. 67-84. Gilhus, I.S., The Nature of the Archons: A Study in the Soteriology of a Gnostic Treatise from Nag Hammadi CG 11,4 (Studies in Oriental Religions, 12; Wiesbaden: Otto Härrassowitz, 1985). Ginzberg, L., The Legends of the Jews (7 vols.; trans. H. Szold et al.; Philadephia: Jewish Publication Society, 1909-38). Goeij, M. de, Jozef en Aseneth. Apokalyps van Baruch (De Pseudepigraphen, 2; Kämpen: Kok, 1981). Goldstein, A.S., 'Conversion to Judaism in Bible Times', Conversion to Judaism: A History and Analysis (ed. D.M. Eichorn; New York: KTAV, 1965), pp. 9-32. González Blanco, A., 'Hermetism: A Bibliographical Approach', ANRW 2.17A (1984), pp. 2240-81. Goodenough, E.R., By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935). —Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period (13 vols.; Bollingen, 37; New York: Pantheon Books, 1953-68). Goodman, M., 'Proselytizing in Rabbinic Judaism,' JJS 40 (1989), pp. 175-85.

Bibliography

281

Grant, F.C., Hellenistic Religions: The Age of Syncretism (New York: Liberal Arts Press, 1953). Gressman, H., (ed.), Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter (HNT, 21; Tübingen: Mohr, 1926). Griffiths, J.G., Apuleius of Madauros: The Isis-Book (Metamorphoses. Book XI) (EPROER, 39; Leiden: Brill, 1975). —The Origins of Osiris and his Cult (Supplements to Numen, SHR, 40; Leiden: Brill, 1980). Gruenwald, I., Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (AGJU, 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980). Hägg, T., The Novel in Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983). Hall, S.G., 'Melito in the Light of the Passover Haggadah', JTS 22 (1971), pp. 29-46. Halperin, D.J., The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel's Vision (TSAJ, 16; Tübingen: Mohr, 1988). —The Merkabah in Rabbinic Literature (AOS, 62; New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1980). Hamilton, G.L., The Latin Historia Assenech', JEGP 11 (1912), pp. 143-44. Hegermann, H., 'Griechisch-jüdisches Schrifttum', Literatur und Religion des Frühjudentums: Eine Einführung (ed. J. Maier and J. Schreiner; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1973), pp. 163-80. Heiligenthal, R., Werke als Zeichen: Untersuchungen zur Bedeutung der menschlichen Taten im Frühjudentum, Neuen Testament und Frühchristentum (WUNT, 2.9; Tübingen: Mohr, 1983). Heinemann, L, Therapeutai', P W, LIX, pp. 2321-46. Heinemann, J., Prayer in the Talmud: Forms and Patterns (trans. R.S. Sarason; SJ, 9; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977). Hengel, M., 'Anonymität, Pseudepgraphie, und "Literarische Fälschung" in der jüdisch-hellenistichen Literatur', Pseudepigrapha. I. Pseudopythagorica, lettres de Platon, littérature pseudépigraphie juive (ed. K. von Fritz; Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique, 18; Geneva: Fondation Hardt, 1972), pp. 229-308. —Judentum und Hellenismus: Studien zu ihrer Begegnung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Palästinas (WUNT, 10; Tübingen: Mohr, 2nd edn, 1973 [ET: Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (2 vols.; trans. J. Bowden; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974)]). Heyob, S.K., The Cult of Isis among Women in the Graeco-Roman World (EPROER, 51; Leiden: Brill, 1975). Himmelfarb, M., 'Heavenly Ascent and the Relationship of the Apocalypses and the Hekhalot Literature', HUCA 59 (1988), pp. 73-100. Hoenig, S.B., 'Conversion during the Talmudic Period', in Conversion to Judaism: A History and Analysis (ed. D.M. Eichorn; New York: KTAV, 1965). —'Oil and Pagan Defilement', JQR 61 (1970-71), pp. 63-75. Hofius, O., 'Eine altjüdische Parallele zu Rom IV.17b', NTS 18 (1971), pp. 93-94 —'"Erwählt vor Grundlegung der Welt" (Eph 1,4)', ZNW 62 (1971), pp. 123-28. —Katapausis: Die Vorstellung vom endzeitlichen Ruheort im Hebräerbrief (WUNT, 11; Tübingen: Mohr, 1970). Hollander, H.W., Joseph as an Ethical Model in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (SVTP, 6; Leiden: Brill, 1981). Holtz, T., 'Christliche Interpolationen in "Joseph und Aseneth"', NTS 14 (1968), pp. 482-97.

282

From Death to Life

—'"Euer Glaube an Gott": Zu Form und Inhalt von l Thess l,9f.', in Die Kirche des Anfangs: Festschrift für Heinz Schurmann zum 65. Geburstag (ed. R. Schnackenburg, J. Ernst, and J. Wanke; Erfurter Theologische Studien, 38; Leipzig: St Benno-Verlag, 1977), pp. 459-88. Horsley, G.H.R., 'Name Change as an Indication of Conversion in Antiquity', Numen 34 (1987), pp. 1-17. Hort, F.J.A., 'Aseneth, History of, A Dictionary of Christian Biography (4 vols.; éd. W. Smith and H. Wace; London: John Murray, 1877-87), I, pp. 176-77. Huppenbauer, H., 'nncD und mno in der Sektenregel von Qumran', TZ 13 (1957), pp. 350-51. Issaverdens, J., The History ofAssaneth (Venice: n.p., 1900). —The Uncanonical Writings of the Old Testament (Venice: Armenian Monastery of St Lazarus, 1901; repr. 1907). Istrin, V.M., 'Apokrif ob losifë i Asenefë', Drevnosti (Trudy Slavjanskoj kommissii Imperatorskago moskovskago archeologiceskago obscestva, 2; Moscow: n.p., 1898). James, E.O., The Cult of the Mother-Goddess: An Archaeological and Documentary Study (New York: Praeger, 1959). James, M.R., 'Apocrypha', Encyclopedia Bíblica (4 vols.; ed. T.K. Cheyne and J.S. Black; New York: Macmillan, 1899-1903), I, cols. 249-61. —'Asenath', HBD, I, pp. 162-63. Janowitz, N., The Poetics of Ascent: Theories of Language in a Rabbinic Ascent Text (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1989). Jeremias, J., Die Abendmahlsworte Jesu (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 3rd edn, 1960 [ET: The Eucharistie Words of Jesus (trans. N. Perrin; Philadephia: Fortress Press, 1966)]). —Die Gleichnisse Jesu (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 6th edn, 1962 [ET: The Parables of Jesus (trans. S.H. Hooke; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1963)]). —Jesu Verheissung für die Völker (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1956 [ET: Jesus' Promise to the Nations (trans. S.H. Hooke; SBT, 24; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1958)]). —Die Kindertaufe in der ersten vier Jahrhunderten (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958 [ET: Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries (trans. D. Cairns; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962)]). —The Last Supper', ExpT 64 (1952), pp. 91-92. —'Die missionarische Aufgabe in der Mischehe (I Cor 7,16)', in Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann (ed. W. Ehester; BZNW, 21; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1954), pp. 255-60. —The Origins of Infant Baptism (trans. D.M. Barton; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1965). —'Proselytentaufe und Neues Testament', TZ 5 (1949), pp. 418-28. —"This is my body..." ', ExpT 83 (1972), pp. 196-203. —'Der Ursprung der Johannestaufe', ZNW 28 (1929), pp. 312-20. —'vuuxpri, vuuxpioç', ThWNT, IV, pp. 1092-99 (ET: TDNT, IV, pp. 1099-1106). Jonas, H., The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon Press, 2nd edn, 1963). Jones, A.H., Essenes: The Elect of Israel and the Priests of Artemis (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1985). Jones, W.H.S., Pausanias' Description of Greece (5 vols.; LCL; London: Heinemann, 1918-35).

Bibliography

283

Jonge, M. de, 'The Earliest Christian Use of Christos: Some Suggestions', NTS 32 (1986), pp. 321-43. Jonge, M. de, et al, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text (PVTG, 1.2; Leiden: Brill, 1978). Kahler, C, 'Zur Form- und Traditionsgeschichte von Matth. XVI. 17-19', NTS 23 (1977), pp. 36-58. Kane, J.P., The Mithraic Cult Meal in its Greek and Roman Environment', Mithraic Studies: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies (2 vols.; ed. J.R. Hinnells; Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1975), II, pp. 313-51. Kasher, A., The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt: The Struggle for Equal Rights (Tübingen: Mohr, 1985). Kautzsch, E., Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments (2 vols.; Tübingen: Mohr, 1900). Kee, H.C., 'The Socio-Cultural Setting of Joseph and Aseneth', NTS 29 (1983), pp. 394-413. —'The Socio-Religious Setting and Aims of "Joseph and Asenath"', SBLSP 1976 (ed. G. MacRae; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), pp. 183-92. —'Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs', The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; ed. J.H. Charlesworth; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983-85), II, pp. 775-828. Kerényi, K., Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur in religions ge schichtlicher Beleuchtung (Tübingen: Mohr, 1927; 2nd edn, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1962). Kilpatrick, G.D., The Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy: The Moorehouse Lectures 1975 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). —The Last Supper', ExpT 64 (1952), pp. 4-8. —Review of Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, by C. Burchard, and Joseph et Aseneth, by M. Philonenko, NovT 12 (1970), pp. 233-36. Klauck, H.-J., Herrenmahl und hellenisticher Kult: Eine religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zum ersten Korintherbrief (NTAbh, n.F., 15; Münster: Aschendorff, 1982). Kleinknecht, K.T., Der leidende Gerechtfertige: Die alttestamentlich-jüdische Tradition vom 'leidenden Gerechten' und ihre Rezeption bei Paul (WUNT, 2.13; Tübingen: Mohr, 1984). Klijn, A.F.J., 'Jewish Christianity in Eygpt', in The Roots of Eygptian Christianity (ed. B.A. Pearson and J.E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), pp. 161-75. Klinzing, G., Die Umdeutung des Kultus in der Qumrangemeinde und im Neuen Testament (SUNT, 7; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971). Kloppenborg, J.S., 'Isis and Sophia in the Book of Wisdom', HTR 75 (1982), pp. 5784. Knox, W.L., Some Hellenistic Elements in Primitive Christianity (London: Milford, 1944). Koester, H., The History-of-Religions School, Gnosis, and Gospel of John', ST 40 (1986), pp. 115-36. —Introduction to the New Testament (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982). Kohler, K., 'Asenath, Life and Confession or Prayer of, JewEnc, II, pp. 172-76.

284

From Death to Life

—Jewish Theology Systematically and Historically Considered (New York: Macmillan, 1918; repr., New York: KTAV, 1968). Kraabel, A.T., The Disappearance of the "God-fearers'" Numen, 28 (1981), pp. 11326. Krämer, H., 'Die Isisformel des Apuleius (Met. XI, 23,7)—Eine Anmerkung zur Methode der Mysterienforschung', Wort und Dienst 12 (1973), pp. 91-104. Kraemer, R.S., Her Share of the Blessings: Women's Religions among Pagans, Jews, and Christians in the Greco-Roman World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). —Maenads, Martyrs, Matrons, Monastics: A Sourcebook on Women's Religions in the Greco-Roman World (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988). —'Women's Authorship of Jewish and Christian Literature in the Greco-Roman Period', in 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the GrecoRoman World (ed. A.J. Levine; SCS, Studies in Early Jewish Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 221-42. Kraft, R.A., Barnabas and Didache (Apostolic Fathers, 3; New York: Nelson, 1965). Krause, M. (ed.), Gnosis and Gnosticism: Papers Read at the Eighth International Conference on Patristic Studies (Oxford, September 3rd-8th 1979) (NHS, 17; Leiden: Brill, 1981). Krumbacher, K., Review of 'Apokrif ob losifë i Asenefë', by V.M. Istrin, ByzZ 8 (1899), pp. 22-23. Kubo, S., 'I Corinthians VIL 16: Optimistic or Pessimistic?' NTS 24 (1978), pp. 53944. Kühn, H.W., Enderwartung und Gegenwartiges Heil (SUNT, 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966). Kühn, K.G., 'The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran', in The Scrolls and the New Testament (ed. K. Stendahl; New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957), pp. 65-93. —'Repas cultuel essénien et cène chrétienne', in Les manuscrits de la Mer Morte: Colloque de Strasbourg 25-27 mai 1955 (Paris: n.p., 1957), pp. 75-92. —'Über den ursprünglichen Sinn des Abendmahles und sein Verhältnis zu den Gemeinschaftsmahlen der Sektenschrift', EvT 10 (1950-51), pp. 508-27. Kuntzmann, R., and J. Schlosser (eds.), Etudes sur judaïsme hellénistique: Congrès de Strasbourg (1983) (LD, 119; Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1984). —'TipooriAuToç', TDNT, VI, pp. 727-44. Ladd, G.E., 'Pseudepigrapha', ISBE, III, pp. 1040-43. Laeuchli, S., Mithraism in Ostia: Mystery Religion and Christianity in the Port of Rome (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1967). Lagarde, P. de., Onomástica .racra (Göttingen, n.p., 2nd edn, 1887). Lake, K., The Apostolic Fathers (2 vols.; LCL; London: Heinemann, 1912-13). Land, J.P.N., Zacharie episcopi Mitylenes aliorumque scripta histórica Graece plerumque deperdita: Syriace editit (Anécdota Syriaca, 3; Leiden: n.p., 1870). Layton, B., The Gnostic Scriptures (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987). Leaney, A.R.C., The Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200 (Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, no. 7; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). —The Rule of Qumran and its Meaning (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1966).

Bibliography

285

Lease, G., 'Jewish Mystery Cults since Goodenough', ANRW 2.20.2 (1987), pp. 85880. Lefkowitz, M.R., 'Did Ancient Women Write Novels?', in 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in The Greco-Roman World (ed. A.J. Levine; SCS; Studies in Early Jewish Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 199-219. Légasse, S., 'Le pain de la vie', BLE 83 (1982), pp. 243-61. Lieberman, S., 'The Discipline in the So-Called Dead Sea Manual of Discipline', JBL 71 (1952), pp. 199-206. —Tosefta Kipshuta (2 vols.; New York: Rabinowitz Research Institute, 1955). Lietzmann, H., Mass and Lord's Supper: A Study in the History of the Liturgy (trans. D.H.G. Reeve; Leiden: Brill, 1953). Lindars, B., '"Joseph and Asenath" and the Eucharist', in Scripture: Meaning and Method: Essays Presented to Anthony Tyrrell Hanson on his Seventieth Birthday (ed. B.R Thompson; Hull: Hull University Press, 1987), pp. 181-99. Lindemann, A., Die Aufhebung der Zeit: Geschichtverständnis und Eschatologie im Epheserbrief(SNT:, 12; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975). Lindeskog, G., Studien zum neutestamentlichen Schopfungsgedanken (UUA, 11; Uppsala: A.-B. Lundequistska Bokhandeln, 1952). Lindijer, C.H., 'Die Jungfrauen in der Offenbarung des Johannes XIV.4', Studies in John Presented to Professor J.N. Sevenster on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday (NovTSup, 24; Leiden: Brill 1970), pp. 124-42. Lohfink, G., 'Eine alttestamentliche Darstellungsform für Gotteserscheinungen in den Damaskusberichten (Apg 9; 22; 26)', BZ 9 (1965), pp. 246-57. —Paulus vor Damaskus: Arbeitsweisen der neuen Bibelwissenschaft dargestellt an den Texten Apg 9,1-19; 22,3-21; 26,9-18, (SBS, 4; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1965). Lohse, E., 'Joseph und Aseneth', RGG3 (7 vols.; éd. K. Galling; Tübingen: Mohr, 1957-65), III, col. 864. —Die Texte aus Qumran (Munich: Kosel-Verlag, 2nd edn, 1971). Lucerna, C., Asseneth: Eine apokryphe Erzählung aus der Werdezeiten des Christentums (Vienna: n.p., 1921). Lührmann, D., 'Liebet eure Feinde', ZTK 69 (1972), pp. 412-38. MacCracken, H.N., The Source of the Story of Aseneth', JEGP 11 (1912), pp. 29192. —The Storie of Asneth: An Unknown Middle English Translation of a Lost Latin Version', JEGP 9 (1910), pp. 224-64. McEleney, N.J., 'Conversion, Circumcision and the Law', NTS 20 (1974), pp. 319-41. —'Orthodoxy in Judaism of the First Christian Century', JSJ 9 (1978), pp. 83-88. McGuire, A., 'Conversion and Gnosis in the "Gospel of Truth" \NovT 28 (1986), pp.338-55. —Review of Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism, by K. Rudolph, Second Century 5 (1985-86), pp. 47-49. Me Knight, S., A Light among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991). MacLennan, R.S., and A.T. Kraabel, The God-Fearers—A Literary and Theological Invention', BARev 12 (1986), pp. 46-53, 64. McNamara, M., Intertestamental Literature (Old Testament Message, 23; Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1983).

286

From Death to Life

MacRae, G., The Jewish Background of the Gnostic Sophia Myth', NovT 12 (1970), pp. 86-101. Maier, J., 'Das Gefärdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise in der jüdischen Apokalyptik und "Gnosis"' Kairos 5 (1963), pp. 18-40. —The Temple Scroll: An Introduction, Translation and Commentary (JSOTSup, 34; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985). Malherbe, A., Moral Exhortation: A Greco-Roman Sourcebook (LEG, 4; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986). —Paul and the Popular Philosophers (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989). —Paul and the Thessalonians: A Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987). Manns, F., Le symbole eau-esprit dans le judaïsme ancien (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Analecta, 19; Jérusalem: Franciscan Printing Press, 1983). Marshall, I.H., Last Supper and Lord's Supper (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980). Martinez Fernandez, R., and A. Pinero, 'José y Asenet', in Apócrifos del Antiguo Testamento (6 vols.; ed. A. Diez Macho; Madrid: Ediciones Christianidad, 1982-), III, pp. 191-238. Massebieau, L., Review of Le Livre de la Prière d'Aseneth, by P. Battifol, Annales de Bibliographie Theologique 11 (1889), pp. 161-72. Mell, U., Neue Schöpfung: Eine Traditionsgeschichtliche und exegetische Studie zu einem soteriologischen Grundsatz paulinischer Theologie (BZNW, 56; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989). Merkelbach, R., Roman und Mysterium in der Antike (Munich: Beck, 1962). Metzger, B., 'A Classified Bibliography of the Graeco-Roman Mystery Religions 1924-1973 with a Supplement 1974-1977', ANRW 2.17.3 (1984), pp. 12591423. Meyer, M.W., The Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook. Sacred Texts of the Mystery Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean World (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987). Michaelis, W., 'teuKÓc, Xeumívco', TDNT, IV, pp. 241-50. —'u¿A,ac', TDNT, IV, pp. 549-51. Milik, J.T., Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judea (trans. J. Strugnell; London: SCM Press, 1959). Moore, G.F., Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim (3 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927-30). Moule, C.F.D., The Birth of the New Testament (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 3rd edn, 1982). Moulton, J.H., F.W. Howard and N. Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek (4 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1929-76). Nauck, W., 'Die Tradition und Komposition der Areopagrede', ZTK 53 (1956), pp. 1152. —Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Johannesbriefes (WUNT, 3; Tübingen: Mohr, 1957). Nebe, G., 'Hoffnung' bei Paulus: Elpis und ihre Synonyme im Zussammenhang der Eschatologie (SUNT, 16; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983). Neusner, J., 'The Fellowship (mían) in the Second Jewish Commonwealth', HTR 53 (1960), pp. 129-36.

Bibliography

287

—From Politics to Piety: The Emergence of Pharisaic Judaism (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973). —The Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988). —The Rabbinic Traditions about the Pharisees Before 70 (3 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1971). —Sifre to Deuteronomy: An Analytical Translation (2 vols.; BJS, 98, 101; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987). —Sifré to Numbers: An American Translation and Explanation (2 vols.; BJS, 118-19; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986). —The Talmud of the Land of Israel: A Preliminary Translation and Explanation (35 vols.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982-). —The Tosefta (6 vols.; New York: KTAV, 1977-81). —'Two Pictures of the Pharisees: Philosophical Circle or Eating Club', ATR 64 (1982), pp. 525-38. —The Use of the Mishnah for the History of Judaism Prior to the Time of the Mishnah: A Methodological Note', JSJ 11 (1980), pp. 177-85. Newsom, C., 'Merkabah Exegesis in the Qumran Sabbath Shirot', JJS 38 (1987), pp. 11-30. —Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition (HSS, 27; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). Newton, M., The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of Paul (SNTSMS, 53; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). Nickelsburg, G.W.E., Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah: A Historical and Literary Introduction (Philadephia: Fortress Press, 1981). —Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS, 26; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972). —'Stories of Biblical and Early Post-Biblical Times', in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (ed. M.E. Stone; CRINT, 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1984), pp. 3387. Nilsson, M.P., Geschichte der Griechischen Religion (2 vols.; Munich: Beck, 2nd edn, 1955-61). Nissen, A., Gott und der Nächste im antiken Judentum: Untersuchungen zum Doppelgebot der Liebe (WUNT, 15; Tübingen: Mohr, 1974). Nock, A.D., Conversion: The Old and the New in Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933). —Review of By Light, Light, by E.R. Goodenough, Gnomon 13 (1937), pp. 156-65. —Review of Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur, by K. Kerényi, Gnomon 4 (1928), pp. 485-92. —Review of Jewish Symbols, vols. 1-4, by E.R. Goodenough, Gnomon 27 (1955), pp. 558-72. Nock, A.D., and A.J. Festugière, Corpus Hermeticum (4 vols.; Paris: Belles Lettres, 1945-54). Nolland, J., 'Uncircumcised Proselytes?', JSJ 12 (1981), pp. 173-94. Novakovié, S., 'Srpsko-slovenski zbornik iz vremena despota Stefana Lazarevica', Starine (Zagreb) 9 (1877), pp. 1-47. Oppenheim, G., Fabuli Josephi et Asenethae apocrypha e libro Syriaco Latine versa (Berlin Dissertation, 1886).

288

From Death to Life

Oppenheimer, A., The 'Am Ha-aretz: A Study in The Social History of the Jewish People in the Hellenistic-Roman Period (trans. I.H. Levine; ALGHJ, 8; Leiden: Brill, 1977). Otto, R., The Kingdom of God and the Son of Man (Lutterworth Library, 9; trans. F.V. Filson and B. Lee-Woolf; London: Lutterworth Press, 2nd edn, 1943). Overman, J.A., The God-Fearers: Some Neglected Features', JSNT 32 (1988), pp. 1726. Parrot, D.M., 'Gnosticism and Egyptian Religion', NovT 29 (1987), pp. 73-93. Patsch, H., Abendmahl und historischer Jesus (Calwer Theologische Monographien, l ; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1972). Pax, E., 'Beobachtungen zur Konvertitensprache im ersten Thessalonicherbrief, Studii Biblici Franciscani Liber Annuus 21 (1971), pp. 220-62. Pearson, B.A., 'Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria', HTR 79 (1986), pp. 206-16. —'Earliest Christianity in Eygpt: Some Observations', in The Roots of Eygptian Christianity (ed. B.A. Pearson and I.E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), pp. 132-56. —'Jewish Elements in Gnosticism and the Development of Gnostic Self-Definition', Jewish and Christian Self-Definition. I. The Shaping of Christianity in the Second and Third Centuries (ed. E.P. Sanders; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), pp. 151-60. —'Jewish Sources in Gnostic Literature', in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (ed. M.E. Stone; CRINT, 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1984), pp. 443-81. —'The Problem of "Jewish Gnostic" Literature', in Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity (ed. C.W. Hedrick and R. Hodgson, Jr; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1986), pp. 15-35. Peli, P.H., 'The Havurot That were in Jerusalem', HUCA 55 (1984), pp. 55-74. Perles, J., 'La légende d'Asnath, filie de Dina et femme de Joseph', REJ 22 (1891), pp. 87-92. Perry, B.E., The Ancient Romances: A Literary-Historical Account of their Origins (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967). Pervo, R.I., 'Aseneth and her Sisters: Women in Jewish Narrative and in the Greek Novels', in 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the GrecoRoman World (ed. A.J. Levine; SCS, Studies in Early Jewish Literature, 1; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 145-60. —'Joseph and Asenath and the Greek Novel', SBLSP 1976 (ed. G. MacRae; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), pp. 171-81. —Profit with Delight: The Literary Genre of the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987). Petuchowski, J.J., 'The Liturgy of the Synagogue: History, Structure, and Contents', in Approaches to Ancient Judaism (ed. W.S. Green; BJS, 27; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983), IV, pp. 1-64. Philonenko, M., 'Initiation et mystère dans Joseph et Aséneth', Initiation (ed. C.J. Bleeker; Supplements to Numen, SHR, 10; Leiden: Brill, 1965), pp. 147-53. —'Joseph et Aséneth', in La Bible: Ecrits intertestamentaires (ed. A. Dupont-Sommer and M. Philonenko; Paris: Gallimard, 1987), pp. cxii-cxxv, 1559-1601.

Bibliography

289

—'Joseph und Asenath', Biblisch-historisches Handwörterbuch: Landeskunde, Geschichte, Religion, Kultur, Literatur (3 vols.; ed. B. Reicke and L. Rost; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962-66), II, cols. 889-90. —'Joseph and Asenath', EncJud, X, cols. 223-24. —Joseph et Aséneth: Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes (SPB, 13; Leiden: Brill, 1968). —'Joseph et Aséneth: Questions actuelles', in La littérature entre Tenach et Mischna: Quelques problèmes (ed. W.C. van Unnik; RechBib, 9; Leiden: Brill, 1974), pp. 73-76. —'Un mystère juif?', in Mystères et syncrétismes (EHR, 2; Paris: Guethner, 1975), pp. 65-70. —'Le "Testament de Job" et les Thérapeutes', Sem 8 (1958), pp. 41-53. Pines, S., 'From Darkness into Great Light' (trans. J. Halpern), Immanuel 4 (1974), pp. 47-51. Piper, J., 'Love Your Enemies': Jesus' Love Command in the Synoptic Gospels and in the Early Christian Paraenesis (SNTSMS, 38; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979). Ploeg, J. van der, The Meals of the Essenes', JSS 2 (1957), pp. 163-75. Priebatsch, H., Die Josephsgeschichte in der Weltliteratur (Breslau: n.p., 1937). Priest, J.F., 'Mebaqqer, Paqid, and the Messiah', JBL 81 (1962), pp. 55-61. Pryke, J., The Sacraments of Holy Baptism and Holy Communion in the Light of Ritual Washings and Sacred Meals at Qumran', RevQ 5 (1966), pp. 543-52. Rabin, C., Qumran Studies (Scripta Judaica, 2; Oxford: University Press, 1957). Rahlfs, A., Septuaginta (2 vols.; Stuttgart: Würtembergische Bibelanstalt, 1935). Rambo, L.R., 'Conversion', ER, IV, pp. 73-79. —'Current Research on Religious Conversion', RSR 8 (1982), pp. 146-59. Reardon, B.P., Courants littéraires grecs des He et Hie siècles (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1971). Reitzenstein, R., Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligion (Leipzig: Teubner, 3rd edn, 1927 [ET: The Hellenistic Mystery-Religions [trans. J.E. Steely; PTMS, 15; Pittsburg: Pickwick Press, 1978)]). Reynolds, J., and R. Tannenbaum, Jews and God-Fearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society, 1987). Riaud, J., 'Les thérapeutes d'Alexandrie dans la tradition et dans la recherche critique jusqu'aux découvertes de Qumran', ANRW 2.20.2 (1987), pp. 1189-1295. Richardson, R.D., 'Supplementary Essay. A Further Inquiry into Eucharistie Origins with Special Reference to New Testament Problems', in H. Lietzmann, Mass and the Lord's Supper: A Study in the History of the Liturgy, Fase. 6 (Leiden: Brill, 1964), pp. 217-702. Riessler, P., Altjüdisches Schrifttum ausserhalb der Bibel (Augsburg: Filser, 1928; repr., Heidelberg: Kerle, 1966). —'Joseph und Asenath. Eine altjüdische Erzählung', TQ 103 (1922), pp. 1-22, 14583. Riggs, J.W., 'From Gracious Table to Sacramental Elements: The Tradition History of Didache 9 and 10', Second Century 4 (1984), pp. 83-101. Ringgren, H., The Faith of Qumran (trans. E.T. Sander; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963).

290

From Death to Life

Robinson, J.A.T., 'The Baptism of John and the Qumran Community', HTR 50 (1957), pp. 175-91. Robinson, J.M., The Nag Hammadi Library in English (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1977). Rohde, E., Der griechische Roman und seine Vorläufer (Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1960). Röhser, G., Metaphorik und Personifikation der Sünde: Antike Sündenvorstellungen und paulinische Hamartia (WUNT, 2.25; Tübingen: Mohr, 1987). Rost, L., Judaism outside the Hebrew Canon: An Introduction to the Documents (trans. D.E. Green; Nashville: Abingdon, 1976). Rowland, C., 'A Man Clothed in Linen: Dan. 10.6ff. and Jewish Angelology', JSNT 24 (1985), pp. 99-110. Roussel, P., 'Un nouvel hymne à Isis', REG 42 (1929), pp. 137-68. Rowley, H.H., 'Jewish Proselyte Baptism and the Baptism of John', HUCA 15 (1940), pp. 313-44. Rudolph, K., Die Gnosis: Wesen und Geschichte einer spätantiken Religion (Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang, 1977 [ET: The Nature and History of Gnosticism (trans. R.M. Wilson; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983)]). Russell, D.S., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Patriarchs and Prophets in Early Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987). Sänger, D., Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien: Religionsgeshichtliche Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth (WUNT, 2.5; Tübingen: Mohr, 1980). —'Bekehrung und Exodus: Zum jüdischen Traditionshintergrund von "Joseph und Aseneth" \JSJ 10 (1979), pp. 11-36. —'Erwägungen zur historischen Einordnung und zur Datierung von "Joseph und Aseneth"', ZNW 76 (1985), pp. 86-106. —'Judisch-hellenistische Missionsliteratur und die Weisheit', Kairos 23 (1981), pp. 231-42. Sandelin, K.-G., 'Maltidens symboliska betydelse i den alexandrinska judedomen. Ett bidrag till fragan om den Kristna eukaristins bakgrund', Meddelanden fran Stifteisens för Abo Akademi Forskningsinstitut 56 (Abo: Abo Akademi, 1980), pp. 128-34. Sanders, E.P., 'The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism', in Jews, Greeks, and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity. Essays in Honor of W.D. Davies (ed. R. HamertonKelly and R. Scroggs; SJLA, 21; Leiden: Brill, 1976), pp. 11-44. —Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977). Sandmel, S., 'Parallelomania', JBL 81 (1962), pp. 1-13. —Philo of Alexandria: An Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979). —Philo's Place in Judaism (New York: KTAV, rev. edn, 1971). Sarason, R.S., 'The Modern Study of Jewish Liturgy', in The Study of Ancient Judaism (2 vols.; ed. J. Neusner; New York: KTAV, 1981), pp. 107-79. —'Recent Developments in the Study of Jewish Liturgy', The Study of Ancient Judaism (2 vols.; ed. J. Neusner; New York: KTAV, 1981), pp. 180-87. Schäfer, P., 'Engel und Menschen in der Hekhalot-Literatur', Kairos 22 (1980), pp. 201-25. —Ceniza Fragmente zur Hekhalot-Literatur (TSAJ, 6; Tübingen: Mohr, 1984). —Hekhalot-Studien (TSAJ, 19; Tübingen: Mohr, 1988).

Bibliography

291

—'Merkavah Mysticism and Rabbinic Judaism', JAOS 104 (1984), pp. 537-41. —Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur (TSAJ, 2; Tübingen: Mohr, 1981). —Tradition and Redaction in Hekhaloth Literature', JSJ 14 (1983), pp. 172-81. Schenk, W., 'Das "Matthäusevengelium" als Petrusevangelium', BZ 27 (1983), pp. 5880, Schiffman, L.H., 'At the Crossroads: Tannaitic Perspectives on the Jewish-Christian Schism', in Jewish and Christian Self-Definition, II. Aspects of Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period (ed. E.P. Sanders with A.I. Baumgarten and A. Mendelson; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), pp. 115-56. —'Communal Meals at Qumran', RevQ 10 (1979), pp. 45-56. —'The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabene in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources', Josephus, Judaism, and Christianity (ed. L.H. Feldman and G. Hâta; Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987), pp. 293-312. —The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Study of the Rule of the Congregation (SBLMS, 38; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989). —Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Courts, Testimony and the Penal Code (BJS, 33; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983). — Who was a Jew? Rabbinic and Halakhic Perspectives on the Jewish-Christian Schism (Hoboken, NJ: KTAV, 1985). Schlier, H., Der Breif an die Epheser: Ein Kommentar (Düsseldorf: Patmos-Verlag, 2nd edn, 1958). Schmeling, G., Xenophon of Ephesus (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1980). Schmidt, C, and V. MacDermot, Pistis Sophia (NHS, 9; Leiden: Brill, 1978). Schnackenburg, R., 'Das Brot des Lebens', in Tradition und Glaube: Das frühe Christentum in seiner Umwelt. Festgabe für K.G. Kühn (ed. J. Jeremias, H.W. Kühn and H. Stegemann; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971), pp. 328-42. —Das Johannesevangelium (4 vols.; HTKNT; Freiburg: Herder, 1965-84 [ET: The Gospel according to St John (3 vols.; trans. K. Smyth et al\ New York: Seabury Press: 1968-82)]). Schneider, G., Neuschöpfung oder Wiederkehrt (Düsseldorf: Patmos-Verlag, 1961). Scholem, G., Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1960). —Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (London: Thames & Hudson, 3rd edn, 1955). Schottroff, L., 'Gewaltverzicht und Feindesliebe in der urchristlichen Jesustradition. Mt 5,38-48; Lk 6,27-36', in Jesus Christus in Historie und Theologie: Neutestamentliche Festschrift für Hans Conielmann zum 60. Geburstag (ed. G. Strecker; Tübingen: Mohr, 1975), pp. 197-221. Schürer, E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (3 vols.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 3rd edn, 1898-1901). —A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (5 vols.; trans. J. MacPherson et al.\ Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897-98). —The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (3 vols.; rev. and ed. G. Vermes étal.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1973-87). Schwab, M, Le Talmud de Jerusalem (6 vols.; Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose, 1871-90). Schwartz, J., 'Recherches sur l'évolution du roman de Joseph et Aséneth', REJ 143 (1984), pp. 273-85.

292

From Death to Life

Schweitzer, A., Paul and his Interpreters: A Critical History (trans. W. Montgomery; London: A. & C. Black, 1912; repr. 1948). Schweizer, E., 'Christianity of the Circumcised and Judaism of the Uncircumcised: The Background of Matthew and Colossians', in Jews, Greeks and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity. Essays in Honor of W.D. Davies (ed. R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs; SJLA, 21; Leiden: Brill, 1976), pp. 245-60. —'Das Herrenmahl im Neuen Testament: Ein Forschungsbericht', TLZ 79 (1954), pp. 576-91. Segal, A.F., Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990). Segal, R.A., The Poimandres as Myth: Scholarly Theory and Gnostic Meaning (Religion and Reason, 33; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986). Sellin, G., Der Streit um die Auferstehung der Toten: Eine religionsgeschichtliche und exegetische Untersuchung von l Korinther 15 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). Siegert, F., 'Gottesfürtige und Sympathisanten', JSJ 4 (1973), pp. 109-64. Sjöberg, E., 'Neushöpfung in den Toten-Meer-Rollen', ST 9 (1955), pp. 131-36. —'Wiedergeburt und Neushöpfung im palästinischen Judentum', ST 4 (1951), pp. 4485. Smallwood, E.M., The Jews under Roman Rule (SJLA, 20; Leiden: Brill, 1976). Smith, D., 'Jewish Proselyte Baptism and the Baptism of John', ResQ 25 (1982), pp. 13-32. Smith, D.E., 'Meals and Morality in Paul and His World', SBLSP 1981 (ed. K.H. Richards; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981), pp. 319-39. —Social Obligation in the Context of Communal Meals: A Study of the Christian Meal in 1 Corinthians in Comparison with Graeco-Roman Communal Meals (Harvard Dissertation, 1980). Smith, E.W., Jr, 'The Form and Religious Background of Romans VII 24-25a', NovT 13 (1971), pp. 127-35. —'Joseph and Asenath' and Early Christian Literature: A Contribution to the Corpus Hellenisticum Novi Testamanenti (Claremont Dissertation, 1974). —'Joseph Material in Joseph and Asenath and Josephus Relating to the Testament of Joseph', in Studies on the Testament of Joseph (ed. G.W.E. Nickelsburg; SCS, 5; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), pp. 133-37. —Review of Joseph et Aséneth: Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes, by M. Philonenko, JBL 89 (1970), pp. 257-58. Smith, M., '"God's Begetting the Messiah" in IQSa', NTS 5 (1959), pp. 218-24. —'Goodenough's Jewish Symbols in Retrospect', JBL 86 (1967), pp. 53-68. —'The History of the Term Gnostikos', in The Rediscovery of Gnosticism: Proceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut, March 28-31, 1978 (2 vols.; éd. B. Layton; SHR, Supplements to Numen, 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980-81), II, pp. 796-807. —'The Image of God: Notes on the Hellenization of Judaism with Especial Reference to Goodenough's Work on Jewish Symbols', BJRL 40 (1958), pp. 473-512. —Review of Roman und Mysterium in der Antike, by R. Merkelbach, Classical World 57 (1964), p. 378. Snow, D., and R. Machalek, 'The Convert as a Social Type', in Sociological Theory (ed. R. Collins; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983), pp. 259-89.

Bibliography

293

Solmsen, F., Isis among the Greeks and Romans (Martin Classical Lectures, 25; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979). Stählin, G., 'aOKKoç', TDNT, VII, pp. 56-64. Stählin, O., 'Die hellenistich-jüdische Literatur', in Geschichte der griechischen Literatur (3 vols.; ed. W. Schmid and O. Stählin; HKAW, 7; Munich: Beck, 191224), IL 1, pp. 535-656. Stauffer, E., 'yauéco, yáuoc', ThWNT, I, pp. 646-55 (ET: TDNT, I, pp. 648-57). Stegemann, E., * "Das Gesetz ist nicht wider die Verheissungen!" Thesen zu Galater 3, 15-29', in Theologischer Brosamen für Lothar Steiger (Beihefte zu DBAT, 5; ed. G. Freund and E. Stegemann; Heidelberg: Wiss.-Theol. Seminar, 1985), pp. 38995. Stein, E., 'Der Begriff der Palingenesie im talmudischen Schrifttum', MGWJ 83 (1939), pp. 194-205. Stemberger, G., Geschichte der jüdischen Literatur: Eine Einführung (Munich: Beck, 1977). Stern, M., Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84). Strack, H., and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch (4 vols.; Munich: Beck, 1922-28). Stroumsa, G.A.G., Another Seed: Studies in Gnostic Mythology (NHS, 24; Leiden: Brill, 1984). Strugnell, J., The Angelic Liturgy at Qumran, 4Q Serek Sîrôt 'Ôlat HaSsabat', in J.A. Emerton et al (eds.), Congress Volume, Oxford 1959 (VTSup, 7; Leiden: Brill, 1960), pp. 318-45. Stuhlmacher, P., 'Erwängungen zum ontologischen Charakter der KCUVT] Ktíaic bei Paulus', EvT 27 (1967), pp. 1-35. —Das Paulinische Evangelium. I. Vorgeschichte (FRLANT, 95; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968). Suski, A., 'Józef i Asenet', Studio Theologica Varsaviensia 16 (1978), pp. 199-240. Szepcssy, T., 'József es Aszeneth törtenete es az antik regény', Antik Tanulmanyok 20 (1973), pp. 158-68 (French translation: 'L'histoire de Joseph et d'Aseneth et le roman antique', Acta Classica Universitatis Scientiarum Debreceniensis 10 [1974], pp. 121-31). Tachau, P., 'Einst' und 'Jetzt' im Neuen Testament: Beobachtungen zu einem urchristlichen Predigtschema in der neutestamentlichen Briefliteratur und zu einer Vorgeschichte (FRLANT, 105; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972). Talbert, C.H., Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (New York: Crossroad, 1987). Talmon, S., 'Waiting for the Messiah: The Spiritual Universe of the Qumran Covenanters', in Judaisms and their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (ed. J. Neusner, W.S. Green and E. Frerichs; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 111-37. Tannenbaum, R.F., 'Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of Aphrodite', BARev 12 (1986), pp. 54-57. Taylor, T.M., 'The Beginnings of Jewish Proselyte Baptism', NTS 2 (1956), pp. 19398. Tcherikover, V.A., 'Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered', Eos 48 (1956), pp. 169-93.

294

From Death to Life

Tcherikover, V.A. with A. Fuks, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (3 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957-64). Thackeray, H. St-J., et al, Josephus (9 vols.; LCL; London: Heinemann; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1926-65). Thiering, B.E., 'Inner and Outer Cleansing at Qumran as a Background to New Testament Baptism', NTS 26 (1980), pp. 266-77. —'Qumran Initiation and New Testament Baptism', NTS 27 (1981), pp. 615-31. nicht mehr männlich und weiblich...: Eine Studie zu Galater 3,28', in Thyen, H., '... Als Mann und Frau geschaffen: Exegetische Studien zur Rolle der Frau (Kennzeichen, 2; Geinhausen: Burckhardthaus-Verlag, 1978), pp. 107-201. —Studien zur Sündenvergebung im Neuen Testament und seinen alttestamentlichen und jüdischen Voraussetzungen (FRLANT, 96; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970). Torrance, T.F., 'Proselyte Baptism', NTS 1 (1954), pp. 150-54. Turcan, R., 'Le roman "initiatique": A propos d'un livre récent', RHR 163 (1963), pp. 149-99. Urbach, E., 'Ger', Encyclopedia Hebraica (32 vols.; Jerusalem, 1949-66), XI, col. 179. —The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs (2 vols.; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1975). Vermes, G., The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 2nd edn, 1975; 3rd edn, 1987). —The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective (Cleveland: Collins & World Books, 1978). —'Essenes and Therapeutae', RevQ 3 (1962), pp. 495-504; repr. in idem, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies (SJLA, 8; Leiden: Brill, 1975), pp. 30-36. —'Essenes-Therapeutae-Qumran', Durham University Journal 21 (1960), pp. 97115. Vikan, G., 'Illustrated Manuscripts of the Romance of Joseph and Aseneth', SBLSP 1976 (ed. G. MacRae; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), pp. 193-208. Vööbus, A., Liturgical Traditions in the Didache (Stockholm: Estonian Theological Society in Exile, 1968). Wagner, G., Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries (trans. J.P. Smith; Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1967). Wagner, S., Die Essener in der Wissenschaftlichen Diskussion (BZAW, 79; Berlin: Topelmann, 1960). Walter, N., 'Judisch-hellenistische Literatur vor Philo von Alexandrien (unter Ausschluss der Historiker)', ANRW 2.20.1 (1987), pp. 67-120. Wedderburn, A.J.M., 'Hellenistic Christian Traditions in Romans 6?', NTS 29 (1983), pp. 337-55. —'The Soteriology of the Mysteries and Pauline Baptismal Theology', NovT 19 (1987), pp. 53-72. Weinfeld, M., The Organizational Pattern and the Penal Code of the Qumran Sect: A Comparison with Guilds and Religious Associations of the Hellenistic-Roman Period (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, 2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). Wendland, P., Die Therapeuten und die philonische Schrift vom beschaulichen Leben (Jarbücher fur classische Philologie, Supplemental Vol. 22; Leipzig: n.p., 1896). Wernberg-M011er, P., The Manual of Discipline (STDJ, 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957).

Bibliography

295

West, S., '"Joseph and Asenath": A Neglected Greek Romance', Classical Quarterly 24 (1974), pp. 70-81. Whittaker, M., Jews and Christians: Graeco-Roman Views (Cambridge Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200, 6; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). Wiens, D.H., 'Mystery Concepts in Primitive Christianity and in its Environment', ANRW 2.23.2 (1980), pp. 1248-84. Wilckens, U., 'Vergebung für die Sünderin (Lk 7,36-50)', in Orientierung an Jesus: Zur Theologie der Synoptiker für Josef Schmid (ed. P. Hoffman; Freiburg: Herder, 1973), pp. 394-424. Wilcox, M., The "God-Fearers" in Acts: A Reconsideration', JSNT 13 (1981), pp. 102-22. Wild, R.A., Water in the Cultic Worship of Isis and Sarapis (EPROER, 87; Leiden: Brill, 1981). Wilson, R.M., '"Jewish Gnosis" and Gnostic Origins: A Survey', HUCA 45 (1974), pp. 177-89. —'Jewish Literary Propaganda', in Paganisme, Judaïsme, Christianisme: Influences et affrontements dans le monde antique. Mélanges offerts à Marcel Simon (Paris: E. de Boccard, 1978), pp. 61-71. Wilson, R.M., (ed.), Nag Hammadi and Gnosis: Papers Read at the First International Congress of Copiólogy (Cairo, December 1976) (NHS, 14; Leiden: Brill, 1978). —'Slippery Words II: Gnosis, Gnostic, Gnosticism', ExpT 89 (1978), pp. 296-301. Winston, D., 'Was Philo a Mystic?', SBLSP 1976 (2 vols.; ed. P.J. Achtemeier; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978), I, pp. 36-55. Wirth, A.H., Danae in christlichen Legenden (Prague: F. Tempsky, 1892). Witt, R.E., ¡sis in the Graeco-Roman World (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1971). Wittman, W., Das Isisbuch des Apuleius: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Geistesgeschichte, 12; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1938). Wolfson, H.A., Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (2 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1947). Wolter, M., Rechtfertigung und zukünftiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu Rom 5,1-11 (BZNW, 43; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978). Yadin, Y., The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness (trans. B. and C. Rabin; Oxford: University Press, 1962). Yovsëp'eanç, S., Revue polyhistore 43 (1885), pp. 200-206; 44 (1886), pp. 25-34. — T'angaran hin ew nor naxneac I. Ankanon girk' hin ktakaranac (Venice: n.p., 1896). Zeitlin, S., 'The Halaka in the Gospels and its Relation to the Jewish Law at the Time of Jesus', HUCA 1 (1924), pp. 357-73. —'A Note on Baptism for Proselytes', JBL 52 (1933), pp. 78-79. Ze'ev, M. Pucci ben, 'Greek Attacks against Alexandrian Jews during Emperor Trajan's Reign', JSJ 20 (1989), pp. 31-48.

INDEXES

INDEX OF REFERENCES BIBLE Old Testament Genesis 107 34 78, 258 41.45 258 41.50 258 46.20

2 Chronicles 132 31.5 132 32.8 Ezra 3.7

132

Exodus 16.31 19.16-18 22.21 24.16-17 32.32-33

Nehemiah 5.11

132

131 212 163 212 113

Deuteronomy 5.22-27 7.13 10.18 12.7 14.23 16.11-14 18.4 24.17-21 27.19 28.51

212 132 167 132 132 167 132 167 167 132

Ruth 2.12

168, 169

2 Kings 2.11-12

212

1 Chronicles 212 28.18

Esther 8.17

4.33 (LXX) 7.9-10 10.3 12.1

244 212 135 113

Hosea 2.8 2.22

132 132

Joel 2.19

132

Haggai 1.11

132

Malachi 3.16-17

113

Apocrypha Tobit 1.10-11

135

162

Psalms 69.28 104.14-15 135.5-11 145.5-7 (LXX)

50

Isaiah 6 51.1 65.17-25 66.22

212 136 173 173

Ezekiel 1 8 36.25

212 212 160

Daniel 1-6 1.1-16 1.8

49, 87, 89 202 135

113 132 50

Judith

9.2 10.5 12.8 13.7 14.10

75 132, 135 75 75 162

Additions to Esther 75, 202 4.17 183 14.3-19 Ecclesiasticus 212 49.8

297

Index of References 1 Maccabees 202 1.62-63 2 Maccabees 6.18-21 202 7.1 202 New Testament Matthew 15.31 75 136 16.16-18 16.17-19 39,58 Mark 5.7 10.17-31

75 58

Luke 1.68 7.46 10.20

75 134 113

John 6 9.31

57, 84 73

Acts 4.24 5.30 9.9 10-11 15.1

183 75 244 202 162

Romans 4 4.17 5-7 5.1-11 6.1-11 7.24-25

39 75 61 59 61 57

1 Corinthians 7.16 10.3-4 10.14-22 10.16 11 15

59 270 270 270 61 58

Galatians 2.9

136

2.11-14 3.23-29 3.28 4 5.3

202 59 59 35,39 162

Ephesians 1.4

57

1 Timothy 6.13

75

Hebrews 3.12

75

Revelation 3.5 6.6 11.3 13.8 14.4 20.12 20.15

113 132 75 113 57 113 113

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA

Apoc. Abr. 9.7

15-29

Apoc. Mos. 33 Asc. Isaiah 9

135 212 212 212

2 Baruch 9.2 21.4-5

244 183

1 Enoch 14 14.18-23 47.3 71 84.2-3

212 212 113 212 183

2 Enoch 22

212

Ep. Arist. 128-42

202

4 Ezra 5.13

244

Jos. Asen. 1-21 1.1 1.4-6 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.8-9 2.1 2.3 2.6

47, 55, 90 108, 258 110, 197 110 98, 110, 258 110 38, 82 110, 197 101 40

3.1 3.3-4 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 4.1-8 4.1 4.7-8 4.7 4.8 4.9-12 4.9-10 4.11 5-6 5.4-7 5.4-5 5.4

70 261 70 110 70 101, 247 43 110 261 106, 110, 197 70 98 258 72, 197 79 98, 144 213 207, 211

298 5.5

6.1-8 6.1 6.2-6 6.3 6.5 6.6 7.1-6 7.1

7.2 7.3 7.4-5 7.5 7.6 7.7-8 7.8 8 8.1 8.3 8.5-7

8.5

8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9

8.11 9-13

From Death to Life 110, 126, 207 98 70 110, 144 79, 110, 144 110, 144 75, 137, 207, 245 104 98, 106, 133, 189, 199, 252, 263 261 110 110, 197 111 261 261 110, 197 63, 241 106, 110, 197 75 72, 98, 99, 104, 106, 111, 119, 120, 133, 139, 197, 260, 263 75, 99, 102, 106, 129, 143, 189, 252, 258 99 99, 106, 258 106 75, 100, 119, 129, 138, 142, 145-47, 172, 182, 183, 192, 242, 270 129 242

9.2

9.3-10.1 10 10.6-15 10.10-13 10.12-23 10.12-13 10.13 10.16 10.17 11-13 11 ll.lx-18 11.3

11.4-6 11.4-5

11.5 11.7-14 11.7-9 11.7 11.9 11.10-14 11.10-11 11.10 11.11 11.12-14 11.13 11.16 11.17 11.18 12-13 12 12.1-13.15 12.1-2

12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5-12

102, 120, 121, 123, 124, 240, 243 119, 138, 242 243 247 197 120 102 102, 252 70 243 74, 167 269 65 115, 122, 144, 167 112 102, 120, 122 115 123 102, 140 75 75, 141, 252 121, 205 112 75, 241 141 115 145 102, 140, 141, 252 141 123 244, 269 123 182 50, 146, 147, 173, 183 183, 192 71 141 192 115

12.5 12.6-8 12.7 12.8 12.9-11 12.9-10 12.11-12 12.11 12.12-14 12.12 12.13-15 12.13 12.14 12.15 13 13.1-11 13.1-9 13.1-2 13.11 13.12 13.13 13.14 14-21 14-17

14 14.2 14.9

14.12-15.2 14.12-15

14.12-13 14.12 15.2-3 15.3 15.4-5 15.4

102, 14042, 167, 204, 252 169 115 71, 123 237 115 145 145 112, 116 102, 120 123 144, 145 145 71 123 112 123 112 102, 120, 142, 204 128, 136 141 71 241 76, 103, 112, 121, 124, 125, 131, 136, 148, 205, 207, 213, 241, 243 125 71 103, 144, 207 247 110, 126, 189, 192, 250 113 33, 103 112, 113 125 194 103, 104,

299

Index of References

15.5

15.6 15.7-8 15.7

15.9 15.10 15.12 16 16.12-13 16.13 16.14-16

16.14

16.16

16.17-23 16.19 17.1-2 17.6 17.7-8 18 18.1-2 18.1 18.5-6 18.8-10 18.9-11 18.9

113, 125, 129, 240 104, 113, 129, 143, 147, 173, 206 104, 113 104, 113 69, 70, 75, 111, 120, 123, 127, 128, 136, 145, 148, 169 113 126, 247 104, 145, 147, 173 63, 104 104 69 104, 113, 142 70, 111, 113, 114, 120, 123, 131, 132, 137, 138, 142-44, 207, 245, 246 105, 113, 129, 131, 132, 136, 143, 194 114, 267 136 113 142 207, 211 65 106, 110 106 110, 126, 197, 247 127, 250 110, 144 207

18.10 18.11 19 19.3 19.4-9 19.4 19.5-11 19.5

19.8-21.9 19.8 19.9 19.10-11 19.11 20.5 20.6-7 20.6 20.7 21 21.1-9 21.1 21.4-6 21.4 21.8 21.10-21 21.11-21 21.12 21.13-15 21.13-14 21.14 21.15 21.16 21.19 21.21

136, 245 106, 110, 136, 144, 245 65, 119 138 73 136, 245 201 103, 105, 119, 121, 129, 131, 136, 138, 242 111 136 137, 207, 245 52, 119, 138 106 189, 201 110, 136, 144, 245, 261 126, 197 149, 173 54, 103, 105, 130, 140, 269 197 30, 99, 106, 258, 260 261 106, 110, 144, 264 189, 197, 201 65, 182 141 141 103, 141 130, 252 105 142, 204 141 141 105, 106, 110, 129,

22-29 22.1-5 22.1-2 22.3 22.6-9 22.7 22.8-9 22.10 22.11 22.13 23.2 23.6-17 23.8 23.9-17 23.9-12 23.9 23.10

23.12 23.14 23.15-24.1 24.1-9 24.2 24.3 24.7 25.5-7 25.5-6 25.5 25.7 26.2 26.6 27.1-5 27.10

27.11

130, 138, 141 55, 85, 90, 106, 108, 214 258 108 106 65 106, 144 111 106 109 106, 111, 137, 145, 207, 245 107, 258 109 106, 137, 207, 245 114 111, 137, 245, 260 99, 106, 258 99, 106, 107, 258 99, 107, 258 258 107 258 109 107 107 114 109 110 110 110, 114, 169 106, 114, 137, 207, 245 107 145, 148, 149, 173 114, 169

300 28.1 28.5-14 28.5-7

28.5 28.7

28.10-16 28.10 28.14 28.15-17 28.17 29.1-5 29.3

29.5 29.6 29.12 Jub. 12.19

From Death to Life 110, 114, 169 114 137, 245, 260 99, 106, 107, 258 99, 106, 107, 111, 258 114 107, 111, 114 107, 111 107, 137, 207, 245 106 109 99, 106, 107, 111, 137, 245, 258, 260 107 107 106

132 202 113

13.26 22.16 30.22 LAB 30.4-5

244

LAE 25

212

3 Maccabbees 202 3.4-7 Odes 1.1-4 5.12 9.8 9.11 11.11 15.2 17.1 17.4 20.7-8 21.3

211 211 211 211 211 211 211 211 211 211

Pr. Man. 12

183

Sib. Or. 3.243 3.34-35 (frag.) 3.46-49 (frag.) 3.591-93 3.745 4.24-30 4.162-70 4.165

132 131 131 160 132 133, 202 160 160

T. Gad 5.7

181

T. Job 12.3 33.9

75 212

T. Jud. 9.8

132

T. Levi 8.4-5 14.6

135 160

4QPrNab 1.3

244

4QShirShab 12

212,213

183 QUMRAN

CD 12.15-17 14.4-6 15.7-15

134, 194 188 191

1QH 3.19-23 10.24 11.3-14

194 132 194

5.7-11 5.13 6.2-5 6.12 6.13-23 6.15 6.20 7.18-21 8.16-19

113

IQSa 2.11-22

33, 192 193 192

4Q405 20 ii 2122 6-14 23 i

1QM 12.2 1QS 1.24-25 3.13-4.26 4.8

189 190 187 191 187, 189 189 191 188 188

4QpNah frags. 3-4, 2.9 188 HQShirShab 5-6 212

187, 188 HQTemple 47.5-7 212 212

135

301

Index of References

MISHNAH

'Abod. Zar. 2.6 36

Dem. 2.2-3 Ker. 2.1

134 135 200

Par. 8.7 Pes. 7.13 8.4 8.8

156

9.10

134 134

Sab. 1.4 14

134 177 177 157, 158, 181 177

Toh. 2.6

134

Ter. 6.1

135

Yad. 4.7

134

Yeb. Maks. 1.1 5.9

135 134

6.5 60

182 182

TALMUDIC LITERATURE

Pes. 96

Bavli

'Abod. Zar. 8 36 37 ße?£. 30-31 30

Ber. 42 43 46 47 52 53

181 134, 135 134

Qid. 78

200 200, 201

Ros Has. 29 31

134 134 177 159, 174 134 134

//M/.

4 5

Ker. 8-9 9

164 172 156 155

Mé?£.

13

172

Sab. 17 Yeb. 8.2 8.9 22 24 45 46-47 46 47 48 62 71 97

164

Yerushalmi Bikk.

1.5 1.64

182 182

Dem. 22-23

200

Pes. 8.8

158

182 177 156 135 182 182 174 182 161 159 158, 163 182 169, 174 174 159 174

Qid. 3.12 3.14 3.64 4.1 4.6 4.65 4.66

159, 161 163 159 159 182 182 182 182

Ros Has. 4.8

173

Yeb. 6.5 6.7

182 182

302 Tosefta Dem. 2.2-3.15 2.11-12 2.14

Ker. 1.11

From Death to Life

200 201 200 156

Pes. 7.14 Seq. 3.22

158 156

1.6 1.7 2.5 2.6

159 182 155, 156

174

Masesch Kitamot Gerim 1.1 182 OTHER RABBINIC LITERATURE

Cant. R. 1.3.3

8.2 8.5 Gen R. 11.2 39.4 39.11 46.10

174 175 174 181 174 174 169

Hekhaloth Zutreti 407-409 210 413-19 213

Lev. R. 29.12 30.3

173 173

Ma'aseh Merkabah 544-55 210 586-91 210

Hekhaloth Rabbati

81 204-511 204-51 258.59 94-106

210 213 210 210 210

Mek. R. Simeon 30 155, 159

Qoh. R. 8.10

181

Sifra Lev. 21.7

182

Sifre Num. 108.2

111 157

155 172 182

Sifre Zutta on Num. 156 15.15 Sifre Deut.

Num. R. 8.2

54

172

2.18 3.25-29 3.30 3.32-33 4.34-35 4.37-38 8.67 9.68-69 9.68 9.73-74

197 198 196 196 197 197 196 196 197 197

167

PHILO

4.34

Abr.

15

Virt. 20 33

167, 172 171, 172,

171

34 40

171 172

167, 171 167, 169,

Vit. Cont. 1.2 2.13

198 197

Migr. Abr.

16

164

180

Praem. Poen.

26

167, 169,

172

180

Spec. Leg.

1.9 1.57

172

303

Index of References

JOSEPHUS

Ant. 3.1.6 11.6.13 12.3.1 12.3.2 13.9.1 13.11.3 16.7.6 20.2.3

161, 163, 165, 167, 169

20.2.4

131 162 134 135 162, 165 162, 165 162 162

20.3.420.4.2 20.4.1-2 20.7.1 20.7.3 23.4

169 167 162 162 136

Life 13

134, 135

War 1.15.6 2.8.3 2.8.7 2.21.1 2.21.2

132 134, 194 191, 192 134 135

123

171

Hernias Poimandres 1-4 25-26 26

205 206 206

CHRISTIAN AUTHORS

Clement of Alexandria 1 Clement 17.3 73

Gospel of Truth 28.32-32.4 205 29.32-30.16 204

Excerpts from Theodotus 204 78.2

Ignatius Ephesians 20.2

84

Philipians 6.1

163

Didache 9 9.3-4 10 10.8 13.5-6

133 133 133 133 135

Vincent of Beauvais Speculum Historíale 1.118-24 20

Justin Martyr Dial. Tryph. 121-23 181 CLASSICAL

Apuleius

Apology 55

221

Metamorphoses 4-6 86 11 49, 51, 86, 220, 221, 238-40, 244, 249 11.1 232 11.2 244, 250 11.3 248 11.5 222, 231, 232 11.6 234

11.10-15 11.10 11.12 11.15 11.16 11.21-24 11.21

11.22 11.23

11.24

247 249 232 232, 237 233, 240 225, 236 226, 227, 231-33, 239, 241, 243, 245 232, 246 228, 229, 231, 242, 243, 246, 247, 250 230, 233,

11.25 11.26 11.27

245-47, 252 244 238 231

Epictetus 2.9.19-21

159

Pausanius Description of Greece 10.32.13 227, 241 10.32.17-18 227, 241 Plutarch Isis and Osiris 20 228 52 249

INDEX OF AUTHORS Abrahams, I. 157, 158, 175 Akibon, R. 21 Alexander, P.S. 208 Alón, G. 180 Alsup, J.E. 58 Anandakumara, S. 241, 253 Anderson, G. 86, 112 Aptowitzer, V. 28, 70, 77, 83, 154, 255 Arai, S. 203 Bamberger, BJ. 156, 161, 163, 170, 174, 180, 270 Barnes, T.D. 81 Barrett, O.K. 163 Bartlett, J.R. 44, 82, 83 Batiffol, P. 20-26, 28, 36, 43, 45, 6669, 71, 72, 76, 192 Bauer, W. 57 Baumgarten, J.M. 134, 188, 189, 194, 200 Becker, J. 59 Beckwith, R.T. 54, 128, 194 Beer, G. 29 Behm, J. 172 Berger, K. 57-59 Bergmeier, R. 60 Berner, W.D. 241, 253 Bertram, G. 73, 101 Besser, R. 22 Best, E. 59 Betz, O. 191 Black, J.S. 24, 34 Black, M. 176 Bleeker, C.J. 228 Booth, R.P. 127 Borgen, P. 58 Bornkamm, G. 218, 220

Bousset,W. 24,29 Bowker, J. 200 Box, G.H. 27 Brandenburger, E. 35 Braude, W.G. 155, 182, 270 Brock, S. 66 Broek, R. van den 202 Bromiley, G.W. 46 Brooks, E.W. 25-27, 69, 73, 76, 77 Brunet, G. 21 Büchler, A. 177 Bultmann, R. 157, 193 Burchard, C. 20-22, 32, 35-39, 41-47, 56-59, 61, 62, 65-69, 71-74, 80, 82-84, 86, 87, 92, 93, 100, 105, 114, 125, 127, 128, 132-34, 136, 137, 141, 142, 147, 148, 184, 192, 198, 218, 237, 240, 241, 243, 253, 254, 261, 262, 264, 265, 269, 270 Burton, E. de W. 123 Bussmann, C. 57 Buttrick, G.A. 46 Byrne, B. 59 Carrière, A. 21 Cavalli, M. 62 Cavallin, H.C.C. 58, 144 Charles, R.H. 25, 160 Charlesworth, J.H. 44, 48, 60, 67, 68, 72, 74, 75, 78, 80, 128, 182, 183, 193,207,211,235,244 Chernus, I. 209, 213 Chesnutt, R.D. 46, 55, 57, 84, 85, 128, 269, 270 Cheyne, T.K. 24

Index of Authors Cohen, S.J.D. 101, 154, 162, 165, 166, 185 Collins, J.J. 44, 61, 78, 82, 121, 128, 130, 134, 144, 162, 215, 261 Colson, F.H. 197 Conybeare, F.C. 195 Conzelmann, H. 221 Cook, D. 62, 63, 67 Crehan, J. 157 Crim, K. 46 Dalbert, P. 260 Daube, D. 175, 181, 182 DeLange, N. 45 Declor, M. 127 Decock, P.B. 193 Del Corno, D. 62 Delcor, M. 32, 33, 45, 128, 187, 195, 196, 250 Delling, G. 36, 53, 57, 71, 80, 104, 131, 258, 269 Denis, A.-M. 43 Dey, J. 227, 229, 230, 233, 234 Dibelius, M. 228, 230, 231, 234 Dillmann A. 22 Dix, G. 176 Dodds, E.R. 213 Doran, R. 44, 89, 90 Douglas, R.C. 55, 110 Drijvers, HJ.W. 204 Dubois, J.-D. 61 Duchesne, L. 26 Dugmore, C.W. 178 Dunand, F. 238 Düsterdieck, F.H.C. 57 Duthoy, R. 219, 220 Dwyer, R.A. 21 Eitrem, S. 228 Enermaln-Owaga, A. 60 Fabricius, J.A. 21 Feeley-Harnik, G. 179 Feldman, L.H. 101, 153 Festugière, A.-J. 227, 235 Fiebig, P. 24 Finkelstein, L. 157, 200 Finn, T.M. 101

305

Fischer, G. 59 Fischer, U. 59 Fitzmyer, J.A. 187 Flusser, D. 60, 181, 182 Forkman, G. 191 Freedman, D.N. 46 Frenzel, E. 34 Gager, J. 83 Gärtner, B. 187 Gavin, F. 174, 182 Gennep, A. van 56 Geoltrain, P. 195 Georgi, D. 35 Gero, S. 133 Gilhus, I.S. 205 Ginzberg, L. 29, 70 Goeij, M. de 62, 63, 67, 205 Goodenough, E.R. 25, 41, 47, 223-25 Goodman, M. 44, 153, 261, 268 Griffiths, J.G. 221, 227-30, 234, 248 Gruenwald, I. 210 Guilbert, P. 191 Hagg g, T. 86, 91, 92, 223, 258 Hall, S.G. 181 Halperin, D.J. 208 Hamilton, G.L. 21 Hastings, J. 24 Hegermann, H. 43 Heiligenthal, R. 61 Heinemann, I. 195 Heinemann, J. 182, 183 Hengel, M. 221, 235 Himmelfarb, M. 208, 211 Hoenig, S.B. 134 Hofius, O. 56-58 Holtz, T. 42, 58, 73, 128 Horsley, G.H.R. 127 Huppenbauer, H. 190

Issaverdens, J. 21 Istrin, V.M. 25, 36 James, M.R. 23, 24 Jeremias, J. 29, 31, 35, 36, 38, 82, 83, 128, 133, 134, 153, 156-58, 160, 174, 177, 179, 181

306

From Death to Life

Jonas, H. 204 Jones, A.H. 131 Jonge, M. de 160, 187 Kahler, C. 59 Kane, J.P. 230 Kasher, A. 266 Kautzch, E. 25 Kee, H.C. 48, 49, 79, 86-89, 128, 136, 154, 160, 164, 165, 179, 183, 208,209,211-14,217,218,221, 238, 239, 245, 251, 259, 261, 264 Kerényi, K. 222, 223, 225 Kilpatrick, G.D. 30, 31, 34, 35, 60, 82, 87, 89, 128, 130, 217, 255 Klauck, H.-J. 60 Kleinknecht, K.T. 61 Klijn, A.FJ. 266 Klinzing, G. 187 Knox, W.L. 233 Koester, H. 44, 45, 203 Kohler, K. 27, 70, 255 Kraabel, AT. 101 Kraemer, R.S. 62, 92, 269 Kraft, R.A. 133 Krämer, H. 229 Krumbacher, K. 25 Kubo, S. 59 Kühn, K.G. 31, 32, 35, 84, 128, 174, 182, 187, 195 Kümmel, W.H. 68 Ladd, G.E. 46 Laeuchli, S. 219 Lagarde, P. de 70 Land, J.P.N. 21 Leaney, A.R.C. 44, 190, 191 Lease, G. 224 Lefkowitz, M.R. 92, 269 Legasse, S. 57 Levine, A.-J. 92, 271 Lieberman, S. 190, 201 Lietzmann, H. 176 Lincoln, B. 56 Lindars, B. 60, 128 Lindemann, A. 59 Lindeskog, G. 173 Lindijer, C.H. 57

Lohfink, G. 35 Lohse, E. 34 Lucerna, C. 28 Lührmann, D. 59 MacCracken, H.N. 21 MacLennan, R.S. 101 MacRae, G.W. 202 Maier, J. 210 Malherbe, A. 267 Manns, F. 60, 127 Marshall, I.H. 60 Martínez Fernandez, R. 62 Massebieau, L. 26 McEleney, N.J. 163, 164 McGuire, A. 186,203,204 McNamara, M. 46 Mcknight, S. 57, 153, 156, 271 Mell, U. 61, 173 Merkelbach, R. 222, 223, 225 Merkelbach, r. 86 Meyer, M.W. 233 Michealis,W. 193,248 Migne, J.P. 21 Milik, J.T. 195 Moore, G.F. 156, 157, 170 Moule, C.F.D. 261 Munck, J. 153 Muraoka, T. 62 Nauck, W. 33, 35, 36, 127, 192 Nebe, G. 61 Neusner, J. 159, 177, 200 Newsom, C. 212 Newton, M. 190, 191 Nickelsburg, G.W.E. 44, 67, 79, 126, 128, 136,193,194,211,246, 255, 258, 259 Nilsson, M.P. 233-35 Noack, L. 21 Nock, A.D. 223, 224 Nolland, J. 163, 164 Novakovié, S. 22 Oesterley, W.O.E. 27 Oppenheim, G. 21, 22 Oppenheimer, A. 177, 200, 201 Otto, R. 176

Index of Authors Overman, J.A. 101 Parrot, D.M. 267 Patsch, H. 60 Pax, E. 58 Pearson, B.A. 202, 266 Perry, B.E. 84, 85, 90, 91, 223 Pervo, R.I. 49, 87-92, 258 Pervo, R.L. 86 Petuchowski. J.J. 182, 183 Philonenko, M. 20, 23, 28, 34, 39-43, 45-48, 50, 62, 63, 65-68, 72-75, 78, 79, 83, 84, 86, 87, 93, 103105, 128, 129, 132, 138, 141, 148, 149, 173, 192, 220, 223, 236, 248, 251, 254, 255, 264, 266 Pinero, A. 62 Pines, S. 58, 181 Piper, J. 59 Ploeg, J. van der 187 Priebatsch, H. 29, 30, 72, 205, 206 Priest, J.F. 191 Pritchard, J.B. 79 Pryke, J. 191 Pucci, M. benZe'ev 81 Rabin, C. 191, 192, 200 Reardon, B.P. 88 Reissler, P. 27, 28, 32, 39, 69, 70, 77, 78 Reitzenstein, R. 24, 220, 227, 228, 250 Riaud, J. 195 Richardson, R.D. 34 Riggs,J.W. 133 Ringgren, H. 190 Robinson, J.A.T. 191 Rohde, E, 88 Röhser, G. 61 Rost, L. 46 Roussel, P. 235 Rowland, C. 61 Rudolph, K. 202, 203 Russell, D.S. 45, 111 Sandelin, K.-G. 60 Sanders, E.P. 58, 137, 245 Sandmel, S. 193 Sänger, D. 50-53, 78, 84, 100, 113,

307

119, 120, 122, 123, 125-28, 132, 138, 139, 147, 205, 206, 218, 221, 226-28, 230, 232-34, 236, 240-42, 246, 249, 250, 253, 268 Sarason, R.S. 183 Schäfer, P. 208, 210 Schenk, W. 59 Schiffman, L. 157, 158, 161, 164, 186, 188, 190 Schlier, H. 34, 36 Schmelling, G. 86 Schnackenburg, R. 57, 128 Schneider, G. 173 Scholem, G. 210, 213-15 Schottroff, L. 59 Schürer, E. 24, 44, 45, 160, 195, 216, 261, 268 Schwartz,!. 54,68 Schweitzer, A. 219, 220 Schweizer, E. 34, 163 Segal, A.F. 56, 186 Seigert, F. 101 Seilin, G. 58 Sjöberg, E. 173-75 Smallwood, E.M. 81 Smith, D. 60 Smith, E.W. Jr 47, 48, 57, 66, 217, 251 Smith, M. 187, 204, 223, 224 Smith, W. 22, 128 Solmsen, F. 221, 222 Sparks, H.F.D. 63, 72 Stählin, G. 248 Stählin, O. 24 Stegemann, E. 60 Stein, E. 173 Stemberger, G. 44 Stern, M. 159, 162, 163 Stroumsa, G.A.G. 205 Strugnell, J. 212 Stuhlmacher, P. 35 Suski, A. 62 Szepessy, T. 50, 87 Tachau, P. 58 Talbert, C.H. 58,61, 125, 144 Talmon, S. 187, 188 Tannenbaum, R.F. 101 Taylor, T.M. 157

308

From Death to Life

Tcherikover, V.A. 81, 260 Testuz, M. 62 Thiering, B.E. 190, 191 Thyen, H. 56, 59, 221, 248, 251 Torrance, T.F. 157 Tutean, R. 223 Turner, V.W. 56 Urbach, E. 170 Vermes, G. 188, 190, 191, 195 Vikan, G. 49 Vööbus, A. 133 Wace,H. 22 Wagner, G. 230, 231, 233, 234 Wagner, S. 195 Walter, N. 44, 215, 216 Wedderburn, A.J.M. 61, 230, 231, 234 Weinfeld, M. 267 Weins, D.H. 220

Wendland, P. 195 Wernberg-M011er, P. 190 West, S. 50, 79, 82, 84, 87 Whitaker, G.H. 197 Whittaker, M. 159, 163 Wilckens, U. 56 Wilcox,M. 101 Wild, R.A. 227, 250 Wilson, R.M. 202, 203 Winston, D. 224 Wintermute, O. 80 Wirth, A.H. 22 Witt, R.E. 230, 234, 237 Wittmann, W. 230, 234 Wolfson, H.A. 70, 224 Woher, M. 59 Yadin,Y. 187 Yovsëp'eanç, S. 21 Zeitlin, S. 157, 161

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA Supplement Series 1 2 3 4

5 6

PORTRAITS OF ADAM IN EARLY JUDAISM: FROM SIRACH TO 2 BARUCH John R. Levison

FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS BETWEEN JERUSALEM AND ROME: His LIFE, HIS WORKS, AND THEIR IMPORTANCE Per Bilde

THE HISTORY OF THE QUMRAN COMMUNITY: AN INVESTIGATION Phillip R. Callaway ESCHATOLOGY IN THE THEODICIES OF 2 BARUCH AND 4 EZRA TomW.Willet

THE FIVE FRAGMENTS OF THE * APOCRYPHON OF EZEKIEL' : A CRITICAL STUDY

J.R. Mueller

REVEALED HISTORIES: TECHNIQUES FOR ANCIENT JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY Robert G. Hall 7 TEMPLE SCROLL STUDIES Edited by George J. Brooke 8 ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY IN THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS: THE NEW YORK UNIVERSITY CONFERENCE IN MEMORY OF YIGAEL YADIN Edited by Lawrence H. Schiffman 9 MYSTERIES AND REVELATIONS: APOCALYPTIC STUDIES SINCE THE UPPSALA COLLOQUIUM Edited by John J. Collins and James H. Charlesworth 10 JEWISH CIVILIZATION IN THE HELLENISTIC-ROMAN PERIOD Edited by Shemaryahu Talmon 11 ANGELS AT QUMRAN: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF l ENOCH 1-36,72-108 AND SECTARIAN WRITINGS FROM QUMRAN Maxwell J. Davidson 13 NON-RETALIATION IN EARLY JEWISH AND NEW TESTAMENT TEXTS: ETHICAL THEMES IN SOCIAL CONTEXTS 14

Gordon M. Zerbe

THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA AND EARLY BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION Edited by James R. Charlesworth and Craig A. Evans 15 THUNDER IN GEMINI, AND OTHER ESSAYS ON THE HISTORY, LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE OF SECOND TEMPLE PALESTINE Michael Wise

16

FROM DEATH TO LIFE: CONVERSION IN JOSEPH AND ASENETH R.D. Chesnutt