The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity. The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 163)

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Herausgeber I Editor JörgFrey Mitherausgeber I Associate Editors F...

Author: Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra

51 downloads 1171 Views 32MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Herausgeber I Editor JörgFrey Mitherausgeber I Associate Editors Friedrich Avemarie · Judith Gundry-Volf Martin Rengel · Otfried Hofius · Hans-Josef Klauck

163

Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra

The Impact of YomKippur on Early Christianity The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century

Mohr Siebeck

DANI'EL STöKL BEN EzRA, bom 1970; studied Theology in Bochum and Bern; Comparative Religion and Jewish Studies in Jerusalem; 2002 Ph.D.; since fall 2003 Mandel Fellow at Scholion- Interdisciplinary Research Center in Jewish Studies, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

ISBN 3-16-148092-0 ISSN 0512-1604 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Thstament) Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in theInternetat http://dnb.ddb.de.

© 2003 by J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), P. 0. Box 2040, D-72010 Tübingen. lbis book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that pennitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Gulde Druck in THbingen on non-aging paper and bound by Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Gennany.

to my dear parents and parents in law Andreas StiJkl and Herzeleide StiJk/, born. v. Schlabrendorff Joe Ben Ezra and Corinne Ben Ezra, born Shabtai

Preface This study presents my doctoral dissertation "The Impact of Yom Kippur on Eady Christianity," accepted by the Hebrew University of Jeru.salem in May 2002. I have reworked many arguments, included further Observations and updated the bibliography. Having come to Jerusalem from the rather intellectual religions of Protestant Northern Germany and Calvinistic Switzerland, the ritual expressions of the numerous denomioations a.ssembled in the Holy City have attracted my curiosity. Reading Origen•s Homilies on Leviticus, I stumbled upon the amazing sentence: Die propitiationis indigent omnes qui peccaverunt,l ("All who have sinned require a Day of Atonement."), and th.e principal question oftbis bookjumped into my mind irresistibly. Th.at tbe work disregards the customary borders of academic disciplines, integrating Comparative Religion with Jewish Histocy, New Testament. Church History and Liturgical Studies bas undoubtedly resulted in many flaws that will not escape the eyes of specialists in these aceas. I bope, however, that the broad scope and the peiSpective of longue duree bring with it the advantage of bringing together a eoherent eollage of arguments otherwise seattered among discrete fields. To cast so wide a net was possible only tbanks to num.erous scholars who were most generous with their time, advice and encouragement, and taught me to read closely and widely. Many scholars have read tbroug.h various parts of the work, pointed out errors and inaccuracies, and helped me to improve extensively on the overall argumeni. All remaining mistakes are of course my own. I .am most grateful to the dissertation's three judges. my Doktorvater Guy Stroum.sa, my Doktoronkel David Satran and Jobn Gager. Their written and oral conunents before and after submission have enhanced countless aspects of this book. lbrough many years, they bave been most generous with their time and kind advice helping .me to ove,rcome ma.ny academic and personal hardships. What a privilege to have had them as teachers and now as eolleagues. I have also benefited much from the guid-

1

Orlgen, Homily on LBYitiCUS 9:1:1 (SC 287:70).

vm

Pre/iJce

ance of Racbel Elior and Oded Irshai, the remaining members of the dissertation committee. My dearly toved wife, Dina Ben Ezra, has pored over the chapters ofthe book and enlumced numerous arguments with her keen intellect. I owe her more than words can express. Clemens Leonhard was never too exhausted tobe a discussion partner, from the beginning of the task to its completion. In COU1ltless cases he helped me marshat material not available in Jerusa1em. Part 1, on early Judaism, bas profited from the meticulous readershipof Gary Anderson, Liora Elias, Martha Himmelfarb and Günter Stemberger. Jörg Frey, Lukas Mübletbaler and Serge Ruzer reviewed and refined part 2, on Cbristianity in the ftrSt and second centuries. Peter Brown was so generaus as to review part 3, on Cbristianity from the third to the tifth centu.ries, and made most belpful suggestions. Stephane Verbeist commented in extenso on the chapter on Christian autumn festivals and kindly sent me parts of bis book on early Christian and Jewish liturgy before its publication. Comments by Daniel R. Schwartz on m.y M.A. thesis much irnproved those sections of parts 1 and 2 that grew out of it. I also wish to thank: the participants and organizers of worbhops and conferences in Aachen. Brussels, Jerusalem, New York, Ox.ford, Princeton and Toronto, who responded most helpfully to some ofthe ideas now contained in this book. In particular, Albert Baumgarten has been most gen erous and kind time and again. At different stages of writing I consulted with many other people, and the book has protited immeasurabJy from these discussions. Am.ong them, I must mention at least: Ra'anan Abusch, Anders Aschim, Jan Assmann, Daniel Bailey, Giovanni Bazzana, Adam Becker, Nicole Belayche, Jonathan Ben Dov, Jonathan Benthal!, Katell Bertbelot, Christine Beshar, Hans-Dieter Betz, Brouria Biton-Ashkelony, Daniel Boyarin, Susan Boynton, Rudolf BrändJe, Georg Braulik, Sarah Brooke, Harald Buchinger, Carsten Claussen, Yaron Zwi Eliav. Daniel Findikyan. Jonah Frae:nlcel, Guy Geltner, Ze'ev Gotthold, Yehoshua Granat, Moshe Greenberg, Cristiano Grottanelli, Paul Hallsall, Galit Ha:zan-Rokem, William Horbury, Jared Hudson, Josef Kaplan, Steve Kaplan, Wolfram Kin:zig, Avner Kfir, Sergio La Porta, Herrman Lichtenberger, Amnon Linder, Basil Lourie, Christoph Marlcsebies, Jason Moralee, Ronit Nikolsky, Lorenzo Perrone, Gerard Rouwhorst, Seth Sanders, Jonathan Schofer, Shunit Shahal-Porat, Stephen Shoemaker, Epbraim Shoham Stciner, David Shnlman, Gregory Sterling, Helene Stökl, Michael Stone, Evelyne Patlagean, Michael Signer, Gregory Sterling, Michael Swartz, Stefano Tampellini, Abraham Terian, Timothy Thomton, Caes van der Freugd, Jan Willem van Renten, Katla 4

Preface

IX

Shira Veblow, Evelyn Vitz, Ewald Volgger, Zwi Werblowsky, Annette Yoshiko Reed and Norman H. Young. This book would not have been possible without them. Amoag my teachers at the universities of Bochum and Bem, I would like to thank most of all Martin Leutzsch and Mare van Wijnk:oop Lüthi, as weil as Magdalene Frettlöh, Christian Link, Ulrich Luz, Konrad Raiser and Klaus W engst, who led me into the world of academic argumentation. I have used many libraries whose staffs have been most helpful, in particular, the libnuy of the Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, the EcoJe Biblique, the BJoomfield Library of the Hebrew University and the Israel National Library, all in Jerusatem; Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton University Library, the British Library in London and Cambridge University Libracy. I wish to express my gratitude to Jörg Frey, Martin Heugel and Ottfried Hofius for accepting the dissertation for inclusion in the series of Wi3senschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, and to the staff of the Mohr-Siebeck Verlag, Tiibingen, for tbeir friendly and efficient assistance in the production process. The English has been thoroughly revised and improved by Evelyn K.atrak: to whom I owe a great deal. W orking with her has been a pleasure and an honor. It goes without saying that I alone am responsible for all mistakes, inaccuracies or deficiencies that may remain in my work. Finally, work: on the thesis would not have been possible without the very generaus and long-term funding of the Dr. NeUy-Hahne Foundation, Stuttgart. Germany (1997-1999), and the Minerva Foundation, Germany (1999-2001). Many individuals have supported me financially, among them my parents Andreas and Herzeleide Stökl, Dieprand and Eva von Schlabrendorff. Jost (t) and Sabine Schramm, and Ruth Roberta Heckscher, ?''r. The dissertation was awarded the Shlomo Pines '1'rize by the Prof. Shlomo Pines Foundation, and the Kennedy-Leigh Award for an outstanding dissertation by the Hebrew University. I deeply appreciatc both. The publication of the book has been generously supported by a grant from the Charles W olfson Research Fund of the Institute for Jewish Studies at the Hebrew University for which I am very grateful. Jerusalem, Pentecost 2003 I Shavuot 5763

Daniel Stöld Ben Ezra

BriefTahle ofContents Preface .. .. .. . ............. .. ...•................. ....... ................ ....... ....... ................ VII BriefTable ofContents ....................................................................... XI Detailed Table of Contents .... ................................... ...................... ..... XIII List of Abbreviations ........................................................................... XIX lntroduction.............................. ................................ ...........................

1

PartOne

Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual Intro
Chapter 1: The Names of Yom Kippur ................................................ Cbapter 2: The Rituals of Yom Kippur ................................................ Chapter 3: Imaginaires of Yom Kippur ...............................................

13 15 18 78

Part Two

The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity in tbe First and Seeond Centuries Chapter 4: Yom Kippur in the Early Christian Imaginaire ................. Chapter 5: Yom Kippur Imagery in Gnosticism and in Early Christian Mysticism .....................................:................... Cbapter 6: Yom Kippur in Jewisb Christian Legends ........................

145 228 244

PartTiuee

The Impact ofYom Kippur on Early Christianity from the Third to the Fifth Centmies Chapter 7: Christian Exegesis ofLeviticus and the Polemies against the Contemporary Yom Kippur .......................................... 261 Chapter 8: Yom Kippur and the Christian Autumn Festivals ............... 290 General Conclllsions ............................................................................ 329 Appendix: Yom Kippur and Bastern Anaphoras .................................. 335

XII

Brie{Toble ofContent~

Bibliography ... ............................ ............... .. ..... .. ...... ....... ................... 345

Index of Soun::es................................................................................. 397 Index ofModem Autho.rs.................................................................... 425 Index ofNames and Subjects .............................................................. 432

Detailed Table of Contents Preface ..................................... ........................................................... VII BriefTahle ofContents ....................................................................... XI Detailed Table of Contents .................................................................. XIII List of Abbreviations ........................................................................... XIX Introduction .................................................................., ..................... . 1. The Topic and the Research Question......................................... 2. Methodological Remalles and Definitions................................... 2.1 Different Types oflnfluence................................................ 2.2 Rite and RituaL.................................................................... 2.3 Myth and Mytbology . .................... ...................................... 2.4 The imaginaire ........ ............................... ....................... ...... 2.5 Christian Judaism ................................................................

1 4

4

6 7 8

10

PartOne

Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual Introduction ...................... ................ ....... .... .................. ...... .. .............. Cbapter 1: The Names ofYom Kippl.ll'................................................. Chapter 2: The Rituals of Yom K.ippur ................................................ 1. Tbe Question ofthe Historicjty ofthe Mishnaic Version ofthe Temple Ritual............................................................................. 2. The Temple Ritual...................................................................... 2.1 The Preparation Rites ... .. .................................. ................... 2.2 The Entrances to the Holy of Ho lies .......................... .......... 2.3 TheSending Away oftbe Scapegoat ..............~..................... 2.4 The Closing RituaJs ............................................................. 3. The Ritual ofthe People ............................................................. 3.l Between Aftlictions and Joy ................................................ 3.2 Prayers................................................................................. 3.2.1 Yom Kippur Prayers in Palemne: Qumran.................. 3.2.2 Yom Kippur Prayers in the Diaspora: Philo................. 3.2.3 Yom Kippur Prayers a.fter the Destruction of the Temple........................................................................ Conclusion: Prayers in and outside tbe Temple.................... 3.3 A Controvcrsial, Popular Blood Sacrifice: kapparot ............

13

15 18

19

28 28 30 31 31 33 33 36 37 46 49 64 65

XIV

Detailed Table ofContent~

3.4 Pagan and Christian Descriptions ofContemporacy Yom Kippur Rites ....................................................................... 3.4.1 Pagan Texts................................................................ 3.4.2 Christian Texts........................................................... Chapter 3: Imaginaires ofYom Kippur............................................... 1. The Apocalyptic Imaginaire ofYom Kippur.............................. 1.1 High-Priestly Visions of God 1: Apocalyptic Texts............. 1.2 The Mythologization of'Az'azel........................................ 1.2.1 Allusions to the Myth of'Az'azel in IEnoch 10......... 1.2.2 11 QMelchizedek: Getting Explicit... ....... ....... ............. 1.2.3 The Apocalypse ofAbraham: ZeChariah 3 Meets the Demonology of'Az'aze1............................................ Concluding Thoughts on 'Az'azel in the Apocalyptic Literature ........ ....... ..... .......... ........ ..... ....... .. ..... ....... ... 1.3 Etiologies..... ........... ....... ....... ......... ..... .. ..... ......... ....... ..... .... 1.4 Qumran: The Current Period of Persecution as Yom Kippur Conclusion................................................................................. 2. Yom Kippur in the Greek Diaspora............................................ 2.1 The Septuagint: Conservatism and Enculturation................ 2.2 Philo's Allegorization ofYom Kippur ................................ 2.2.1 The Rationale ofthe People's Yom Kippur Rituals.... 2.2.2 The Allegorizations ofYom Kippur's Temple Ritual. Conclusion.......................................................................... 2.3 The Viearious Atoning Death in 4Maceabees 17 and the Imaginaire ofYom Kippur.................................................. Excursus: The Scapegoat as Backgroundfor J1icarious Atoning Suffering in Isaiah and Josephus? .... .......... ...... .. ...... ...... ..... Conclusion: Yom Kippur in the Greek Diaspora........................ 3. The Christian Jewish Imaginaire ofYom Kippur....................... 4. Aspects ofthe Rabbinie Imaginaire ofYom Kippur................... 4.1 Mythologieal Events Conneeted to Yom Kippur ................. 4.2 Rabbinie Interpretations ofthe Temple Ritual..................... 4.2.1 The High Priests......................................................... 4.2.2 Goats ......................................................................... 4.2.3 Red Ribbons............................................................... 4.3 Rabbinie Interpretations ofRitual ofthe People.................. 5. High-Priestly Visions of God III: Aspeets of Yom Kippur in the Hekhalot Literature.................................................................... Coneluding Thoughts to Part One.......................................................

68 68 70 78 79 79 85 85 90 92 94 95

97 100 101 102 107 107 109 114 115 116

117 118 118 121 124 124 127 130 132 134 139

Detailed Table ofContents

XV

PartTwo

The Impact ofYom K.ippur on Early Christianity in the First and Second Centmies Chapter 4: Yom Kippurin the Early Christian Jmaginaire .................. 1. Christ and the Scapegoat: Barnahas, Matthew and Galatians..... 1.1 The Tradition of Barnabas.................................................. 1.1.1 The First Picture (Barnabas 7:3-5) ............................ 1.1.2 The Second Picture (Barnabas 7:6-11) ...................... 1.1.3 The Interpretation ofthe Proto-Typology in Justin, Tertullian and Hippolytus........................................... Excursus: Did the Scapeg0t;1t Rite lnjluence the Earliest Account ofthe Passion? John D. Crossan's Thesis..... 1.2 Barabbas as Scapegoat in Matthew 27:15-23 ...................... Excursus: The Catalytic Function ofthe Pharmakos and the Scapegoat .... ......... ..... ........ ...... ....... ........ ........ ......... ........... 1.3 The Redemptive Curse: An A11usion to the Scapegoat in Galatians 3? ........................................................................ 1.4 The Scapegoat as Catalyst? John I :29 and 1Peter 2:24 ........ 1.4.1 John 1:29 ................................................................... 1.4.2 1Peter 2:22-24 ........................................................... 2. Christ as High Priest: Hebrews .................................................. 2.1 The Setting......................................................................... 2.1.1 Sacred Time: The Present Eschaton as Yom Kippur... 2.2.2 Sacred Space: The Heavenly Sanctuary ...................... 2.2 The High Priest and His Actions ......................................... 2.3 The Participation of the People ........................................... 2.4 Conclusions Regarding the High Priest in Hebrews............. 2.5 History ofTradition: The Role of Zechariah 3 in the Justification ofthe Hjgh-Priestly Christology before Hebrews...... 3. Christ as kopporet (i.l.aa'tfJpwv): Romans 3:25-26...................... 3.1 The Influence ofYom Kippur on Romans 3:.25-26 ............. 3.2 Interpretation ofRomans 3:25-26....................................... 3.3 Paul's Predecessor: The Pre-Pauline Formula Romans 3 :24/25-26a* ...................................................................... 4. Christ as Atonement (i.l.aa116<;): Uohn........................................ 5. Yom Kippur as Background to Early Christological Hymns? ..... 5.1 Colossians 1:12-20............................................................. 5.2 Philippians 2:6-11 .............................................................. 6. Historical Synthesis ................................................................... 6.1 The Observance of Yom Kippur by First-Centuxy Christians 6.2 The Abolition ofYom Kippur by First- and Second-Centuxy Christians... .. ......... ..... .... ............ .......... ................. ......... .. ...

145 147 148 150 152 155 161 165 171 173 176 176 178 180 181 181 182 184 190 193 194 197 198 202 204 205 206 207 211 212 213 219

XVI

!Htailed Tobte ojCo'llttnb

6.3 The History of Traditions.................................................... 223 Concluding Thoughts ................................................... .................. 225 Chapter 5: Yom Kippur lmagery in Gnosticism andin Bady Christian . Mysticism ..•.. ....... .. ...................... ....... .................... ....................... 228 1. The High Priest's Entrance in Valentiman Soteriology .............. 229 2. Thc High Priest's Entrance and the Ritual ofthe Bridal Chamber 232 3. Philonic and Valentinian Mystieism as Merged in Clement of Alexandria................................................................................. . 23 7 3.1 Stromaleis 5:6:39:3-40:4 .................................................... 238 3.2 Excerptsfrom Theodohls 21................................................ 240 Conclmions and Implications......................... ................................ 243 Cbapter 6: Yom Kippurin Jewish Christian Legends.......................... 244 1. James, the Permanently Interceding High Priest......................... 246 2. Zeebariah's Revelation on Yom K.ippur ............................. ........ 250 Ezcursus: Simeon and John as High Priests ................................... 255 Conclusion .... ......... ... ..... .............. ........ ..................... ..••.. ............... 257 PartTbree

• The Impact of Yom K.ippur on Early Christianity from the Third to the Fifth Centuries Chapter 7: Christian Exegesis of Leviticus and the Polemies against the Contemporary Yom K.ippur ...................................................... 1. Christian Exegesis ofLeviticus and the Templli:ation ofthe Liturgy ....................................................................................... 2. Cbristian Participation in tbe Jewish Fast................................... 3. Christian Polemies against the Contemporary Yom Kippur ........ 4. Anti-Christian Polemies in Yom Kippur Texts........................... Conclusion .................. :.................................................................. Chapter 8: Yom Kippur and 1he Christian Autumn Festivals............... 1. The Encaenia, the Exaltation ofthe Cross and Yom Kippur ....... 2. The Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September) and Yom Kippur ............................................................................... 2.1 The Origin ofthe Solemn Fasts........................................... 2.2 Leo's Sermons on the Fast ofthe Seventh Month and Yoxri Kippur ................................................................................ 2.3 The Readings ofthe Fast ofthe Seventh Month and Yom Kippur ................................................................................ Conclusion................................................................................. 3. Bastern Commemoraiion of Gabriel's Annunciation to Zechariah

261 262 273 277 283 288 290 290 303 304 312 317 321 322

General ConchlSions........................................................................... 329

Detailed Table ofCo1Uents

XVII

Appendix: Yom K.ippur and Eastem Anaphoras.................................. 335 Bibliography .......................................:............................................... 345 Index of Sources................................................................................. 397 Index ofModern Authors.................................................................... 425 Index ofNames and Subjects .............................................................. 432

List of Abbreviations I tried to avoid abbreviations. Exceptions are the Septuagint, the Bible in English translation. rabbinicalliteraton:, Qum.ran texts and Patristic series: LXX

NRSV

Septua&int. The Holy Bible containing ihe Old ond Nf!W Tutament1 with the Apocryphal I Det~tuocanonical &Jolrs. N- Revised StandOI'd Yeralon. (New York, 1989).

Rabbinical.Literature Tractate uames are abbreviated as follows:

AZ .A.bol

.A.vodah Zarah .A.vot

RH

Rosh Ho.Shanah

Sanh

BB Ber

BtwaBaua BeroJehol

Sabb

Sanhedrin Shobbat

Bet~ah

Belzah Gittin Hagigah Makkot Megillah Menahot Mo'edQatan Nedorim

Git Hag Mak Meg Men

MQ Ned Parah l'e'ah Pq

Parab Pe'ah Puahlm

Seqal Sebu Sotah

$/l/ckah Ta'an Tamid Tem Ter Yebam

Sheqalim Shevu'ot Sotah Suklwh Ta'tmit Tamid Temurah Tenmrot Yevamot

Yoma

Yoma

Zebah

Znahim

The eolleetiollll are signified by a prmx to tbe abbreviation of the tractate (as in the Standard GenDill .sy.stem without periods aft:er the c:ollection and the IJac:llltc names):

m t y b

Mishnah Tosefta Palestinian 1 Jerusalem Talmud Babylonian Talmud

List ofAbln11Vlatlom

XX

Name:s of Qumran Writi"gs 1QPuhv Habaldtuk lQS Rvle oflhe Commrmiry 1QSb Rute ofBJessings lQWord.r ofMotw.r 4QI6l Pf.f8hu l1aiah 4Q171 Ptslwr on Psalms 4QEnoch Giants• 4QEnocho.b.c 4QSong• of the Sage 4QTargzmr of L11Vilicus 4Q YisiOIIS ofA.Mran,. 11 QMelchizedek 11 QTempJs Scroll DaMa.rcr~.s lJ«;vMent

Fttstlva/ Prayers Songs af the Sabbalh Sacriflce War Sero// DSST

IQpHab lQS (d. 4Q2:56-264, 5Q12) lQ2Bb lQ22 4Ql61 (cf. 4Ql62-l6S) 4Ql7t (cf. 4Ql73) 4Q203 (cf. 1Q23, 1Q24, 2Q26, 4QS30-S31, 6Q8) 4Q201, 202, 204 {cf. 4Q207, 212) 4QSJO and 511 4Ql56 4Q544 (cf. 4Q.543, 4Q:545-S48) 11Q13 11QI9-20 CD (CD-A, CD-B, 4Q266-273) 1Q34, 4QS08, :509 and .S07 4Q400-407; 11Q17 tQM (cf. IQ33, 4Q28S, 4Q471, 4Q491-497)

F. Garc:la·.Martlnez. (ttansl.). Tlte Dead Sea Scrolls Translated. TM Qumran Tt!!XtS in Engli.rh. (Leiden, 1~95).

Series oj'Church Father:s and Cla3sical Literature ANF CCSL

CSCO CSEL GCS LCL NPNF

PG PL PO SC TLG

The Ante·Nicene Fathers: Tnmslations ofthe Writillgs oftbe Fathers down to A.D. 325; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1986-1989, repr. orEdinburgh 1885-1896. Corpus Cbri.Jtianorum Sories Latinll; Turnhout, 19.54ff. Corpus Scriptorum. ChristiaBorum Orientalium; Paris, Rome and Louvain, 1903ff. Corpus Scriptonnn Ecclesiasticorum Latillorum; Vienna, 1866ff. Die griechischen christlieben Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhuuderte; Berlin, I 897ft: Loeb Classical Libnuy. A Select Library of the Nicc:ne and Post-Ni~oe Fathers of the Cbristian ChurclJ. First Series. (14 vols; Grand Rapid:~ [Mich.), Edinburgh, 1988, repr. ofEdiubuz&h 1886-1890). A Seleet Library oftb.e Niceoe and Post-Niceoe Fathers oftbe Cbristian Church. Secood Series. (14 vols; Grarul Rapid.s [Mich.], Edinburgb, 1988, repr. ofEdinburgh 188:5-1896). Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series GraeQ; 161 vols; Paris, 1857-1866. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina; 221 vols; Paris, 1841-1864. Patrologia Orientalis> Tumhout. 190Jff. Sources Cbretiennes; Paris, 1941 ff. Thesaurus Linguae Graecae [version 8].

Introduction 1. The Topic and the Research Question In recent years, much scholarly effort has been devoted to understanding the em.ergence of Christianity from Judaism and their subsequent interaction. Following Marcel Simon's groundbreaking study Yerus Israel, scholars began to reconsider the impact of Judaism on Christians and pagans after the Bar Kokhba revolt. 1 The peroeption of early Christianity and early Judaism as two homogeneaus blocks has shifted toward a more differentiated perspective of a variety of competing Judaisms and Christianities with various modes of interaction. 2 I would lik:e to argue that the study of ritual, as opposed to traditional theological concems alone, provides a helpful vantage point for this new understanding of Judaism and Christianity. The "multifaceted sensory experience" attained through the performance of rituals involves the whole human being: body, mind, senses and emotions.3 More precisely, religious consciousness and behavior culminate particularly in festivals. 4 The 1 M. Simon, Yenu Israel. A Stu4Y ofthe Relations between ClrTistians and Jews in the Roman Empire AD 135-425 (Littman Library of Jewish CivilW.:ion; London, 1996; French original: Paris, 2 1964, 1 1948). Lately, tbe intluencs oflate antique Cbristianity on Juda.ism bas been takeu more seriou.sly into coDSideration: sec e.g. I. Yuval, "Eastcr and Passover As Early Jewisb·Cbristian Dialogue," in: P. Bradshaw and L. Hoffinan (eds.), Passowr anti Easter. Origin and Hi!J:tory to Mode", Times (2 vols; Two Liturgical TraditiobS S m:l6; Notre Dam.e {lnd.], 1999; vol. 2, pp. 93-124). 1 E.g. D. Boyarin, "Semantic Differenees; or, 'Judai.,m'/'Cbristillllity\" in: A. Becker and A. Yoshiko Reed, The WQ}'s That Nner Parted. Jews and Cltrl1tians in Late A.ntiquity and the Early Middle Ages (Texts and Studies in Anc:ient Judaism 9S; TUbingen, 2003; pp. 65-86); and R.A. Kraft, "The Weigbing of rhe Parts. Pivotsand Pitfalls in lhe Srudy ofEady Judaisms and their Early Christian Offspring." in the sam.e volume pp. 87-94. Fortbs study oflhe emergence ofC.hri5t.iuity, Jolm Gager has underlined the importente in studying those groups and individuals whose identities lie in between wbat beeame "the" Jewish and "the"' Christian (and tbe papu) mainstrum.s: Judai~, Jewish· Christians and God·fcarers: see J. Gager, "Jcws, Christians and the Daogerous Ones in Between," in: S. Biderman aDd B. Scharfstein (eds.), lnterpretalion i11 Religions (Pbilosophy and Religion, a Comparative Yearboolc. 2; Leiden 1992; pp. 249-257). 3 C. Bell, Ritlllll. Perspectfvu anti Dimensions (Oxford, 1997), pp. 1:59-164. 4 Bell, Ritval, pp. 120-128.

2

Introduc/ion

cyclical repetition of rituals shapes the conceptions of time and place of the participants; the recurring commemoration and reenactment of myths embed them more deeply in life. "In fasting and feasting rites, there [is] ... a great deal of emphasis on the public display of religiocultural sentiments."5 In collective ritual perfonnances, therefore, the individual has to negotiate between bis private conceptions and behaviors and those ofthe group. Moreover, the participation in collective rituals- particularly rituals observed by almost everybody betonging to a certain group - can render the generally invisible boundaries of the collective identity perceptible to observers. 6 Festivals, then, are an appropriate focus also to elucidate the gradual separation process of two religions such as the emergence of Christianity from Judaism. Indeed, the friction caused by Christians keeping Yom Kippurin Antioch is one of Simon's central case studies.7 Surprisingly, however, the impact of Yom Kippur on early Christianity has not until now been studied comprehensively. 8 This study is a first attempt to fill this gap. It investigates the impact of Yom Kippur on early Christian thought and ritual from the first to the fifth centuries of the Common Era. In this epoch, Yom Kippur was doubtless the most important Jewish festiyal in the diaspora and in Palestine. It would seem, therefore, that it had a fundamental status also in the life of the first generations of Jesus' followers. Yet unlike Passover, Pentecost or the Sabbath, this festival did not become part of the Christian liturgical calendars. In following the traces of a Jewish institution rather than the prefiguration of a Christian one, the present work should be seen as an attempt to pose a "Jewish question" to a Christian coxpus oftexts. My central thesis is that Christian atonement theology and its festal calendar not only emerged under the influence of Yom Kippur (part 2} but also continued to develop in light of the ongoing challenge that the contempocary Yom Kippur posed to Christians (part 3). To addcess this issue I bad to develop an approach that would make possible the study of a festival's impact on a different tradition or religion. Consequently, the guiding questions are as follows: What is Yom Kippur, and what are the concepts and rituals connected to it? Where can traces of Yom Kippur's ' Bell, Ritval, p. 120 (emphasis added). 6 For example, "fasting [during Ramadan) sets Muslimsoff as a distinct community (umma) in cantrast to their non-Muslim neighbors." Bell, Ritual, p. 124; cf. pp. 23-60. As we shall see, the penneability of these borders, can become visible, too, e.g. if Christians observe Jewish festivals. 7 Simon, Verus Israel, pp. 217-223 and 326-328. 8 Research has been conducted on su(;h topics as the presence of Yom Kippur theology in the New Testament or the exegesis of the scapegoat; but so far nobody has tried to view these phenomena as parts of a whole.

Introduction

3

impact on early Christianity be detected in Christian Iiterature and Iiturgy? Which Christians observed Yom Kippur? Why did others abandon Yom Kippur? And finally, how did Yom Kippur influence Christianity after the fast ceased tobe observed? To determine the most important areas of impact, and because no one has previously investigated the impact of Yom Kippur as a complex of rituals, institutions, myths and theology, I wanted to spread my net as widely as possible. I therefore considered the Greek, Latin, Syriac and Armenian traditions as weil as the Georgian, Coptic and Arabic,9 mainly from the frrst five centuries CE. To find the relevant texts and passages, I relied largely on the indexes of the editions in the main series of Christian texts (CCSL, CSEL, CSCO, GCS, PO, SC) for references to Leviticus 16. In addition, I searched the digitalized libraries of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae and the online Patrologia Latina for key terms (Day of Atonement, fast, high priest, scapegoat, kapporet). Similarly, I checked Menahem Stem's and Amnon Linder's collections of references conceming Jews and Judaism.in pagan Iiterature and in Christian legislation 10 The further I progressed, the more amazed I was by the volume and variety of Christian sources on Yom Kippur. While I have to a certain extent focused on the digitalized corpora (Greek and Latin) and there may be untouched treasures hidden in the libraries of the Christian Orient, I hope to have uncovered a promising field for further investigation. The structure of my argument takes the following form: Part I is devoted to a detailed reconstruction of Yom Kippur, its rites and its imaginaires in the Second Temple and rabbinie periods, with the help of a broad range of Jewish and non-Jewish texts from Palestine and the diaspora. This analysis is the basis for the comparisons in the parts that follow, which proceed chronologically. Parts 2 and 3 deal with the impact ofYom Kippur on early Christianity. Part 2 (chapters 4 to 6) covers the formative period, the frrst two hundred years, while part 3 (chapters 7 and 8) covers the development of early Christianity in the years 200 to 500. Part 2 begins w~th an investigation into the impact ofthe temple ritual and the Jewish myths and concepts associated with it (especially the high priest and the scapegoat) on the ernerging Christian mythology about the atoning death of Christ (chapter 4). Chapter 5 deals with the influence of the Jewish apocalyptic-mystic 9 Being ignorant of Georgian as weil as of Coptic and Arabic, I could consult only translations. The same is true for the sources in Slavonic and Ge'ez. 10 A. Linder, The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages (Detroit and Jerusalem, 1997); M. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Edited with Introductions, Translationsand Commentary (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-1984).

lntroduction

4

imagery ofthe high priest's entran.ce into the holy ofholies on Valentiman Christian soteriology and on the Valentiman ritual of the bridal chamber. Valentiman concepts in turn extensively influenced Clement of Alexandria's mysticism. Chapter 6 provides a close reading of Jewish-Christian legends that depict James the Just and Zechariah, John the Baptisfs father, as high priests. These legends give some hint of Jewish-Christian attitudes toward the continuing observance ofthe Jewish fast. Part 3 analyzes the impact of Y om K.ippur on Christianity in the years 200 to 500, the second stage of literary production, after the foundational texts of the New Testament bad been written and most of them bad achieved canonical Status. Cbapter 1 analyus the Cbristian exegesis of Leviticus in relation to Christian polemies against the contemporary Jewish fast. Leading Cbristian theologians perceived contemporary Yom Kippur's continuing attraction for Christians as a threat to Christian identity and to ehe exclusivity of Christ•s once-and-for-all atoning death. They responded not only with polemies but also with an exegesis of Leviticus (the bib!ical Yom Kippur); they developed further the sacrificial atonement theology ofHebrews and instituted new festivals to fül the fallow fall season. Accordingly, chapter 8 inve;;tigates the impact of Yom Kippur on three Christian festivals, the Jerusalem Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross, the Roman Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September) and the Annunciation to Zechariah in the Bastern churches, all three of which are approximately contemporary with 10 Tishri and show some affinities with Yom Kippur. I decided to focus on Christian autumn festivals mainly for pragmatic reasons, to keep the book to a reasonable length; also because an influence might here be most clearly perceptible. Before launehing into the research itsel:f. I would like to clarify some tenns regardlng the methodology followed, in particular, the meaning of "impact," the different types of influence, my understanding of rite, ritual, myth and mythology, and the meaning of imaginaire and of Christian Judaism.

2. Methodological Remarks and Definitions 2.1 Different Types ofInjlwmce Judaism influenced Christianity in various modes, which can be distinguished by mediator and period. The accompanying list is divided into two parts: the first two modes (apostolic. biblical) refer only to Cbristianity and Judais.m, the other three (adoption, compulsion, reaction) refer to the influ~ ence of any religion on another.

l1ttroductio11

5

The frrst mode is connected to the collective memocy of Judaism. Jewish "converts19 to Christianity brought with them their imaginaire, their rituals, their texts, their myths and their conceptions, especially in the formative stage of Christianity in the fust century. Since most of the Jewish a.dherents of Christ probably "converted" in the apostolic period, I have called tbis mode ofinfluence ..apostolic." The second mode is connected to the Hebrew Bible, the written foundation of Jewish culture that in its various translations influenced Christianity at all times andin all places. Waves ofmore intense biblic:al inspiration can be perceived, e.g. during the Christianization of Palestine (see nex:t paragraph) but also in the Carolingian epoch, when kings modeled their image after David and temple tcrminology was u.sed in churches. I call this mode of influence "'biblical"; where influence by Jewish Iiterature goes beyond the canon, I call it "bookish." A co.mbination of the ..apostolic,. and the ..biblical" forms of influence appeared in the fourth century during the Christianization of Palestine~ when Christianity bad to cope with the new situation of Christians ruling the land ofthe Bible. This bad two contradictocy effects. On the one band, the Christian rulers wcre now responsible for deciding the way of commemorating tb.e symbolic world of the Old and the New Testament in the country where the events related in these books took place. On the other band, Christianity had to leam the local symbolic Ianguage in order to take over control ofthe Holy Land. Christians were influenced by the traditions and practices of the Jewish inhabitants re1ating to the location and commemoration of events sacred to botb religions. Arehitecture, calendar, Iiturgy, administ:Iation - thcse are only a few of the areas affected. As I shall argue in chapter 8, ..The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christi an Festivals,•• tbis influence encompasses not only holy places such as the tombs of propbets but also, for example, ways of celebrating the dedication of a sanctuary according to biblical models. I have called this kind of influence Orrsgeist paralleling Zeitgeist: the Ort (the land of the Bible) has a Geist tbat exerts an intluence over its rulers, here its Christian rulers. 11 Conquering the land of thc Bible oonfers new power and authority on the Bible, its land and its surrounding traditions as foundational stories. The Bible beoomes the raison d'etre not only tobe in the land ofthe Bible but also to rule it. i.e. to determine its future, to "make" it as close as possible to one' s

II I mean something different from tbe appropriation ofparts ofthe Jewish collective memory as developed by M. Halbwachs, La lopographie Iegendaire de:r nangile:r en terre sainttt. Emde d8 mimolre ro/lectl'fle. Prij'ace de Fernand DwiiOJtt (Paris, 21971 ).

6

Introduc/Ion

understanding of the biblical stories. And vice versa. the new rulers bave to play according to the rules of the mythical country. 12 Apart :from these two (and a half) modes, two religions can, in a more general way, mutually influence each other by three further modes, which I have called "adoption" (voluntacy), ..compulsion" (forced) and "reaction" (polemical). Adoptiontakes place when one religion observes a practice or becomes aware of an exegetical tradition or a myth of the other religion and voluntarily adopts it. Compulsion occurs when the adherents of one religion control the life of followers of the other and impose measures on them, such as Justi:nian's edict that Jews would henceforth read the Bible only in Oreek. The third mode, reaction. responds with polemies or self~ restriction to a certain exegetical or Hturgical tradition of the other religion being perceived as a threat.

2.2 Rite and Rit11al Ritual and rite are repeated religious behavior. The difference between ritual and rite is the Subordination of the latter to the fotmer, i.e. a ritual is composed of several rites. 13 By its definition as "repeatedt behavior," rituals~ especially collective rituals, belong to the most conservative religious institutions. 14 Collective institutions are more conservative than are those of individuals; and a ritual, which involves the body and the senses, is more conservative than a conception, since frequently repeated movements are stored in the parts of the brain responsible for subconscious movements and will continue unchanged in this form until consciously changed or stopped. For example, one is less likely to forget how to ride bicycle than to forget how to read. Finally, it is easier to begin observing a new rite than to cease observing an old one. This, too, is valid for any religion or religious transformation. Unlike the continuation of a behavior, it is the break with it that lea.ves historical traces. Our working assurnption should therefore be that most Christian Jews continued to observe the same festivals after hearing about Jesus as before- unless we have evidence to the conb:ary. I try to distinguish as much as possible between ritual and its interpretation. Ritual acts are more or less fixed and allow for only minor changes 11 In a sense, this process resembles a development in modern Zionism after thc 1967 conque!lt ofthe Old City and thc ancicmt heanlands of Judea and Samaria tbat eaused a shift in the modern state oflsrael toward a more religious character. 1 ~ Obviously, this distinctlon is relative, since one may often break up rites into subrites. 14 See C. Bell, Ritual, p. 211; ''Despite •.. evldenee for change, it is nonetheless quite true that ritnal a:ctivmes generally tend to resist change and often do so more effectively than other forms of social custom."

lntrodllction

7

(especially if our subject is the ritual of tbe most sacred space, day and person); the int.er"~Rtations of rituals, however, can be manifold. Contradietory explanations drculate in the same group, even in the same time and space, end be used according to which is more useful fol' elucidating a certain aspect. Only wben dealing with verbal rituals such as prayers will the distinction obviou.sly fall away. The interpretation of a ritual may express a variety of different attitudes toward the ritual itself. For example: a) Interestin and support for the ritual (by proposing a new rationale) b) Disinterest in the realities, sometimes in favor of a more spiritualized Ievel c) Substitution of the ritual on account of temporary constJ:aints d) Substitution of the ritual on account of theological or sociological dissent None of the above attitudes - end the Iist is not exhau.stive - necessarily entails aboHtion of the ritual. Modem Cbristian interpreters of ritual ra~ tionaJes tend to generalize the last of the above-listed alternatives. For example, Paul Hanson argues that the existence of the eschatological interpretation of the scapegoat ritwd in 1Enoch 10 entails a polemical stand against the temple ritual. 15 Yet, as I will argue, JEnoch 10 more strongly reflects the first alternative, interest in and support of the ritual by proposing a rationale. Philo's allegorical exegesis ofthe temple and its institutions does not entail a complete disregard for the temple ritual, though he rather fits the second group. The third attitude is the centrat one expressed in the rabbinie writings. Foreach Christian writing we will have to assess which attitude it demonstrates.

may

2.3 Myth and Mythology A mythology is the ensemble of myths of a certain collective. 16 A myth is a narrative that bas a foundational status for this coUective. 17 With this definition, myths are o~y myths in a certain sociological constellation v.ith 1' See P.D. Hanson, ..Rebellion in Heaven. Azazel, and Eubemeristic Heroes in l Enocb 6-11," Journal ofBibllcal Literature 96 (1977) l9S-233, here p. 226. ' 6 For a rieb and interesting introduction 10 various defmitio!IS and approacbes, see A. aud J. Assmann, "Mythos," Hondlnu;h religionswisaemchaftlicher Gn~ndbegriffe 4 (1998) 179-200. R.. Bultmann, "Mythos UDd Mythologie IV (im NT)," Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart~ 4 (1960) 1278-1282, is a clas.sic. On myth in tbe New Testament, see now the !ntroduction and first part of G. Theissen, Tlre. Religion ofthe Earllest Churches. Creating a Symbollc World (Minneapolis, 1999), pp. 1-13 and 19-60, and bis references to further literature on p. 323. 17 For such a sociological defmition, see e.g. B. Ba.ezko, Le.s imaginalre.s sociaiiX. Memoires Bt espoirs co/lectfft (Critique d.e Ia politique; Paris, 1984), pp. 11-63.

8

lntrodllction

hlstoricallimits otherwise they are narratives. I have chosen to work with such a functionalist sociological defmition of myth because the distinction commonly drawn between history, legend and myth is itself a product of Christian culture and therefore an emic definition, which is not very helpful for comparing Christianity to other religions (but has its use in other realms). 18 According to the emic definition, we have to distinguish Christianity, whlch is based on (salvation) history, from paganism, whlch is based on myth, a priori. For the scholar of comparative religion who uses the sociological definition, legend, history and "myth" (in tbe old sense) are only different subcategories with the shared function of establishlng the collective identity. A historicat event. fiction or legend with a historical nucleus becomes part of the mytbology of a group the moment it is accepted as foundational for its identity, worldview and Iifestyle. The foundational status is paired with the impossibility of questioning the truth of the myth without incun:ing social sanctions. 19 Chronologically, m)1hs are often formulated in the fo:tmative period of the group and adapted to subsequent times by henneneutics and exegesis, whieh in turn refo:tmulate and recreate the myth. He:tmeneutics and exegesis also have the task of

systematizing contradictions between myths. 2. 4 The imaginaire Studying collective concepts and their relation and transmission to other collectives, I found the term imaginaire very useful. Tbe termwas devel~ oped in French philosophy and historiography .as one referti.ng to an ensemble of conceptions of a given collective.20 Since the definition ofthe tenn often remains amorphous, I want to define my use of this term more specifically. By the imaginaire of X in Y, I mean the collective repertoire of motifs of a certain collective (Y) regarding the element X, from which an author of this collective {Y) derives the items with which to weave his text onX.21 18

For such a definition. see P. Ricoeur, "Myth and History," Encyc/opedia o[R~Iigion

10 (1987)273-282. 1; Consequently, the scholar wbo investigates any given narrative as a myth in the sense of this definition takcs an etic view. 10 See e.g. J. Le Golf, L'lmaginaire midieval (Paris, 1985); 1!. Patlagean, "L'histoire de l'imaginaire." in: J. Le Go.ff, R. Cbartier and l. hvel (eds.), La NOIIWllle. Hiatoire (Paris, 1978; p. 249-269). In no case do I intend a ~Oflllettion to Iungian ar~hetypes, on which the wolk of Gilbert Durand was formulated. See his Lcs .stnJ.clUTes anlhUJpologiques de l'imaginaire (Paris, 12 1992- 19S9). 21 D. StOkl, "Yom Kippurin the Apocalyptic Imaginalre aod thc J.oots of Iesus' High Priesthood. Yom Kippurin Zechariah 3, JEMCh 10, IIQMelkizedeq, Hebrews and the A.pocalypse of Abxaham 13," in: 1. Assmann and G.G. Stroumsa (eds.), Tr(111$formations

lntroduction

9

The imaginaire differs from mythology in being a collection not only of narrative, but of unsequenced motifs with a much wider variety (including sensual impressions such as scents, songs, feelings. etc.) and of the associations between them. All members of the collective share a basic group of elements, and in order to communicate with bis Iistener the speaker 1u:u to use the common imaginaire. AB.y member of the collective can play around with the elements of the imaginaire of a concept and even add new elements that will slowly become part of the comm.on imaginaire. This concept of a common imaginaire can help explain aspects of the process of creativity and its re~ Iation to tradition. While the collective a.~pect of the imaginaire makes it conservative and traditional, the new associations by individuals continually broaden it. The imaginaire defines the boundaries of possible associations between concepts; in other words, it is the Iangue of the collective, while the concrete expression of the individual is his parole. Or, as formulated by Philippe Desan: Il ne faut toutefois pas~;:onfondre imagination et imaginaire. L'imagination releve d'une performao.~;:e individuelle et se dtcele au niveau de Ia <parole>, alors que t•imagi.naire res:sort du collectif et ne se con\)Oit qu'en tant que ."12

We can re<:onstruct parts ofthe Iangue by assembling the paroles. The ad~ vantage of this approach to the conventional hlstory of tra.ditions lies in its ability to reconstruct the potentia1 paroles of a certain historical collective, rather than be limited by extant paroles. This process is similar to Claude Uvy-Strauss' higbJy controversial approach to myth.23 However, unlike Uvy~Strauss, I do not cross the cultut'al boundaries of the group investi~ gated. Neither d~ I claim to reconstruct a myth that supposedly once existed. The imaginaire defines the possibilities of expression and thought of a certain collective. For example, the "German imaginaire of Christmas" may include such motifs such as Christmas tree, snow, Santa Claus, gifts, "Silent Night," family, scent of cinnarnon cookies, solitude, frostiness, sledge, church, heated house, frosted windows, holidays, coziness, etc. Some elements, such 8s Santa Claus or the Christmas tree, are more closely associated with and refer unequivocally to Chri..<~~tmas, while others, such as church, soli· tude, presents or cinnamon cookies, are more arnbiguous and may be associated with numerous other concepts. Contradietory elements such as ofthe lnnw Self in Ancienl Religions (Studios in lhe History of Religions (Numen Book Series) 83; Leiden, 1999; pp. 349-366), p. 349. 12 P. Desan, L 'imoginaire iconomiq~e de Ia Renaissawce (Paris, 1993), p. 9. 23 C. Uvy-Strauss, "La gesre d'Asdiwal," in: idem, Anthropologie structurale 11 (Paris, 1973; p. 175-233).

10

.bttroduction

coziness and solitude can be part of the same imaginaire depending on the Situation of the speakcr. Any Gennan can evoke Christmas in the head of another German by mentioning just a selection of these elements, which do not necessarily belong to the ..close., part, i.e. snow, church and cinnamon cookies may already be enough. Different groups of Gennans may associate some elements more closely and dissociate others, e.g. secular Germans migh.t associate cinema or discotbeque rather than church. 2.5 Christian Judaism

I pon.dered for a long time which term to use for the German Urchristentum, i.e. the Christian groups of mainly Jewish origin with some Gentile fellow travelers in the first two generations. "Early Christianity" is too im.precise. "Primitive Christianity» imports notions of beginning from zero. For some time I considered "proto-Christianity" as best manifesting the element of transition. but it too ean be understood as close to a beginning from zero and imply an ideal conception ofthe first Christians. Eventually, I decided in favor of "Christian Judaism," a term that expresses adequately the relation an.d different Ievel of importance of tbe Jewish origin and the new Christian direction. Still, it remains difficult to determine the exact point of transition from Christian Judaism to early Christianity. I suggest coJmecting tbe point of traosition to a self-definition of the collective identity over and against Judaism itself. Depending upon the place, this occurred at different times and paces. In comparison, the tenn "Jewish Christianity" presupposes that there is also a "non-Jewish Christianity" distinct from it, which in the first generation is not very meaningful. "Christian Judaism," however, defines itself as distinct from "nonChristian Judaism," whicb makes more sense in tbe first century. Moreover, the inversion "Jewish Christianity" does not give the same weight to the Jewish origin and sets Christianity as main category. In addition, tbe term "Jewish Christianity" is a set expression (if ambiguous and hotly disputed) fot a phenomenon enduring wdl into the second, third and fourth centuries. l prefer to consider "Jewish Chri.stianily" as one of tbe developments deriving from "Christian Judaism" after this defined itself as distinct from "Judaism," as exemplified by Ignatius of Antioch.

PartOne

YomKippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

Introduction Any invcstigation of the impact ofYom Kippur on carly Christianity has to begin with a close look at the ritual of Yom Kippur and its Jewish imaginaire in tbe Sccond Temple and rabbinie pcriods (antiquity and late antiquity). One bas to know the realia to be aware of the temple ritual and the rites outside of the temple, as weil as the various concepts and mytbs oonnected to Yom Kippur, to discem where each of these dimensions of Yom Kippur might have iilfluenced early Ch:ristianity. One has tobe able to distinguish between biblical concepts, the ritual of the Second Temple and of the synagogues, rabbinie imagination, priestly traditions, and apocalyptic mythology to evaluate the exact impact ofYom Kippur. Unfortunately, a oomprehens.ive and critical examination oftbis question has not yet been undertak:en. Existing studies on Yom Kippur arc, for the most part, nmow in their scope or conservative in their approach to th.e rabbinie sources, accepting them as "normative Judaism" without taking into account tb.c variety of way.s it was possible to celebrate and imagine Yom Kippur. This lacuna is too vast to be :filled by thc pages that foUow; thcy can be no rnore than a preliminary investigation, particularly with regard to the rabbinie and liturgical sources. Many questions could be dealt with only scantily. and the theses offered are often no more than sketches in need of further elaboration. To avoid a Billcrbeck-like approach. one tbat would view Judaism through Cbristian eyes, I did not restriet myself to noting only those details of rituals and imaginaires tbat bad an impact on early Christianity. I wanted to present as many motifs as possible tbat are oonnected to Yom Kippur in early Judaism, and only then examine what indeed had an impact on early Ch:ristianity. As a result, the present part is not only very long but also slightly lexicon-like, with DJan.Y loose ends that I will not take up in the chapters on early Christianity. Nevertheless. I hope to have thrown some new light on the developm.ent of the Yom Kippur ritual an.d its imaginaires in ancient Judaism. A study of the shift in Jewish ritual from antique (before 70) to late antique (after 70) Judaism has to cantend with the state ofthe soun:es before and after the destruction of the temple. On th.e one band, theJ:e is the varlety of Seoond Temple sources, from very different provenances and extant in many languages and traaslations; on the other, the corpus of rabbiDie texts; and in between the Christian-Jewish texts, whieh, while still a part of Jewish culture, already manifest the stirrings of a new religion.

14

Yom Kippu1' in Early Jewilh Thought and Rillfal

I decided against drawing a shaip distinctioo between the Second Temple and rabbinie periods. To do so would have emphasized the revolutionary aspect of the results of the temple•s destruction. Clearly, the demise of the temple and its institutions bad an important effect on Jewish worship. I was surprised, however, at the great degree of continuity in the communal ritua.ls -· in the diaspora as wen as in Palestine - as between the Second Temple period and the rabbinie period. Already in th.e Second Temple period, Yom Kippur was celebrated in Palestine and in the diaspora with prayer assemblies, and the development of the prayer service on the Day of Atonement ftom the Second Temple period to the rabbinie period is closer to an evolution than to a revolution. The same is true ofthe abstinences. Another reason for not separating the analysis into two distinct periods was that the character of the sources is suited to an integrated analysis. Some "Second Temple" sources- e.g. 4Maccabe.es or the Apocalypae of Abraham postdate the destruction, while post-temple sources such as the Mishnah include essential infonnation on the period before the destruction. Part 1 proceeds from the generat to the specific and from the conerete to the abstrac:t. Chapter 1 dwells briefly on the various names given to Yom Kippur and the general theoJogical conceptions behind these names. Chapter 2 deals with aspects of the rituals in tbe temple and in the communities. The first section dealing with a reinterpretation of the historical value of the mishnaic description of the temple ritual is probably the most tecbnical, more easily understood after read.ing the rest of part 1. Chapter 3 analyzes the different rationales for the ritual of Yom Kippur and the imagi71aires connected to this feast in various ancient Jewish groups, in particular apocalypticism and Qumran (secdon 1), the Septuagint and Philo (section 2), rabbinie sources (section 3) and Hekbalot Iiterature (section 5). While Christian Judaism is dealt with only in part 2, 1 have included a paragraph (section 4) on the Cbristian Jewish sources here, where they in fact belong. The Cbri.stian Jewish sources of the New Testament in some Apocrypha and Gnostica should be used - albeit with due care - in every investigation ofthe imaginaire of Yom Kippur in early Judaism, sinee they sometimes coostitute a missing link in the development from the Second Tetnple to the rabbinie period as I hope to show in part 2.

Chapter 1

The Names of Yom Kippur The three principal name form.s for Yom Kippur describe its pmpose (atonement). its common practice (fasting) and its solemnity. The Ilebtew Bible and the Tannaitic and Am.oraic sources usually call the holiday tl'1l!l'J:l c,• (Yom Ha-K.ippurim = Day of Atonements), referriug to its purpose. 1 Tbe Hebrew name current today. Cl" (Yom Kippur = Day of Atonement) appears only in the high Middle Ages. In Greek. however, the singularform {1\) i)J.lipa ('toiJ) il;ll.aGIJ.Oü (Day of Atonement) ex.ists already in the Septuagint.2 This ruune is sometimes used in other Greek. Jewish and Christian sources. such as Philo, Origen. Eusebius, Pseudo-Athanasius, Basil and Theodoret of Cyrus. 3 Philo sometimes uses simply U.a.oiJ.Ö; (atonement). 4 It depends on the author ifthe Greek word for atonement is more in the sense of expiation (Septuagint) or propitiation (e.g. Philo). In early piyyutim the name iln•?c z:n• (day of forgiveness) appears.s Wbat these names have in common is 1hat they indicate the pmpose (expiation, propitiation, atonement, forgiveness) ofthe festival. Another fonn of the name, Dl!C or vqat&\a., emphasizes the practice of fasting. The earliest attestation might be in the Septuagint of lsaiah 1:1314.5 In the late Second Temple period, VTtat~::ia bad become the most

,,,,:>

I

Lev 23:27.28; 25:9.

2 Lev 23:27;

25:9 LXX.

E.g. Philo, De plantatione 61; Eusebius, DemoliStratio EvangelictJ 1:3:2; PseudoAthanasius, On Sabbaths and Circumci1ion (PO 28:137A-C); Basil, Homlly 011 Fruting 1:3 (PG 31:165C); Theodoret, Commentary on lsaiah 1:14 (SC 276:163-171). 4 De ~ngr&:~"u ervditionis gratw 8!U07; Qltis ren~m divi'flal'flm heres.slt 179; De posteritate Caini 48. ' See e.g. the Seder A:vodah ·• 'Azkir Gevurot 'Eloah" {ill'11C nnm '1':ltlt) ("I remember 3

God's mighty decds") in A. Miislcy (ed.). Ymse ben Yo.rse Poems. Edited with an lntroduction, CommelJtary and Notes [iu Hebrew] (Jerusalem, sl991, 1977), p. ISO,Iine 133. 6 This text gives a list of festal days including a fast (tcio; VOVJ.LflY~ i~Ji&v ~ea.l 1:G. CIÖ.~10. KGi -iiiJCpoY foi.Efal,flv OOK llvi:tOJ.LO.\' VI}O'tti4v ICO.t cip-y\ay ICI&i 't~ YOUjllJVi~J.C; V,..lfiV Klli t~ eop'li~ VlllllY IUO(i iJ V JlOU). 1be only Single fast in the row of OT festivals,

'lll1i

however, is Yom Kippur.

16

Yom Kipp11r in Early Jewish Thought and Rihlal

common Greek nam.e for Yom Kippur.7 The Hebrew and Aramaie equivalents are used in Qumran and in the Palestiman rabbinie sources.8 Some Qumranic texts em.phasize tbe affiiction. using ll'lltll 1VI1l (period of affiiction)9 and ll'lll'llil C1' (day of aflliction), 10 which may have a more general significance (not only fasting, but also aftliction) or be moving in the direction of Jubilees, emphasizing the austere character of the day. "The Fast" becomes a common name for Yom Kippur also in the writings of the Church Fathers. 11 Finally, the Libtr Anriquitatum Biblicarum combines t1w first and the second meaniags (atonement and fast) in calling tbe holiday ieiunium misericordiae, the fast that evokes meroy, which emphasizes that divine merey is achieved primarily through the fast. 12 The third name underlines the importance of the holiday. The biblical flll:l!U .n.::1111 might be understood in the same way as the Septuagint tnmslation "the Sabbath of Sabbatbs" demonstrates. 13 Forthis reason. Philo calls Yom Kippur ioptctJv ttiv J.l.6')'lCS"tflV (tlw highest holiday). 14 One of the later 1 E..g. Acts 27:9; 1osephus, Antiquitatu}•daicae 17:165-166; 18:94; Philo, De specialtbslegibus 1:168.186; 2:41.193.194.197.200; Legatio ad Gahlm 306; De vita Mmis 2:23; De decalogo 159. Yet VJtOteio is ,sed also forother fasts -see e.g. Josephus, A.nti· q11itatesjvdaicae 5:166; 11:134. 1 ln the faJnous passage in lQPeshu Hahaüuk xi:7-8, Y0111 Kippur is described a.s tllll Dl'. In the Palestinian rabbinie soun:es, Yom Kippur may he called the fast (xznx) or tbe great fast (10"1 ltlll!')- yBer4:1, 7b, 7c; yPe'ah1:4, 20b, 8:9, 2lb; yTrr8:.S, 4Se = yAZ 2:3, 4la. In the Babylonian Talmud I follJld only one pessage (bTem 29a) using thu

form. ' 4QS08 2 3; cf. 4Q171 Pesher on PsaJms ii:9-IO; iii:2-3 (quoted below, pp. 98-99). On all formulatious connected to n•l»n in Qumr.m, see N. Hacham, "Com.munal Fa.sts in the Jndeaa Desert Scrolls and Assomated Literature," in: D.M. Goodblatt, A. Pinnick and D.R. Scllwartz (eds.), Hls.torical Perspectives: From the Ha8monean:s to Bar Ko/cltba in Light of the Dt!ad Sea SC1'o/ls: Proccedings ofthe F ourth International Symposlvm ofthe Orion Center far the Shldy of Dead Sea Scrolls anti A:rsociated Literahlre, 17-31 JDmlary, 1999 (Studies on the Texts ofthe Desert of Judah, 37; Leiden: Brill, 2001; pp. 127145}, who claims that in Qnmran ll"llln always refers to Yom Kippur. I hllve reservations about bis iDclusion of 4QS1 0 and 4QS 11 Songs of the Srsge, whicb use mDn in lbe plural. 10 D0111asC11S Dot:r~ment vi: 19. 11 E.g. Aets 27:9; Barnoba3 7:3; Jnstin, Dialogue with Trypho 40:4; Origeo, Homlly on Jeremiah 12:13; Eusebins, Demonstratio Evangellca 1:3:2; Ephrem. On Fasting 1:12; Ba.sil, Homily on Fr.rstlng 1:1 (PG 31:164AB); JobnCbrysostom, AgaiNt theJews 1 (PG 41!:8S4B). 12 Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarvm 13:6. In a similar way 4QS08 2 3 calls Yom. Kippur

lhe appointed time of your mercies 1'l>n, 1Y11l. Later rabbinie sources ~ givcn in the commentasy on this pessage by H. Jacobson, .A Commentary on Paeudo-PhiJo':s Liber .4.1Jtiquitahlm Biblicarii/JI with Latin Tut ond English Tr411Siation (2 vols; Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Un:hristentums 31; Leiden, 1996). 13 Lev 16:31. 14 Despecialibus legibus 2:19J-194.

Tlr« Name1 of Yom .Kippur

17

titles of the rabbinie tractate for Yom Kippur, tml'- the day -evidences tbis attitude. The same title also expresses the idea that jt is primarily the day that atones.u In swn. three principal names are used for Yom Kippur) expressing its purpose (atonernent, propitiation. expiation, forgiveness), its general practice (fast, aftliction), or its solemnity. Tbe Old Testament and the Babylonian Talmud use only names based on the pu.rpose, whereas Greek sources, Qumran, Palestiman rabbinical texts, and the Church Fathers also use names based on the principal practiee of the people and sometimes on the solemn aspect, too. Each group has its terminological preferences. Qummn prefers to addtess the affliction, Greek: sources primarily the fast and rabbinie sources mostly the purpose, atonement.

1'

Rabbi Yehudah ba-Nasi in bYoma SSb.

Chapter 2

The Rituals ofYom Kippur The bibücal account of the ritual of Y om Kippur in Leviticus 16 is the most detailed description of any ritual in the Bible. This cbapter is supplemented by Leviticus 23:27-32 and 25:9--10, Exodus 30:10, Numbers 29:711, and many soun:es from the Second Temple period as well as rabbinie accounts, in particular Mishnah Yoma. The early history of Yom Kippur, the exact date of its establishment and the origin of some of its rites - all are hotly debated. 1 An in...depth analysis of the biblical cbapters on Yom Kippur is beyond the scope oftbis study, as is a complete reconstruction of the ritual and its historical development in the Second Temple period; the following pages are to be understood as merely a preliminacy sketch. I have tried to use all available material, the Bible, apocalyptic and Greek diaspora sources, Qumranic, Christian and rabbinie texts. Therefore, althougb not a comprehensive treatment of the subject, tbis chapter might constitute a step in furthering understanding of the development of Yom Kippur's rituals. The Yom Kippur rituals can be divided into two main groups; those perforrned in the temple and those performed in the community or at home. The ftrst section oftbis chapter investigates the historical value ofthe main source of tbe temple ritual, the mishnaic tract Yoma, arguing that some of its features can be plausibly explained as projections from rabbinie exegesis and synagogue services into memories of the temple ritual. Discussion of these introductory matters is followed by a rewnstruction of the generat aspects ofthe temple ritual. Section 3 is devoted to an investigation ofthe rituals performed outside of the temple - at home, in the community or in the synagogue during the Second Temple period and after the destruction ofthe temple. While the destruction Qfthe temple entailed an abrupt end to the blood sacri:fices, I argue for a certain continuity (and l was surprised at this discovery) of the community-oriented cult, the prayers and the 1 On the diS<:ussion of biblical texts, see the fascinating Levitleus coiilll!entuy by 1. Milgrom, LniiiCII: 1-16. A New Trarulot;on with lntrQJuaion and Commentary (Anchor Bible JA; New Y ork, 1994). See also G. Deiana, IJ giorno dell'?.fpiazione. Il kJppur nella tradizione biblica (Supp!etnenti all Revista Biblica 30; Bologna, 1994), who argues for the fast as tbe original nucleus of the festival.

The Rihlou of Yom Kippr.rr

19

afflictions. As tbis chapter is confined to deaJing with ritual details, the summaries that end the sections arc brief. Additional conclusions follow in tbe next chapter, wbich deals with the intexpretations, the imaginaires and tbe myths of thc rituals.

1. The Question ofthe Historicity ofthe Mishnaic Version ofthe Temple Ritual Mislmah Yoma contains a very detailed discussion of the rituals in and outside of tbe temple. 2 The redaction of tbe Mishnah is usually dated to the time ofRabbi Yehudah HaNasi, around 220 CE. Despite such a late date of redaction, about 130 years after the destruction of tbe temple, some ofthe misbnaic traditions may come :from the time the temple was still standing. The methodological crux is to fmd out which of its traditions reflects a histo.rical memory of the actual Second Temple .ritual and which are posttemple developments, exegeses derived :from the biblical text only, resembling the practice of the Christian Church Fathers. Those temple rites that are confirmed by independent Second Temple sources are almost certainly bistoric. T o this group belong most of the details conceming the scapegoat ritual,3 the high-priestly prayer in tbe sanctuary4 and the bowl- tbe a:rtif.act that holds the sacrificial blood until it is sprinlded. s

,_ I u$011 1he critical editions by Y. Roseo.berg, ..Mishoa 'KipiU'im' (Yoma)- A Criti~ cal Editio11. with Introduction. Volum.e 1: lntToduction. Volum.e 2: Edition,'' [in Hebrew with English summ.vy] (2 vols; Ph.D. dissertation, Thc Hebrow Univcrsity of Jerusalem, 1995}, for the Mislmah; for the Tosefta: G. Larsson, Der Toseftatralr.tal Jom ha*-Kippu· rim. Tut, Obersetnmg. KtJmmentQl'. I. Tei( KapitelflUid 1 (Luod, 1980); for 1he PalestiDian (Jerusalem) Talmud: P. Sdilfer and H.-J. Bcclter (eds.), Synopse zum Talmvd Yerushalmi (Texts and Studies iD Aßcient Judaism 31, 33, 3S, 47, 61, 82, 83; 7 vols; Ttlbingen, 1991-2001); tbe German translati011 ofthe Pales.tiDian l'almud ment:ioua variant readings as weil: see F. Avemarie (Irans!.), Yoma- Jlersöhmmg~tag (O'benetzuog des Talmud Yerushalmi 2:4; TtlbiDgen, l99S); for tbe Babylonian Talmud: variant readings in R. Rabbinovtcz, Diqduqey Soferim. Jlariae Lectione& in Mischn01fl elln Talmud BabyltmiC'UM qur.rm c oliu librl.r antiqui:rsimis et scripti& et imptasis hlm e Codice MonaceMi JWDB&tantisslmo collectae, amwtationibus instructae. Pars 4. Tract. Rosch Haschanah et Joma (Mua.ieh, 1871) andin the biliDgual edition of Lazarus Goldsehmidt, Dllr Babylonf:rche Ta/ITUid (9 vols; Berlin, 1897-193')- See also J. Meinhold, Joma (Der YersDhn11ngnag). Tut, Obersetnmg und Erklärung (Giessen, 1913). 3 The red rlbbou. (Barnabas1:8.I1; mYoma4:2; 6:6); the scapegoat's abuse (Barnabas 7:8-9; mYoma 6:4); the scapegoat's fllllin& (JEnoch 10:4-8; Pl!.ilo, De plantatione 61; mYoma6:6) and its similarity to the sacrificial goat (Barnobas1:6.10i Justin DiaJope with Trypho 40:4; Tertullian Agamal Mtll'cion 3:7:7 and Agair~~t llae Jews 14:9;

20

YDm Kippur in Earl}l Jewish Thought (llld Ritual

Yet the whole tract of Yoma is often attributed to a certain figure (Sbim'on Ish Mitzpeh or Zechariah ben Qabutar) dated to the Second Templeperiod or shortly after it, with only minor exceptions regarding this or that tradition.6 Four arguments are raised to support this contention. First, the contents of Yoma deal with temple acts that were supposedly more important in the time of the temple. Second, some scholars regard a Tannaitic Statement in the first person or an Amoraic ascription of the first redaction of this tract to an authority from before 70 CE as trustworthy. Third, some expressions seem to belong linguistically to an older stratum than the rest of the mishnaic tracts. Fourth, Mishnah Yoma is quite uni~ form, with few deviations from the topic. Most of the Mishnah is anonymous; few of the authorlties cited lived a.fter 70 CE. With regard to the first argument: that there is a detailed discussion of the Mishnah in the Gemara of the Talmudim shows that interest in tbe detaiJs of tbe temple cu1t continued even after the temple was destroyed; that such interest did not depend on the existence of a temple. The second argument seems very unlikely. Recent research has rendeted attributions of traditions to named rabbis highly suspect.1 The authority speaking in the first person, Zechariah ben Qabuf.il,r, is mentioned only once,1 and bis short statement appears as an appendix to a geneml statemenl and Iooks very much lik:e a later addition. He bimself is described in the third person and is not mentioncd anywhere eise in Yoma. The attribution of the tract to Shim'on Ish Mitzpeh appea.rs late in Amoraic sources.t The third, lingui~ tic. argument merely suggests a formulation of the ttact at an eadier time tban 220 CE, not the historicity of some traditions prior to 70 CE. Tbe only a.rgumem requiring a more detailed refutation is the fourth one, pointing to the formal differences between roma and otber tracts. Admittedly, Yoma contains relatively few disputes and rarely deviates

Cyrll G/aphyrorum in Lwiticum liber [PG 69:588AJ); • the place name Belh Hadudu (or something similar) (IEnoch 10:4). • See mYoma 5; 1 aod Pbilo, Legatio ad Gai11m 306. ' Sec mYoma 4:3 and llQTemple Scroll XJCV:6. • Honoch Albeclc accepts tbe suggestion of1he Babylonian Taln1.1ad, whicb attributes the lract to Shim'oa lsh Mlttpeb (hYoma 14b); see H. Albeck,lntroductlon to the Mishnah [in Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1959), p. 71. Y.N. Epstein, Prolegomli!lfa ad Litteras Tannaitlcns [in Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1957), p. 37, ascribes IlD Urf()rm of Misbna.b Yoma to Zeebariah ben Qabutar. He is followcd by S. Safrai, "Der Versohnungstag in Tempel UJJd Synasoge,'' in: H.-P. Heitlz (ed.), Jlersöllnung in der jSdfschen und cltrhtliclwn Liturgie (Quaestiones Di~putatae 12.4; Freiburg i.Br., 1990; pp. 32-55), p. 33. 7 As 11 result oftbe sl\ldies by Jacob Neusncr. s mYoma 1:6. 9

bYoma 14b.

The Ritllal& ofYom KipJ111r

21

from the sequence of the ritual in the sanctuary described in Leviticus 16unlike other tracts from Seder Mo'ed such as Sulclw or Pesachim, which deal mostly with the ritual(s) of tb.e people outside the temple. However, these fonnal divergences of Misbnah Yoma from other mishnaic tracts do not necessarily imply that Yoma is more ..historical" than other tracts- the formal differences may simply stem from tb.e dissimilarity of Yom Kippur•s ritual from other ritu.als, and from the dissimilarity ofthe Bible's description of the ritual in Leviticus 16 from other biblical festival descriptions. Leviticus 16 itself is very detailed and chronologically weil structured; it can be easily adapted and amplified - much more so than the biblical passagcs for Sukkot or Pesach. Though more detailed, the eight chapters of Yoma follow the same structure asthat ofLeviticus 16.10 Tbe fmt seven chapters describe the high-priestly .service; the eighth and last deals with the prescriptio.ns for the people's ritual and includes some theological deliberations, paralleling the division of Leviticus 16 into verses 1-28 and 29-34. 11 On the other band, four Observations mitigate the blind acceptance of the historicity of the misbnaic details. Whereas some Statements are based on reliable sources and are therefore historical, others are defmitely the fruit ofrabbinic exegetical creativity. First and most strikingly~ the Mishnah seems to live in tb.e world ofthe Bible in presupposing the existence of tbe ark ofthe covenant in the holy of holies. 12 The mention of this artifact has to derive from Leviticus 16, i.e. it depends on exegesis and not on knowledge of the Second Temple practice, from which it was absent. Mishnah Yoma in.serts a note to the effect that in the Second Temple the il'nttr.r pN (foundation stone) bad replaced tbe ark. 13 This scems to be an ex post facto correction of the biblical atmosphere. If the Mishnah were a faithful recounting oftb.e Second Temple ritual, the ark would not appear 10 Some scholan claim tlutl cluspters 1-7 deal wilh tbe ritual befure tbe destru.ction of the temple and c;bapter 8 with the ritual after that. However, it is more correct to cbaracterize the distirlction between 1-7 and 8 as ritual iMide and out1ide of the temple. 1t Ui the stru.cture ofLev 16 thal determined tbe Mishnt.h's $tructure. 11 The seven chapters ofthe high-priestly ritual are divided as follows; (l) week-tong preparation of the higb priest; (2) the l.oltery among his adjut10ts about the rigbt to per~ form c:ertain s•erifices; (3) tbe moruing Tamid and the high priest's c:onfession over his buU; (4) the lottei)' oftbc goats and the high priest's second confeasion over bis buU and its slaugbter; (S) the three mtrances of the high priest into the holy ofholie.s -· first with the incense and prayer. then with the blood of tbe bull and flnally wilh the blood of the sacrificial goat - and the pwging of tbe altars; (6) thc scapegoat ritual; and (7) the conchading Tituals - includi'llg readings, prayer, a founh entrance to remove tbe incense, additional bumt sac:rlfic:es and a celebration. IZ See mYoma S:J.4. 13

mYoma 5:2.

22

Yom Kippurin Early J~ish Thought and Ritual

at all (as e.g. in Josephus) and such an explanatory note would not have been necessary. 14 However, if the Mishnah is understood as an exegeticaJ tract, then the mention ofthe ark is easily comprehensible. Second, some of the misbnaic details contradict Second Temple sources. For one thing, Qumran, Philo and Josephus all disagree with the Mishnah about the number of rams for the sacrifices described in Nurobers 29:8-11. Since the ram sacrifices were central rites, such a discrepancy is hardly imaginable for a well-informed source. 15 For another, a secend mishnaic detail, a high-priestly vigil on the night before Yom Kippur, is contradicted by Josephus. 16 Josephus relates an anecdote about a high priest who in the night before Yom Kippur slept, dreamt, had a semen emission and had to be replaced by another high priest. It is hard to imagine that Josephus would have related this anecdote had he known about a vigil. While Josephus is not a comprehensive halakhic compendium, he came from a priestly family and his anecdote lacking mention of a vigil is conspicuous. One could claim that the anecdote is historical, that the vigil did not (yet) exist in 4 BCE, the year of the incident, but was instituted as a reaction to this incident to prevent further similar cases and that the Mishnah reflects this later stage. How~ver, Josephus writes the story in 90 CE, after the destruction of the temple, without referring to any institution of a 14 Moreover, the rabbis disagree about various architectonic features, such as the ownber ofthe curtains (mYoma 5: 1) or the number ofthe bases for the censer (mYoma 5:4). 15 IlQTemple Scroll xxv:I4-16, PhiloDe Specialibus legibus 1:188 and Josephus Antiquitates judaicae 3 :240-242 agree on the number of rams being three, only the Mishnah says it is two (mYoma 7:3). 16 See mYoma 1:4-7; Josephus, Antiquitates judaicae 17:165-166. On the contrary, Mishnah Avot reports that one of the ten miracles in the temple was that the high priest never had a semen emission before Yom Kippur (mAbot 5:5). Josephus refers to Yom Kippur in several further passages: Antiquitates judaicae 3:240-243 (on the ritual) and 18:94 (on the golden garments ofthe high priest that were kept under Roman authorlty); Bellumjudaicum 5:236 (on tbe white gannents); Contra Apionem 2:282 (on the universal observance ofmany festivals and the fast). On Josephus and Yom Kippur (especially the blood sprinkling), see W. Kraus, Der Tod Jes-u als Heiligt-umsweihe. Eine Untersuchung zum Umfeld der SOhnevorstellung in R(jmer 3,25-26a (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 66; Neukircllen-Vluyn, 1991), pp. 72-73; J.P. Scullion, "A Traditio-Historical Study ofthe Day of Atonement" (Ph.D. dissertation, Washington, Catholic University, 1990), pp. 187-193; N.H. Young, "Tbe Impact ofthe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament" (Pb.D. dissertation, Manchester, 1973), pp. 127-132. Being ofpriestly descent and writing shortly after the destruction of tbe temple. Josephus is valuable mostly for rec:onslruc:ting details ofthe temple ritual. His interpretations are mucb shorter than those of Philo; I have therefore not devoted a separate section to Josepbus but have included the relevant Observations in the appropriate places. Here, the generat observation may suffice that the wording of Josepbus' explanatioo ofthe Yom Kippur ritual clearly reveals that be was addressing a Gentile audience.

The Rilllals of Yom Kippur

23

vigil. It is therefoi"e difficult to bring the Mishnah into alignment with Josephus. One has to assume that there never was such a vigil. Third, some of the rites were supposedly secret priestly knowledge. The Mishnah however portrays (high) priests, its presumed informants, as a deteriorated class. 17 If the Mishnah indeed had access to esoteric priestly traditions one would have expected a more sympathetic portrayal of its informants, especially in a description of the most solemn ritual of the high priest. their former Ieader. This antipathetic attitude becomes even more apparent when compared to the praises of Sirach or of the poetic Sidrei Avodah, which were probably composed by priests. Fourth, the Mishnah does not resolve a crucial point, one that the biblical accounts of Numbers 29 and Leviticus 16 leave open: Rabbi EHezer and Rabbi Aqiva disagree about the moment of offering the sacrifices mentioned in Nurobers 29:8-11. 18 If, for the sake of the argument, we accept the attribution ofthe sayings to these sages ofthe second generation ofTannaites, it follows that only one generation after the destruction ofthe temple the specialists are disputing a centrat question of ritual practice. This confinns the impression that exegetical skills rather than ritual memory played a significant role in the formation ofMishnah Yoma. It is highly unlikely that the most important temple ritualleft these questions open. to be decided by that year•s high priest. Again, the moment of offering must have been obvious to any insider who knew the actual temple ritual, and even to observers - but not so for someone struggling primarily with the biblical account, which leaves these questions open. Even if one of the rahbis was historically right, the redactors of the Mishnah did not know the ritual well enough to decide between these opinions or to decide which was the better-informed source. Exegetically, both opinions are possible, and this is the stage of information the Mishnah conveys. 1n sum. some mishnaic details can be plausibly explained as rabbinie inventions derived from exegesis or from an analogical deduction from similar rituals, among them: the existence of two instead of three rams. the discussion about the right moment to sacrifice the ram ofNumbers 29, and the high priest>s abstention from sleep the night before Yom Kippur. Having discussed the historicity of those mishnaic details that can be verified or COntradieted by Second Temple sources, we are left with a tbird 17 This negative attitude is apparent in the following details, among others: the high priest is obliged to vow obedience before a rabbinie court (mYoma l:S); the rabbis consider the possibility that the high priest might be unintelligent or illiterate (mYoma 1:6); at the lottery bis adjutant has to instruct him on what to do (mYoma 4:1). 11 mYoma 7:3; cf. tYoma 3:19.

Yom Kip]I'Ur irr Eorly Jewish. Tho11gh.1 and Rih4al

24

group - those whosc historicity can be neither con:firm.ed oor contradicted, either because they appear only in the Mishnah or because Second Temple sources axe ambivalent. some agree.ing with the Mishnah, somc not. Tothis set belong (among others): the exact direetion ofpassing sround the altar; 1!il the existence of a paravent to cover the naked high priest;:zb the place of ligbting the incense;21 the number of sprinkliogs in the holy of holies;22 tb.e fourth entrance to remove the incense pan;23 and the high~priestly readings, the prayer of eight benedictions and the two confessions on the bull.24 It is to the last tluee - tbe high-priestly readings, tbe prayer of eigbt benedictions and the two confessions on the bull- that I now wish to turn. An investigation of their bistoricity is c:r:ucial to UDderstanding the am.ount of reinterpretatioo in the rabbinie tract and the transition from the temple to the synagogue ritual. since these three rites are the main basis for lsmar Elbogen•s and Josef Heinemann's claim that the synagogue service in the ti~ ofthe Sec:ond Temple influenced and spiritualized the temple ritual. 2s The bigh-priestly prayer after the scapegoat rirual includes eighl: benedictions: Torah. temple service, thanksgiving, forgiveness of sins, temple. the people of Isracl,26 the priests and a last benediction.21 Reinemann 19 111 Yoma

»

S:S.

mYOIIItl 3:4.6.

mYo"'" S:l. zz "'Yoma j;3-C. %1 mYoms 1:4. N See mYoma 7:1-3 and mYoma 3:8; 4:2.

ll

zs Blbogm even spealcs of "einer valligcn SpiritualisieiUOg": see bis Studie." zur Geschich'e des jtiduclten G()ttesdienstu (Schriften der Lcbranstalt fiJr die Wissenschaft des Juda~mums 1/1-2; BcrliD,. 1907), pp. .52-.53. Elbogen gives the following reasons: CoJ14;cntiDg tbe sl~Qifices, lhe addfessee, God, is empha.sized, and the proc:ess of slaugbteriag recedes to tbc baekground. The scapegoat is sent to the desert, Dot to a demon •Az, aal. With an increasc in tbe DllD1bcr of confessions, tbe verbal part of the sac:rific:es becomes IPOI'C imporunt. The bigh priest prays in Ibo boly of holies and aftet rmiJhing the sac;rificcs be reads from tbe Torah and prays. The people participate by observio.g tbe high-priesd.y act, by respond..ing when the high priest mentions die divine name and by re,e.ivillg the bigh·priestly blessing. Tbe overall focus is uo lonpr dte sacrifice but its purpose, alonemftl, whk:h can be rcathed also through pl'&yc:rs, co:ufessions and

repeDtance·

;JIII Some manuscripls of the Bahylonlan Talmud .inc.lude here a benediction about JeJUSalem, whic:h was not part of the misl:maic prayer. 11 MaDU$cript Kaufinarm does .not read "mn ~· for the benedictions "temple," "Is-rael" and "priests," but &ives a homogeneous Iist as tbe parallel in mSotah 7;7: sec Y. J.Qscnberg, "Mislula 'Kipurim'," vol. 2. p. 80. The eommon reading with "mu 1111:1" probably eutered via t~o~a 3:18 and Mishnah readings in the Babylonian Talmud. The topic of the last benedu;ttoo u not clcar, as can be seea lhrough the various solutions proposed in the commentaries.

The Rituals of Yom Kippur

25

observed that the form a.nd content ofthe benedictions are similar to synagogue prayers,18 and he suggested that the temple service was influenced by "popular worship." prayer and readings by the spectators in the syn.agogues of the Second Temple period, which intruded into temple worship, as portrayed in Sirach.29 On the one hand, if Reinemann could explain the existence ofthe high~priestly prayer by assum.ing an inßuence ofthe syn.agogue on the temple ritual, it is only a small step further to suppose tha:t this influence took place "post mortem" - i.e. after the destruction of the temple; that 1t was not an influence on the temple ritual itself but only on its literacy description. On the other band. the benedictions in Mishnab Yoma fail to agree in detail with those of the seven-benediction Amidah of Yom Kippur.~0 A complete invention of the high-priestly blessings by rahbis after the destroction ofthe temple. then, seems unlikely but some ofthe benedictions may have been retrospectively introduced. The readings by the high priest i:rnmediately after the performance of the ritual just described therein. seem somewbat excessivc. 31 Indeed, tbe Palestinian Talmud notes thls oddness and provides a scriptural justification for it. 32 Of course, such a reading in close jux.taposition to actual sacri:fice is possible and is practiced in other religions. Brahmans accompany the sacrifices with a recital of the instructions, to ensure that the sacrifice is perfonned perfectly, lest the actual sacrificer, G<Jd forbid, should slip. 33 However, the mishnaic account leaves one major difficulty in the ritual unexplained. The high priest received the Torah just after having handled the entrails of some sacrifices, so his hands were probably bloody. Centamination of a Torah scroll through bloodstained bands is UDimaginable. That the high priest washed his hands and the rabbinie souoces omit tbis washing is also unlikely, considering the meticulous attention devoted to band washing elsewhere in Mishnah Yoma, the Tosefta and 28 His thoughts on tbese matten .are collected in I. He.ineiiWlll, Prayer in the Pericd of the Tanna'i111 and the Amora'tm. /ts Nature: and !ts Patterns [in Hebrew, with Englisb. summary) (Public:ations of tbc Perry Foundation for Biblical Research in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Ierusalem, 2 1966), pP. 7~7. On the similarity of the ti.rst benediction, See also tYoma 3:13. 29 Sir SO: 19. Heineman:n rejects the possibility of a:n influence in the opposite dire<:tion, of tbc temple service on thc syaagogue. .His main argwnent for this is that if the dramatic changc of the concept of worship toward p:rayer and iectioos bad indeed originated in the temple, we would find examples in otber rituals as weil, Heinemann, Prayer in the PttriQd ofthe Tanna'im anti tlul Amora'im, p. 84. :!II The numbers and sorne ofthe name$ oftbe blt:ssings differ, n mYomo 7:1-3. 32 yYoma 1:1, 44a.. n See the stndy by J.C. Heesterman, The Broken World o[Sacrifi.ce (Chi.cago, 1993).

26

Yom Kippurin EarlyJewish .Th(JUghJ and Ritual

Sifra. 34 The high-priestly reading. therefore, seems to be a projection of synaogal practice onto the description of the temple ritual. Did the high priest twice lay both bis hands on the bull and confess bis sins, or istbis an embellishment of the Mishnab?35 Leviticus 16 mentions only the confession over the scapegoat, but a confession might bave been patt of any guilt offering. 36 Sifra suggests the repetition of Levitleus 16:6 in Levitleus 16: 11 as a scriptural prooftext for an act of atoning before the slaugbter, i.e. a confession.37 Analogously, from the "superfluous" mention of two hands in Leviticus 16:21 the Tannaites deduced that alllaying on of hands was to be performed with both bands.38 Both of these details may have been part of the temple ritual. But. equally, it may have b~ the redactors of the Mishnah who increased the number of confessions :trom the biblical one to three, as tbis verbal act becomes much more frequent in the prayer of the synagoguel9 and takes the central place in the service. The high num.ber of confessions in the prayers of Yom Kippur40 appears more justified if even the high priest confessed more than once. Moreovet,

• between the readings for the temple a.nd for the One could llf&lle that differences synagogue service make such a reflection of synagogue practices bal;k into the temple ritual description unlikely. The reading of Lev 23:27-32 is missiog among the synagogue Jections (mMeg 3:7; tMeg 3:7; yMeg 3:7, 74b; bMeg 31a). But we cannot be sure tbat there really was such a difference in the readings in mishnaic times (or before). E.g., thc Tosefta gives more lections than the Mishnah for about tbe same time a.nd place. It is highly feasible that the readings ofmYoma 7:1 represent a form of the readings of some synagoguc, earlier or f'rom a different area/tradition t1w1 the synagogue ofthe community behiDd bMeg 31 a. Most prolxtbly, these lections were for a long time not faed and mYom11 1; 1 and bMeg 3la 8fe on.ly examples of some possibilities. Moreover, the differences could be easily explained: A reading ofLev 23:27-32 could easily be cotu:eived of as superfluous, u the contenlll mostly repeat what has just been read iD Lev t 6:29-34. FinaDy, those scholan who accept Blbo,gen's and Heinemann's theory that the readißg of the temple ritual was intluenced by the contemporary synagogue ritual would have to assume that Lcv 23:27-32, too, was one of the leewes in s)'llagogues of the Second Temple period, i.e. that mYoma 7:1 reflects some .synagogue service. 35 mYoma 3:8 a.ad 4:2. 36 Lev 5:5; cf. also Num S:7. 37 Sifra, Ahare Mat 2:1 (to Lev 16:6), cf. bYoma 36b. It deduces f'rom a guera sluwl'ah that the bull is simllar to the scapegoat; ,,,., is .sa.id oftb.e scapegoat in Lev 16:10 as weil as ofthe bull in Lev 16:6 and 16:11. A second solutionlies in the observatioo that Lev 16:6 speaks of atonement whib: the bull is still alive; sinc:e it is only slaughtered in Lcv 16:11, the ato.nement must have been effected by somethiog other than blood. The confession onr the bull is referred to also in mMeg 2:5; and mSebat. l :7. 38 Sifra Ah11n Mot 4:4 to Lev 16:21; aud mMenah 9:1. " Altogether six sea of confessions: one set in each ofthe tive prayen and another at home before Yom IGppur. 40 The Tosefta already mentions six confessiODS (tYoma 4:14). :M

The Rituals ofYom Kippur

27

the "biblical" confession over tbe scapegoat is a collective confession; the "Tannaitic" confession over the bull is by an individual for bis personal sins and that of bis relatives. Tbis transition corresponds well witb the move toward a more personal aspect in the synagogue prayer, which includes collective as well as individual eonfessions. Ifthe readings, tbe prayers andlor the two extra confessions belonged to the temple ritual as Elbogen and Heinemann claim, a spiritualization ofthe temple ritual itself took place before 70 CE: blood sacrifices were amended by readings of their prescriptions and by prayers containing a request for tbe vezy same purpose as the sacrifices, forgiveness of sins. This would have been the fust step to a türtber spiritualization of the. Yom Kippur ritual in the synagogue. which replac:ed the actual soorifices with Iiturgical poems. According to this conceptualization, the readings. prayers and multiple confessions continue the high-priestly ritual rather than replace it. However. in light of the contradictions by other mishnaic rites of Seoond Temple sources. and in light of the late time of redaction of the Mishnah (about one and a half centuries after tbe last Yom Kippur in the temple), we cannot simply aecept all of these traditions as historical. The proximity of the readings and confessions to the ritual of the synagogue raises the suspicion that they may be projections of the synagogue ritual onto that of the temple after the destruction of the temple, rather than accurate historical memory .'11 It might be impossible to prove that these two rites are inventions of the Tannaites, but it is equally impossible to prove that they were practiced in the temple. Their character is bctter suited to the context of the synagogue service - as is presupposed also by Elbogen and Heinemann, who asswne an influence of synagogue worship on the temple - and the rabbis bad an excellent motive for introducing their own ritual into the era of the temple. The burden of proof lies, therefore, on those who consider them to be temple rites. It is also possible that the readings and the two extra confessions originated in the Second Temple period and were practiced in some synagogues but were not part of the temple ritual. In this case, too, the Tannaites thought it necessary to justify some of their rituals by contextualizing them in tbe temple, and the readings and multiple confessions, portmyed as continuing the high-priestly ritual in foot replace it. · ln sum, each detail of the mishnaic account has to be carefully compared with all the sources available. Wbile some mishnaic traditions faithfully describe the temple ritual, others can be explained as rabbinie inventions based on exegesis. Some ritual details matehing later synagogue 41 For a similn eonclusion, see D.J. Silver, "The Shrine and the Scroll," Journal of Reformed Judaism .31 (1984) 31-42, whose arguments, however, ne not substantial.

28

Yom Kippur ;,. Early Jewish Tlro~~ght and Ritual

service may have been proje<;ted into tbe memory of tbe temple service in order to justi:ty these practices and reinforce the inlpression of a continuity between temple and synagogue. In any case, reciting. studying and discussing the Mishnah became one of the forms of reenacting the temple ritual. As will be shown below, Mishnah Yoma itself was considered suitable for liturgical purposes. In fact, thc closcness of the earliest extant Seder Avodah to the Misbnah suggests tbat the Mishnah itself might have developed out of similar needs and precisely for this Hturgical purpose albeit at different times and different places in slightly different versions.

2. The Temple Ritual For reconstruction of the temple ritual, I confine myself to the basic aspects of the ritual and to commenting on tbe main differences amon,g the sources. The rites of Yom Kippur include many cultic acts tbat are also performed elsewhere42 or that are similar to those of other rituals." 3 Still, Yom Kippur has several "unique" features and is a sort of acme of all temple rituals. Only on this dayt.is the holy of holies, the most sacred precinct of the Jerusalem temple, entered. Only on t.his day does a ritual have to be performed by the high priest. the "holiest" person. Ooly on this day does the high priest ch.ange bis golden garments for special white linen ones. The ritual can reasonably be broken down into four parts: (1) the preparation rites, (2) the entrances to the holy of holies with incense buming, prayer and blood sprinkling, (3) the sending away ofthe scapegoat and (4) the closing rites. I will discU5s the ritual according to these parts.

2.1 The Preparation Rites The introduction to Leviticus 161ists the conditions for the entrance to the holy of holies: preparing certain animals.44 washing the body and putting on linen garments. 45 Going weil beyond the biblical regulations, the first chapter of Mishnah roma describes a week of preparation during which the high priest is isolated (to avo_id contamination) and carefully schooled so that he will to ..:r E.g., the sin otrcring aod lhe bumt offeriDg or blood sprlDJdin.g. 43 E.g.• tfle affering ofthe two goats is similv to the two birds in Lev 14. 44 Lev 16 lists a bull, two goats and two rams. Num 29:7-11 li1ts a bull. a ram aod seven lambs, and a thlrd goat. On the different au.swers to the question of wb.ethtr this ram is o.ne ofthe rams of Lev 16, see below, p. 31. 4$ Tbe linen giiillents are destribed in l.ev 16:4 (tunk, Ieggings, sasb. tutban) aod their value is discussed in mYowuz 3:7.

The Ritllal& of Yom Kippwr

29

be able to perform bis complicated task. The character of this preparatory wcek as investiture is underscored by tbe purification sprioklings with the ashes of the Red Heifer on the third and seventh da.ys.46 The mishnaic statement that durlog the last night before Yom Kippur thc high priest is not aiJowed to sleep is most probably not bistorically accurate..f? Yom Kippur itself starts with the otrering ofthe Tamid. whlch tbe high priest performs in bis festal garments after having been washed.48 Having completed the moming Tamid, the high priest takes a purification bath,411 puts on tbe white linen garmentsso and offers a bull as a sin offering {na1:1n) on his own behalf.51 He then makes a lottery between tbe two goats of the people.51 One ofthem, tbe goat for YHWH (the sacrificial goat) will be sacrificed and its blood sprink.led in the holy of bolies. The other, tbe goat for 'Az'azel (the scapegoat), is p1aced in front of the sanctuary, tobe sent away after the blood rites in the sanctua:ry have been completed. The two goats have tobe equal. 53 The scapegoat is marked with a red ribbon. 54 46 Phüo, Duomniis 1:214; mParah 3:1, sec Y. Baer, Wfhe ServiceofSacrifice in Second Temple Times," [in Hebrew] Zion 40 (1P6S) 95-153, here p. 112. 07 See p. 22, uote 16, above.

mYoma 3:4-S. mYoma 3:6. Tbe Bible asks for two washings: at the beginuing of t.he ritual (Lev 16:4) md after tbe sendiag away of lhe sawpegoat (Lev 16:24). The extant ftag· ments of llQTemple Scroll xxvi:IO mention washing of bands and feet between si:n offerillg and confession over the scapegoat. The rabbinie lrac:ts mention fiVe co.mplete wasbings and ten ablutions of bands and feet (mYoma 3:3) oacb time the clothes are c:banged - (1} before the momiDg Tamid, (2) after the morning Tamid md before the Yom Kippur sacrifices, (3) afler the sending away of the scapegoat and bc:fore the bumt offerings, (4) after the bumt afferings and before the removal of the cemer and PJII, and {5) before the evening Tamid. See Milgrom, .LniliC14 1-16, p. 1047. 50 mYoma 3:6. 51 Lev 16:6.1 L Literally, the buU see1n11 to be slaughtered twice. The rabbis explain this duplication by assuming a twofold c:onfession over the bull: see mYoma 3:8 md 4:2. :u Lev 16:7-lO; mYoma3:9; 4:1. The Muhnah states, two temple officials helped him. SJ The earliest extant soun:e is Btzmabos 7:6.Hl (beautifui md similar). Cf. also Iustin Dialogue witlt Trypho 40:4 (similar) md TertulJian Against Moreion 3:7:7 md Agaimt the Jews 14:9 (alike and $Unilar in appearance); mYoma~i:l (alike in appearao.ce, size, \'alue aud buying date). Cf. also Cyril of Alexandria, wbo states: ..Two goats, beautiful 41

411

(1e.u1.o\) a.ad oflhe same heigbt (i.e~o~ietac;} and streqth (~u:ac;) and ofthe same c:olor {o}lbxpoot)" (my translation of Glap/ryrOI'IIIII in Lniticwn libel', PG 69:S88A). This is close to Bamabas but not dose enough to provo dependence. It mipt also hint at a d~ col1l8Ct of Cyrll with a Jewish exegetical tradition. On BlH'nalxu and the temple. see especially thc analysis by G. Alon, "The Halakhah in the Epistle of Bamabu,.. in: idcm, Studies in Jewfslr History {in Hebrew] (2 vols; Tel Aviv, HIS7; vol. 1, pp. 293-312), here pp. 302-305; rmd sc:e the sectioo. on Bat'raalxu on pp. 148-l61, below. 14 Tbe earllest source is agaia Bamabtls 7:8.11. See atso the patristic texiS depellding on the same Cnditioo md mYoma 4:2; 6:6.

30

Yom Kippvr in Early Jf:Wish Thovght Olfd Rihlal

2.2 The Entrances to the Holy ofHolies The holy ofholies is entered three or four times. 55 During the ftiSt entry,56 the high priest bums especially fine incense.57 The rabbinie sources dispute at length the question of where the high priest was supposed to light the incense, inside or outside the sanctuary.s8 The latter is presented as the position of the Sadducees (Sifra, Talmudim) and Boethusians (Tosefta), while the fonner opinion is connected to the Pharisees, who are clearly presented as superior. Philo's description ofthe rite might support the Sadducean case. 59 Given that the high priesthood was mostly in the hands of Sadducees, they probably k:new the ritual better and represented the original performance, whereas the Pharisaic position is either an innovation or theoretical polemics. Philo and the rabbinie sources add that the high priest also says an intercessionary prayer in the sanctuary.60 Fot the second entry the high priest, taking part of the blood of the bull in a goiden bowl,61 enters and sprinkles it with bis ~gets on and before the kapporet.62 He then leaves. slaughters the sacrificial goat and takes its blood for the tbird entrance and further sprinkling as before. 63 He similarly sprinkles the sanctua.ry64 and daubs and sprinkles the incense and the sacrificial altars with a mixture ofthe bull's and the goat's blood. 65 According 55

Philo and Hebrews empbasize that the holy of bolies was entered only once a year.

This has to be understood in context as an intensification of their polemical and typological arguments. 56 According to a Christian or Gnostic tradttion, wbich may weil be based on Jewish on entering the sanctwuy, removing it only for entiaditions, tbe high priest woR the tering the boly of holies. See Clement of Alexandria, bct~rpts from Theodobls 21 (discussed below on pp. 240-243); and N. Bezalel, "Ciement of Alexandria on an Unknown C11stom in the Temple Service of the Day of Atonement" [in Hebrew] Sinai 103

r:s

(1989) 177-178. 51 Lev 16:12-13; mYotna 5:1. 58 tYoma 1:8; Slfra, A.hare Mot 3; yYoma 1:5, 39a-b; bYoma S3a. See J.Z. Lauterbach, '"A Significan.t Coottovmy betwcen the Sadducees and tb.e Pharisee:s," Hebrew Union College Annual4 (1927) 173-205; Milgrom, Leviticusl-!6, pp. 1028-1031. n De specialllms leg;bws 1:72. This would supPort the thesis that Philo was of priestly descent: D.R. S<:hwartz., "Philo's Priestly Descent," in: F.B. Grcenspahn. B. Hilgert and B.L. Mact (eds.), NOJUishedwith Peace (Chico, 1984; pp. lSS-171). .,. Leg<~tlo ad Gaiatn 306; mYoma 5:1. 61 This item i9 mentioned by ll QTemple &roll xxv:6 and mYoma 4:3; 5:4, tbough the Tannaitic sources do not describe it as golden.. This may perhaps be concluded from the description ofthe golden ineense pan (mYoma 4:4), cf. Y. Yadin (ed.), The TempleScroll (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1983), p. 116. 6Z Lev 16:14; mYomo 5:3. On this item, see below, pp. 104-105. 63 Lev 16:15; mYoma 5:4. 64 Lev 16:16. Jn the Mishnah thls has become the altar.
The Rlt11als ofYom Kippur

31

the Mishnah, a fourth entry took place after the scapegoat ritual in order to remove the censer, which was supposed to have been left there during the blood-sprinkling rite.66

to

2.3 The Sending Away ofthe Scapegoat After the lottery between the people's two goats and the three entries to tb.e holy of holies, 67 the high priest retums to the scapegoat, lays both bis hands on its head and delivers a collective confession.61 He then hands the scapegoat over to an adjutant, who escorts it to the desert. 69 The scapegoat is maJtreated on its way out of the city70 and ultimately killed by being thrown from a precipice jn the desert,11 at a place called something Hke Bet Haduri.n

2.4 The Closing Ritllals After sending the scapegoat away the high priest takes a bath and changes into the golden gannents. 73 He then offers two rams for bimself and for the people as bumt o.fferings."4 At this moment, he probably also offers the offerings mentioned in Numbers 29:7-11, a buU. another ram,75 and seven 8 mYoma 7:4. Ancient ea.stem parallel$ make such an entrance probable: see Milgrom, L1111itiCIIS 1-16, pp. 101S and 1068. (;T llQTemple Scroll xxvi:IO n:ports that the bigh priest wa.shed his bands and feet

from the blood ofthe sa<:rifi<:ial goat before approacbing the s<:apegoat. 68

Lev 16:21a; mYoma 6:2.

Lev 16:2lb; mYoma 6:3. '10 Barnabas 7:8 "spit on it, and piorce it," eursing; Tertullian: "cursed, spit upon, pulled around. and pierced, and driven by the people out of the city" (Against Mareion 3:7:7-Againsl tlle Jews 14:9). ~r~Yoma 6:4: pulling hair, cursing "bear (our sins] and be 69

gone!" 11 Forthe fall, see JE"och 10:4-8; Philo, De plantatione 61; mYoma6:6. For tbe killing, see m Yoma 6:6; Justin, Dtafope wilh Trypho 40:4. From the nde that the higb. priest could c:ontinue the ritual upon the message that tbe scapegoat had reaehed the desCJt (and not tbat tbe scapegoat was lrilled), Milgrom ded~~ees that the killing was not essential: Milp:om, Leviticm 1-16, p. 1045. 'll For the name, seealso J&och 10:4 aud the diseussion ofthis passage p. 88, note 44, below. On the variaut readings ."-n,, n•::~/nn., 11"':1/ ,.",il n•J 11"'111:~ n•J I Tn1<1 n•.J in the Mishnab and the Talmudim, see Rabbinovicz, Diqduqey Soforim, vol. 4 pp. 193-194; and Yehoshua Rosenberg's eritlcal edition ofthe Mishnah trac:tate Yoma, vol. 1, p. 76. 73 Lev 16:23-24a. 74 Lev 16:24b. The Mishnah has the burning of the remains ofthe sac.rificilll goat and the high priest's bull before the wa.sbing and cbaugjng of clothes (mYoma 6:7; 7:2). Such a sequence is possible: see Milgrom, Leviticvs 1-16, pp. 1046-48. 15 From the Bible it is not clear ifNum 29:8 refers to the same tam as Lev 16:3.5 or to a third mB. The sac:rific:e of this tbkd ram is confirmed by all relevant Seco.ad Temple soun;;es (llQTemple Sero// xxv:l2-16; Josephus, Antlqvitales jvdaicae 3:240-243;

32

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ril'llal

lambs. 76 A third goat is eaten by the priests as a sin offering.77 The carcasses of the bull and the sacrificial goat, whose blood was sprinkled in the hoty of holies, are then burned by an adjutant at a special boly place outside the temple. 78 The Mishnah includes a higb-priestly Torah reading and prayer, but the former may have been added later to justify existing synagogue practice. 79 The long series of sacrifiees ends with the evening Tamid. 80 Sirach gives a quite detailed description of the evening Tamid that migbt be tbe end of the temple service of Yom Kippur. 81 He refers to the bumt sacrifice82 and its libation.83 On hearing the sound oftbe trumpets84 the people prostrate themselves, 85 the high priest blesses the congregation86 and the people fall down again. 87 According to Sirach, at least this part of the serPhilo, lk specialibu.J legibv1 1:1&8). Tbe discussion in the rabbinie sourc:es leaves both possibilities open (h Yoma 70b; Sifra Ahare. Mot 2:2). This c:ase demonstrates how c:arrid one has to be when using rabbinie sources for rec:onstruc:ting the temple ritual, wbeD llli· merous traditions may be simply based on exegesis and developed from (later) ideas aad regulations. See abovc. pp. 21-28. 111 Num29:&-10. The rabbink so:p..-ces contain a dispute over tbe conect IDOIIlent to offer the burnt afferings mentilllled in Num 29:&-lO. Tbe opinion atcepted here isthat of Rabbi Eliezer, who agrees with llQTemple Scroll xxvii:3-4. Rabbi Aqiva claims that they were offued during the moming Tamid, while the two nuns were bumt offerings during the even.ing Tamid (mYoma 7:3-4). See abo"e, p. 23. Tl Num29:11; the lectio dfjficilior in Philo, De $J'6Ciali~ legibu 1:190; BamabtJJi 7:4-S; mMe11ah 11:7; bMenah lOOa. Mislmah Yoma sldps tbe sin offering of lhe third goat. 111 I..ev 16:24b-2S.27• ." See above, pp. 25-26. 10 mYomo 7:4. See above, p. 32, note 76 for the deviant opinion ofRabbi Aqiva. 81 While Sir SO:S-21 has i'Mquendy been explained as depicting Yom Kippurin the temple, espeeially for its closeness to piyywtim in the synagogue service (C. Roth, "Ecclesiasticus in the Synagogue Service," Journal o/Biblica/ Literature 71 [19S2J 171178), Shmuel Safrai and alter him F. O'Fearghail ~ed the conc:lusion that Siraeh refers to the daily o«eri11g and not to Yom Kippur. See S. Safrai, uon lhe History ofthe Service in the Seco.nd Temple" [in Hebrew] Mehkare Eretz Ylsrael (l9SS) 3~1; F. O'Fearghail, ..Sir. 50:5-21: YOlll Kippur or tbe Daily Wbole Offering," Biblica 69 (1978) 301-316. However, a Tamid was affered also on Yom Kippur and the description ofSirach ha5 an espec:ial!y soleum aura. which migbt well point to the evening Tamid at the end of ehe Yom Kippur celebrations. I use Sirach oaly with rc•ervations. u Sir 50:12-14; mTamid 1:3• ., Sir SO: lS; mTamid 7:3. 14 Sir SO: 16; mTomid 7:3 . ., Sir 50;11. Mishnah Tamidmentions tlumpet playing and prostrations in every break ofthe Leviticat singing (mTamid7:3). 116 Sir 50:20; cf. 'Asappu Gedolot (ed. Mirsky, p. 202, line 197). t1 Sir 50:21; mYoma 7:3.

The Rilflal$ ofYom Kippur

33

vice was accompanied by songs of thc si.ogcrs and prayers o( tbe people. 88 The mishnaic description of tbe temple ritual closes with a celebration orgarW:ed by the high priest for bis friends after "leaving the holy of bolies in peace. nl9

3. The Rituals of the People The rituals of the people mainly comprise various sorts of afflictions and long communal pmyers. This is the samein the diasporaandin Palestine before and after the destruction of the temple. The afll.ic:tioD$ differ alDong the communities. As weshall see, some choose a more active direction with mowning (Jubilees. Festival Prayers) or a vigil (Jubilees. Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer) or standing (Philo, Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer); others are more

lenient. Some communal Yom Kippur prayers of the Second Temple period have survived in Philo and the Festival Prayers found in Qumran. Daniel Falk has convi.ocingly argued tbat most of the Qumran Festival Prayers were probably used outside the sect. Yet the Festival Prayers that can be pJausibly identified as betonging to Yom Kippur number more than the five determined by Falk. That manna is used both in a Yom K.ippur prayer by Pbilo and by the Festival Prayers may point to an early common traditioo in the communal prayers of Yom Kippur in the land of Israel and the diaspora.90 It is not clear to wbat extent Second Temple J udaism. already performed ritual reenactments of the temple ritual outside the temple. The prayer service included supplications, praises and most probabty confessions. A liturgical .reenactment of the higb-priestly ritual by reading the biblical descriptioos or related texts is possible io thc Second Temple period, though decisive evidence for this is stiU missing. In rabbinie times. the temple ritual is solemnly reenacted by the Seder Avodah in the synagogue liturgy and by the popular sacrifice oftbe kapparot at hom.e. 1.1 Between Aßlictions and Joy

The Bibie commands the people to do only two things: to abstain from work arad to "affiict their souts•• (!U!ll "'J'll') without specifying wbat is

81

89

S.ir 50:18-19, ~f. mYoma1:l (bigh-prie:stly reading); tYoma 3:18 (people reading).

mYoma 1;4. Or to the same exegetical tndition ~:ombining Lev 16:29.31 aud Deut 8:.3. See bYom.a 74b; and see the pages 41, 47, 97, below. 911

34

Yom Xipp#r ;" Early Jewish Thought and Rihial

meant by the latter.9l The Second Temple sources interpret this as fasting.92 The Mishnah gives a detailed list of six abstentions: food, drink. sex, sanda1s, washing and oiling.93 Most of them were probably practiced already in the time ofthe Second Temple. Tbe fust three are part ofmost religious abstention rites,94 and the last two belong to the rneasures polemicized against in Matthew 6:16-18, i.e. they were practiced on some fast days. The fourtb rite is a typical ancient mourning rite. 9S Some may wear sacke1oth and place ashes on the head;96 they abstain from sleep,97 induce tears and cry,98 stand for long hours during the prayer, 99 or suffer more extreme aftlictions.100 The fact that active forms of 91 Lev 16:29-31; 23:27-32; Num 29:7. The Septuaginl undentands tbe construction I:D'nlll9l n1:111»n as an inner affliction, translating t~ '~!'VX&,; ~v, i.e. Maffiict your souls." llQTemple SCTOll xxv:IQ-12 understood l/191 as a reflexive, as in the Aramaie meaning, and ttanslates "afflict yourselves.... n This is refl"ted also by lhe most conunon Greek name for Yom Kippur, "tbe fast." The earliest source is.lsa 1:13-14 LXX. Otberwise, tbe earliest reference is probably in the P:oalms of Solomon 3:8 "[Tbe rigbteousl atones for (sins of) lgnorance by fasting ud humbling the 3oul and tbe l.ord will cleanse every devout person and his house.•• These songs have been dated to approximaa-Jy 70-45 BCE. See R.B. Wright, "Psalms of Solomon." in: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testami1ft Pseudcpigrapha 1 (New Yor.k, 1985; pp. 63~70). p. 640. " mYoma 8.:1; cf. mTa'an 1; cf. m&bb 9:4. 114 Pregnant women and the sick did not have to fast, childfen bad to get accustomed to the fast from about the age of ten, probably connected not only to the capability of fast· ing but also to taking responsibility for lheir deeds. Other Palestinian communities Iet even younger children fast, as statements by Sbammai (tYoma 4:2 and SQ/erlm 18.:7) and a legend in Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46 reveal. See J. Ta.bory, Jewuh Festivals in tJre Time of the Mi:~hnah and Talmud. [in Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1995), pp. 279-280. On tbe legend in Pirqe Rabbi Eliezu 46, see below. In Samaritan and K.araite commuuities the fast is eompulsory for everybody, including ehildren. o,s E. Marbach, "Nudipedalia," P011li-Wissowa 17/l (1936) 1239-1241. " See e.g. Jonah 3; Isa 58:3-5; mTa'an2:l.

n bYoma19bandJ.,hllees34:13. • Cf. e.g. the mourning in JflbiJI!.u 34 and in the Futival Prayers as weU as the lamenting mood in suc;h piyyutim as 'Ein Lana Kohl!.lf Gadol (jm J:T.> u? l'K} (ed. Mißky, pp. 210-216) :and Mah 'Anu flMah Hayyenu (11"11 ili'Jl lllt ;m) (bYoma 87b; Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on {ed. Davidson, Asafand Yoel, p. 262]). 911 D11. specialibuslegibus 1: 186; Pirqe Rabbi Elil!.ze.r 46. 100 Foi' a mueb later period the Shulkhan 'Aruklr mentloos such prac;tices as wbipping oneself in order to receive the mercy of God (Orah Hayyim 607:6). ne Sbi'ite 'Asbura is famous for its self-a:ftlictions with daggers and whips during dances and processions. On connections between the 'Ashura and Yom Kippur, see G. Vajda, "'Jeline m1111ulmane et jeßne juif," Hebrew Union Col/l!.ge Amrua/ 12-13 (1937-38) 367-385, esp. pp. 373379; S.O. Goitein, "Ramadan, the Muslim Month offasting," in: idem, Sbidies in lslamic HistM)' and Institutions (Leiden, 1966; pp. 90-110); G.R. Hawting, "The Tawwabun, Atonemcnt and Ashura," JewisJr Sbidie.s in Arabic anrl it111m 17 (1994) 166-181. See

The Riwals of Yom Kippw

35

asceticism are objected to in a long discussion in the Babyloni.an Talmud may mean that stricter forms of aftlictioos were indeed observed. 10 l These stricter aftlictions are often considered as sectarian and ascribed to marginal groups such as the conununity of Jubilees, Qumran and later the Karaites. 102 This probably originates in too simple a differentiation into "mainstream versus the other," perhaps under the infiuence of this talmudic discussion. Qumran's Festival Prayers, which speak of sorrow and mouming, were most probably not sectarian. 103 After the destruction of the temple, one might have expected an increase in the severity of the aftlictions, but this does not seem to have been the case. Instead, some traditions connect aspects of the temple ritual to the afflictions of the people. Abstention from slecp is presented as an imitation of the high prlcst's vigil. However, this custom was controversial, since the redactors of the Babylonian Talmud criticized it as providing the opportunity for unehaste deeds. 104 When did the custom of wearing white garments begio? In Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer, people are described as bare-footed, not eating or dtinking. standing and praying. 1os Notably, Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer does not mention white garments, which therefore seem to be a later custom. In Pseudo-Philo's sennon On J()71tJh, the young women an: told to wear white garments. 1011 Such a commandment would make sense only ifthe white garments ofthe young women distinguished them from the other people; in this case, the older women and all men apparently did not wear white ganncnts. These white garments hintat a second, contrasting aspect of Yom Kippur. Several sources ascribc ajoyous character to Yom Kippur; an e:xample is tbe famous passage from Mishnah Ta 'anit 4:8:

also below, p. 325,note 154. K. Sindawi, ... Ashwa' Oay and Yom Kippw," A.ncient Near Eastern Stildies 38 (2001) 200-214, doe5 not add anything significantly new. 101 See lhe beginning ofthe eighth chapter in bYoma. 1112 See J.M. Baumganen, "Yom Kippw in the Qlllllr8ll Serolls and Second Temple Sources,"' Dead Sea Discovuie:s 6 (1999) 184-191; N. Wieder, TM. J11dean Scro/ls and Karaism (London, 1962); I. Blbogen, Der jtidbche Gotle.rdien:Jt in seiner geschichtlichen Eni'Wicklung (Hildesheim, 1967= repr. of' 193 1). Jll) See below, pp. 37-46. 104 bYoma 19b. nis critique cannot however be used as an argument for the existence of a higll-priestly vigil in the time of the temple,. as the idea for such a vigil migJit have developed out of the need for a sta~ of purity for l.be fast. Cf. p. 29, note 46, above. uas Pirqe Rabbi Eliezu 46. 106 F. Siegert (transl.), Drsi hellenistisch-jiidische Predigttm. Ps.-Ph11on, 'Ober Jona', 'llber Sjmson • und 'Ober die Gottesbezeichm111g 'wohltätig veneirrendes Feuer· (2 vols; Wissenschaftliche UntersuchUilgen zum Neuen Testament 20, 61; Tübingen, !980, 1992), here vol. 1. p. 38..

YQm Kippur in Early Jewish Tho11ght a"d Ritual

36

lbere were DO happier dayJ for Israel tban the I 56 of Ab and thc D.,- of Atone· ment, for on lbem tbe daughters of Jorusalem u.sed to go fortb in white taiments .••• And the daughtcrs of Jerusalem wellt forth to danu in the vineyanls. And what did they say? 'YoliDg man, Iift up lbine eyes and see what thoa wouldest

choose for thyself. ' 107

Festal garments are mentioned by Tertullian, too. 108 Joy appears also in Plutarch and Theodoret. 109 The dancing is confirmed by Chrysostom, Theodoret and Pseudo-Philo On Jonah. 110 We cannot be sure if thls was already a custom in the time of the temple~ but it is possible. Some communities it seems celebrated Yom Kippur with an ambivalent mix of af~ flictions and joy, while others dem.anded the observance of slricter aftlictions, including active asceticism. Some may have tended more to a conception of Yom Kippur as a day of wrath and feac, others as a day of forgiveness - without necessarily linking either conception to a specific community. After all, both tendencie.s are in<;luded in the conception of Yom Kippur as judgment day.' 11 3.2 Prayers

The biblical prescriptions for Y1>m Kippur and even their translation in the Septuagint do not in<;lude prayers among the obligations of Yom Kippur. The high priest's t~ple ritual stands at the center. Yet it would be difficult to explain the immense importance of Yom Kippur already in thc time of tbe Second Temple if people bad bad no patt in the liturgy. lt is clear that people did participate in the high-priestly acts by observing them. Sirach describes people watehing the daily temple ritual and participating with supplicatory prayers and prostrations. m The Mishnah confirms the popular ob.servation of the high priest c:onducting the Yom Kippur service. m However, the number of people who could actually view the high priest was limited. How did the remaining people spend their Day of Atonement, on which aJmost eveeything was prohibited - eati.ng. drinking, cobabitation, work and, according to some, sleep? .Philo and the Festival Prayers from Qumran provide ample evidence for extensive Yom Kippur prayers in the Alexandrian diaspora as weU as in Palestine already in the 107

1118

Tr:an.sl. Danby. Tertulli1111, On Fasting 16:6. For discussion oftbis text, see below, p. 71-72.

1011 Plutarch, QuDe.stionu Convjvales 4:6:2, 67lD; Theodoret, Qr~autione.s in Octateuchum, in Leritie11m 32. For dilcussion oftbese texts, see below, pp. 68--69 aud 280. 110 See below, p. 74. and On Jonah (transl. Siegen 1:41), bu.t ef. mBetzah 5:2. 111 On Yom KippuriRosh HaShanah as judgment day, see Liber Antl(fllitatum Biblicarr.m l3:S-6; cf. mRH 1:2; bRH l6b; Pseud~Pbilo, On Jonah (IIllnSI. Siegert 1: 11). 112

113

Sir 50:19. mYoma 7:2.

The. Rituals ofYom Kippur

37

Second Temple period, i.e. at least from the second century BCE in Palestille and the first Qentury BCE in Alexandria.

3.2.1 Yom Kippur Prayers in Palestine: Qumran On Yom Kippur, some Jews in Palestine engaged in commuoal prayer. In addition to what appears in the Mishnah conceming the prayer toward the end of tb.e temple service, 114 snatches of prayer services from the land of Israel have been preserved in the Festival Prayers, which were found in Qumran but most probably used outside of the Dead Sea community. 115 The earllest copy, 1Q34, was written ca. 70--60 BCE, the others during the fll'St century CE.1u; In bis recent, very detailed investigation of the Qumran prayers, Da.niel Falk reached the conclusion that the Festival Prayers do not betray an ideology specific to the Qumran sect and that they contradict the calendar and the benediction forms usually employed in Qumran. 117 According to him, tbe Festival Prayers belong to a "broad tradition" of Jewish liturgical texts attesting to the emergence of fixed prayer in the Second Temple period. 118 Following suggestions by Bilhah Nitzan, 119 Falk draws attention to some oonspicuous analogies between QUIIU'a1l Yom IGppur prayers and much later piyyutim.120 The four scrolls of Festival Prayers (1Q34, 121 4QS07, 4Q508, 4QS09) provide us with a set of prayers for several festivals. Only two fragments u• See above, pp. 24-26.

m These praye13 have been investigated mainly by J.T. Milik., "[Q] 34. R.eeueil de prieres liturgiques," and "[Q) 34bis. Rec:ueil de prieres liturgiqnes," in: idcm and 0. Bartbelomy (ed.s.), Quml"an Cave 1. (Disc:overies iu the Judaean Desert 1; Oxford 19SS; pp. 136 and lS2-5); M. Baillet, Qumrän Grotte 4. II/ (4Q482-4QJ10) (Discoveries in the Jodaean Desert 7; Oxford, 1982); in lhe typology ofB. Nitzan, Quml"an Pl"ayer and Religioua P061ry {Studies on lhe Texts ofthe Desert of Judab 12; Leiden, 1994); and lllOSt recently in tbe analysis and reedition by D.K. Falk, Daily. SabbDtll, ond FutiPal Prayers in tlre Dead Sea 3c:roll~ (Stu.dies on the Texts ofthe Desert of Judab. 27; Leiden, 1998). Cf. R.A. Werline, Penilential Prgyer in Sec~md Temple J11dt:Jilm. 11re Development of a R.eligima Institution (Society ofBiblic:al Litenture, Early Judaism and lts Literature 13; Atlanta (Georgia), 1998). 116 Falle. Daily, Sabbath, .and FuthlaJ Prayer& in the Deflli Sea Scrolh, pp. 155-1S6. 111 Falk, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers inthe Dead SeaScrolls, pp. U~-lj7. 11 Falle, Daily, Sabboth, and Festival Prayen it~the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 200-207. 119 Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and ReligiOMS Poetry, p. 100, note 43, remarked that Qumran's Yom Kippur prayers are el0$C to later "mainstream" prayors. Ja Falle does not, alas, presume a generic conoection, but he notes the p~let between 4QS08 2 4-5 and the public .recitalion of the Amidah on Yom Kippur: see Falk:, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayet~ in the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 212-213. 121 Following Falle, Dai/y, Sabbatlr, and Festival Prgyers in ths Dead Sea &:rolls, p. lSS, note 3, I will use the abbrevation 1Ql4 fbr all ftagmenu oftbis scroll, inclading tllose published under IQ34bis.

*

38

Yom KippMr in Early Jewi11h Thought and Ritual

can be associated beyond aoy doubt with a specific festival, since they mcmtion it explicitly. One of these Festival Prayers belongs to Yom Kippur. 122 Which of the other prayers can be associated with Yom Kippur is a matter of debate, as evidenced by the greatly differing views of the investigators of the Festival Prayer.t: Joseph Milik, Maurice Baillet, Bilbah Nitzan and Daniel Falk. The discussion that follows proceeds according to the degree of probability of the prayers' association with Yom Kippur, from practically certain to only probable. Daniel Falle ascribes the fewest number of prayers to Yom Kippur, namely five: 1Q34 2+1 6-7, 4QS08 2 1-6. 4Q509 S-6 ii, 4QS09 7 and 4Q509 8 1 (whicb he identifies with 4Q508 22+23 1).1 23 Of these, two prayers are too fragmentary to convey theological contcmt. 1Q34 2+1 6-7 is the only one to be explicitly named ·~a praytr for Yom Kippur,.. but it contains only the :first line ofthat prayer; 4Q509 8 l II 4Q508 22+23 I contains the end of a Yom Kippur prayer, but without any further helpful infonnation. 124 Two otber prayers are also very fragmentary: 4Q509 5-6 ii quotes Deuteronomy 31:16;11' the equally fragmentary 4QS09 7 refers to the last days. 126 The least fragmentary and mo# interesting prayer is 4QS08 2 1-6:

(... J And yo11 dwelt in our midst [... ] Remember, 0 Lord, the appoinled time of your mercies (-pmn), and the time of repenta.ace (:llW) ( ••• ] aod you have established it for us (as) an appointed time of aftliction (n•lm u1o), a stat\lte {yln) fore(ver •.• J and you know 1he hidden thiugs and the revealed thing[s ... ] ( ;!llll:l [m]?mt nnnal.1 ;mll1') you [k]now our inelination [ .•. ou]r [rising] and our lying down you [ .. .}.'27

tn 1Q34 2+1 6. 121 Falk, Daily, Sobbath, and Festival Pruyer1 in the Dead Sea Scroll1, p. 165-9. 04 IQ34 2+1 6-7 reads "Prayer for the Day of Atonement. Remem[ber 0 L)ord [ ... )." 4Q509 8 l//4QS08 22+23 1 rcads ~[ ... ]the work (:1111~:'1} [ .•. ] you and {... Blessed be the Lord, w]bo had compassion on us (1mn1) in the ti[me of ...]." Transl. by Falk, Daily. Sabbath, and Fatival Pruyen i1l the. De.ad Sea Scroll1, pp. 165 and 167. IZS The ftagments relld: ilnlll' D[.•• ]:J[... )'~ll llJlll1i?'7 m .. [...] Xi?J mn ;~(... )D'Il' ... w[ )'1[ ...:'1:l'n'I)::JK m ::IJ1V1 ;o3{:1... ]:uro1 "111110 u[::~ ...]n-i7K:t '.n[::>... ]1ll'l1 ilnl.,.!l [ ••• )'71::1:1. 116 Contrary to Baillet, Qumrtin Grotte 4.111, p. 185, who regards both fragmeu.ts as belonging to a Rosh. Hashanllh prayer, Falk righ.tly points out that this attribution does not match their positionqfter4QS09 3 l-91/1Q34 2+1 1-4 (whlch mclv.des the begiuning of a Yom Kippur pra)'er in 1Q34 2+1 6): Falle, Doily, Sabbath, and Festival Prtzyer:s in the Dead Sea Sero//:., p. 165. 4QS09 7 reads: 'r'n• [ .••] ;m10111 D'nlll:l '::J [ ••• ] .,,:>:n nWliln:l[l] ]1!••• [.••]'1[ ...}J 11.l!D'n'.l anf...}l D{ ]llvn{'f}i? lb{ •.. ]D'Il':'lll''mll:l[•••). •.:o•l!l'7D. 127 4QS08 2 1-6; I have slightly modified the transllticm by Falk in Doi/y, Sabbath, and Festival Praye.n in the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 168.

TM Rituals of Yom Kippwr

39

Tbis prayer connects God's presence and compassion to the human repentance and self--affiiction. 128 Ood's compassion has appointed time (1lnD). The prayer speaks of God's omn.i$cience even regarding such secret matters as the inclination of the people. 129 in a formulation remarkably similar to the talmudic confessionon Yom Kippur called 'Attah Yodea' Ra:zey 'Olam. 130 This idea appears also in the Delos steles and in Pseudo-Philo. 131 The prayer may be part of a confession, for the Ood who knows tbe secrets of the heart knows also the sins committed. Baillet and Nitza.n connect also 4Q509 12 i + 13 to Yom Kippur: 132 tb.e exiles who wander (D'Jln11), without ('.,::ITJ) [someone tobring (tbem) back /1] [ ... ] [w}itbout strength; tbose who fall (D'.,!IU11), without {someone to raise (them); //} [ ... ] witbout someone to give (them) understanding; wilhout [someone to bind (them) up; II] tbe broken (D',»'l:!), [ •.. )in [their] iniq11ity ([tl]lllll:l), [and] tbere is no (l'IC[l]) one to heal (M!ln); [ ••. ) [and tbere is no one II to] comfort (anm); stumbling in tbeir transgressions {Döl'liV"J), {aod tbere is no one to ... ] 118 Baillet, Qumrdll Grotte 4./11, p. 178-179, regards 4QS08 2 l as the end of a Rosh Hashanab prayer and the fotlowing lines as the begiRDing of a Yom Kippur prayer. However, for the atgwnCDt that the first line belongs to the Yom Kippur prayer, too, see Falk, Dal/y, Sabboth. and Festival Proyen in the Dead Sea ScroUs, p. 168. lzt See M. Weinfeld, "Prayer and Liturgical Practice in tbe Qwnran Sect,'' in: D. Dimant and U. Rappaport (eds.). The Dead Sea Scro/Js. F()Tty Year.s of Research (Studies on the Texts oftheDesert ofJudah JO; Leiden,Jerusalem, 1992; pp. 241-258), p. 247; Falk, Dai/y, Sahboth, and Feati:llal Prayus 111 the Dead Sea Scroll1, pp. 212-213. 130 'Attah Yodea' Razey 'OI.,m (D.,1Y •r, llll' :tM) ("You know the mysteries of tbe world"). Nitzan, Q1111tran Prayer and Religious Poetry, p. HJO, note 43. 'Attah Yodea' RGey '0/am is quoted incipit in bYoma 87b, and is tberefore probably very early. The full text appea.rs for tbe first time in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on, q110ted below, p. 52, note 199 andin Eng1ish translatiDn in tb.e appendix. For tbe terminology, see Deut 29:28 and Ps 103;14, and compare the Jarer prayer HQ!..o KolltoNistarot vehaNiglot 'Attak Yodea' (ll'l'l" i'lnK rn'nl;n nnmu.1 .,, K?n, "Don't you know all the bidden and the revealed thiugs?") in Seder Rav 'Amram G.,'ott (ed. Goldschmidt, pp.l61, 166). The combination of the two biblical veßes, however, and tbeir use in a prayer for tbe Day of Atonement in both periods show "thar we are dealing with an element of festival prayer tradition." See

Falle, Daily, Sabhath, and Festival Praysrs in the Deod Sea Scrolls, pp. 21l. 131 See bclow, p. 48, oote 172. I» Baillet, Q11mrän Grotte 4.111, p. l85; Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religiou PO#Jtry. pp. 100-101, note 43. Falle prefer.s to associate 4QS09 12 i + 13 tentatively with Silkkot because ofthe prayer's position on the scroll (4QS09 11 i + 13 is part ofa uew prayer, whicb follows tbe Yom Kippur prayer) and its content (the expression na., nl\l:m in 4QS09 8 4 I/4Q508 22 + 23 3 appears in Lev 23:39 in the con.text of Sukkot andin an Amidah for Sukkot from the Geuizah). At some time duriDg tbe worlc on his book he seems to bave cha.Dged his mind, ascribjng the prayer tentatively to Yom Klppur: see Falle, Daily, Sabbath, and FestiPol Prayers ;n tlw Dead Sea Scrolh, pp. 168·172 and209.

40

Yom Kippu,. in Eorly J-ish Thoaght muJ Ritual ( Re]member //1he: sonow (111') and the weeping (':ll). You are tbe companiOD of prisoner[s]m

Some tenninology is l'eminiscent of Yom Kippur: iniquity, transgression, healing and (ifNitzan's reading is cor:rect) Iiberation ofprisoners. 134 Sorrow and weeping match the Yom K.ippur as depicted in Jubilees 34 and early piyyutim. In addition, Nittan recognized a :remarka.ble similarity concerning content and form to a much later acrostic piyyut of Yom Kippur•s Mussafservice, VeHen 'Anu 'Atah keTo•im ye'Ein Levaqesh: 135 Behold we are now: like snayers (o'WD), li.ke captives (o>'l:lW,),

with none (fKl) to seek; with none to retum;

like fools. lilce weary ones (EI'!I'lr.l),

with non.e to teach; with none to refresh;

like bent ones (D'!I10:I:J),

witb none to straigbten;

like mol!TDers.

with noue to cODSole tb.em;1341

Falk, who takes up Nitzan's observation, suggests that this points to the existence of "a post-biblical pruyer tradition - albeit d.rawing on biblical resources - which is reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls but also in medieval liturgical poetry." 131

ln 4QS09 12 i + 13; translalion in Fa1k. Doily, Sabbath, and Festival p,.ayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 170, nota~ ac:cording 10 tbe struc:tu.re of the poem. From the con· text, Nib:an unde.rstands the last line as "release !he imprison(ed]": see, Qvm,.an P~r anti ReligitnU Poetry, p. 100, note 42. 134 See pp. 85~92, bclow, on JEnach 10 and llQMelchiudek. 13! rt~:l'l l'K'I D'ill1:l Mll mc Behold, we are now lite stra.yers witb 11011e to seek"). See Nitzan, Qumran Prayer aml Religiow; Poetry, pp. 100-101; cf. Fa!k, Daily, Sablxlth, Qnd Festival Prayers in the Dead Sea Saolu, pp. 211-212. 1341 Traustation based on N.N. Schermao, The Cumplete AnSeroll Mach:or Yom KippiiT Nw:uzclr Ashkenoz. A N- TrQifSliJ/ion and Anthologized Commentary (ArtScroll Mesoralt Series New York, 1986), p. S79; for the Hebrew, see D. Goldsc.bmidt (ed.), Mohzorfor the Days of Awe. According to the Ashktrnazy Rite of All Cutoms Inclu.ding the Western Ashkenazy Rite, the Polish Rite, and the A:ncient Fl'ench Rite. Yolu111e 2: Yom Kippur (Jorusalem, 1970), p. 49S. m Falle, Dolly, Sabbath, a71d Festl'lal Prayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 209-212.

r.n (..

Thß RiJua/s ofYom Kippur

41

1 would argue that 4Q509 16, another fragment from the same scroll, may also belong to a Yom K.ippur prayer. [ ••. }in all [their] pain[~; ..• ) Have pity 011 them bec.ause oftheir aftlictian (» C."ll!lm an•lli11) [ •.. ] !he sorrow (11l1) of our elders aud [our] noble[s..•] 1be youths taunted

111e.m [ ••• ) t.bey bave {n}ot considered that Y{ou ... ] our wisdom [ ..•J iUid we [ ... ]. 136

Falk prefers to associate this prayer with Sukkot, 139 but "Have pity ou them because of their aftliction.. (!:1ll'l17ll .,31 Ci12:1n1) and the ..sorrow of our elders" mateh Yom Kippur better. Baillet regards f\uther tex:ts as Yom .Kippur prayers. among them 1Q34 3 i //4Q508 1 l-3: 140 ( ... ] and [he] comman[ded... ] in the Iot (",u) of the rigb.[teJous but for the wic:lced the l[o)t ( .••] in their booes a disgrace to alt tlesh; but tbe rigbteous [ ...] fat by the cloud$ of beaven and the produce of the earth, to distinguish [between the righ]teous and the wicked. And you give the wicked (for) our [r]ansom (ln!ll(:l]), andfbut the tr[eacher]ous ones ( ...] the extennination of all our oppcesson. Aod we will praise your n.ame forever [and ever,} for il is for tbis tbat you c;reated us, and (it is for) this (reason) tha[t we say) to you: Blessed [bc the Lord wb.o ... ]. 14 '

UnfortunateJy, the position of 1Q34 3 i 114Q508 1 on the scroll is unc.lear and the contents are the only basis for any association to a festival. Falk is WlSW'C ifthis prayer belongs to Passever or to Yom Kippur. 142 Yet two of the motifs that he explains against the background of Passever appeat associated with Yom Kippur. First, the phrase «fat by the clouds ofheaven" c:learly refers to tbe beavenly manna. Manna and Yom K.ippur are link.ed in lQWords of Moses and Philo. 143 Second. Falk associates the distinction between rigbteous and wick.ed with the (wieked) generation ofthe exodus. Yet the motifappears in llQMelchizedek in eonnection with Yom Kippur. Also tbe eschatological (?) extennination of the oppressors and the term U,!ll[:l] (ransom) evoke the imagery ofYom. K.ippur.

151 4QS09 16; tramlalioo in I-"alle, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers in the Dead Sea Scroll&, p. 173. Nitzan. Qvm7an Prayer and Rellglt>J~J Poetry, pp. 108-9. also assllJMs tbat tbis fragment is part ofa Yom Kippur prayer, albeit without provid.ing arguments. J:w See Falk, Dtsily, Sabbath, and Festhai Prayttrs in the De(ld Sea Scrolls, pp. 172173. Baillet, too, assoeia~s the fragment with Sukkot for reasons of position on the $CI"OII: Qwl7dn Grotte4.fii, pP. 185 and 191. 1411 Baillet, Qvmrdn Grotte 4./ll, pp. 177-178 and llS. 141 1Q34 3 i II 4QSOB 1, tr~~nSlated by Falk in Daily, Sabbatlr. and Festhai Prayen in the Dead s~a ScrtJll;,, p. 178. 1 ~ Falk,. Daily, Sabbath, and Fe$/ival Prayer: in the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 178. 143 See pages 47 and 97, below; seealso bYoma 74b.

42

Tom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

ßaiJlet also considers 1Q34 3 ii //4Q509 97+98 i, whicb follows IQ34 3 i//4QS08 l.just discussed, as Yom Kippur prayer: ( ... ] lhe grea[t) light for the appointed tiJ:ne of [day, and the little tigbt for the night ... ] and one must not transgress their laws, and all of them [... ) and their dominion in aU the world. But the seed of ma[n] did not perceive all lhat you caused hlm to i.nherit, and they did not know yo11 [in a]ll your words, but lhey acted more wickedly than alt (others) and they did not pereeive your great might. Therefore you rejected tbem for you take no pleasure in iniquity, and the wieked wiU not be establ~hed before you. But you chose for yourself a people in the time of your favor for you remembered your covenant and you [granted] tbat they should be set apart for yourself as holy from all the peoples, and renewed your covenant for them by a vision of gl[or]y and lhe words ofyour [spirit] ofholiness, by the works of your hands and lhe writing of your right hand, to malte tlwn .lmow the iJorious instruction and the etemal works. [ ... you :raised up] for [th}em a failhful $hepberd ( ... ] poor and [ .• .].1<14

Falk. does not .rule out Yom Kippur as the liturgical Sitz im Leben, but be tentatively associates the prayer with Shavuot because it addresses the re~ newal of the covenant and the giving of the Torah. 145 In favor of an attribution to Yom Kippur it may be ~tated that a juxtaposition of the giving of the covenant and the covenant sacrifice with Yom Kippur is found in the Epistle to the Hebrew.s 9:18-21. 146 The election of the Jewish people and the teaehing of the commandment.s to them is the main theme of lhe ancient prayer 'Attah Bahartanu. ao addition to the fourth benediction of the Amidab (the ..I:Ji":'' nlli'l'Ti''') on festivals and especially on Yom Kippur. 147 Finally, in the biblical nanative and in rabbinie Jiterature the second giving of the Torah is connected to Yom K.ippur.14' While l Q34 3

144 1Q34 3 ii II 4Q509 97+9& i, translated by Falk in Doily. Sabb4tl!, and Festival Prayus in the Dead Sea Scrolls. p. 1?9. 1"-' Falk, Daily, &:lbbath, ond Felllllal Prayers in the Dead ~ Scrolls, pP. 178-180. 146 A call to God to remember the covenant is the central topic ofthe Zekhor Lanu ( mr lJ"), a prayer ending the Zikhronot from lhe Mussaf service of Yom K.ippur. See Oc>ld.sehmidt, Maltlor for tlre l)Qy.Y ojA.we, vol. 2, pp. 574-576. 1" 7 'A.ttah Bahartanu (mnn:l ;unc, "Y ou bave c:bosen us"), quoted iltcipft .iD bYoma 87b. Seder Rov Sa'adia Oa'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, pp. 259·-260), gives a Cull

Babylonian version, and Genizab. frasments provide a Palestinian version begioning 'Attah Baharta heYisrael (7K,III'::I n'ln::l MK): see E. Fleis~bet, Eretz-lsrael Prayu and Prayer Rihlals a:~ Portray•d in th~ Oeniza Doct1111enu [in Hebrew] (Publications of the Peny Fo11ndation in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Jerusalem, 1988), pp. 95-96. The parallel was first noted by Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religiou3 Poetry, pp. 103-

104. 148 According to the traditional reading of Rashi this concept stands behind Mekilta, Amalek4 to Exod 18:13 (ed. Horovilz, p. 196; ed. Lauterbach vol. 2, p. 179). Seealso tbe Baraita in bTa'an 30b and hBB J21a.

The Rituals of Yorn Kipprn

43

ii //4Q509 97+98 i mentiorJ.S the writing ofthe hand of God and therefore the flrst giving, the ideas are related. l49 Yeho5bua Grintz suggest.ed viewing 1Q34 3 ii as the remains of an early Seder Avodah pointing to the connection of creation with the bistory of 5in in a Yom .Kippurprayer."0 We do not, however, know ifthe fragmentcon~ tinued with the main part of 1he Seder Avodah. the high-priestly setvice. Therefore, even if 1Q34 3 ii II 4Q509 97+98 i belongs to Yom Kippur, it does not have to be a Seder Avodah fragment. According to Baille~ 4Q508 3, too. could have belonged to Yom IG~ pur. 151 It mentions Noah, Isaac and Jacob and could have been part of a prayer retelling the bistory and therefore even part of a Seder Avodah. Moshe Weinfeld points to the use of 1Jl11U1fl ("we were lawless") - a rare form in the Hebrew Bible- in the Yom Kippur prayer 'Aval Hatanu} 52 Unfortunately, the context of 1lVVl,il in 4Q508 3 is missing; the text is therefore too fragmentary to permit certainty.

148

Weinfeld, "Prayer and Liturgical Practice in the Qumnm S"ct," p. 247, points to a

parallel motive of"God not desiring" in the prayer ve'Attah Hivdalta (;,n"l1::1.'1 :TnRl), part of the Ne'ilah servite (cf. Sedu Rov Sa'adia Ga'on, [ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 262)). However, this resemblmce seems to me superficial, sincc in I Q34 God does not desire iniqllity while in the Ne'ilah prayer God does not desire the destruction <(the world or the death o{tlre wlcked. ~ Y.M. Grinlz, "A Seder Avodah fur Yom Kippur ti:om Qumran" (in Hebrew] in: Chapttrs tn the History ofthe Second TtliJiple (JetuSalem, 1969; pp. 155-158). Nitzan see!Ds to accept this thesis: Qurnran Prayer and Religiow Poetry, p. 98, note 33. Fora discussion of the emergence of Seder Avodah, see below pp. 59-04. lSI Ba.illt:t, Qurnran GrOlle 4.111. p. 177. The extant text of 4QS08 3 ~ds:

]'!IP ;rn-p; :t( ...:t]jnJr.lll :npr"n pn[l'?•..] ml7 oyn[1 )m"Jllt[ .•.}l»'IU"l;r R{ Baillet further suggests tbat the liny fragments 7, 30 and 3941 of 4QS08 m.ay also have be.en Yom Kippur prayers. Their texts read: 7: ]Zll [ ... ?]:v i!l:l[ 30: ]'l[ ... ] TTY'Io:J 1"11C ...m :O'l!l?D[..•] 'm[ '?]ll l'[?ll ]i~J.., n::~.., 1[ 39: j'J{ .•. ] ll"nll'lllU rn[...Dlll]' lll' ::1..,::1 U"'Jl Ult1 ( 40: ].. '10 D[ ••• ]Ol::I'Klll'~llnl 7[...]:"1., OlTinl iWK( 41: ]ll.::l'n u ... [... ]n'l•'l1 !ltll' m[ ... )1lmc"n 'm "lll I Nitzan, Qumran Prayer ond Religiorur Poetry, pp. 100 and 109, agrees on the association offragmeuts 30 and 39 with Yom Kippur. IS2 'IJI(Cn '?:llc ("'But we sinnßd"). M. Weinfeld, ßPrayer and Liturgical Practice in the Qumran Sect,'' p. 247; the prayer quote.s Neh 9:33; the form 13!1W1<1 appears also in Ps 106:6 and Dan 9:5. The prayer 'A.vaJ Hotanu is first attested in bYorn 87b (incipit) and in its full version as an addition to the fourtb benediction of Yom Kippur's Amidah (OT'il n!lmp) in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on {ed. Davidsou, Asaf 110.d Yoel, pp. 261-262). see below, p. 53, note 204.

44

Yom Kippv in Ear/y Jewish Tlroaglat onJ Rlhlal

Manfred Lebmann, folJowed by Nitzan, associates with Yom Kippu.r also IQ34 2+1 l-4- whose text can now be improved with the overlap~ ping tex:t of 4Q509 3 2-9: 1S3 [ •.. ] and her sorrow [ •.. ) lbe appointed time of our peace [ •.• For you made us rejok:e] from our distres.s, and you gather together [our exiles for the time of ... ] and our seattered ones {for {the age of} you] as[semhle for the age of ...] ycur (me}rcies upon our as.semhly liko dr{ops of water upon tbe eanh in seed time lilce rain upon the fi]eld in the time of grass1J4 and [ ... And we, we will siog ot] your [w}onders trom genention to gencral{ion. ... Bless)ed be the Lord, who made [us} rejoice ([l]lJID0) [ .•. ].ISS

Lebmann draws attention to a similar use of Deuteronomy 32 in a Samaritan Yom Kippur prayer. 1s6 Baillet and Falk prefer to associate the prayer with Rosh Hashanah because of its emphasis on rejoicing (n~) and t1:1e position of the prayer just before the clear Yom Kippur prayer 1Q34 2+1 ~7, discussed above.m However, the mention of M7J!U does not excludc Yom Kippur since many Palestiman Yom Kippur prayers :from the Genizah include the expression iiMI!Illl' .,,1113.1ss f:inally, Menahem Kister has suggested seeing a Seder Avodoh in SQ13. 1S9 The reconstruction bf him and Elisha Qimron thc highly fragmentary 5Ql3 is congenial, 160 and the parallels betwcen the historical

of

ISl M. Lebmaun. '"Yom Kippur' in Qumran," Revu11 de Qumrtm 3 (1961/1962) 117124, here pp. 120-121; Nitzan, Qumron Prayer and Religious Poetry, p. 102. 1s. Quoting Deut 32:2b. 155 My traoslation based on DSST. 1 ~ Lehmann, '"Yom K.ippur' in Qumran," pp. 120-121; A. Cowley, The SamaritDII Lihlrgy (Oxford, 1909), vol. 2, pp. S06-.508. The Samaritan Yom Kippor litur&y bas bccn investigated by J. Macdottald, A Critical Edition ofthe Text ofthe Samarita" Yom HaKipplll'{im) Liftlrgy. with Tronslation tlaereof and ComptJriJon wirh th11 CorrUptNidütg Jewi:sh Litrugiu (Leeds, 1958), which, regrettillly, was unavailable to me. 1" Fallt, Daiöo, Sobbath, and Fe:rtivol Prayers in lhe DetHI Sea Scrolls, pp. 163-164. l!8 E.g. Fleischer, Eretr-!Jroel Prii)JCF ond Prayer RltualJ os PoriFOJied in the Genizo .DoC'IImems, pp. IJ9-140, numbers l, Ia, 2, 9, 10, 14. '" Menahem Kister, "SQ13 and the 'Avodah: A Historical Survey md Its Significance," Dead Sea Discov~ie~ 8 (2001) 136-148. lto In particular the suggestion to put 11.1n on fragmeot 3 next to line S and the reconstruction ofpns• in line 7 and 1nmt in IiDe 9. Ki.ster's and Qimron's reconstructi.on reads; "God of all [ ... who ... ] and founded [ es]tablished[ed ... )treasl.ll'es[•.• ) as [you] made ( ••. ]Enoch ('??)[ l have you dlosen ftom a.moog the sons of A(d]am, md you [ ..• ] forever? [ ..• ]Alld Noah bave you preferred from amo;og lbe so[ns of... ]. Alld Abraham ( ... Isa]ac you have selected out and [ ... ]. You (madeJ yourselfknown to Jacob at Sethel ( ...aud you ... bim .•. ] to UDderstand [your] wodcs. Aod Levi bave you se[paratJed and you appointed hisn to bind [ ... ]service of[ ... and Aaron you have cb]osen (from] Levi to go out [ ... and c;ome io ... to maJlc:e hidden thiDg[s] bown (... in] lbeir covenant before

The Rit"als ofYom Kippw

45

survey of the Seder Avodllh 'Attah Bara'ta and 5Q13 are interesting.l61 However, in the extant parts of5Q13, there is no allusion to the main part of any Seder Avodoh. the Yom Kippur service of the high priest. 162 In sum, the material disc;:ussed suggests that the following extant prayers should be categorized as Yom Kippur prayers: 1Q34 2+1 6-7, 4Q508 2 16, 4Q509 5-6 ii, 4Q509 7 and 4Q509 8 1 II 4Q508 22+23 1; probably 4Q509 12 i + 13, 4Q509 16 and 1Q34 3 i II 4Q508 1; and possibly 1Q34 3 ii//4QS09 97+98 i, 1Q34 2+11-4//4Q509 3 2-9, 4Q508 3 and 5Ql3.1f Falk' s attributions to the festivals are correct, the Yom Kipp ur prayers did not exceed one and a half columns. In this case. either the services of the communities using these prayers were shorter than Philo's or relatively little of them have survived. Falk states that other Yom Kippur prayers probably existed, but he prefers to associate the rest ofthe extant Festival Proyen with events other than Yom Kippur. According to the arguments discussed abovc, however, probably four more fragments belong to the solemn day of awe. I 63 The Yom K.ippur prayers associate the conceptions of divine indweUing and omniscience, a special season for God's mercy and human repentance. Beyond Ibis. they probably mention the brokenness of human existence, afflictions, sorrow and weeping evo.ldng divine mercy, dle manna, punish· ment of the wicked. and perhaps also creation, history of sin. election and covenant renewal. .A.lnlost all motifs appear also in late antique piyyutim. The comparable material in Philo is very scant It is thus even more significant that the motif ofthe manna appears in the Festival Prayers as weH as in Philo - raising the question of whether there was some form of common prayer tradition extending from Palestine to Egypt. We do not have any hard evidence for a reenactment of the temple ritual in the Yom K.ippur service ofthe Qumran community or any other Second

you (... eve].r:y year and you commanded hittl to admon[ish? ... ) and afterwa:rds they [will] ded~~~e ( .•. ]to eve.r:y mau of Israel( .•. bis] pat[h] conceming... " 1' 1 'Attah Barata (:tnll,:l 01n1t, '"You created"). Both begin wilh the ereation and give a Iist ofseveral eleeted people of God from Adam to Aaron concluding with Aaron'$ ser· vice. That neitb.er of them mention Moses or the To.rah is a wealc argument for SQ13 bcing a Seder Allod4h. 5Q13 is highly fcagmenta.y. f'l.lrtbermore, Moses and the To.rah aJe mentioned in otber early Süirei Avo®h, so, the laclc of Moses or the Torah seems to bc not a distinct fealure of Si
Yam ICippur in Ear/y Jewish 7'/wugltt ond Ritual

46

Temple community. ls it possible that they recited othe.r material, e.g. Leviticus 16 or 4QTargum of Leviticus or (in Qumran) the relevant passage from llQTemple Scroll or llQMelchizedek? 164•

3.2.2 Yom Kippur Prayers in the Diaspora: Philo

For the diaspora, impressive evidence has been preserved in Philo's writings, which have been all but ignored in previous research on Yom Kippur prayers. The service attracts the participation even of those who usually

are less religious or non-religious: On the tenth day is the fut, which is carefully observed not only by the zealous for piety aod boliness but also by those who never act religiously in tho rnt of their life. For all stand in awe, iJvercome by the sanctity of the day, and for the moment the worse vie wilb the better in self-denial and vinue. II!$ The day-long prayers bave a propitiating :function and include supplications and praise of God •s gracious nature. The boly-day is entirely devoted to prayers and supplications (l.L"tll~ .:cri b:"iuv;), and men from mnm to eve employ cheir Ieisure in nothing else hllt otrering pelitions ofhumble Mtreaty (6.tnrllKwtti-ra<; ri:f.ti:<;} in wllieh 1bey seek: eamestly to propitiate God (tev kov ~EVJ1tvltlo8cu) and ask for remission (11opa:i'tTJcnv) oftbeir sins, voluntary and involuntary, and entertain bri&flt hopes looking not to tbeir own meriu but to tbe gracious nature of Him Wbo sets pardon before d\astisementliSCI

The placating effect of prayers for forgiveness is even more explicit in the following sentence, where the root iM1<Jl<:- appears: But in our fut men may not put food and drink to their lips, in orderthat with pure b.earts, Ulllroubled and untrammeled by any hodily passlon. such as is the common outcome of repletion, they may keep tbc boly-day, propitiatiDg (il.co~c:O!levoa) the Father of All with fittiog prayers, in whieh they are wont to ask that tbeir old sins may be forgiven (aJ&YYJcniav) and new blessillgs gained and enjoyed. 167

The afflictions are purification rites providing the necessary conditions for

the propitiatoxy effect of the prayers. The prayer se.rvice in Philo's Alexandrian community must have been highly developed and high!y regarded. l6t Further poiots are discussed below, pp. 49~4. in the section on Yom Kippur prayers a:fter lhe destruttion of th.e temple. 161 D~ specialibWJ l'gibr.rs 1:186; transl. by F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Philo 7:20!1-206. Tbis statement is reminisccnt ofRudolf Otto's Das Heilige. tt!
The Rihlah of Ycm Kippur

47

At one point, Philo actually quotes a prayer for Yom Kippur. The formula~ tion in the plural makes clear that the Yom Kippur prayer is communal and not private. They say, "'We have gladly received and are storing the boons ofnature, yet we da not ascribe our pre$ervation to any conuptible tbing, bui to God the Parent and Father and Saviour of the world and all tbat ia tberein, Who has the power and the right lO nourish and sustain us by means of these or without these. See, for exampte, how the many thouS3Jlds of our forefathers as they ttaversed the trackless and aU-barren desert, were for forty years, the life of a generation, nourished by Him as in a land of riebest and most fertile soil; how He opened fountains unknown before to give them abWldance of drink fof their use; how He raincd food from heaven, neitber more nor less than what sufficed for cach day, !hat they might conswne wbat they needed without hoarding, nor barter for the prospect, but taking little thought ofthe boWlties received rather reverence and worsbip the bountiful Giver and honour Him witb. the b.ynms and benedictions that are His due." 1o;a

Besides giving tb.a.nks for p.reservation, the prayer includes an allusion to the wandering tbrougb the desert and being sustained by tbe manna (ExQdus 16) and Moses' water miracles (Exodus 15:22-26; 17:1-7). Mannais also connected to Yom Kippurin the Festival Prayers and lQWords of Moses from Qumran. 169 This connection may point to a common liturgicalexegetical tradition linldng the affl.ictions of Yom Kippur with Deuteronomy 8:3, combining manna and afflic.tion. Philo expHcitly links Yom Kipp ur and Deuteronomy 8:3 in a tradition that also combines the two main acts of the people on Yom Kippur, self-affliction and prayer. 170 Abstention from food and renunciation of passions frees the human being to re«;ive the true divine food. Similar combinations of self-affliction and

See p. 41, above ~~nd p. 97, below; sec aha bYoma 74b. "He says in Deuteronomy also: 'And He affiicted {t~CO.JCmae:) thee ~~nd made thee weak by hunger. and fed tbee with manna, which thy filtbers knew not, that He might proclaim ro thee, !hat not on bread alone sball man live, but on every word that goeth forth through tbe mouth of God' (Deut. viii. 3). This afilicting is propitiatlon (ft d~~:ma~<; ain11 il.ao~t~ i<J-tt); for on the tenth day also by afflicting our souls He makes propitiation (xa~~:ibv in1mv 'tri~ '!IVX.;.<; l:l.n
110

pleasant things, we think we are being aftlicted (1CfliCOUGtlat), but in reality thereby we have God propitious (i).trov) to us. He oecasions famine also to us, not a famine of virtue, but a famine of the creations of passion and wickedness,. (Legum allegoriae 3:174; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Philo 1:419). Notably, active and passive affiictions are equated here.

48

Yom Kippur m Early Jf/Wish Thovght and Rihw/

prayer can be found in the Apocalypse of Elijah111 and two steles ftom. Delos.l 12 Concerni.ng the contents of the day-long prayers. Philo speaks of prayers for forgiveness, supplication and praise of God.m One passage of Philo may be understood as alluding to a confession of sins. l 74 The early association of repentance with Yom Kippur in Jubilees makes such a confession of sios as part of the prayer service highly probable for Palestine in the second century BCE. 11S A recitation of biblical passages, though not allW:led to, is quite likely, given the need to fill the lengthy service.

17 ' Apoc
4Q5082l~).

The Ritva/1 of Yom Kippur

49

3.2.3 Yom Kippur Prayers after the Destmction ofthc Temple 176 The earllest Tannaitic sources mention an exceptional number of five ser~ vices for Yom Kippur: on top of Aravit, Shah.arit and Minhab, not only Mussaf - the "additional.. offer/prayer as on the Sabbath and other festivals - but also the Ne'ilah (the "'closing"), a special prayer for the end of Yom Kippur are added. 177 This matches the length of the anonymous sermon On Jonah and the statements by Philo on the prayers filling the whole day.l18 Tosefta Deralehot prescribes seven benedictions for each of the prayers of Yom Kippur, as for Sabbath and other holidays. 119 Yom Kippur exceptionally bad four priestly blessings. 1so Few complete prayer texts have been prescrved from the Tannaitic or Amoraic periods; most rabbinie sources quote inctpit. The earliest extant Siddur, the Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on, is from the niath century. 111 lt includes numcrous prayers and is extremely valuable for understanding the geneial sequence of the prayers; but the textual evidence is too corrupt to permit reconstruction ofthe actual wording ofthe prayers. 182 Among other 176 See the uaeful survey in Tabory, Jewi1h Festivals in the nme ofthe Mi1ltnah ontl Tolmutl, pp. 282-293; J. Maier, "SOhne und Vergebung in der jlldisehen Liturgie,'' Jahrbuchfiir Biblilcl~e Theologie 9 (1994) 145-171; Goldschmidt, Mahzor for tha Days of Awe, vol. 2, pp. ~:u; Fleiscber, Eretz-lsrael Prayer and Prtzyer Rituals as Portrayed in the Geniza DOCilmelll'l, pp. 93-155, esp. pp. 120-147; I. Elbogen, "Die Tefilla tur die Festtage" Monat.sschrfft/iir Geschichte 11nd Wisse.nschqft des Jude11111ms 55 (1911) 426-

446,:586-:599. l'TI Cf.mTa'an4:1;yBer4:1, 7c;yTa'an4:l, 67e. 111 See p. 46. abo\'e and pp. 51-59, below. 179 tBe.r 3:12; bYoma 88a. Tbese benedic:tions comprise nT.IK (the Patriarchs), :nm (God's migbt), 1:1111:1 nvrnp (the saactity oftb.e namc), J:ll>:J nwnp (tbe sanctity ofthe day), :m:lll (the temple service), tl'llll (thaoks&iviDg) and 1:11'711.1 (peace). ln additi011, the same additicms as lhe belledictions on Rosh Hashanab (the so-caUed Zilrhronot (nnn:n, memories), Mol/chuyol (m>J')Il, kingdoms) and Shofarot (nmmu, Shofars or trumpets), were at some poillt included in the Amidah ofYom Kippur (bTa'on 16b-17a; &ferim 19:6; cf. mRH 4:5-6; mTa'4n 2:2-S}. Cf. H. Maek, "The Source of the MalkhvyyQI Benediction," Jewish Shldiu Qri11rter/y 9 (2002) 205-21.8; J. Heillem&Dil, "Tbe Ancient 'Orders of Benedictions' foJ' New Year and Fasts," (in Hebrew] Tlll'bü 45 (1976) 25&261; N. Wieder, "The Form ofthe Third Benediction ofthe 'Amida on Rosh Hashsluma and Yom Kipp•r' [in Hebrew] Tarbü 34 (1964) 43-48; L. Liebreich, "The Insertions in the Tbird Beuediction of the Holy Days," Hebrew Union Co/fege AnnJIQ/35 (1964) 7910 l; I. Elbogeo, "Die Tefilla fllr die Festtage," Monatsschrift ZfiF Geschichte vnd Wilsen&chaji des Judentf4nu SS (1911) 426-446, 586-599. 1111 mTa'an4:l;yBer-4:1, 1c;hTa'4rn26b. 1&1 D. Goldschmidt, Setler R(N 'Amram Ga'on. Edited according to Manuscripls and Prints wlth A.dditiOPIS. Variant Lectit»U and lntrotluction [in HebrewJ (Jcrusalem, 1971 ). l&;l Goldschmidt,Setle.r Rav "Amrom Ga'on, p. 10.

so

Yom Kippur in &frly Jewish Thouglrt and Ritvol

tbings, theSeder Rav 'Amram Ga'on mentions an Amidah of scven benedietions with additions, confessions and supplication prayers. readings of the Bible, and (at least) for Mussafthe acme ofthe serviee in th.e liturgical reenactment, the Seder Avodah. 181 The text of the Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga'on, written half a century after the Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on., is commonly perceived to be more faithful to the original. I!-4 It lists confessions, 18:~ some additions to lhe seven-blessing Amidah 186 and many piyyutim for Sidrei Avodah and Selihot prayers. Wbile the two Siddurim. the Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on and the Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on, gi.ve essentially :Babylonian prayers, m.any prayers from the early medieval Palestinian rites have been published from Geni2ah manuscripts. 111 A fuU investigatio.n of the early medieval Yom Kippur liturgy would require its own detailed treatment. I will however deal briefly with general aspects of the eady development ofthe confessions, readings and the Seder Avodah in the Tannaitic and Amoraic periods (before theSeder Rav 'Amrom Ga'on and theSeder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on).

113 Seder R(lll '.AIIVmn Ga'on (ed. Goldschm.idt, pp. 166-172). From Gaonic: responses wc lelltll that there were mauy c:olllDIIIIlities in which it was customary to read a Seder Avodah in each scrvice. See the discussion iu L.A. Hoffinan. The Canonuation of th11 Synagogue Service (Uuivcrsity of Notre Dame, Ceuter for the Study of Judaism and Christimity in Autiquity 4; Notro Dame {Ind.) and London, 1979), pp. 107-110. Tluee of Yose ben Yose's SirJ,e; ;bO/Ülh were used in three different services.: 'Attah Konanta (:IIUI'O iTnlt) for Shaharit, 'Adil' GW11.1'ot 'Eioah {:n"JR nrn:u 1'.':1JM) for Mus:taf and 'Asa~ Gedolot (m?111 ,Dalt) for Minbah. Mussaf was finally chosen, sinc:e it was supposed to be at the same timt: as the temple service. This e!evates the status of the Seder Avodah as a conscious reenactmcnt ofthe ll;tUa1 sacrificial ritual. 184 Y. DavidSOA. S. Asaf and Y. Yoel (eds.), Siddur R. Sa'adjtJ Ga'on [in Hebrew]

(Jerusalem., 1941). lU 'Attah Yodea' Razey 'Olam with a briefversion of '.AJ Het (MI:In 'nt); 'Aval Hatanu; and a special CODfcssion for lhe Ne'ilah prayer Mah Ne 'emar Lefaneikho Yo11hw baMarom (ll11%r.l ::uut• 1•m 11:lltl :11.1) Seder R(lll Sa 'aditJ Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, pp. 259-264). 1" &pecially 'Attah Bahm-tanu (nn111l ölnK), 11eTiuen Lamt (13'1 1M1) aad 'Eloheittu ve 'Eiohei 'Avoteinu MehoJ ('nno U'llllK •i1'1Klll":!'nc ). m See the ttxts of tbc additions to the ADiidab (esp. 'Attah Baharta beYI.uael- :lnK '1JC1111'::1 n11C; veTinen Lamt -1i'llJ'Ill\; 'Eloheinu v.r 'Elohei 'Avotetnu Galleh - ':'1'1Kl 1l':'I"N :!'1lll'~IC; 'Ana 'Elohelnu Ya'alelr veY(l!IO- K'O"' ':'i'li> 11~ ~t:m; 11eHasi'enu-llK'W
The Rituals of Yom Kippur

51

The status and number of confessions and their contents vary greatly from the Bible toSeder Rav ~mram Gtz'on and Seder Rav Stz'adia Ga'on. The biblical account in Leviticus 16 mentioos one confe.s· sion - that of the high priest "for all the iniquities of the people of Ismel, and all their transgressions, all their sins."18& This is a vicarious confession CONFESSIONS:

by an individual representating the collective. The biblical descriptions of the people's ritual do not include confessions. For the rabbinie period, Targum Pseudo-Jono.than clearly dem.onstrates the increased importance of confession over and against sacrifice. To each "atones" in Leviticus 16 the translator(s) added a "by confession." Moreover, Targum PseudoJonathan Leviticus 16:30 includes a Ionger reference to confession and its power to atone. When did the confessions become centrat to the individual prayer service (and not only in the high-priestly vicarious confession)? This might have occwred when repentance became the foca.l idea of Yom Kippur, an association fust made explicit by Jubilees in the second century BCE. One of Qumran's prayers (4Q508 2 1-6) is close to the talmudic confession 'Attah Yodea' Razey 'Olam and might tberefore have been part of a confession.189 Philo, too, alludes to a personal confession. 190 The mishnaic account of the temple service has two more confessions than Leviticus 16. The first i.s a personal confession by the high priest for hirnself and for his house. 1~1 The second again covers the high priest and his house but also the other priests. 192 St:J.11, it is fonnnlated in the first person singular. We do not know if these two extra confessions took place only in tbe synagogues or also in tbe temple. In any case. they clearly indicate a shift from tbe coUective toward the individual. ftom the vicarious to the personal. Whoever recites tbe confession contained in the Misbnah or in aSeder .Avodah becomes bimself (or herself) the high priest reading the high priest's confessions as a verbal reenactment. lfthe whole community recites theSeder Allodah, tbe high priest's confession becomes the private prayer of every individual. The early rabbinie sources on the synagogue prayer speak of yet other confessions. The Tosefta teports that a confession is included in all five prayer services and that an additional confession was pronounced before

111

Lev 16:21.

1111

191

See above, p. .39. Philo, De pMteritate Caini 10-12. Was it part of his Alexandrim .service? mYo111a 3:8.

192

111Yoma4:2.

190

Yom Kippurin EarlyJewi!ih Thought and RihuJI

52

the beginning of Yom K.ippur. 193 The confessions secm to have been extraordinarily long. 194 According to one tradition the words were fixed, according to another they varied and were strictly personal in order to match the sins committed in the previous yeac. 195 A non-tixed confession undencores the shift from the vicarious confession by the high priest on behalf of the collective to the personal and individual confession of a person praying for himlherself befo.re God's judgment. Early on, several fonnulas developed tbat were initially the personal c:onfessions of influential rahbis and then became co.mmon usage. 196 The Palestin.ian Talmud gives a confession in the name of Rabbi Ba bac Bina: Ribboni llatati uMura · 'A.siti (•n'Vlll ll11Z2, •nKe~n ~n:l,). 1 rn The Babylonian Talmud menrions several additional confessions, some of which match confessions still in use: 198 Rab: 'Attah Yodea • Razey '0/am (c;w '" ,", ;m~) 1 99 l!n The mdividual spoke the C:Oilfession after the Amidah, whereas iD thc repetition tbe prayer leadcr included it in the fourth beoediction, the 01':1 n111lli' (t.Yonto 4:14, c:t: bYoma 87b). 194 The Tosefta emphasizes the extrt!lle leogth ofwhat it calls tbe order of the coms.sion ('n"'il "1,0) (tBer 3:6). 1" tYonta4:14-JS. Seo Hoffinan, The Cononization of the Synagogw Senice,

pp. 102-107. 1915 For various ancient versions fi"om the Talmudim and the Genizab, see Elbogen, Der jiJdische Gottttldlei'/Si in seiner guchichtlichen Entwiddrmg, pp. 149-lSl; and Goldsclunidt, Mah2or for the Days ofAwe, vol. 2, pp. '-::!'. On post-talmudk: coomssions from the Geniz:ah, sec al$0 the brid diS$Crtatiotl. by G. Onnann, Dos Sündmbe/umntni8 du llersöhnungltagu, ISein All/ball wul seine Enlwickl11ng. in Yerbimlurrg mit Gmiza-Ttullllf untersucht (Fnmkfurt a.M., 1934}. 197 yYoma 8:9, 45c, gives the text in full: 11'l"1ll' 'll"il ;nn nro1 '""'' J1ll)l •n~mn 'l1J1 'JIII'!l '1::~ ?1 '? "l!IJnllt) ·n~ '" 1'19'm ll!1 ':!' .rnuu1 'l'K •n•nw cvr.n 1'1;"1.'l •n":t :Jinn, ",~ •n111m ?:> f.'i'l111'.lnl] n'lom •nuw 'r.I.,J •'1 '?Win{l. The first band of manuscript Leideo did oot wri~ the words in parentheses ( ) but included the words in square brackets [ ]. Tbe second hliDd adapted both to the printed text. Cf. wo the second part of 'Attah Yodea' Razey '0/Qnt in Seder Rav Sa'adla Ga'<m (ed. Davidson, Asafand Yoel, p. 259): 'i1' "'!l:ln1 1l'nlllll ?:177n'1'mmnw u•:J'?K "' 1'l9'1ll nr~. And see the appendix. below. 1 ~ bYonta 87b. "' See Sedu Rav Sa'adia Oo'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 258) aives the followill8 wording: m•'J::~ ~:I ~'lln '1::1 lll!lln MK •'" '?.:1 ..,nD n1PJ1'1'llm a."ll 'l"' :n1• <mlC u•nm11 ;;, 'J11 u') .,lr'll>n!lt l3'i1':1K "' T'l!I.,D 111:1 1:t" •1'1'11 'fllZ) "'nol l'lfl 1zm a?il ill ');, 1"11 .:~'n lJig~D!J ~ '111 u'J "'!I::Jm. For a full translation, see the appeodbc.. Ma'QSelr Merkavah cootains a similar p.-ayer: see below, pp. 137-138. Michael Swartz suggests that "the author adapced a genre of c:onressional prayers recited on Yom Kippur f.or bis purposes." See M. Swanz, Mystlcal Prayer in Ancient Judai:snt. An Analysia of Ma'aseh Merkwoh (Texts aud Silldies iD AIH;ient Judaism 28; T1lbingen, 1992), pp.ll6-118. For the text, see P. Schäfer, M. Scblllter and H.G. von Mutius (eds.), Synopse :~ur Heklralot-Literalllr (Tfibingen, 1981) §548 {Mo'QSCJh Merkavah].

» .",

;m,,,

The Rihlal$ of Yom Kippw

53

Mar Shmuel: MiMa'amaqei Lev (:J.'? 'ii'll»tl!:l) or 'Attah Yotka "Omqo shel Lev (::a'? '?11 '!PZ),Y Y'Tl' illlM) or 'Allah Yodea 'Mo 'amaqei Lev (.::l'?il 'P7J:I17.l rn" i1l1M)200 Levi: UveToratelcha Katuv Lemor (,i'.nt':l ::nn;, 1n,m:n)201 Rabbi Yonathan: Ribbon Ha'Olamim (t'l'b':I~Yi111~)w. Rabbi Yehudab: /(j 'Avonoteinu Rabu miLemanot veHatoteino 'Atsmu

miLesapper (,,071!1 11.l31l1ll'lllttlnl l11lll71:l '::."' u•nm:r •::~)203

Anonymous: 'A.val Halanu (UICDM [Unl11:]"?~)204 Rabbi Hamuuna/Rava: 'Eiohai 'ad shelo Notsarti (,n,!ru ~':1111 1Y "i1'1tti0s 'A.val Hatanu is defined in the Gemara as the minimum to fulfill the obli-

gations.206 • Elohai 'ad shelo Notsarti was also the daily confession of Rava.201 200 For the two last incipits 'A.ttah Yo.cka' Mo'amaqei Let~ and 'A.ttalr Yodea' 'Omqo 3hel L11v attested by ancient witne.sses, see RabbiDovicz, Diqdllqey Soferim, vol. 4, p: 309. Israel Abrahams clai.ms to bave found the lost version ofShmuel's confession in a (lost?) Oenizah fragment reading: 1'l!l'> nn:J ''IS' •1"Jll <JnK m>'):;, •1no1 ~'I 'i'n11J :nt• nnK .;'R)"' 1311',fiKVl :111l' lllK :'111., u•:T:nc ,. 1'l!l') D'111M lllt U'llll1131' "Tbou .knowest the dcptbs of lhe heart, and an cognisant of the mysteries of the reiDs. The imaginations of (all) aeatures are revealed before Thee and our device.s are not bidden from Thee. Forgiver of iDiquity and transgression wast Thou c:alled. Thou art He, 0 Lord our Ood wbo knowest that our end is the worm. Our ia.iquiti.es we eonfess before Thee, 0 Lord our Ood. iDclino Tbine ear to our eatreaty." Though there is a brcak: here, the confession seems to colltimle much longer. See I. Abraltsm$. "Tbe Lost 'Confess.ion' of Samuel," Hebrew Union College A.llflllal 1 (l924) 377-85. However, the Genizah manuscript may well be an elaboratioo oftbe enigmatic talmudic incipits ftom the Middle Ages. 201 Cf. bRH 35a. Manuscript Oxford coatinues with a quotation from Lev 16:30. Tbc text of this c:onfessiou. is lost. 1112 lt is impossible to discem wbich of the many surviving prayers that begin wilh this formula is the talmudic p.myer ofRabbi You.atban. :118 Cf. E2n19:6. Manuscript Oxford reads u•nmWI\1 instead of U'llll:tiRl: see Rabbinovicz, Dlqduqey Soft~rlm, vol. 4, p. 309. This confession appears in St!.dtr Rav Sa'adia Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 262) a.s pa.rt of a long eonfession for rhe Ne'ila iD lieu of 'A.ttah Yodea' Ra:ztty 'Oiam. 201 The best Talmud manuscripts and Seder IWv Sa'odla (Ja'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 261} do not read nn:uc: see R.ahbinovü:z, Diqduqey Soferim, vol. 4, pp. 309310. PeJiqta Rabbali 3S has a loag version of the oonfession very close to lhat in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga•Oit (additions in square bra<:kets, omissiou in parentheses): [lllllK]'>JI! l!llln .11., ;'11!1? R'n (D'lltl:l) 1'1:1Dlii'Zl(l.))l 1'msZIZ! mot (ll''llll) 1l111J UIJWD ["l.inl"111) ll'lr.l 'llKliR \Jnnjl 1l!Uin lJ'In MIC ':I ll'.,l11C::r.J .,, 'TJJ P''JI. 2Q.f The text is given in full: .'ll1lnl Jt1 t?•IIC 'II'IJUV1l'V1.lll' .•tn:> 'l'll 'll,:!llllt'll/1 "7ll '11'111 :Ull ltlll'lll 11.,171 1'l!l.,l.) 1111 ':'!" .,,Z),.,.)l 11111'1::1 IÖ!l ..,:ll 1'l!l~ 'lK ,,;t ,•nn•!)J ,ZilRl '/p "RJ ':liC 1.,10, ,,, '"~' 11? 'r.IK 1"DR"t:l i'l"ll:: •nxanw. :106 bYomt~S1b. · 201 For tbe daily confession, see bßu 17a.

,!ll1

54

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

The great number and variety of confessions indicate on the one band that this part of the service was not fixed until the early Middle Ages. On the other band, the Babylonian Talmud's listing ofthe various confessions reveals an interest in preserving and canonizing prayers. 208 The increased number and length of the confessions in comparison to the Bible indicate a higher Ievel of spiritualization. However, we should not underestimate their outward aspect as a perceptible manifestation ofthe otherwise invisible repentance. When the dearth of outward aspects of the temple ritual came to be acutely feit, the role of confessions may have increased as a suitable SUpplement to the temple rituals. THE READINGS: Sources on the early readings are scarce, and even where we have a source, it does not necessarily mean that the readings prescribed in it were read everywhere- in Palestine as well as in the Babylonian and Mediterranean diasporas. 209 I would expect people in the Second Temple period who pray througb the whole day to start with texts that are highly respected and at the same time easily to band and not having to be composed, such as the biblical descriptions Leviticus 16 and 23:27-32 and Numbers 29:7-11. 210 4QTargu'll of Leviticus, the only Aramaie fragment of the five books of Moses in Qumran, could have served such a liturgical purpose. 211 Reciting the biblical pericopes on Yom Kippur is a reenactment of the high-priestly ritual and · may well have been performed in synagogues even at the time of the temple for people who could not attend

2118 Did the attitude of the communities behind the Palestinian Talmud differ _in this aspect? 209 For Iiterature on the development ofreadings, see E. Fleischer, "Annual and Triennial Reading of the Bible in the Old Synagogue" [in Hebrew with English summary] Tarbiz 61 (1992) 25-43; idem, "lnquiries Conceming the Triennial Reading ofthe Torah in Ancient Eretz-Israel" [in Hebrew] Hebrew Union College Annual61 (1991) 43-61; J. Offer, "The Masoretic Divisions (Sedarim) in the Books of the Prophetsand Hagiographa" [in Hehrew with English summary] Tarbiz 58 (1989) 155-189; A. Shinan, "Sermons, Targwns, and the Reading from Scriptures in the Ancient Synagogue," in: L. Levine (ed.), 11reSynagogue in LateAntiquily (A Cente[IJ]ial Publication ofthe Jewish Theological Seminary of America; Philadelphia, 1987; pp. 97-110). C. Perrot, La LeeIllre de Ia Bible dans Ia Synagogue. Les anciennes lectu.res palestiniennes du Shabbat et des fetes (Publications de l'institut de recherche et d'histoire des textes, section biblique et massoretique, collection massorah Serie I. Etudes Classiques et Textes 1; Hildesheim, 1973), esp. pp. 154-157, 195-199 and 265-270. 210 See also z. Malachi, "The 'Avoda' for Yom Kippur" [in Hebrew], (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hehrew University of Jerusalem, 1974), p. 151. 211 Randy Buth has expressed a similar idea in a paper given at the Second Colloquium on the Rabbinie Background of the New Testament, Jerusalem, July 2002.

The Ritual:r of Yom KippiiF

55

tbe temple service.212 Mishnah Yoma 7:1 places the reading ofthe biblical descriptions from Leviticus 16 and 23:27-32 and Numbers 29:7-11 in the temple ritual, perhaps a projection from a synagogue service. 213 Otber lections were included early without it being possible to point to a specific century. According to the Babylonian Talmud, Leviticus 18 (on incest) is the Torah reading in the Minhah service,214 while Isaiah 57:15ff (probably 57:15-58:14) and Jonah are the Haftarot for Shaharit and Minhah, respectively.m Leviticus 18 may have been read simp1y as a continuation of Leviticus 16.216 Instead of Leviticus 18, Exodus 32:11-14 (Moses interceding on behalf of the people after the incident of the golden calf) and perhaps also Exodus 34: lff (the second giving of the Law) might have been read in some Palestinian communities.217 The contents of Jonah and Isaiah 57:15-58:14 are closely connected to the ritual ofthe peop1e on Yom Kippur. Pseudo-Philo On Jonah can be regarded as the first evidence for the reading of Jonah on Yom Kippur, but its date of origin is uncertain.218 In Palestine, however, Jonah might not have been the Haftarah; some Jews might have preferred to read 1Kings 18:36ff (Elijah and the prophets ofBa'al).219 Baer, "The Service of Saerifice in Second Temple Times," p. I 12. Cf. mMeg 3:7; yMeg 3:7, 74b; only the ineeption is given. While Mishnah Megillah and the Palestinian Talmud mention only Lev 16 as a reading, the absence ofLev 23:2732 and Num 29:7-11 here does not mean that these texts were not part ofthe ritual in the Tannaitic period, given that the Tosefta does include Nwn 29:7-11 among the readings (tMeg 3:7; again, only the inception is given). Cf. also the seetion on tbe historicity of Misbnah Yoma, above, particularly p. 2S-26. 214 bMeg 31a; see Elbogen, Der jiiduche Gotte:rdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwickl."ng, p. 167. 21 ' bMeg 3 Ja; see Elbogen, Der jiiduche Gotte:rdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklllng, pp. 182-183. 216 The rabbinie texts indicate only the beginning of tbe reading in Lev 16. In the yearly reading cycle, this section goes as far as Lev 18:30. In tbe Ionger cycles in Palestine, the section roight have been shorter. See Tabory, Jewish Fe:rtivals in the Time ofthe Mishnah and Talm11d. p. 292, on alternative traditional explanations for the choice oftbis reading. 217 Ezra Fleischer, "Piyyut and Prayer in Mahzor Eren Israel," [in Hebrew} Kiryat Sefer 63 (1990) 207-262, here p. 24S. 218 For a discussion of the relation of Pseudo-Philo On Jorrah and Yom Kippur, see below, pp. 57-S9; see also tbe reference to Jonah in De solstitiis et aeq11incx:tiis, discussed below, p. 2S3. 219 Fleischer, "Piyyut and Prayer in Mahzor Eretz Israel,"' P- 246. Jonah is absent from Genizah founds of Qerobot to Yom Kippur. A more frequent connection could be expected between Jonah and Yom Kippur in rabbinie texts if it was a widespread reading on Yom Kippur, as suggested by Ganter Sternherger in a much appreciated e-mail communication observing that the only major discussion of Jonah is Pirqe Rabbi Elierer 10. 212 213

56

Yom Kipp!l,. in ElJ,.Iy J.wilh Thought ~md Ritual

The frequent allusions to Isaiah 58 in Christian texts on Yom Kippur, beginning with Justin Martyr. may also point to an early association in Jewish ritual, but I cannot preclude tbat Christians alluded to this chapter for its contents without knowledge of Jewisb liturgical traditions,l20 I soggest that some synagogues may bave read the passages aJready in Tannaitic times. or even earlie.r even ü they are attested to only in Amoraic traditions. Furthennore. long discussions of Hosea 14 in the Babylonian Talmud and of Psalm 27 in Leviticus Rabbah malc:e it probable that in certain synagogues these texts bad some furaction in thc Yom Kippur service or during the days before, such as Sabbath Shuva. 221 In the Gaonic period in Babyloniao academies~ the first five verses of Genesis were also read during tbe Minhah or Ne'ilah service.222 Seder RDll 'A.mtom. Go'on also mentions Obadiah and Mic:ah 7:18-20 for Minbah.223 Yet I want to stress again that we caonot be sure about the provenance of most of these readiugs. Until the lections were unified, many different orders may have been in use in different places. In addition, Jonah is part of a bomily for Sabbatb Shuva: Pe:Jiqta Rav Kahana 24:11 (ed. Mandelbaum, pp. 361-364) and Mishnah T11 'anit 2:1 c:onaects Jonah to public fasts. 220 Morgenstern even suggests the prophecy preserved in Iu 58 was made on Yom Kippur: I. Morgeostem, "Two Prophecies of the Fourth Century B.C. and the Evolution ofYom Kippur,'" Hebrew Union College Allnual24 (1952-1953) 1-74, here pp. 38-39. On lsa 58 in Ju.stiu Martyr's Yom Kippur passage, see below, pp. 1S6. According to PerTot, La L8f:tu,.e t.k Ia Bibfe. dans Ia Synagope, pp. 195-204, Luke4:18-l9, which oombines Isa 61:1 with lsa 58:6, is based on an old Jewish Iectionary tradirio.n. Pcnut's positioo is accepted by e.g. F. Bovon, Das Ewmgellum nath Lukas. 1. Te.ilb~md. Lkl.l9,j0 (EvMgelisch-X.Ubolischer Kommentar zum Neucn Testament :3: 1; Zllric:h ud Neukircb.en·VIu)'ll, 1989), pp. 211-212. :nt Sabbatb Shuva is the Sabbath between Roih Hashanah alld Yom KippUf. For Hos 14, see bYomDI6a-b; Pesiqta Rav K4hana 24:1-t2.17-19 (ed. Mandelbaum, pp. 347-3:58, 369, 375-78); and the incürcct evidenee M' the early Cbristian lloman lectionaries (.see pp. 317-321). On Ps27 and Yom K.ippur, see Lnitica Rablxzh2l:l {cd. Margulies, pp. 473-474). Naomi Goldstein Coben, ..Earliest Bvidcnu of tbe Haftsrah Cyc:Je for the Sabbaths betwecn the 171h of Tammuz ud Sukkolh in Philo," JOJlrnal of Jewish Shulie.s 48 (1997) 225-249, sees evidenc:e in Philo tbat the traditi011al Haftarot from 17 Tammuz until Sukkot wero faxed already in the first century. m See Elbogen, D11r jiidiache Gone.sdienat ilr &einer- geschichtlichen .Entwicklung, p. 167. l2J for the readings of Obacliah ud Mic:ah in Sedu ~ 'A.mram Ga'on, see ed. Goldschmidt, pp. 166 and 168. For Mic 7:18-20 in Pale$tinian usage, see Fleischer, E,.eu-J&,.ael Praye,. ond Prayer Rihtals os Po,.trayed in the Geniza Docullf~ta, pp. 134135 8.lld 143. Mic: 7:18 is quoted in a Yom Kippur/Sabbath Shuva homily in Pulqta Rav Kahan~:~ 2S:2 (ed. Mandelbaum, p. 381). In Puiqro ~ KahaR~:~ 25, Num. 14:18-20 plays a centrat role, bm this text is never quoted in bYoma.

The Rituoh ofYom Kippur

57

A long sermon On Jonah survived under the auspices of Philo. 224 Originally composed in Greek, it has reached us in an Arrnenian translation. Folker Siegert, who made a detailed investigation of thls setmon., suggests it was written sometime between the second centw:y BCE and the fourth century CB, in a Hellenistic city. He suggests Alexandria225 befure the tbird century CEP6 teaving open othcr options. among them Antioch in the fourth century. While we cannot be surc tbat Jonab was read on Yom Kippur in other communities than the ouc behind Megil/ah 31a,227 some hints in the text make it probable for the community of Pseudo-Philo, too, in wbich case On Jonah is tbe earliest extant Yom K.ippur sermon. The difficulty lies in deciding if this is a depiction of the Yom Kippur ofthat period, of some other fast, or of the fast of Jonah. The description of the Ninevites' fast mentions most of the usual affl.ictions of a public fast like Yom Kippur. but this can be explained as merely the bookish intluence of Jonah, without any connection to Yom Kippur. People repent and pray and abstain :f'rom food, drink, sex and adornment.2211 They walk around in .sackcloth and ashes and sleep on the floor.229 The latter features are not evidence against Yom Kippur despite the fact that they do not match the rabbinie tracts of Yoma, since Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer seems to know of such practices on Yom Kippur. Yet neither do they support an association with YomKippur. I would like to draw attention to two rites tbat match Yom Kippur but no otber public fast. First, the people put oo their festal garments in the fuint hope that the judgment may be delayed,230 and at tbe end of the day they dance. 231 These practices match the descriptions of Chrysostom, Theodoret and Misbnah Ta 'anil 4:8. 232 The mention of festal garments 224 Cf. F. Siegort (transl.), Drei hellenlsti.Jch-jüdtsclre Predigten. Ps.-Philon, 'Ober }IJlla', 'Ober Simson' rmd 'Ober die Gone1bneiclurllng 'wohltlitig wtnehrende:s Ff111er •• Jlol. J: OberseU.llllg aus da A.nnenilchen wnd :tprachliche Ef'/4uterungen. J'ol. 2: KommentQJ' nebst Beobachtwngen liur hellenistischen Yorgeschichte der Bibelhermenel'lik (2 vols; Wia$ensebaftlicbe Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 20, 61.; Ttlbingen,

1980, 1992). ;w Siegen,. Drei hellenlltisch-jildi:sche Predigten, vol. 2, pp. 49-51. 226 Sieg«t, Drei hellenistlsch-jiidische Pnuligten, vol. 2, pp. 40-46. m Jonah ia never- quoted or even allnded to iD Philo: sec Y.·M. Duval, Le Iivre de Jot~a:J dans /o lllteratl.ll'e chrltümne gf'fcque et latine. Sources et influence du CommentaiN! 3flr Jontts de 1olnt Jbome. (2 vols; Paris, 1973). p. 77. m See Pseudo-Philo, Orr .lont~h, (tl'all$1. Siegen I :30, 3~. 37, 48). 229 S~<~e Paeudo-Philo, On Jonah, {ttansl. Siegort 1:37). %ölt See Pscudo-Pbilo, On Jonah, (tnmsl. Siegert l :38). :DI See Pseudo-Pbilo, On Jonah, (transl. Siegert J :4l). Dz Tbis seems more logical to me than the recursion on a distinction betweeo pagan and Jewish moumiug practice.s as Siegort proposes.

58

Yom Kippur in Ear/y Jewish ThOflghf fJIId Rittlai

expücitly contradicts thc biblical book of Jonah, so this speaks against a merely ..bookish" intluence. Its source can plausibly be seen in contemporary Iewish practice on Yom Kippur. Moreover. the author uses the Armenian equivalent for tautvdl, to humble oneself.233 which plays so strong a role in the Septuagint descriptions of Yom Kippur. ''They humbled themselves to that extent and exercised such self-control according to tbe Scriptures that even their animals became intercessors of their prayers."234 Besides these ritual aspects, two conceptual motifs are interesting; God's position as judge is emphasi1..ed.23s and God is depicted as knowing everything, including sins committed secretly and not admitted in confession. 236 "But all (secret) human knowledge was rnanifested to the (captain) with complete clarity and put before his eyes by that One, whö alone cannot be deceived." 237 The latter motif appears explicitly also in the Delos stetes, the Qumran Yom Kippur prayer 4QS08 2 1-6 and the talmudic 'Anah Yo· dea' Razey 'Oiam. 238 Regarding these observations. it seems plausible that Pseudo-Philo's sennon On Jonah is not only the earliest scrmon on Jooah but also the earliest evidence for a readiog of the prophet on Yom K.ippur and the earliest extant Yom Kippur sennon. even before Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 10.239 ~ Regarding the ritual status of the reading. the Misbnah reports that the high priest in the temple bad the choice of performing the readings and the prayers in the holy linen garments or in a simple white stole. Why does the Mislmah mention such freedom in the most sacred ritual? If the description reflects actua) practice, some of the high priests apparently considered the reading and the prayer as part of the avodah. i.e. the obligatory and effective part of the main liturgy of the day, while others did not.240 On the m See Pseudo--Philo, On Jonah, (trausl. Siegert 1:37). See Pseudo-Philo, On Jonah, (tnnsl. Siegert 1:37). Siegert tmnsl.ates: "Sie erniedrigten sich aber dennaßen und llbten schriftgemaß solche Selbstbcbm-schung, daß (sogar) ihre Haustiere zu Verteidigern ihrer Gebete wurden." » 5 E.g. P$eudo-Philo, On Jon.ah, (tnmsl. Siegert 1:11 ). 236 See Pseudo-Philo, On Jonah, (transl. Siegert I: II and 23}. 217 See Pseudo-Philo, On Jf»>tth, (tnlnsl. Siegen l: 11). Siegert tfaDslates: "Doch alles (geheime) menscbliche Wissen brachte derjenige, der allein unhintergehbar ist. dem {Kapitäll} zu uotrO.g)icher Klarheit und stellte es (ihm) vor Augen." :as See above pp. 39 and 411, note 112. m Cf. Friedlander (p. 66, note S); Duval, Le Iivre de Jon.os dans Ia littirDturu chriiienne grecq11.e et Imine, p. 98, note 146. 7MI Most commentators (incl. the Talmudirn) consider the ficedom to wear or not to wear the white gannents as a sign that the prayer and the readings. did noJ belong to the avodah. Butthis would have been tbe case only ifthe high priest had always cbanged to the white garments or if one applies tbe logi.cs of later {supposedly etemally valid) ~:ationales to earliu rltuals. lf a high priest opted to continue reading in the holy l.inco 224

Thlt Ritaals of Yom Kipp'IJ.,.

59

other band, if the description does not reflect actual practice, this choice might reflect two Trumaitic attitudes to the relation between the verbal reenactment in the synagogue and the high~priestly avodah in the temple stressing more strongly either the continuous or the substitutive aspect.

THE SEDER AYODA.H: The most peculiar part of the prayers of Yom Kippur is the reciting of a Seder Avodah.241 Today, Seder Avodah is the term for very sophisticated religious poems (piyyutim ), which usually have thcee parts - an account of the creation, a history of men from Adam and Eve until Aaron. and a description of the high-priestly ritual on Yom Kippur. For our survey of early post-temple practices. the Sldrei Avodah are very interesting rituals, heilig complete verbaJ reenactments combined with such liturgical gestures as prostratior;t. Some key passages appear in aJmost all Sidrei Avodah and are so impo'rtant that they even influenced the text of the Misb.nah. 2112 They mark those rites of the temple ritual that the high priest (supposedly) perfonned with words: the three confessions with the responses of the people and the two countings that accompanied his sprink-

gannents, he probably did this to indicate the continuity. It is often more reasonable to asswne a conceptual change behind a change in practice than to reconstmct a common rationale for both. 241 Oo Sidrei A.vodah, see Malachi, "The 'Avoda' for Yom Kippur''; Mirsky, Yo.r.re ben Tosae Poe1'111; M. Zulai (ed.), Piyyutey Yannoi [in HebrewJ (Berlin, 1938); Z.M. Rabinovitz (ed.), Mahzor Piyyutey Rabbi YannalleTorah vleMo'adi1'1 [fu Hebrew] (2 vols; Jen~salem, 198H7); J. Yahalom (ed.), Pricstly Pale.rtinitm Poetry. A Ntm'ative Liturgy for the Day of A.tont~1'1ent (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem. 1996); idem, Poetry and Society in Jewish Galilee of Late A.ntiquity {in Hebrew) (Tel Av.iv, 1999), esp. pp. 107-136; M. Swartz, "Ritual about Myth lllbout Ritual: Towards an Underslllnding o{ the AYodah in the Rabbinie Period," Jownal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997) 135-lSS; idetll, '"Sage, Priest, and Poet. Typologies of Religious Leadersbip in lhe Ancient Synagogue," in: S. Fine (ed.), Jews, Cluistiana, l11Jd Polylheist.r in the A.ncienf .s)nogog~te. Cvltural Interaction dvring the Grec:o.Roman Period (Baltimore Stildies in the History of Judaism; London and New York, 1999; pp. 101-117). M. Swartz and J. Yahalomhave prepared an English tran.slation of some Sidrci Avoaah. 242 The prostration ofthe peopte in response to the mention ofthe Tetragnumu.aton in the higb priest's confessio11 was not part of the original reading of the Mishnah. lt does not appear in the most reliable liUlnuscripts nor is it cornmcnted upon in the Talmudim. Apparently, the liturgical formulations of the Sid,.ei A.vodah entered so deeply into tbe heads ofthc pcople that their elaboratcd form infiuen~:ed lhe copiers ofthe Mishnah. See Rabbinovic:z, Diqd11qey Soferim, vol. 4, p. 183; also the discussion in Rosenberg, "Mishna 'Kipurim'," vol. 1. pp. 126-142, e.specially 139-142. This becomes importaut in the disCIISS.ion of the Helchalot texts, demonstnrting a closer relationship of the Iader to the (priestly?) piyyutim than to the rabbinie tra<:ts. See pp. 134--139, beJow.

60

Yom KippUI' in Eorly Jewi4h Thought and RltJIQ/

ling of the blood.243 These sentences, distinguisbed from the rest of the poems by their prose fonn (and at least today by raising the voice), mark the central actions of the higb-priestly ritual, the confessions on bul1 and scapegoat, the mention of the ineffable name, and the sprinkling of the bull' s and the sacrificial goat' s blood in the holy of holies. This matcbes the obligation expressed in Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on to read aSeder Avo. dah "with sprinkli.ng.<J and confessions."244 Today, the Seder Avodah is read only during the Mussaf service. This is an achievement of the Gaonim, wha challenged the common custom to recite a Seder .A:vodah in each of the three prayers of the Day of Atonement. The Mussaf be.41t matches a liturgical reenactment of the temple service, since both are set at the sametime and since in the temple tbe special festival sacrifices are offered during the Mussaf. 24S The practice ofreading a Seckr .Avodah has two roots~ first, the transition ofthe temple cult from a one-man performance to one-man show with participation of the people; second, the interest in implemeating the biblical prescriptions and the temple cult in the synagogue. Regarding the first root, the transition from the purely cul.tic concept of a rite petformed in a secret b.oly place by a special person to a more collective ritual may already be perceived in the temple. Sirach describes the presence of spectators at the high-priestly sacri:fices in the temple. 246 EIbogen has rigb.tly noted tbat such observation by outsiders who get involved by praying on the outskirts of the temple changes the purely cultic concept oftemple worship into a m.ore edifying one.247 1n othe.r words, not only the cultic perfonnance itself is important. but also the participation (by observation) of those gathered. This change bad already taken place at the time of Sirach, i.e. around 200 CE, at lhe latest.148 Sirach's evidence is supported by Mishnah Yoma, which emphasizes the equal importance of w Malachi, "Tbe 'Avoda' for Yom Kippur,'" p. 154, states that the reenactment ofthe sprinldings beloogs to a later stage, since they are aot included mmost Sidrei Avodah. However, they an: included in Shrv'at Yamim (D"':l' nlr.lw) andin Yose ben Yose's 'Azkir Grnuot 'Eioah (n17lt m,ul 1':JTK) for Mussaf and 'A..rapper Gedolot (m',m 1!10K) for Minhah. Yose's 'Attah Konanta (nn:m::. :lliR) (for Sbaharit) does not includc the formula. The cwo Sdarim edited by Yahalom ('..U be'Ein Kol and 'A.romem le'E() have lacunae at these parts. :IA4 Goldscbmidt, &eder Rav 'Amrom Ga'on, p. 168:7-8. 14' Hoffinan, The Canonizotion ofthe Synagogue &II"Vice, pp. 103-110. w SirSO:l?-21. :z,c7 Eli)Ogeo, Snulien zur Geschieht• des judischen Goltelldienster, p. 52. 2"' Despile the grea1 iDfluenc:e of the end of Sirach 011 Sidrei AWJdah aud other Yom Kippur piyyutim in language, c:ontent and Jtnlc:ture, it is not in itselfaSeder Avodah: sec Rotb, ..Ecclesiaaricus io the Synagogue Service.''

The Rttwa/.s ofYom Kippur

61

observing either the high-priestly reading and prayer or the buming of the sin offerings. "Who sees the high priest reading does not see the bull and the goat buming, and who sees bull and goat buming does not see the high priest reading- not because he is not allowed to, but because tbe distance is great ond the work of both is equal. ,.249 From this key sentence we can conclude that in the opinion of tbe editors of the Mishnah the watehing of the temple liturgy was as important as tbe participation in it. Furthermoxe, the Mislmah considers the reading to be as important as the buming of the sacrifices, sinee the Misbnah underscores that it does not matter which of tbe two rites one sees. This oomparison of the Iiturgie importance of tbe word and of the sacrifices presupposes that both rites belang to the same category, but the determination that the two are equal goes even beyond tbat. 2so If watehing the high priest reading the prescriptions for Yom Kippur was as important as watehing the performance of tbe prescribed sacriftoes, this is the frrst step to a virtual verbal rcenactment of the whole temple sen'ice, lik.e the Seder A.vodah.zsl The second root of the custom of reciting a Seder A.vodah was almost certainly the early custom of reading biblical Yom Kippur passages.252 None of the ex.tant Second Temple sources proposes any reenactment of the temple ritual. This does not preclude the possibility that such a reenactment was part of the liturgies in Qumran or Alexandria. However, the theories that see a Seder A.vodah in 1Q34 3 ii II 4QS09 97+98 or tbe influence of a Setkr A.vodah behind Pbilippians 2:6-11 or Colossians 1:12-20 need more suppOrting evidence. ~3 The same is true for the recent suggestionofMenahem Kisterto seeaSeder Avodah in 5QI3.2S4 In Philo's account of the prayers. he is very brief regarding bis explicit .statement about the enonnous length of tbe Yom Kippur service. 255 We can only speculate about the rest of the prayers of bis community. Philo betrays a detailed acquaintance with tbe Halakhah of the temple ritual beyond the bibiical sources. His information may stem from a Seder Avodah.15' Similarly. it is not improbable that JJarnabas is basedonsuch a mYoma 7:1, my translation, with emphasis added. Cf. Sir 4:14, wbicb compares the study ofTorah to temple !Lturgy. 151 Even if the statement does not reflect the Secoad Temple period, it elucidatcs. the rationale behind the m::ilation ofthe biblical passages in tbe synagogue service. 152 See also Malachi, "Tbe 'Avoda' ror Yom Kippur," p. 151. :w 1Q34 3 ii has Ileen :seen as a Seder Avodah by GriDt:z. Fora diseussion. see abovc, p. 43. For a brief dileussion of a Seiler Avodah as a possible baclcgroWJd to Philippians md Colossians, see below, pp. 206-212, below. 1j4 Kister, "SQ13 aud lbe 'Avodah." See above. p. 44-4S. 1ß s" above, p. 46. 1341 See bclow, p. 112, note 166. :lAI

~

Yom Kippw' mEarlyJNilh Th()Ughl and Rirval

62

Seder Avodah.251 Its author is acquainted with details of the Ha.lakhah and speaks of a written sourcet which might perhaps have been of a liturgical nature. It is only around 400 CE that we reach safe ground. The Babylonian Talmud alludes to the recitation ofa Seder Avodah in the prayer. 2S8 Moreover, two tiny fragments, most probably of Sidrei Avodah from around 400 CE, were unearthed in Oxyrhynchus.m In the nine1eenth centuxy, scholars proposed that if one takes out a few ofthe disputes and some thematic digressions, Misbnah Yoma migbt once have served as such a liturgical text. Some even tried to reconstruct such an ••ur-"Seder A.vodah.2~ This hypothesiswas conoborated when, in 1907, Blbogen published some Oenizah fragments with a prose Seder Avodah Shiv'at Yamim261 remarkably similar to Misbnah Yoma with the necessary adaptations and sorne additionallines frorn the Bible, Tosefta and Mishnah Tamid.14l Blbogen does not give a date for the fragment, but it is likely to be ear1ier than the earliest poetic Sidrei Avodah of the fourth or fifth century by Yose ben Yose and his companions.263 Shiv'at Yamim seems to have been kept in use for a long time, as theSeder Rav 'A.mram Go'on

See below, p. 161, note 69. While the subject of bYoma 36b might have been a simple confession without an elaborate Seder Avodah, bYoma S6b clearly alludes to the transition from the sprinkling in the holy of holies to the sprinkling of the veil. Raba corrects the leader of tbe prayer who mingles the majority opinion with the apinion of Rabbi Yehudah. Elbogen's fragments display the reading accordiog to Raba 's correction (fragment A, p. 19, lines 13-14: Elbogen, Studien zur Geschiclrte da jüdischen Gortesdiensles, p. 108). m In 191S. Cowley publish.ed two very tiny Hebrew papyrus fragmenls from Ox:yrttynchus tbat clearly deal with Yom Kippur and might weil have been part of a Seder A.11odah (A. Cowley, Journal for Egyptian A.rcheology (1915] 211-212). Having little mar:erial for comparison (even less before the fmdinp of Qumran, Mezada and Muraba'at), he suggesls the broad period from the third to the fifth century CE, opting for 400 CB. The f'U'St fragmentreads: ..•]lZJll1 '"( •••]11111 ~!lll1( ...) U"TJ '1'J!II[..•]lM'R ":l'm[••• The second fragments reads: 'l!17( •••n]mn:17 1"1 111[...]:1 7ll c[...]'Vll!m O!lr.l [ •••1]1:1tm ("] 'l!i"1[... 257

)!B

..•]? ?111.1\'~ll [•..]ni"111l 260 J. Oere:obowg, "Essai de reslitution de l'ancienne r~dac:tion de Masslchet Kippeturim,"' Ret~lle des etudesjuiltes 6 (1882) 41-80; and H. Strack (ed.), Joma. Der Mischnatralr.tat 'Yersöhnungstag' (Scbriften des Institutwn Judaicwn iD Bcrlin 3; Leipzig, 2 1904). 261 This Seder Avodoh is caJied Shlv 'at Yamtm (D'IJ' nliJW) ("Seven Oays") after its inception. 2& Elbogen, Srvdien zur Geschichte lks jf.ldl1chm Gottesdienstes, "Anhang 1," pages

102-117. 261

The Palestinian Talmud ca11s the reading11 7Sb).

1:1'1' (yMeg4:S,

trom Lev 16 and Lev 23:26--32

'7Vl mo

11re R.ituo/s of Yom Kippllr

63

(ninth centu:ry) refers to it as one ofthe customary Sidrei Avodah,-w. highly honored by occupying fir.st place on the Iist of Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on. With regard to Shiv 'at Yamim, we cannot simply suppose that the present wording is the same as that used when it was fust written in th.e second, third or fourth ccntury, since the manuscript includes later traditions. 265 Nevertheless, we can still deduce two important arguments from it. First, the invention of reciting a Se der A:vodah does not necessarily demand a priestly origin. 266 Second, if Shiv 'at Yamim originally began directly with the preparatory week of the high priest and was circulated without a poetic preface ftom Genesis to Aaron's ordination. this is quite a strong argument against any attempt to suppose that connections to Yom IGppur underlie some New Testament hymns combining creation aod atonement.267 Usually, the argument is based on the connection of these elements in the poetic Sidrei Avodah, but it neglects tbat the earliest Seder Avodah, Shiv 'at Yamim, does not reflect this combination. Of course, it is possible in principal that the connection between creation, histocy of sin, 264 Goldschmidt, Seder R~ ~mram Ga'o11, p. 168:5-8. The other oplioll$ referrcd to are: "Azkir Sela (i!'!o ,'Jlll), 'Attah Konanta (:TnD'D ilnK). 'At.saltsel {?!;:sK) and "A.shanm

(JlfllC).

E.g. the higb-priestly prayer in the holy o{holies. See bYomo S3b. YOBef Yahalom and Michael Swartz have suggested that many of the early poetic Sidrei Avodah were written by priests. The poetic Siefrei Avodah reßect a different conception of priesthood and atonement from the rabbinie texts, which are usually quite critical toward priests. However, I cannot identify a priestly attitude already in Shlv 'ot Yamim, whicb is much more focused on the Mishnah than are the later Sidrei Avndah. One gloss may point to a slightly pro-priestly attitude.: a Statement regarding the high priest that "Israel's purity depends on you" (fragment p. 14 line 8-9: see Elbogen, Studielf mr Geschichte des jüdischen GottesdiensteJ, p. 104). Oll the other band, Shiv'at Ya,.,im does not skip the embarrassing passage on the high priest who has to swear loyalty to fhe rabbinie practice ofYom Kippur, but even anbellishes it (fragmeat p. 13, lines 1-13: see Elbogen, Studitm z11r Geschichte dujiidischen Gottesdienstes, pp. 103104). Furthermore, it changed thc passage about people readi.Dg before the high priest to '"lhey n:ad before him the 'Seder llaYom• and teach him the "Seder Yom HaKippruim'," thus reinforcing the intellectual inferiority oftbe hi&h priest. On the other band, Elbogeo inc:luded a preface to Shiv'at Yamim i1.1 his appendix, a short alpbahetic poem 'Attah Baro1a covering the crcatioo of the world to the appointment of Aaron and his soos (Eibogen, Studiet~ zt~r Gachichte desjüdischen Gottesdiem:les, pp. 116-117). We do not know when this pret'ac;e was added to Shiv'at Yamim, but here Aaron is cleuly the hero ofYom Kippur and notdie inferior clerk ofthe rabbinie tracts. 267 Cf. the sectionon Phil2:6-ll and Coll:l3-20 onpp. 206--212, below. On tbe basis tbat these hymns c:ombine atoneJnent wirh creation, the eommon ftrst part of poetic Sidrei A.)'odah, a number of scbolars bave assumed a cOilllection to Yom Kippur. Grintz, "A Seder Avodoh for Yom Kippur from Qumran," proposed one of Qumran's Festival Prayers (1Q34 3 ii) as the earliest Seder Avodah (see above, p. 43 note 150). 265

2f4

64

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

bistory of the forefathers of Aaron and Yom Kippur was made as early as the Second Temple period, but then we would have to assume that Shiv'at Yamim skipped the combination of creation and atonement. Josepb Yahalom and Michael Swartz perceive a more positive description ofthe high priest in the Sidrei Avodah, in Opposition to the rabbinie portrayals.2611 The Tannailic literature, which describes the high priests as little more than stupid clerks, tried to bolster the position of the nonpriestly sages·. The Amoraic literatme reflects two conflicting tendencies: like the Tannaites, a further diminution of the historical. (high) priests; and a reappraisal, as in the piyyutim. Yaha1om and Swartz explain the difference between piyyutim and parts of the rabbinie Iiterature by supposing that priestly groups, who have a stronger position in the liturgy of the synagogues, are responsible for the composition of these Sidrei Avodah. We know that priestly circles remained very important after the transition of the spiritual centers of Judaism :from Jerusalem to the Galilee. Th.ey lived in organizcd neighborhoods and kept records on wbich watch was to serve in the temple. I do not think that we can regard the increasing importance of priests as being dis1inct from the parall~l rise of priesthood and bigh-pricstly Christology in Christianity of the third and fourth centuties. Thc argument of Yahaiom and Swartz can be supplcmented by a further factor, one tbat is not intracultural but intercultural: the reappraisal of the ideal historical high priests can be understood as a Jewisb reaction to the evolving bighpriestly Christology. The inclusion ofJong praises of Levi and bis sons and th.e complete silence about bis rival, Melchizedek, in the Sidrei Avodah is only one example. I will discuss this question further in the discussion of Jewish-Christian polemics.269 Conclusion: Prayers in and outside the Temple Qumranic, Philonic and rabbinie praycrs share several motifs, whlch. however, are not closc and numerous enough to point to an extensive continuous tradition. In the Secend Temple period, prayers became a roajor focus ofthe ritual ofpublic fasts in and outside the temple. According to Philo as weil as rabbinie sta:temcnts, they fi1led the entire day. In a certain sense, prayers also connected the rituals in and outSide the temple. The high priest prayed at the end of his sacrificial ceremony, and some see in this the origin of Qumran's Festival Prayers- although, u.nlik:e e.g. the Songs 268 See the :introduction io Yabalom, Priestly Palesti11ian Poetry; and Swartz, "Sage, Priest, aDd Poet," p. J 58, oote 68, with reference to tne earlier works by Goitein and Mirsky. ~ See pp. 283-288, below.

1'11~

Rituols ofYotrt Kippur

65

ofthe Sabbath Sacrijice, the text ofthe Festival Prayers does not display a particularly close affiliation to the temple rituaL An intluence of the :synagogal prayers on the high priest•s concluding prayer seems more Jikely. Ritual reell&ctments ofthe high priest's ritual were probably part of the service in some synagogues of the Seeond Temple period. especially in the form of reading the biblical descriptions (or a translation or a parapb.rase of them). We can only speculate if some Second Temple communities even used a kind of Se
210 The early witnesses for this ceremony have been investigated by J.Z. Lauterbach, Rabbinie Es:says (Cincinnati, 1951), pp. 354-378. He also pursued developments in the eeaturies following Sbesbna: see idem, "111e Ritual for the Kappatot Ceremony," ln: idem. Studies in Jt~Wish Law, Custom and Folielore (New York. 1970; pp. 133-142). Y. Garmer,· uThe Histury of lhe kapporot Rite Regarding the Custom of Marseilles," (i:u Hebrew] Sinai 114 (1994) 19&-217, published anolller text for the rite ofMarseilles. See also I. Scheftelowitz. Da.J stellvmetende Hvhnopfor. Mil be$0nduer ßericksichtipng du jtidischen Yolbglauben8 (ReligiOllllgesehichtliche Versuche und VorarbeiteD 14/3; Giessen, 19l4}. m See the Ietter of Rav Sheslm.a from Sura, quoted in Lauterbach, &bbinic E811ays, pp.:m-357. m Today a different formula is used, e.g. the falber of the fam.ily takt:s the bird and swings lt arOIIJld bis head or that of the "benefited" saying something lüee: "This is mylyour excbange (öl!!''m), tbis is mylyour substitute (imnn), this is my/your atolleflleut (;,1!1::1). This ro0$terlhen will go to its death while Ilyou will enter and proceed to a good long life, and to peac;e." Quoted after thc modern rite in Schennan, The Complete .btScroll Machzor Yotrt Kippur NM!ach ,bhA:enaz. pp. 2-S, here 2-3.

66

Y~m Kip]1'117' in Ea,.ly Jewish Tho11gh1and Riiflal

He then swings tbe rooster around the head of lhe person for whom it is to be a substitute, while nc:iting the following words:m "A life for a life." He does this seven t.im.es. He then plac:es bis band upon lhe head of the rooster, saying, "This rooster shall go out to death instead of this pefl!oa."' 'fhen he places his band upon the head of tbe person who is to receive atonement by tllis ceremony, saying. "Thou, so and so, tbe son of so and so. shalt enter into life and thou shalt not die." This be does tb{ee times. Then the penon for whom tbe substitute is offered plaees bis band upon the head ofthe rooster, as a sort of;'I:J'ZIQ [the ceremony oflaying tbe hands upon the &acrificial animal]. He lays bis band (1D'ID1} upon it [Ehe raoster] and slaugb.tm it im:mediately, tbns in a manner following tbe rule prescribed for sacrifices, viz., that the slaughtering of the sacrifici.al victim must follow immedia~ely the ceremony ofthe laying on ofbands.174

The ritual includes gestures and a benediction expressins substitution.:m Some elements are repeated three or seven times. a feature often associated with magi(; rituals. The entrails are commonly thrown onto the street or the roof, where the birds feed on them, and the meat is given to the poor.276 Both rites are common methods of obtainins release from some kind of sin or impurity. Rav Sheshna does not give the exact time ofperfonnance for this ritual, but traditionally iNs during the night or the moming preceding Yom Kippur. Not only roosters were used.217 Rav Sheshna mentions rieb families using rams (c•7•K). "The essential thing - according to these people ·- is that the animal should be of the kiod that has homs. like the ram that was offered instead of our father lsaac." 278 He bimself prefei.'S roosters because they areeheaper and, symbolically, the Hebrew ,:u can mean rooster as ....vell as man.l'19 Jacob Lauterbach suggested that a background to the kapparot, e~ cially that with homed animals, is provided by identification of two mythological sacrifices with the scapegoat: the ra:m that Abraham sacri-

:ro I omit a long quotation ofPs 107:10-21; Job 33:24. 214 TranstatioD by J.Z. Laute:rbach. Stadiea in Jtnt~ish Law, Cu3tom and Folklore (Edited by Bemard 1. Bamberger; New York. 1970), pp. 356-357. The words in pareutheses ( ) are ad~tions by Lauterbacb, those in square bracket$ [ ] are additions ft'om tbe text given in a note oo. tho previous page. 275 Usually tbe pater famili.a.t bv.ys a beo for eacb. female and a to<:k for each male family member. See the Ietter of'Rav Sheshna from Sura, quoted in Lauterbac:h, Robbtnie Essay:~, p. 356. Today, white ls tbe preferable color. m Lauterbach, Studies in Jtnt~ish Law, C113tom and Folklore, p. 369. 177 Mueh later llasbi speaks of the poor using saeks of beans (on b&lbb 81b): see Lauterbacll, St&lliiu inJewish Law, Cv:stom and Folklore, pp. 370-373. 271 Rav Sheshna from Sura, quoted in Lauterbach, Rabbinie Es:say1, p. 356. m See Lauterbacb, Rabbinie &say.r, p. 356.

The Rituals ofYom KipJ718

67

ticed instead of Isaac280 and the male goat wi1h whose blood Joseph's lnothers colored his coat and tried to fool their father.l 11 He refers to a passage from Targum Pse.ut:W-Jonathan Leviticus for a combination of these ideas tagether wi1h tbe golden calf.l82 The kapparot with a ram combines the functions of an apotropaic sacrifice to satanJ•Az'azel and a reminder to God ofthe forefathers' merits. Tbat sacrifice of a ram ca.n also be seen as sacrifice to the evil powers alone ca.n be leamed from the Midrash. preserved in the late collection Yalqut Shim 'oni.213 To what extent is the kapparot a substitution for the scapegoat rite'P84 Sheshna's description and bis sacrificiaJ tenninology demonstrate amply that the kapparot is a ritual killing of an animal for an expiatory purpose. Rav Shesbna uses sacri:ficial terminology such as ;JJ"llO and regulations for sacrifi.ces (tbe slaughtering follows immediately aftcr the laying on of one hand). Unl.ike the scapegoat ritual, however, no confession is spoken and only one band is laid on the animal. Still, the performance does look like a sacrifice intended for Satan, a revival oftbe scapegoat, especially ifhomed animaJs are used. 285 It was precisely this mis.Ieading closeness to sacrifices that was one of the reasons for medieval halak.hic authorities objectlng to the rite.286 Yet, despite the fact that tbe kapparot were strongly opposed by numerous great authorities like Nachmanides, Rashba and Rabbi Y osef Qaro, it remained popular throughout tbe ages. This is probably due to the deep psychological impression the ritual makes on the performer and the spectators and the need to perform some act ensuring atonement. Ritual blood spilling and detachment of the entrails embodying the sins fulfilled these psychological needs better and more visibly than a mere verbal recounting of the temple ritual.

Gen 22:13. Gen 37:31-33. 2u Targum Pt~eudo-JoMthan Leviticus 9:3. 210 211

m See the discussion ofthis passage 011 pp. 128-129, below. Ia modern prayer books one often f"mds tbe argument to use a rooster, because it is an aaimal that c:ould not be .sac:riticed in the Jcrusalem temple and does not raise the su.spicion tbat the hipparat CO!IId be mistalcen for a probibited sacrificial rhe outside the sanctuary. This argument is much more recent than Sheslma. Fwthenn<~te,. this argumenlation is true on!y J.br the theologiau, not for the antbropologist or the performer of the rite. 215 Lauterbach, Rabbinie Essay:~, p. 365. ~ Lauterbach, Studi11 irr Jewi.sh Law, Cwtom and Folklore, pp. 3S7-3S8, note 77. 2M

Yom Kippur in Early J..."ish Thought a11d Rihlol

3.4 Pagan and Christion Descriptions ofContemporary Yom Kippur Ritea 3.4.1 Pagan Texts Jewish festivals, with the exception of the Sabbath. arenot very prominent iD pagan tex.ts. Menahem Stern in the index to bis magnificent Greek and Roman A:u.thors on Jews and Judaism lists only two passages for Yom Kippur.287 and he rejeets them in bis commentary- unjustiflllbly, as wc sb.all

see. In an attempt to portray Judaism as a variant cnlt ofDionysus. Plutarch (ca. 40-120 CB) tums to some of the Jewish festivals, amo.og them Yom Kippur and Sukkot; Tbe time aud charaaer ofthe greatest. most sacred holiday ofthe Jews clearly befit Dionysus. Wheu they celebrate their so-called Fast (,:J1v ylip MYOfi.CvrtY VIIG'Eiav). at the height oflhe vintage, tbey setout lables of all sorts offtuit 111leh:r tents and huts plaited for lbe most part of vines and ivy. They call lhe first of the days oftbc feast Tabemacles (c1C1Jvr):v) ••• 211

According to Stern, Plutareh's usc of Yom Kippur is a mistake and he is

really referring only to Suk:k.ot. Yet Plutarch may well reßect the impression of an outside observer of the festivals of Yom Kippur ond Sukkot. Philo. too. empbasizcs thc time of the fast in the middle of the harvest period. Authors more a.cquainted with Judaism than Plutarch who certainly were fusthand observers confused Sukkot and Yom Kippur, among them

:a7 Stem, Greek o.nd Lotin Autltars on Jews and Judaism. In addition to the two passages discussed herc, onc should mention the passage of Hecateus of Abdera rcfi:tnd to below (see p. 109, note 149), whose description of the Iewish high priest may have been influenced by the temple ritual of Yom K.ippur witb its entranc:e to the holy of bolies au.d the proslration of the peop!e. A fowth passage, a Ietter of Augustus to Tiberius, probably confuses Sabbath and Yom Kippur: "Not even a lew. my dear Tiberius, fasts so scrupulously ou. Jtis Sabbaths (dillgenttr sabbotis f«iwnivmsenat) as 1 have to-day; for it was not until aftu U.e f",.;st hour of the .oigbt !hat I ate two mouthfuls of bread in the batn before I began to be anoinled." (Suetonius, Divu.v Augusttu 16:2, translation by J.C. Rolfe in LCL). Stem, Greelc and Latin Authors on Jews o.nd Judai1711, vol. 2, p. 110, eornments that othcr classica.l autbors express the same notioo of a fast on the Sabbatb. Heinricll Lewy observed that it may bave been oae of the names of Yom Kippur, Sabbath of Sabbatlu that caused this confusion: see H. Lewy, "Pb.ilologisches aus dem Talmud," Philolops 84 (1929) 317-398, ~ pp. 39G-391. For the possibilicy that in Romc, Yom K.ippur was kept on a Sabbatb. see D. Stök.l Ben Eua. ..Whose Fa.st ls lt7 The Ember Day and Yom K.ippur," in; A.H. Beeker aud A. Reed (eds.), The W(I)IS That Never Parted: Jews ond Christians Irr Antiquil)l and tht Early Middle Ages (Tem and Studies in Aneient Judaism 9S; TUbingen: Mollr Siebeck, 2003; pp. 259-282). 288 Plutarch. Quaestiones Ct»Wi11ales 4:6:2, 671D, translation by H.B. Hoffleit in. LCL; cf. Stern, Greelr. and Latin Authors 011 Jews and hdaism, vol. 1, p. 557.

The Rituals ofYom Kippvr

69

Eusebius, Chrysostom,. Cyril of Alexandria and Jocob of Sarug.239 For outsiders, th.is unity of the drree autumn festivals is amply demonstrated by an explicit statement o{the ninth-century Syriac cxegete Ishodad: "In the seventh lunar month, first TiShri, there is a festival from the beginning until the twenty-first day.'Q90 This misapprehe.osion illustrates that for the non-Jewish observer the festivals, being so close chronologicalJy, might appear to be one long festival. Moreover, two dctails of Plutarch's deseription match not only Sukkot but also Yom Kippur: the joyful eontex.t ofthe dances in the vineyards and the festive meal as breaking ofthe fast after sunset.291 It is therefore quite plausible to see Plutarch's description as a firstband outside observation that is slightly confused. The sathist Juvenal (ca. 60-130 es) wrote the most delightfullines on YomKippur: [This diamood) was given as a present long ago by the barbarian Agrippa to bis incestuous sister, in that country where kings celebtate fesul Sabbatbs with bare

fect, aod where a loog-established clemency suffers pigs to attain. old age.m

Again, Sternrejects that this passage reflects Yom Kippur and, following a suggestion by Friedländer, refers to the generat obligation to remove tbe shoes on entering the Temple Mount. Heinrich Lewy, however, suggests 219 EW~ebiu.s, Demon.strutio Evungelica 1:3:2 (Yom Kippur a.s one of the three pilgrimages); Chrysostom, Aguin$ the Jews 1: I (wro.ng order); even more so on page 12Ja ofthe ncwly found manusa:ipt of Agotnst the Jews 2, where he speaks of a fast on Suldcot; see also Cbryso$t0m, Christmas Homlly S (PG 49:357BC); Cyril of Alexandria, Commtmtary on Jsoiah 1:14 (PG 70:36C); Jaeob of Sa.nag, Homily on the Scf1Pegoat, io P. Bedjan, Homiliae Se/ectae Mar-Jacobi Saf'llgeruir {Leipzig and Paris. 1907), vol. 3,

pp.2S9,263,267,275. ~ Did Ishodad know neither Shemini •Azeret on Tishri 22 oor Simhat Torah? The text continues: "At the beginDing of the monlh i.s the festival of thanksgiviDg, that of tbe ha.n'est; and on tbe tenth is the day of expiation [.:c.____], on which they fa.sl and are idle; .and ftom t:he fifteenth to the twenty-first is [the festivaJ} of booths. On the day of expiation, the priest expiatcs and sanctifies the holy of holies and the altar in order that

they be no Ionger nmdered ilbpure because of the fault afthose who were not proper to serve as priests. Regarding this God issued tbe reproaeh: 'Thcy have defilod my name and m:y altat' ."My translatioo oflshodad, Commtu~tury on LeviliCIIS 23:23-26, following c. van den Eynde (ed.), Com~r~ttntaire d'l3o'dad de Merv SIIT I'A"cien Tatoment. n. üode-Devtlroname (CSCO 176, S~:riptores Syri 80; Louvain, I9S8), p. 84 (cf. his Fnmch triWilation in CSCO 81, p. 112}. On lshodad., see C. Leonhard, 18/totlad ofMenv's Eugu.ls ofthe Psolm.r 119 and 119-147. ..4 Study ofHis /fflerpretatton in tlte Light ofthe S"iac Translation ofTheodore of Mopsuestia's Commtntary (CSCO S8S; Subsidia 1Q7; Leuveo, 2001). 291 Cf. mTa•an4:8 and mYoma 1:4. m Jovenal, Satrtrae 6:1S7-160, translatioo by G.G. Ramsay in LCL; c:f. Stern, Gre11.k ond Latin Author3 on Jew:r and Juda/sm, voJ. 2, p. 100.

Yom Kippur in Early Jewüh Thought ond Ritual

70

tbe custom ofwalking barefoot on Yom K.ippur. 293 Four arguments suppon Lewy's suggestion over Stem's and Friedlinder's. First. the rite of walk.ing publicly with bare feet on Yom K.ippur attracted the attention of other observers, too.194 Second. the mention of the Sabbath is more reasonably associated with a special day such as Y om K.ippur than is the prohibition against entering the temple witb shoes, which is vaJid every day. Moreover, the Sabbathis confused with Yom K.ippur also in other passagesfor example, in Augustus' letter.m Tbird, JuvenaJ was more likely to have heard about the king walleins barefoot on a Yom K.ippur in Rome than about the king's barefoot entry to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Fourtb, the moment of absurdity (in Roman eyes) lies in the concept that a king would celebrate a festival barefooted - i.e. with a mouming custom rather than in the common practice of removing the shoes before entering a sacred precinct. The latter would not be considered amusing. In sum, none of the pagan references to Yom K.ippur is a straightforward description; all are problematic, especially the ftrSt. We can consider this result as a cup baJf full or half empty. The cup is half empty because pagans seem to have taken little notice of Yom Kippur. On the other band it is half full because in the pagan texts Yom Kippur is the "most famous" festival after the Sabbath.296 3.4.2 Christian Texts

Christian lcnowledge of Jewish Yom Kippur rites was faidy general (though much more specific than the pagan texts), mentioning the date arul the rites of praying. fasting. walking barefoot. dancing and assembling in open places as well as various mouming practices. Most descriptions appear, however, in a polemical context susceptible to fabrication. 297 It is therefore crucial to distinguish between imaginary descriptions Alld references to actual Jewish ritual. Only those Christians who refer to nonbiblical rites other than fasting and mouming can be considered eyewit· nesses.2llll Refer:ences to sacke1oth and ashes in the mouming rites may reflect polemical topoi based on Isaiah 58. Jonah and Matthew 6:17 rather than personal observation of Jewish celebrations. Those Christian authors m Lewy, "Philologisches aus dem Talmud," pp. 396-391. 2')0 Su the discussion 0111111dipedalia in the Cbristian texts, below, pp. 74-75. m above, p. 68, note 287. 2" Accortling to the index in Stern, Greek and Latln Authors on Je'll/3 and Judaism, Passover and Shavuot do not scem to bave becn me.ntioned at all, and Sukkot is rcferred to only in the passage quoted above. m For ful'lher analysis of passages by the Chun:h Fathers on Yom Kippur, see pp. 262-289, below.

s"

291

Fora discus.sion oftbis question, see pp. 277-2&3. below.

Tlte R1"tuals of Yom Klppur

71

who mention the practice of fasting and mouming might be using exegeti~

ca1 deduction from the juxtaposition of "humbling" and "fasting., in Psalms 34:13 or lsaiah 58:4-5 with Levitleus 16 and Jonah. Wb.ile for many, ..the fast" is the name for the Day of Atonement iostead of the bibH~ cal Yom .Kippur, this notioo may be derived from the descriptioos of Pbilo.299 Praying, the central rite, is mentiooed only by Tertullian and Ephrem. Was prayer perbaps too private to be noticed in closed synagogues? The earliest Christian description of Yom K.ippur outside the temple - that by Tertullian, On Fasting 16, suggests the opposite location, open space: A Jcwis.h fast (Iudaicum leiunium), at all events, is "lebrated evei)'Where; while, negleeting the temples (templis), throughout all the shore, in every open plac:e, at length they send prayer{s) up to beaven. And, albeit by the dress and omamentation they disgrace the duty of m.ouming, still they pn:tend loyalty to abstinence and slgh for dMl anlhority ofthe liD.gerillg star [to sauction tbeir eating}.300

To my knowledge Samuel Krauss was the first to use this passage for reconstructing the Jewish customs of Yom K.ippur.301 Krauss was followed notably by Claude Aziza.302 Against both, Hillel Newman bas argued that Tertullian describes the fast of a pagan group that fasts as ifthey were Jews, as suggested by the adjective Iudaicum. 303 Newman•s mein argument is that it is difficult to explain the term. templis in the plural in a Jewish context.304 Yet Steven Fine's recent study shows that the "templi7.atioo" of Cf. note 1 on p. 16, above. Sligbtly cbanged translation of On Fasting 16:6 by S. Thelwall in Ante·Nicene Fathers 4: 113; text in A. Gerlo (ed.), Qutnti Septim/ Florentit Tertulliani Opera. Pars ll Opua Mtmtanistica (CCSL 2; Tumhout, 1956), p. 1275. JOI SeeS, .Krapss, Synagogale AltertUmer (Berlin, Viellll&, 1922), p. 272. Jlll C. Aziza, Tertullien et le jrldatsme (Publications de Ja Fac:ult6 des Lettrcs et des Seiences Humaines de Nice 16; Nice, 1977). :m See H. Newman, "Jerome and !he Jews" [in Hebrew with Englisb swnmary) (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1997), bere p. 167. Newman oompares !he Iudaicu111 of this pwage with the Ninilllticum in the imm.ediately precediog P*fagraph, which clearly refers to pagans (sacriticial altar fire, idols). Yet it is by no m.eans clear tbat the two paragraphs are about tbe same group illld ritual. In fa41t, in the first paragraph, the people wear sackclodl aud ashes while in lhe second pamgraph they are dresscd omately, which in Tertulliilll's eyes distmbs the mouming ambienc:e. Thi5 5ignificaut point has been tumed 11psW. down by S. Thelwall's translation. lM The expression l:JJ!l W'Ti'13 ls very rarely used for synagogues and teaehing halb, aud then only quite late (only in bMeg 29a). On the tetm, see Krauss, Synagogale Alte~tf}mer, pp. 17-18 and 28, note 6; and Stem, Greek and Latin ,(utltors on Jews and J11dai~m, p. 43. Two early non-Jewish authors use "t:emples" to refer to "synagogues..: Tacitus, Historia 5:5:4 (ig;t.,. nulla simulacnl urbihwt sais, nedum templis s[ist]wnt), see C.H. Moore in L<-"'L Tacitus 2; Stern, uumber 281, vol. 2, pp. 17-63; Agatharchides of Cnidu.s li'P

*

72

J'om Kippur in Etll'ly Jf1'Wi$h Tlu,ugflt and Ritual

the synagogue began to occur already in the Tannaitic period. 305 That Tertullian refers to pagans who followed Jewish practices {including fast~ ing) elsewhere, and that the custom of fasting until the end of the day is attested in pagan texts, too, makes a pagan provenance as possible as a Jewish one, but not more likely. 306 In either case, I still consider it the earliest detailed non-Jewish description ofYom Kippur outside the temple, notwithstanding that the depietion might concem a Yom Kippur observed by pagans - for even in this case, the oom.pa:rison with the Jewish fast reveals how Tertullian imagined a Jewisb Yom Kippur and what he knew about it. Tertullian chooses to characterize this "Jewish fast" by depicting the people as engaged in prayer and abstinenc:e, dressing in solemn clothing and congregated in open places until the setting of the sun and the appearanc:e of stars. All these non-biblical details and also the nota:ble length of the prayers can be verified by other evidence.307 The omate dressing is particularly significant, since it matches the rabbinie descriptions of joy and dancing only on Yom Kippur and not on any other Jewish fast. 308 Con-· sidering that the Old Testament (Isaiah 58 and Jonah) and the New (Matthew 6) describe the opposite custom. Tertullian probably observed with bis own eyes not only the pagan fast but also the Jewish Yom Kippur. While Tertullian, when engaged in directly anti-Jewish polemies, contrasts the fast with tbe Eucbarist and considers participation in the fast bannful,309 in 0" Fasting hc only disregards the joyful aspeet without a demonization ofthe Jewish fast (as e.g. Chrysostom wiJl do), and he even prefers it to psychic - i.e. Catholic Christian - fasts.

apud Josephus, Contra Jtpionem I :209; au· ev wtt; Uipott; 81Ct~Cl.:Ot&; TAl; J.afpelc; dJxllG8rl• seeStem, numberlOa, vol.l, pp. 106-108. :lOS S. Fine, This Holy Place. On tlle Sanctity of lhe Synagogve during the GrecoRoman Period (Cbris.tian.ity aod Ju.daism mAntiqoity Series 11; Notre Dame (Ind.1 1997), pp. 41-SS (quoting e.g. mMeg 3:3 and tMeg 3;21-23), and cf. pp. .55-59 on the limitatiOilS. • Ad noliont3 1:13:4 (CCSL 1:32). M. Simon. "Le Judaisme berbere daJis l'Aiiique ancienne," in: idem, Rßcherclrcs d'hi.stoire Jvdeo-ChritiVInt (Etudes Juives 6; .Paris, 1962; pp.l0--87), p. 61, takes tbis as prooffor his tbesis of Jewish intluence on local Semitic peoples around Cartbage. 301 Open. places are menrioued for the prayer asscmblies on public fasts by rnTa'an 2: 1, cf. Krauss, Synagogale AlttrtiiMer, p. 269. Cluys0$tom states that people daD<:ed in marketplaces (A.gaiiiSt the Jews 1:2; 1:4). Does tbe beach ill.dic:ate tbe qibla to Jerusalem? 301 The elaboraw clothing mab;hes the joyful aspect of Yom Kippur mentioned in mTa'an4:8. l~ er. the passages in Jtgainst Mareion 3:7:7 and Against the Jfi'WS 14:9-10. discusaed oo pp. 156-158, bClow.

p~~~

171e Rit11ols of Yom Kippur

73

Three of the details observed by Tertullian appear also in other nona Jewish sources: prayer, a.ssembling outdoors and the joyful aspect. Regfltding the Jewish preoccupation with prayer on Yom Kippur, I found OIJly one other Cbristian author, Ephrem, in bis Homily on Fasting: Thercfore, on tb.e day or its fut, thc blind people rushed in mogaw::e and .in error tbC fast ill it$ !DOUth, [but] the idOl i11 its heart, thc praycr 011 its lips, [but) sorcery in its mi.nd, its stomach empty of bread., but fUU of lie[s], its huds washed every day, but their onseen blood calling out against thcm.310

The last line could eitner be an exegetieal device to underscore the pollutjng effect of the murder of Christ, or it could reflect Jewish purification rites- presumably before Yom Kippur as suggested by Didymu.s the Blind (d. 398) in bis Commentary on Zechariah: "The word ofthe almlgbty Ood came to me." says tbe prophet, "and ordered {mc) to fast on the fourth and tbe tifth and the seventh and tbe teuth•-lll_ obviously [tbe tenth day] of lhe month, since therc is :no te:nth (day) of the week, as we domonstrated before. And tbe almighty God ordercd these {fasts] u an image for thc seventh month according to the {compulation of tb.e] Hebre'Ws, on which the socalled Day of Atonement and humiliatio.n (i~IMGjl()(i "cd TGliC\vdlac<»<; ..;pipa) is perfonned, 'Which Jews observe publiely (i1111ouläic;), calling it fast, puricying pn~ viously (11POill'Vi.I;Ofl6Y«JV) on thc fourtb aod the fifth and tbe seventh of the [days] coming before tbe pubüc fast (tOiv i11:l
Didymus emphasizes the public cbaracter of the fast. Thls terminology is remjniscent of the Hebrew expression "11.::1'! n,D11" ("public fast")~ thougb it is a publicly observed fast rather tban a fast of the public. What does Didymus mcan by ••purification" and wh.at is the source ofhis description? Is he referring to the ten "days of awc.. before Yom Kippur? The context gi.ves no hint. Didymus is one of tbe few Christian authors with a neutral attitude toward Yom Kippur, perhaps because be wishes to use it to interptet the enigmatic prophetic veue. The joyful aspect appears also in Theodoret of Cyrus (ca. 393-466): He [Ood} ordered fast.ing on the tenth oftbe month. lberefore, he c:alled this day the Day of AIOncment. He said "Hwuble your souls from the eveui.ng ofthe llinth 310 Epbrem, Hymn 011 Fasting 1:12; my traoslation of the Syriac in E. Beck, Des 1/eiliglln EphraBm des Sytllrl Hymnen de leirmio (CSCO 246; Scriptores Syri 106; LouvaiD, 1964), p. 4. It is norewortby that the Hymn on Fo$ting 2 begins with Iss 58:1-5; Hymrr on Ft1$li.ng 10 speaks about Moses' fast as atouement for the sin ofthc golden ca1f aad mocb the Jews wbo c.:omplained abour eating thc manna. 311 Zech 8:1!>. m My trao.slation of Commentarii in Zachariam 3:32; for the Greek text and Freu.ch translation see L. Doutreleau, Didyme I'Aveugle. Sw Zachorltt. l11t1'oductiorr, lale aitiqlle, troduction et 1101e1 (3 vols; SC 83-85~ Paris, 1962), VQl. 84, pp. 628-(;30.

74

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritllal of the month"313 and "every soul, which will not be humbled on that day, that sout will be destroyed from your people."314 Yet the Jews, who undisguisedly fight against the law, do not Iook sad on Ibis day, but laugh and play and dance lllld practice unehaste words and deeds ("yd.&ol Kai 1t11il;oum Kai xopsiJOuo\ xo.i ciKo~ cn:otc; Ptj,J.acn Kll.i n:pciyllii.OIICtxPTJnat).m

Dancing matches Mishnah Ta 'anit 4:8316 and is mentioned also in John Chrysostom. In bis notorious Sermons Against the Jews, which are directed against Christians who participate in the Jewish Yom K.ippur celebrations, he gives a vivid description of some contemporaneous Jewish practices: e.g. he complains that "they dance with bare feet on the market place."317 While the state of barefootedness is usually explained as pagan nudipedalia,318 it matches well the rabbinical prescription~ since abstaining from wearing sandals appears as one ofthe six basic abstinences ofYom Kippur in Mishnah Yoma 8:1.319 lt also appears in the sermons of Leo the Great (440-461) on the Fast ofSeptember in Rome. When, therefore, dearly beloved, we encourage you toward certain matters set out even in the Old Testament, we are not subjec:ting you to lhe yoke of Jewish observance, nor are we suggesting to you the custom of a worldly (carnalis) people. Christian self-denial surpasses their fasts, and, if there is anything in common between us and them in cbronological circumstances (temparibus), the customs (moribus) are different. Let them have their barefoot processions (nudipedalia), and Iet their pointless fasts (ieiunia) show in the sadness oftheir faces (in tristitia uultuum). We, however, show no change in the respectability of our clothes. We do not refrain from any right and necessary work. Instead, we control our freedom

Lev 23:27.32. Lev 23:29. 3" My Iranstation of Quaestiones in Octateuchum, in Leviticum 32 in: N. Femandez Marcos and A. Saenz-Badillos (eds.), Theodoreti Cyrensis Quaestiones in Octoteuchum (Textos y Estudios "Cardenal Cisneros" de Ia Biblia polliglota matritense 17; Madrid, 1979), p. 183:12-19. For further discussion, see below, pp. 280-281. As the diffenmt choice of vocabulacy reveals, the statement is not literally dependent on the formulations of lohn Chrysostom. Tbere may theoretically be an indirect dependence, but it is muc:h more likely that John and Theodoret, who lived in such close proximity - geographic:ally as chronologically - witnessed the same festivities on different occasions. 316 Quoted above, p. 36. 317 •••flljlVOic; tot~ nooiv in:i tflc; ciyopii~ c)pxotillt:VOI (Against the Jews 1:4; PG 48:8460). See in the same section: yv11vo~ ßG,lit~s tote; nooiv ai tfl~ ciyopdc;.Kai Konmvtl tflc; aeJXTJIIOativl)c; ainoi~ ICCli toii yil..mt~ (Against the Jews 1:4; PG 48:849C). 318 See the conunentary to this passage by R. Brlndle in idem and V. Jegher-Buc:her (eds., transl.), Acht Reden gegen Juden (Bibliothek der griechischen Literatur 41; Stuttgart, 1995). 319 Campare also Juvenal's parody ofthe barefoot Agrippa mentioned above, p. 69-70. 313

314

Tlre Rituals ofYom Kippur

75

in eating by simple ftugality, limiting the quantity of our food, but not condeJillling what God has created. 320

Here, the commentators explain the nudipedalia against the background of Manichean practices. 321 Regarding the fact lhat Chrysostom and Leo both claim to describe Jewish Yom Kippur practices, and considering that this roatches the rabbinie prescriptions, we have to consider the Statements of these Church Fathers as eyewitness accounts. 322 In the chapter on liturgy this deduction will be important in assessing the historical connection of Leo and the Christian Fast ofthe Seventh Month to the Jewish fast. 323 Besides walking barefoot, Leo mentions sadness, less respectable clothes, total fast and idleness as characteristics of Yom Kippur. Sadness and shabby clothing may be polemical topoi rooted in Matthew 6, Isaiah 58 :no My translation of Sermon 89:1 of the Latin in A. Chavasse (ed.), Sa~~cti Leonis Magni Romani Pontiftcis Tractatus Septem et Nonaginto (Hom 39-95) (CCSL 138A; Tumhout, 1973), p. SS1. Cf. the translation of A.J. Conway and J.P. Freeland, St. Leo the Greot: Sermo~~& (The Fathers ofthe Church 93; Washington, D.C., 1996). The trans1ation of Freeland and Conway ("if there is anything in common between us and them in circumstances, there are great differences in our character'') misses some aspects of the comparison. Dolle's French translation goes in lhe same direction as mine. Mores is the headline for the five customs that follow. 321 Conway and Freeland, St. Leo the Great: Sermo~~&, p. 368. 32Z Blaise's dictionary gives two meanings for nudipedolia, one pagan and one Jewish. Jerome uses the term nudipedalia to describe an explicitly Jewish practice accusing Paul "n11dipedalia exercueris de caerimoniis ludaeorum." - Letter 112: 10; I. Hilberg (ed.), Sancti EIISebii Hieronymi Epistll/oe (CSEL 54; SS; 56:1-2; Vienna, 2 1996), here vol. SS, p. 379:15-16. Cf. lhe same incident in Again.rt Joviniamu 1:15 (PL 23:234C); Commentary on Galatians I; 2:8-9 (PL 26:339A, 37SD). This may possibly reflect Jerome's acquaintance with lhe contemporary Jewish practice as weil, but does not necessarily refer 1.0 Yom Kippur. The textual basis for the Roman practice of barefoot processions rests on quite a fragile foundation: three passages by Tertullian and Petronius, much earlier than Leo's time, Leo being closer to Jerome: see Marbach, "Nudipedalia." Petronius refers to women who walle barefoot to a hill (the Capitol?) to pray for rain (Satyricon 44). Perronius, however, uses the past tense (antea ibant), which may mean "that the ceremony bad been abandoned in the speaker's own time," as suggested by M.H. Morgan, "Greek and Roman Rain-Gods and Rain-Channs,'' Transactionsand Proceedings ofthe A.merican Philological Association 32 (1901) 83-109, here p. 100; or "daß er [der Brauch] nicht mehr so allgemein und so gewissenhaft wie früher durchgefiihrt wurde": E. Samter, "Altrfimischer Regenzauber," Archiv filr Religionswissenschaft 21 (1922) 317339, here p. 321. Tertullian about ISO years later describes a similar rite, the nudipedalia oflhe people, who intimes of drought pray to Jupiter for rain on the Capitolian hill (Apologia 40). In a second passage he speaks of several communities (quastklm uero colonias) who follow this practice (On Fasting 16). In general, walking barefoot is a sign of mouming (Terence, Phormio 106-107; Suetonius, Divus Augustus 100:4; bPesah 4a). 323 See below, pp. 312-317.

76

Yom KJppur in .Early Jewish Thought
and Jonah, but it may also describe Roman Jewish practice, since the ra~ binic data are not univocal on this issue. How much did ancient Cbristian scholars know about the detaUs of the prayer service? Jerome. Chrysostom and Hesycb.ius mention the sound of Shofarot in close juxtaposition with Yom K.ippur descriptions associating eschatological concepts to it.324 Yet it is di:fficult to decide whether these Sbofar blasts refer to Rosh Hashanah or to Yom Kippur, and whetller the Christian authors heard the Shofarot or only read about tbem in the festival calendar of Levitleus 23. Were Christian authors familiar with the Jewish readings? Some readings of the Roman Fast of the Seventh Mouth are conspicuously close to the readings of Yom K.ippur, Hosea 14, Micah 7, Exodus 32 and Leviticus 23.325 Furthermore. Isaiah 58, one of the Haftamt for Yom K.ippur; appears very often in Christian texts on Yom Kippur or in close juxtaposition to passages on the fast. 316 Yet it is impossible to discem if this juxtaposition is the result of a Christian polemical pun on the cita:tion of Isaiah 58 in tbe Jewish prayer in some communities, or if some Jewish communities introduced Isaiah 58 as a reading in on:ler to counter Christian attacks. Most likely is a third possibility, that lsaiah 58 entered the Jewish liturgy aQd the Cb.ristian polemies independently merely because its content was weil suited to both. Two results of the analysis swprised me. First, with the exception of Theodorct of Cyrus' portrayal of Yom Kippur, the most detailed descriptions of the Jewish Yom Kippur- Tertullian, Ephrem, Didymus, Chrysostom and Leo - do not appear in exegeses of Leviticus 16. The reason for this discrepancy between extensive exegesis and detailed ritual description is probably the different orientation of the exegetical genres, with concepts having a certain primacy over ritual. For example, Protestant exegesis explains the Protestant understanding of the biblical text and probably justifies Protestant liturgy and ritual. In the times of ProtestantCatholic polemics, Protestants devalued Catholic liturgy by attacking Catholic concepts and the interpretation of their canonical prooftexts. Tbe Protestants did not need to describe, analyze and counter the details of Catholic ritual itself, since they bad already ex:tractcd ..its roots!' On the othet band, descriptions of Catholic ritual appear as circumstantial evidence in letters, diaries. newspapers, etc. Accordingly, the 324 Jerome, Letter 52:10 (CSEL 54:432-433); Cbrysostom, A.gainat the Jews I:S.8; Hesychius, Commentary on Leviticw 23 (PG 93:1091BC). l:U See the section on rhe Roman Cbristian fast in September, below, pp. 317-321. 326 E.a. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 40:4; Origen, Homily on Leviticus 10:2:4 (SC 287:136); Ephrer.n, Hymn on Ftuting 2;l; Basil, Homily on Fa.'Jiing 1-2; Leo, Se171101'1 92:2.

Tht! Rimals of Yom f(jppar

77

preponderance of noo~exegetical texts over the ritual descriptions and the relative disinterest of Christian exegesis in contemporary Jewisb ritual are "normal." l:z? Second, I was surprised by the fact that Origen does not refer explicitly to the specific Yom Kippur pra.ctices of bis Jewisb contemporaries, tbough be clearly Hved in a town with a dense Jewish popu1ation, fought Christians participating in Yom K.ippur fasts expressis 11erbis, and was ac.quainted with some exegetical traditions. Given bis provenance and tbe specific situation of tbe battle a.gai.nst Christian Judaizers, it is bighly unlikely that Origen did not know at least the main visible features of tbe popular Yom Kippur rituals. We can therefore use tbe case of Origen to deduce that an argumentum e silentio cannot be applied to other authors with regard to Yom Kippur: if Cbristian authors do not explicitly specifY Jewish ritual practices, this does not mean that they were not aware of at least tbeir basic elements. In sum, aJmost all Christian authors were acquainted with tbe fac.t tbe Jews ta.sted on Yom Kippur; some were also familiar with the joyful aspects of the rites such as dancing or beautiful clothes, and outdoors gatherings; few mention prayer or purification rites. Some may have known of the use of Sbofarot in the prayer service or the reading of Isaiah 58 or Jonah, but it is impossible to prove. I did not find any Christian witness for the Jewish custnm of wesring specifically white clothes or performing the ktlpparot sacrifice, wbicb is quite suitable as an object of polemics. lt is difficult to point to any conclusions conceming time and place. Neither is it possible to ascribe certain Jewish customs to specific communities. Ephrem, Cbrysostom a.nd Theodoret do not seem to be informed more precisely, nor do they relate ra.dically different facts tban Leo or Tertullian. Texts from Alexandria. Jerusalem and Caesarea are less informative than Leo from Rome and Tertullian from North Africa, and less than I expected them tobe. Certainly, some oftbe great exegetes ofLeviticus such as Cyril and Hesycbius lived in towns with considerable Jewish minorities, just as Origen did.32s Clearly based on eyewitness accounts are the descriptions of Epbrem, Chrysostom, Theodoret and Leo, 8lld most probably also Te.rtullian; they g:ive detailed extra-biblical infonnation that tallies with rabbinie regu[ations. . :m kl a test case, it would be intcresting to c;ompare Yom Kippur to, for example, Pussover. How much did Cbrlstiens lmow about !hc Jewisb post-temple Passover practiees, md in wbat contexts and geores do thes~: desc:riptions appear? I am not aware of sudl a study, but the limiied ftamc: ofthe prescnt one prec:ludes my undenalcing it at this point :m These authors are discussed below, pp. 262-265.

Chapter 3

lmaginaires ofYom Kippur The different Jewish groups attached various rationales to the ritual of Yom Kippur and variously used its imagezy to explain theological ideas. Tiris section investigates these imaginaires according to the major sources. I sball begin (section 1) with 1he apocalyptic texts of different provenance (including Qumran) that use similar imagery based on Yom Kippur to describe the primordial and the eschatological figbt against evil, and the vision of God. This discussion is crucial for understanding the emergence of early high-p.riestly Cbristology and of Valenti.nhtn and Clement of Alexandria's mysticism. I shall tben (section 2) deaJ with Greek diaspora texts. The Septuagint demonstrates the enculturafion of Jewish conceptions in a pagan wortd. Phllo shows how allegorlzation can serve the needs of the temple-less diaspora. Tbe portion on 4Maccabees 17 uses Yom K.ippur imagery in post-temple ]ewish martyrology, a phenomenon parallel to Cbristian Jewish thought. The same phenomenon may be the background to a pas· sage in Josephus. The brief passage on Cbristian Jewish texts (section 3) was inserted mainly to remind the reader that many of the texts to be investigated in parts 2 and 3 in fact belong here. in the analysis of the Jewish material. The next two sections deal with aspects of two corpora of post-temple Judaism oflate antiquity: the rabbinie texts (section 4) and Hekhalot Iiterature (section 5), with an emphasis on the irrst corpus. The Hekhalot texts resume the use of the imagery of the high p.riest's entrance to the holy of holies for the description of the mystical ascent. resembling Philo and the apocalyptic sources. All o{ these corpora are essential for unde:rstanding the development of this imagery in early Cbristian mysticism, especially the Valentinian sources. 1 will retum to aspects of pi;yyutim and the rabbinie texts in the section on Christian-Jewish polemics. 1 I tried to investigate each group in its own right. Yet this chapter has to be understood within the Iimitation of the frame of this work as a. tool for addressing the primary issue - the impact of Yom Kippur on early Christi1

See below, pp. 277-283-

l•aginairtll of Yom Kippur

79

anity. i.e. the compara.tive aspects determine the foeus and scope. Despite these Iimitations, I hope to have added some new observations and interpretations. espec.ially regarding the apocalyptic material and 4Maccabees. 1. The Apocalyptic lmaginaire of Yom Kippur Tbe mythopoetic potential of Yom Kippur finds one of its deepest expressions in two major elements in the ancient Jewish apocalypses: 1. Some descriptions of heavenly ascents employ the high-priestly entry into the presence of God in tbe holy of holies (Testament of LBv(} or allude to it (Isaiah 6; Zechariah 3; JEnoch 14, Apocalypse of Abraho.m).z 2. In some cosmological myths of Urzeit and Endzeit about the genesis and termination of sin. the •Az'azel goat serves as imagery for the leadets of the evit powers (Apocalypse of Abraham; JEnoch 10). So:metimes the 'Az'a:zel goat ritual is used to describe the eschatological end of sin (JEnoch 10). Often thc protagonist of the good forces is portrayed as a (high) priest (I Enoch, Zechariah 3. ll QMelchizedek, Apocalypse ofAbraham).3 I wiJJ start with a briefanal ysis of tbe fust and continue with the second. A final section deals with the etiological aspects of another tradition contained in Jubtlees. Jubilees is not apocalyptic, but it has many traditions in common with 1Enoch. and it deals with Yom K.ippur in a mythological time and from a priestly perspective.

1.1 High-Priestly Visions ofGod I: Apocalyptic Te;;;ts The high-priestly entrance to the holy of holies served as imagery for apocalyptic texts to describe heavenly ascents to God. Similu pictures appear also in Philo, Valentinian Gnosticism, early Christian mysticism and Hekhalot texts. The heavenly ascents adopt the language of Leviticus 16. Schotars have frequently investigated these texts and their interconnections. This section treats only the apocalyptic texts; the othcr texts will be dealt with separately. I focus on the connection of the sources to Yom K.ippur and mainly ask two questions: With l'egard to the bistory of tradition, which text.s reinforce what kinds of elements of the Yom Kippur 2 The two main e-Iements may be eonnected, as for example in the A.pocalypse of Abraham. 1n tlte Book of the Watchers (IEnoch 1-36) and in the Testame11t of Levi the two moments appear in different chapters of the book. 3 A previons version of these thoughts has been published as Stökl, "Yom Kippur in lhe Apocalyptic: lmaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High Prie~ood."

80

Yom KippW' ln Ear/y Jewlsh ThoMght ßlfd Rihlal

imagery? And, what mystic ritual lies behind tbis conception of the visionary as high priest entering the holy of bolies? The prophetic vision.s of Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 1 and l 0 use terms and motifs alluding to the temple and the holy of holies without aUuding to motifs specificaJly connected to Yom Kippm.4 Although Ezekiel envisages God's throne placed on the cherubs (i.e. above tbe kopporet on the ark in the holy of holies) surrounded by figures clothed in (priestly) white linen, he does not directly refer to the kopporet. s Zechariah 3 describes a vision of the high priest Joshua standing before the heavenly tribunal.6 :t:l Then he showe4 me tbc high priest Josbua (nn:~•IIIJOOOI;;) staoding before tbc angel of tbc LoRD, and Satan (lOW;r/o lll
4 lsa 6 mentions God dnssed in robes sitting an a throoe in the palace ('):)•:1) (6:1), surrounded by wi.oged seratim (6:2), who glorify him with the threefold 1anctus (6:3). lsaiah does not state cleady whetber tbc building sUinds in heaven or on eerth and, tberefon, wbetber Isaiah ascends to heaven or enters tbe earthly 'I:J':T. Tbe lal1er is more probable. The throne and tbe palace evolce a king's council (cf. 1Kg.s 22:19; lob 1:6; 2:1; Zeeb 1:8; 3:1; 6:1-3), but the liturgy with the cultic-military appellation l11K:J! :Tl:'!', the alw, the smoke, the exceptional puritication an4 tbe atonement of lsaiah's sios belong to a cultic temple context: see H. Wildberger, Jesaj'a. I. Teilhand Jesaja /-12 (Biblischer Kommentar XII; Neulcir<:hen·VIuyu, 1972), pp. 243-253; J. Bleokiusopp, lsaiah 1-39 (Ancbor Bible 19; New York, 2000), pp. 222-226. The nnoke and tbe allllr in the house I temple (ml) are remlniscent of an incense sacrifice. Isaiah ls purified and bis sius (lnv, nR!II'I) are atoned (,!IT.)ll) (6:S-7). No mention is made of a separation of tbe sa.netuaJy ioto severa.l parts, 1 veil, a holy of holies, or a b1ood ritual. s Ezelc I de•cribes Ezekiel seeing 7nvm in the open heaveu, out of which emerges a cbariot wilh wheels and four fiery winged animals, and above them a fiery hwnan tigure seated on a throne. Ezek 9-10 descn'bes the exit ofGod's glory from the throne above the eherubs in the temple (10:1). This vision was very influential, tnst it does not include ~ltic elements relevant to lhe Yom Kipp11r ritual. See the commCJrtaries on tbis verse: W. Zimmcrli, E:;echiel. 1. Teilband: Ez:echiell-24 (Bibli.$cher Kommentar XIIJ/1; Neuldrche.n-VIuyu, 1969); M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-10. A New Translation wilh lntrod.cti(IIJ and Commgntary (Anchor Bible 22; Garelen City, N.Y., 1983). The &aDle i$ tn1e for the vision of final judgment in Dan 7:9-10. See 1.1. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, 1993), pp. 299-303. 6 The scene has also some elements in common wilh lsa 6: see R. Hanhart. SacharjtJ (Biblischer Kommentar. Altes Testament 14:7; Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1990ff), pp. 205-206.

lmaginoires of Yom Kippur

81

turban on bis bead.,. So they put a clean tuJ:ban on bis head, and clothed him; and the IlDgel ofthe LORD was staD.diog by. 6 Then the qel of the LORD assured Joshua, saying 1 "'''bus l!ays the LORD of hosts: lfyou will walk in my ways aad keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house. and have cllarge ofmy c;ourts, and I will give you ac;c;ess to tbose who are standing here. a Now Iisten, Ioshua, higb priest, you and your colleagues who sit before you! F or they aR people of evidente [an Omen of thiogs to come): I am goiog to bring my servant "Braoch." 9 For on tbe stone tbat I have set before Jo$bua, on a single stone witb seven facets, I will engrave its inscription, says tbe LoRD of hosts, aad I will remove the guilt ofthat land in a single day ( llS' M '11V1Zil 1nK Zll':l IC':l:'l f"llt:"l/qrl!Aa.'llliiiQ) lllillllV uJY Win:ia.v 'tfl<,: Y~ tJteiVI)(; Sv iJIIiPIJ !1\4). I& On !hat day, says the LORD of hosts, you shall invite eaeh other to come under }'Our vine and fig tree."'7

Robert Hauhart has discemed some elem.ents connecting the scene of Zechariah to Yom Kippm. 8 The protagonistisahigh priest. He stands at a special place where only he, God, a defendiog angel and the accusing Satan are present. The right of access to this place is dependent on observance of certain regulations and a moral code. This evokes the holy of holies. The centrat act is a symbolic change of vestments. The soiled high priest's vestments sym.bolize bis sins. Exchanging these soiled elotbes for clean ones signifies atonement. 9 The "single day" of purification of the land evokes Yom Kippur and gives it an eschatological ring. The cultic scene alluded to could be the picture of a high priest who changes bis lioen vestments, which have become stained from spriakling the blood on Yom

Kippm.to Regayding the number of corresponding elements, a connection to Yom Kippur is probable. Later reade:rs of Zechariah (at least those behlnd the A.pocalypse of Abraham araund 100 CE) undoubtedly viewed Zechariah 3 as being connected to Yom Kippur, as will be shown in the ensuing subsection on 'Az'azel in apocalypticism.lfLeviti<:us 16 is one ofthe texts in the background of Zechariah 3, the prophet is the earliest evidence for a

Zecb 3; my tnmslation based on the NRSV. Hanhart" Saclrarja, pp. 166-240, especially pp. 184-189. See also H. Blocher, "Zacbarie 3. Josu6 et Je Gnmd Jour des Expiations," Etudu Tlrlologl~ts et Religieuu 54 (1979) 264-270. Most c:ommentators empbasize tbe differences in tbe two situations and discard any relationsbip. Haubart underscorea; ihe amount of reinterpretation of the priestly ritual. 9 Tbe rare Greelc term for the vestment, «ol!ipJK, will be discussed below, in 1he section on BOJ'nabOI and tbe proto-typology, p. 160. 10 Hanhart, in coatrast, under$tauds the change of ves1111ents in Lev 16 as sign.ifying two aspeets ofthe ritual, purification ofthe sanctu;uy (Lev 16:20) and atonement for the sins of priest and people (Lev 16;24), witbout drawing Gn tbe rabbinie tradition of the rihlal and the cbanges ofvestments: see Hanhart, SachOJ'jtJ, p. 186. 7

1

82

Yom Kipp111' in Early )I!Wilh Thowght anti Ritual

conception of Yom IGppur as a day of judgment, of historical and eschatological atonement. Apocalyptic sources from. the Second Temple period develop these cultic e1ements in the prophetic texts into an ascent vision of approachins God in the holy of holies of the heavenly temple. lEnoch 14:8-25, :from around 300 BCE, is the earliest extant description of an ascent to Ood seated on hls throne in the heavenly holy of holies.11 Enoch js described as subsequently entering three areas of increasing sanctity. matehing the structure of Jerusalem's temple with its a'111C, 'n:IT and i'::il. 12 God sits in white gannents on a throne sUITounded by angels praising him and by a fiery sea with fiery rivers flowing out :from below bis throne. 13 Upon encoimtering this scene, Enoch is frightened; he prostrates himself, and God asks him to draw near to the area tbat even the angels cannot enter - just as regular priests cannot ente.r the holy of hoHes, only the high priest may do so. 14 Here, Enoch is supposed to deliver his intercession on behalf of the Watchets. 15 Many details attest to a major priestly component in the apocalyptic thought of JEnot:h 14.16 The white garment is best understood as referring to the linen vestments wom daily by the priests17 - and wom, too,

11 Chapter 14 is part ofthe so-called Book ofWatchers, which is dated to at least tbe tbird century BCE: see tbe extensive eommentary by G.W.E. Niekelsburg, 1 Enoch 1. A Comme:ntory on the Book. of I Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 (Hermeneia; Mi:wteapolis, 2001), pp. 7, 229-275; M.E. Stone, "The Boo"- of Enoch and ludaism in the Third Ceni:W:y B.C.E.," Catholic Bibllcal Quart~r/y 40 (1978) 479-492; M. Black (ed.), The Book. of Enoch or I Enoch. A New English Edition with Commentary and Textwal Noles (Studia in veteris testamenti pseudepigrapha 7; Leiden, 198S), here pp. 149-IS2. The inftuence ofthe biblical vision scenes (or, in the case of Daniel, tbeir sources) i' .strildDg: see M. Himmelflu-b, Asce:nt to HraveJT in Jewi:sh ond Christion Apocolypses (0l(ford, 1993), pp. 10, 13, 16, referring to Ezekiel for the throne witb the cherubs, wbich did not stand in the Second Temple, its useless wheels, aud the visionary's prost.ration; au.d to Isa6 and lKgs 22:19-22 for the angels snrrounding God and tbe vision&l}''s fear. Dan 7:9-10 is very close, but since the Boolo: of lhe Watchers is earlier tban Daniel, it is not clear ifthe latter was influenced by the fonner or ifboth rely on a common Vorlage. 12 lEnoch 14:9.10.14. 13 JEnach 14:14-23. 14 JEnach 14:24 and 14:21. 1' /Enoch 1S:2-16:4. 16 Himmelfarb, Äscent to Heaven in Jewish and Christion Apocalypses, pp. 27, 28. It is this priestly group that c:ooceals a criticism of the Jerusalem priestly establlshment bebind the fulmi.uatioos apillst the Watchers. · 11 Cf. Himmelfarb, .A.scent to Heaven ln Jewi&h anti Christion Apocalyp3u, pp. 18-20.

Jmagi11alres of Yom Kippur

83

by the high priest. on Yom Kippur. Enoch's intercessory prayer on behalf ofthe Watchers matches the high priest's actions on Yom Kippur. 18 The Testament ofLevi 19 describes a vi.sionary ascent of Levi to the holy of holies in the sanctuazy in the highest heaven.10 The language vividly paints the litu.rgical scene. 21 J:-' In the uppamost heawnZZ of all dwells tbe Great Glory in tbe holy of holies (tv ily~ ä yimv), superior to all holiness. 5 There with him23 ue the angels of the Lord's face, who serve (l.la~oupyoiiw~) aad atone (t~\l.o.o~eojlevo\) before the Lord for all the sins of ignorauce ofthe righteous (~) aud offer (gpoG!ptpOVOl) to the Lord

a pleasing ftagrance, a rational aad bloodless oblatioo.:u

After crossing a series of heavens, Levi enters the .higbest heaven, which is explicitly called holy of holies. God's Gloty is suuounded by archangels whose main liturgical funetion is to atone on behalf of the righteous. In other words, the main cultic function of the heavenly holy of hoHes is atonement. Some of the central cultic elements mentioned in IEnoch are missing. such as the fear and the prostration. Himmelfarb ascribes this ab· sence to a Cluistian redactor. 25 Yet the preservation of such texts as JE110ch and the Testament of Levi by Christian scribes, and their translation into various languages, demonstrates the interest of Christian readers " Himmelfarb, AsctUJt to HellYen ;" Jewish (ll'ld Christian ApocalypaQ, p. 2S. Intercession may be, amoog other things, prophetic, but a priestly intercession matehes best the Olher priesUy eleme.ots aad lhe sactal geograpby ofthe ~:hapter. 1' Even if one considers the Testament of the Patriarchs a Cbrislian work that draws on Jewish sourccs, we can, with care, use tbe Testament of Levi for reconstructing Jewisb thought of tbe Second Temple period, since we bave fragments of one of its sources or traditions, lhe Aramaie LBPi from Qumran. a fragm.e.ot from the Cairo Genizah as weil as a .fi:agmeut of a Greek cr.mslatioo in a maauscript from Mount Athos. 111 In fact, there are two asceots (Teata",ent of Levi 2:5-S:7; 8: 1-18), but lbe fll'St contains all the motifs relevant to our issue. The secend vision, in chaptet: 8, includes a detailed investiture of sorts in seven (!) priestly garmenls, conferring qualllies and powers on Levi, such as priesthood. prophecy, judgment, righteousness, understanding, truth aad faith. Obviously, this investiture deviates widely from the biblical prescriptions for priestly vesrments. On the ascenta in TeaJament af Levi, sec Himmelfarb, Aacent ta He~Zt~en in Jewish and Clu'utum Apocalypses, pp. 30-37. 21 E.g. the use of eiGtpx<JI.Ult for crossing into another heaven (2:6-7); o-Vverrut;; leLt011pyo.; (2: 10). 21 lt is not completely clear if the numbet: of lteavena i:s three or seven, Appareatly, two eonceptions have been mixed. 13 M. de Jonge aud H.W. Hollander, The Testaments ofthe Twelve Patriarclu (SIUdia iu Veteris Testameoti Pseudepigrapha 8; Leiden, 198S), eonsider the Sentences that follow to be descriptiom of heavens four to six, and consequently translate here "in tbe (heaven) next to it" (p. 1315). N Testame171 ofLevi 3:4-6; my traaslation. l5 See Himmelfarb, A.1cent to HeiZtJen mJew~h and Christian Apocalypse:s, p. 33.

84

Yom Kippw in EaP'/)' Jewi.Jh Tho11ght and Ritual

io this cosmological and theosophical material.26 And, as ~e sball see in the section on the Valentinians and Clement of Alexandria, early Christian mysticism used the same imagery io its descriptions ofa vision of0od.Z7 Allusions to Yom Kippur are fewer tban in Philo or in Valentiman Christianity. The sacred geography of Yom Kippur (i.e. the entry to the holy of holies) attracts most attention in the visionary descriptions. The dimension of time (the entry is annual) is eliminated by empbasizing the etemity ofthe angelic cult and the pennanence ofthe ascending person's participation in it. Explicit allusioos to the spedfic ritual of Yom Kippur (incense, sprinkling, atonement, intercession) are quite rare. The first to make an ex.plicit connection between a vision of God and Yom Kippur's high-priestly entrance is Philo. 21 Hebrews and Valentinians depict the vision of God in tenns closcr to the apocalYPtic texts; probably all are drawing on the same esoteric tradition of priestly origin. To imagine the high-priestly entry is to imagine an encounter with t.be divine, and an encounter with the divine may be weil mhrored in the high. priestly entry to the holy of holies. Scholars are divided about the basis of these depi<:tions. Are they solely the fruit of literary imagination, or do they reflect induced visions?~ In this context, the evidence provided by the Songs oj the Sabbath Sacrifice becomes important.30 Despite the fact that the Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacrifice were found at Qumran, they "M:re probably in use in a community outside Qumran, since the texts do not contain any "sectually u 2EtJOCit describes Encx:h's metamorphosis into an angel on the asc:ent to the highest beaven in terms of a priestly investiture. The arehangeI Michael briags Blloch to the tend:l heaven, where Enoch slmds before the indescn"bable face of the Lord, who is seaWd on his throu.e surrounded by sillging chcxubs and seraphs. Enoch p.roslrates himself and is bidden oy God to stand up. God orders Michael to anoint Enoeh and c:hange bis clothes, and Eooch is ordained by Michael, a membcr of the order of angelic priests (eh. 22). See Himm.elfarb, A..Jcent to HeiZlien in Jewislt tu1d Chri$titul Apocalypsu, pp. 37-44, especially 4()-41. The cbange or clothes bas D.O atooing connotation. The stru.eture of ten heavens clearly prosumes a hierarehical sac:red geography. The orctiaation talces p • in the holiest space. See Himmelfarb, •bcent to Heaven in Jnflsh and Clvistian Apoca· l)'pses, p. 42. Cherubs and tbrone are remiDiscent of dle holy of holies of tbe First Temple. The prostration may point to the priestly cult rr See below, pp. 223-237. See below, pp. 110-112. Tbe fll'St view is expt"e$Sed by Himmell'arb, Ascent to Heoven in Jewialt and ChP'i:rtian Apocalypsea; tbe second by, among otber.s, M. Stone, "Apocalyplic- Vision or Hallu~ination?" Milla wa-Milla 14 (1974) 47-56. Many illtermediate positioos are discussed in Hirrunelfarb's flfth chapter. 30 4Q400-407 and 11 Q17 edited in C. Newsom (ed.), Songs ofthe Sabbatlt Sacrifice. Ä Critical Edition (Harvard Semitic Studies27; Atlanta [Ga.]. 19&5}. 28

29

Imaginaires ofYom Kippur

85

explicit" features. 31 The Sitz im Leben of these fragments on the angelic cult of the heavenly temple is communal prayers.12 They describe a heavenly liturgy that takes place in the seven heavens which contains several bolles of hoHes (1•:n), some of tbem with a throne and a veil, where angeJs (a-'1K) offer pure and perfect heavenly sacrifices. These scenes are built on the same imagery as the apocalyptic ascent visions. Esther Chazon has worked out the various levels of correspondence between the heavenly and the earthly liturgy, up to human participation in the heavenly prayer, Le. ritualized mysticism in communal prayer. 33 This ritualization will be important when we come to the Valentiuian ritual of the bridal chamber. As we shall see in part 2, the Yom Kippur temple ritual does not become a fixed part of the depiction but continues to serve as a ;~liVing" source of inspiration in the Cbristian Jewish texts. The Christian Jewish textsnot only use motifs derived from the apocalyptic tradition of the vision but also add elements from their imaginaire of Yom Kippur. Yom Kippur, then, remained a powerful influence.

/.1 The Mythologization of 'Az'azel 1.2.1 Allusions to the Myth of 'Az' u.el in 1Enoch l 0 Yom Kippur•s scapegoat rite influenced JEnoch 10 - at least from the second century BCE onward, JEnoch 10 was understood against the background ofYom Kippur.:u JEnoch 6-11 is the part ofthe Book ofthe )I The tenn :is Carol NewsQlll's in '"Seetually exp!icit' Iiterature from Qumr.m," in: The llebrew Bible afld Jts Interpreters (1990) 167-187. n C.R.A. Morray-Jones, "The Temple Witbin. The Embodiment ofthe Divine Image aud lt$ Worship in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other·Early Jewisb. and Christian Sourees," S<Jciety cfBiblical Literalwe Stzmin(JJ" Papers 31:1 ( 199&) 400-4.31. 13 E. Cbazon, "Human a.nd Angelic Prayer in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls" (paper delivered at the Fifth Orion International Symposium, 19-23 January 2000, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem). 1' A nwnber of scholars have previously dealt with thls question. See the notes in A. Geiger, "Zu den Apokryphen," Jüdische Zemchrift für Wissenschaft und Leben 3 ( 1864) 196-204, bere pp. 200-201; R.H. Charles (ed.), The Apocryplra ähd Pseu.depigropha of the Old TeJtament in Engll:rh (2 vols; Oxford, 1913); idem, The Bnok of Enoch or 1 Enoch. Trarulatedfrom the Editor's Ethiopic Te:xt (Jerusalilltl, 1973=1912); D. Dimant, '"l'he Fallen Angels iD the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Related Apocryphes and Pseudepigrapha" (in Hebrew] (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1974); D. Dimant, "1 Enoch 6-11: A Methodological Perspective," Socldy of Biblical .Lireralll!'e Seminar Papers {1978) 323-339; Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven"; R. Rubinkiewitz, Die Eschatologie von Henoch 9-11 u11d dQ!l Neue Testament ( ÖSterreichische Biblische Studir:n 6; Vienna, 1984). L.L. Grabbe, "Tbe Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in Eariy lewish Interpretation," Journal for the Sludy of JuckJism 18 (1987) 152-167, I found very helpful; R. Helm, "Auzel in Early Jewish Tradition." Andrew: Unh>ersity

Yom Kippur in Early J~~tvilh Tho11ght and Rihlal

86

Watchers (!Enoch 1-36) that teils the myth of the fallen angels who de· ceive humanity and introduce sin into the world. 35 These chapters (6-11) are usually regarded as being composed of two different layers named after the two Ieaders of the evil angels, 'Asa'el and Shemihaza. 36 The eenttal passage pertaining to our question appears in lEnoch 10, in the 'Asa'el layer: 4 And

further lhe Lord said to Raphael, "Bind [' Asa'el}n by bis bands and bis feet,

and tbrow him into the dadcness. And split open the desert which is in Dudael, end throw him tbe~. 1 And throw on him jagged and slwp stones and cover him with darkness; and let him stay there for ever, au.d cover his face, that he may not sec light. 6 aod that on the great day ofjudgment he may be hurled into the fire.1 And Seminary Siudies 3:Z (1994} 217-226, however, added nothing significantly new. Most of my thoughts on IEnoch lO, the Apocalyp1e of Abraham aud llQ.Meiclrizedek can be faund in Stökl, "'Iom Kippurin the Apocalyptic Imaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High Priesthood." iS On !Enoclr 6-ll, see now Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, pp. 165-228. 36 George Nkkelsburg and Paul Hanson proposed two contradictory tbeorjes for tJae relationship between these layers and their backgroWids: see G.W.B. Niclrelsburg, "Apocalyptic and Myth in I Enoc~ 6-11," Jo"rnal ofBiblical Literatlire 96 (1977) 38340S; Nickelsburg, I Enoch J, pp. 165-228, esp. pp. 191-193 au.d21S-228; Hanson, "Re· hellion in Heaven." Hanson argued that lhe Shemihaza Iayer follows an anc:ient Semitic: pattem (1( a "rebellioo in heaven"myth tbat in turn inflnenced the 'Asa'el stratum,. wbicb was fonnulated according to Lev 16. Nickelsburg claimed that Prometheus influenced the Shemihau layer, originally buih on Gen 6:1~. This is not the context in which to try to resolve fhi~ thomy question. On the bighly intere$ting melhodologic:al issues involved, see J.I. Collins, "Melhodologicallssucs in tbe Study ofl Enoch: Refl~ions on the Articles of P.D. Hansou and G.W. Nickelsburg," Society of Biblical Literatlire Semimu Paperll (1978) 315-322, especially pp. 319-320, and the responses ofNkkelsburg and Hansan in tbe same volume. See also J. VanlkrKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic T1aditfon (Catholic Bihlical Quarterly, Monograph Series 16; Washin&ton, D.C., 1984), pp. 122-130; aod E.J.C. Tigehelaar, Prophets of Old and the Day of tlre End: Zechariah. ths Book ofWatcherl tmd Apocalyptic (Oudtestamentiscbe Studien 3S; Leiden, 1996), pp. 165-182. I do not !hink that the either/or approacb is necessarily oor~t here. In other words, an influence by the Prometheus myth on the Shemihaza layer does not necessarily rule out an influence by Lev 16 on lhe fmal stage. Nickelsburg • futed Hanson's argwnents, partly because Hanson built bis thesis solely on tbe correspondences between I Enoch and Targum Pse11do-Jo1U11han and did not use other sources !Tom the Second Temple (Philo!) or the rabbinie period, n M. Knibb translates the Ethiopic versioo~~. whieh reads 'Azaz'el: see M. Knibb, The

Ethiopic Book ofEnoclr. A New Edition in the Light ofthe Aramaie Dead Sea Fragments. Vol. 1: Text and Apparatlls. Yol. 1: lntrod'llction, Translation and Commentary {in ccmsultatioll witlr Eilward UllendorfJJ (2 vols; Oxford, 1978). Tbis is "an accommodation to the bibJical traditioa": see L.T. Stuckcnbruck, Tlle Book of Gtants from Qi.lmran. Te:t:ts, T,.anslation, and Commentary (Texte und Studien twn antiken Judentum 63; Tllbingen, 1997), p. 79. The Greek version reads M«lil.. or i\~Gl~fJl... 4QEnoclt- (4Q201) iii 9 :reads ;Koll; 4QEnoclf(4Q204) li 26 rcad5 ['1]KV1J.

Jmagi11airu ofYnm Klppur

87

restore the earth which the mgels have ruiaed, and iiDßounce the mroration of the earth. for I sball restore tbe earth, so that not all tbe sons of men sball he destroyed tbrOugb the mystery of everything which the Watchers made latown'• and taugilt to tbeir sons. & And cbe whole earfl:l has been ruined by tbe te84;bing of tbe works of [' Asa'el], and write upon him an siu." And the Lord said to Gabriel: "Proceed ag-,;inst the baslards and the reprobates and aaainst tbe sons of the fomicators, and destroy the $Ons of the fornicators and the soos of the Watcbers from amongst mea. Aud send thenJ. out, and send them agalost one another, aod let them destroy thomselves in hattle, for they will not bave lengtb of days. 10 And they will all petition you, but their fathers will gaia nothing in mpecl of tbem, for they bope for etemal life, and that eacb of lhem willlive life for five bundred years. • st

Acolll'lection between lEnoch 10 and Yom Kippur has long been noted.40 The closeness of 'Asa'el to 'Az•azel is strilcing41 and was certainly perceived in the second century BCE by the authors of 4Ql80, 4Q181 and 4QEnoch Giants•, who teil the myth of the fallen angels and call the Ieader oftbefallen angels 'Azaz 'el (_;mr11), i.e. the demoni:zed form of his name.42 At least in these texts the two demons •Asa'el and •Az'azel were equated. Yet a nwnber offurther points of resemblance make an earlier influence of the scapegoat ritual on the formulation of 1Enoch probable. The punishment of the demon resembles the treatment of the goat in aspects of geography, action, time and purpose.43 First, the name ofthe place ofjudg· · M On tbis obvious emendation of the commentfll)l, sce Black, The '!Jook of Enoch or I E'lloclr. " This is Knibb's tnnstation ofthe Etbiopic text of JEnoch 1();4-10. See Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of&roch, whicb I sllgbtly a
in

88

Yom Kippru in Early Jewi!lh ThDuglrt and Ritval

ment (Dudael - nl'r:l 11•:::1) is conspicuously similar in both traditions aod can likely be traced to a common origin.44 Bothin the deseription ofthe prison of the dernon in JEnoch andin traditiollll about the precipice oftbe scapegoat ritual an element of ruggedness appears.45 This ruggedness could reflect an early Midrash on the meaning of1u (cut, split up) in ru~ ;t1Tl (Leviticus 16;22) andlor historical memoty of the actual cliffs in the mountains of Jerusalem.46 Second, the sins are literally put on the scapegoat and written on the demon.47 Both are mistreated (though in different ways),48 brought to the desert, and hurled down. 49 Third, the reference to '"the great day" (ofjudgment) can be oonnected to Yom Kippur, sinee tbis is one ofits names in later tradition.~ Fina:Uy, the restoration ofthe earth by removing the sin (10:7-8) and the destruction ofthe evil forces in a war incited by Gabriel (10:9-10) allude to the cathartic rationale behind Yom Kippur.

tion of the material in ehap 10, where the punishments are commanded." See Dimant, "1 Enoch 6-ll." p. 327. 44 For tbe interpretation of the si,milar ru~me~ of the strange location Äallov!jA I Aou8a~J. in 1Enoch and the rabbinie ,".", f I I 11n;, I rmn n•::~, seo alleady Geiger, "Zu den Apokryphen," pp. 206-201. Soe also Milik's different explanations ln Disc011eries of thll Judaean Deser't 2 (1901), pp. 111-112; Milik, Tlre Boola of Enf)Ch, pp. 29-30; and Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven," pp. 195-233; C. Moleobetg, "A Study ofthe Rotes of Sbemihaza and 'Asa'elln 1 E.noch 6-11," JQI/rnal f1j' Jewish Studies 35 (1984) 136-146, bere p. 143, note 34; Blaclc, The BDDk oiEnoch or I Enoch, p. 134; Grabbe, "The Sc:apegoat Tradition," p. 155, note 6. Hanson's main argument seems tobe a pun on 113D as tbc Aramaie traoslatlon of rr'1v1 in Lev .16:22-23 be!ow the mystcrious saying "open. tlle desert" in /Enoch 10:4. But Grabbe's Jong note 6 in, ..The Sc:apegoat Tradition," pp. lS4-15S, is a quite definite response. 45 Targum Pseufio.-JOMthan Lov 16 (•v;ry1 'I'Pn 1nK,Yill); and Philo, De plamatlone 61 (tic; Ii& tißo.tt Kai llil'lllu xai päpdpa i~t~tllt"tlllV). "' Campare ÜlkJ.'la with IC'TI "'lliC in Targ~~m Psudo-Jorrathan Lev 16:22. Aoother theory raised is a COOllection between m'rn ll'l c:oming ftom the root 11n (sharp, pointed}. Dimant, "1 Enoch 6-11," p. 327. 47 This is the limal mcaning of the Greek of JEnoc1110:8 ~~:oi in' t~in:fi! ypayov tic; fiJ&a~tiac; !tUcrac;. Cf. Lev 16:21 "puttlng them (the sins) upon tbe head ofthe goat" ( tnl1 1'liV1:1 1'1.0 ?» nn11t) and tbe rabbinie description of the people's exclamations when die scapegoat is Iead out of the town "Take and go! Take and go!" (KJ'I ?tD KJl '110}: mYoma 6:4. ... We have oo evide.nce for a binding of the scapegoat. nor for its being covered dem.on is; neither is the demoll treated as the scapegoat is on bis leavin8 Jerusalem. 0 IEnoch 10:4-8 strongly emphasizes this point by mentio.ning four timesthat the dernon is b.urled down. ,., Cf. e.a,. bRH 2la. The Etbiopic rcacb as the equivalent for ..great day." 4QEnoch" (4Q202) iv 11 reads 10"'1 ltlll'. The extaot Oreek has no equivalent for Kl"l, but the cltation of JEnach 10:6 i.o Jude 6 reads llf;!'call'; llJI(pac;.

m1;T ,,,,n

as-

lmtzginairu ofYom Kippur

89

The Shemihau Iayer juxtaposes an eschatological destruction of the evil forces and the Iiberation of their p:risoners achieved by the archangel Michael with the •Asa•eJ tradition.'1 Following the termination of sin, Mi~ cbael introduces paradise-like conditions.52 The choice of wotds for the different types of sin in 10:20 slrongly resembles Leviticus 16:21.'3 The references to fligbt and Sabbath rest in 1Enoch 10: 17 can be seen as reminiscent ofthe Jubilee. And the purpose behind the narrative is an eschatologica.l day ofpurification ofthe whole earth from sin. Again, Yom Kippur may have bad some influence, especially considering tbat the later traditi~n depicts Micbael as a heavenly high priest. Finally, 1Enoch 13:1 ("befo:re these tbingsj shows that Enoch's ascent vision of the entrance to God's throne in chapter 14 took place before the events of lEnoch 10, i.e. the stiUCture of lEnoch 1~14 matches the ritual of Yom Kippur with its high-priestly entrance before tbe scapegoat rite. These argnments corroborate the claim of an intluence of Leviticus 16 and the Y om IGppur temple rite on 1Enoch 10, or at least on its formulation aod reception from the second centw:y BCE onward, if not on the original version of the narrative. The primordial and eschatologica.l history of sin become part of Yom Kippur•s imaginaire in Jewish apocalyptic groups. and the myth also reveals one of the rationales behind the ritual. The annual Yom K.ippur was perceived, at least by some, as a ritual anticipation of the eschatological puritication of God's creation from sin. The goat originally sent to 'Az'az.el was seen as the personification oFAz'azel, the demonie source of sin. This explains why the people mistreated the scapegoat oo its way out ofthe city.54 Hanson follows 1he wrong track by arguing for a sec:tarian origin of this tradition in a group opposing the temple because, b.e claims, "the normalmeans provided by the Temple cult for dealing with defilements is implicitly judged ineffectual...ss The myth

51

IEnoch 10:11-17.

~2

IEnoch 10:18-11:2. " This has been independently ooted by :Rubinkiewitz, DjiJ &clratologie von Henoch 9-11 und da.$ Neue Te.ttgmerrt, pp. 88-39, and even by the ..Opponent" ofa Yom Kippnr i.ntluence,. Nickelsburg himself~ see Nickelsburg, • Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6-

fl".

11," p. 403. Lev 16:21 reads l) Jlll!l; 2) 1111n; 3) lbis is traD5IIsted bythe LXX with I) ®u:ia; 2) GJlllp'ria; 3) livo11ia:. IEnoch reads slightly differe11tly: 1) ilöuda; 2) u)laptia:; 3) ~ia. However, the LXX can ttaDslate lllJ not only as livoJLiG but also as aoqkia (Ezek. 33;9; Ps 32 [31}:5). The importanc:e i.s the tlu-eefold distinction aod the order of words. Cf. Exod 34:7; Num 14:18: 1) li'IQflia. 2) 46\~tia; 3} 11JtGVtia. 54 BarnabQS 7:8 and mYoma 6:4. $5 Hanson, ":Rebellion in Heavea," p.l26.

90

Yom Kippru in Early Jewish Thought an4 Ritual

is not arguing against the temple~ it is illustrating the yearly cult as a preenactmc:nt of the final eschatological decision. 56 The impact of this myth of the punisbment of the fallen angels on subsequent generations is difficult to overestimate.57 It affected Jubilees as weil as the Testame"t of the Twelve Patrial'chs, Jude, l I QMelchizedek and the Apocalypse ofAbraham.51 The following pages investigate the two latter texts, both of which intensify the references to Yom Kippur. 1.2.2 11QMelchizedek: Getting Explicit

This section focuses on the role of Yom K.ippur in the famous llQMelchizedek scroll.!9 Tbe scroll prophesies that at the end ofthe tenth Jubilee, ·Melchizedek, the heavenly Ieader of the forces of light, will liberate the prlsoners of Belial, the Ieader of the evil forces. Melchizedek will then expiate the sins of the people of bis lot and take .revenge on the adherents of Belial. The extant fragments of the story resemble the punishment

S6 For lhB following cbapters (12-16), Himm.elfa~b uses a similar aJgument stating that they "'involve a critique of lhe JC(USalem priestly establishmc.nt that takes seriously thc priestbood's claims for i1Self and tbe importance of priestly duties and categories. This attitude is at once critical of the reality it sees in the temple and deeply devoted to ehe ideal Df the temple understood in a quite concrete way." See Himmclfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish anti Christi an Apoca/ypses, p. 27. n The history of this myth has been investigated by Dimant, "The Fallen Angels in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Related Apoayphes and Pscudepigrapha." 51 For the Apocolypse ofAbraham, see among others, Rubjnkiewitz, Die Eschatologie von HellOCh 9-11 rmd das N~e Testamenl, pp. 52-55. On the relation to JIQMelchlzadek, see Grabbe., "Tbe Scapegoat Tradition," pp. 160-161; J.'f. Milik, "Milki-sedeq et Milki-re..~a· dans tes anciens ecnts ju!fs et c:bretiens," Jqvrnat for the Study ()I Judaüm in the Pers;on, Hellenistic and Roman Period23 {1972) 95-144. 59 See the final edition ill F. Garcia-Man.IDez, E.J.C. Tigchelaar and A.S. van der Woude (eds.), "llQMelcbizedek,." in: idem (eds.), Qumran Cave 1 J. Vol. II: 1JQ2-18, JJQ20-11 (Discoveries in the llldaean Desert 23; O:xford, 1998; pp. 221-241), witb bibliograpby on p. 22l. Mon: rec:ent bibliosraphy 4ritii be fo.md in F. Garcla-Martilll:z, "Lu tradiciones ilobre Melquisedec en los manuscritos de Qumrin,,. Biblica 81 (2000) 70-30; and A. Aschim, "The Genre of 11QMelchizede.k,., in: F.H. Cryer and T.L. Thompson (eds.). Qumran between the. Old and Ne.w Testfllllena (Sownal for thc Study of tbe Old Testa.m.c.nt, Supplement Series 290; Sheffield, 1998; pp. 17-31). For the older works. see also E. Puec:h, "Notcs sur le ma.nuscrit d.e XIQMetklsc!deq," R~ue de Qumran 12 (1987) 483-513. MO&t sc:holars date the fragmen1S ofthe scroll to SO BCE :1: 2S years. The story may be older {ifthe rceonsm..ction in ii 18 is correet, the book ofDaniel is terminuspost quem), but the extant text is possibly the autograph.lts train ofthought, if$ teuninology and its genre as a pesher make a sectarian origin prac:tically certain. See tbe recent rein·vestigation by Aschim, "Tbe Genre of 11 QMclcbizedek." The texts of tbe Hebrew Bible used by l!QMelchi:edek include Lev 25:9-13; Deut 15:2; lsa S2:7; 61 :1-3; Ps 7:8-9; 32:1-2; and probably Dan 9:2s-26. The relationship to Hebrews is discussed below.

liNlginaires of Yom K.ipp11r

91

of Shemihaza by Michael.60 but in 11 QMelchizedek tb.e connection to Yom Kippur beoomes even more explicit: p11 (':ll?ll 'nll (')Wl!C(l 11~)'1:1 .",.,, 'C 1!!l:l? '1"11n':1 7::1[1'}01 {"!l]D ö1[1C1);"1 D'"11{!!::1<1 D1)'1

And the D[ay of Atone)me.nt1 i[.s] the e(nd ot] tbe tenlh [iulbilee in wbich atonement will be made for all the SOllS of [light and for) tbe men [of] the Iot ofMel{chi]zedek. (11 QMelch!:edek ii 7-8).

It is evident fro.m the extant text that the author of 11 QMelchizedek considered to be Melchizedek a high priest, since he is described as an individual performing a collective atonement on Yom Kippur.r.2 This might have been stated expticitly in a line of tbe text no Ionger extant. Melchizedck is the incumbent ofthe high priesthood in Targumic sourees,63 and bis role is very close to that of Michael. the heavenly high priest in Second Temple and rabbinie sources.64 Furthennore. it is quite probable that 4QVisions of Amram6 2:3 identifies tbe two as heavenly opponents ofBelial. 65 Witb regard to the imaginaire of Yom Kippur in the Book of the Watchers, the most important development isthat llQMelchiutfek has embeJlished the dctails of the proximity of the eschatological purification to the high-priestly ritual on Yom Kippu.r. Melchizedek explicitly atones, and the day of judgment is explicitly called Yom Kippur. Does 11QMelchizetlek also reinforce tbe elements depicting the evil Opponent in term.s Grabbe, "The Scapegoat Tradition," p. 166. Tbis universally recognized reconsttuction is based on the context of the Jubilee, which according to Lev 25:9-10 begins on Yom Kippur, and by lhe mention of1!1J?. See Garcfa-Martinez, Tigchelaar and van der Woude, "11 QMelcbizedek," p. 231. a This was fust asseJted by Emile Puech, "Notes sur le manuscrit de XIQMelkis6deq." p. 512: "En llQMelkis~deq, ee personnage est clairement consid6r6 comme le graad pr6tre de Ia Iiturgie celeste au Yom Kippiir puisque executant les jugemcnts divins, il fait l'Expiation defmitive ... signifWlt le pardon divin des transgressions pass6es pour ceux de son lot, ..• Dans le contexte de l'epöque, la fo~on saeerdotale d'expiation ttait le propre du grand pratre au jollf de Kippur. n e M. McNalllaJ8, ,.Melcbi.zedek: Gen 14,17-20 in the Targums, in Rabbinie and Early Christian Litel'llture," Bibllca 81 (2000) 1-31, here pp. 22-26. 61 011 the xelatioos between Miebae1 and Melchizedck, see e.g. J. Davila, "Melcbi.zedek, Michael, and Wa~ in Heaven," in: Soctety ofBiblical Lituature. 1996 Seminar PaperJ (35; Atlanta [Ga.], 1996; pp. 2S9-272); P.J. Kobelski, Melchizedek and Mefchirda (Citbolic Biblical Qu~erly, Monograph Series 10; Washington. 1981). On Mic::.hael, see the clasiic by W. Lueken, Michael. Eine Darstellung und Jlerglelcharng der jiidisclten .und der morgmltJndisch-chriatlichen Traditloo vom Erzengel Michael (Göttingen, 1898). Carol Newsom has suggested that Melcbi'Udek be recollStructed as the name of a heavenly aogel in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q401 ll 3; 22 3): Newsom, So• of the Sabbath Sacrijlce, pp. 134 and 143-144. 65 The ingenious reconstruction was suggested by Milik and is ac:cepted by most sc.b.olars, see Kobelslti, Melchizedek and Melchirda, pp. 24-36. 60

61

92

Yom Kipprtr in Early Jewish Tlroughl ond Rlwal

of tbe scapegoat? Belial js devoured by frre and not tbrown into a pit in dJ,e desert. 66 llQMelchizedek is closer to the Shemihaza layer of lEnoch (influenocd by Yom K.ippur in a general fashion) than to the Asael layer (influenced by the scapegoat ritual). However, the extant text is far too short and too fragmentary to resolve this question. 67 1.2.3 The Apocalypse ofAbraham; Zechariah 3 Meets the Demonology of 'Az•azet The narrative of the Apocalypse ofAbraham includes a heavenly journey by Abraham, set in the scene ofthe sacri:fice ofGenesis 15.68 A bini lands on the halved animals and tries talking to Abraham: 13'' And it cune to pass when I saw the bird speaking I said thill to tbe angel: "Wbat is this, my lord?" Ancl he said, "This is disgrace,e this is Azazel!" 1 Aad he said to him, "Shame on you, Azazel!'JI) For Abnmam's portion11 is in .heaven, aud

~ 11QM~chiudek

iii 7; on the bumillg, I hoch 10:13-14. E.g. Belial may have been hurled down in the desert later in the text, in a line that clid not survive the troubles oft~. 61 The tex:t i.s extant only in a Slavonic tnnslatiCIJl, its original l.anguage was Semitic, either Hebrew or .Aramaic. I u.sed the tntnslation and commentary by A. Kulik, "Apoealypse of Abraham. Towards the Lost Original,'' (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2000); and the two translarions by R. Rubinkiewicz: "The Apocalypso of Abraham," in: l.H. Charleswonh (ed.), The Old Tutommt Paeudeplgrapho. I (New York., 1983; pp. 681-705), and L'Apocalypatl. d'Abraltom en viera ;sl(lVe. lntrod~tctlcm. texte crilique, traducti011 et commentaire (Zr6dla i monografie 129; Lublin, 1987); and compared them to the translatiCIJls by B. Philonenko-Sayar and P. Man: (eds.), "VApocalypse d' Abraham. lntroduction, toX1e slave, trad\1Ction et notes," Semitica 31 (J 981) 7-117; and 8. Pbilonenko-Sayar md M. Philonenko, Die Apocalypse Abrahams (Jadische Schriften aus hellenistischer und römischer Zeit 5:5; Gnterslob, 1982). Tbe Apoca/iFe of Abraham has been dated to uound IOO CE :1!: 20 years, whicb makes it contemponmeous with the later writings of the New Testament. See Rubinkiewicz. "The Apocalypse of Abraham," p. 683. His evidence in L 'Apccalyple d'Abraham en viera: slave for aa even more exact dating (between 79 and 81 CE) is not convlncing. ~ Rubinkiewicz's Greek reconstruction is O.ocße:i.a. In bis French translation Rubinlciewicz reads iniqviti. He postu1ates :11Tlr.l or N"l a.s tbe original Hebrew reading {L 'Apocalypse d'Abroham en vinu: 1/ave, 143-147). Philoneoko-Sayar's French 1J:aDSiation reads impititi and her German veBion reads Gottloligk4Jt. Kulik, "Apoc;alypse of Abraham," pp. 89-!10, translates "iniquity" and suggests a.s additional pOS$ibilities "disgrace," ( tin)ltt~/ll':lp I :tll..,:J), "impiety" (äos~da) /"wickedness" (ß71) I "transgress{ion]" (ll'111!l) /"iniquity" (llllf). 'IQ Rubinkiewicz suggests 'P ,lfl' u the original reading. the saure reading as Zech 3:2. Kulilc:, "Apocalypse of Abraham," p. 90, d.oes not disc:uss this possibility. He translates "reproach is on you" and lllgge&ts oveüi~ as the Greek and "'," as the Hebrew readins. He proposes that bebind tbe two terms "iniquity" and "reproa.ch" in 13:6-7 stood n1111:1 6i

Imaginaires ofYom Xippur

93

your.l is on euth, ' for you have sclected here, (and) become enamorcd of thc dweilins place of your blem.ish. Therefore rhe Etemal .Ruler, the Migbty One, has given you a dwelling on eartb. 9 Through you the all-evil spirit (is) a liar, and tbrough you (are} wrath and trials on the generations ofmen who live impiously. 10 For the Etemal, Migbty One did not [send}n the bodies ofthe righteous tobe in your hand. so tbrough thom tbe righteous life is affirmed and the destruction of ungodliness. 11 Hear, counselor, be shamed by me! Vou have no pennission to tempt all the righteous. 11 Depart from thi5 man! 13 You cannot deceive mm. beeause be is the enemy of you an.d of those who foUow you ~d wbo Iove what you w:isb. 14 For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours bu been set uide for bim. and the corruptionn whicb was on him bas gone over to you." 14:l And the an.gel $aid to me. "Abraham!" And 1 said, ..Hete I am, your servanl." lAnd he said, "Know from this that the Etemal One whom you have loved has chosen you. 1 Be bold and do througb your authority wbatever I order you against him wbo reviles justice. " wm J not be able to J'evile hlm who ha$ scattered about the C811h tbe secrets of heaven and who has tak:en anmsel against the Migbty Ooe? s Say to him, "May you be tbe firebrmd ofthe fumace ofthe eartbl Go, Azazcl. into the u.otrodden parts of the eartb. 74 6 For your beritage is over those who are with you, with the stars and with the men. bom by the clouds, whose portion you are, i.Ddeed they exist lhrough your bei.ng. 1 Enmity is for you a pious act. 'Therefore through your own destruetion bo gone from me!" a And I said the words as the aogel had taugilt me. t And he said, "Abraham." And I said, "Here I arn, your servant!" 10 And the angel said to me, "Answer bim not!" ll And be spoke to me a second time. 12. And the angel said. "Now, whatever he says to you, answer him not, lesthiswill run up to you. u For the Etemal, Mighty One gave him the gravity md the will. Answer him not.,. 14 And I did what the angel had comm.anded me. And wbatever he &aid to mc about the desc:ent, I aoswered bim not.75

Tbe name of the chief of the demons, Azazel, reveals the influence of the demonology of IEnoch and Leviticus 16. Beyond that, several formulatioos allude to the imaginaire ofYom K.ippur. Mare Philonenko and Belkis Pbilonenko-Sayar translate the Slavonie equivalent for "portion'' in 13:7 as "Iot,,. wbich may reflect the dualisti.c anthropology of two lots, one evil

11!>1n1 (lsa 30:5) or li!I1M1l'ln (Ps 15:3; Neh 1:3) as the original Semiticreaditig. Prov 18:3

reads li'liiJ.~ II:~Ji 6v•dio<; I :1!111l 11':1~. 71 On this word and its allusion to Yom Kippur, see the following paragraph. n lbis is Kulik's translation. On thi$ word and its allusion to Lev 16, see the follow~ ing pamgraph. 73 Tbc Greek reeonstruction is ,eOt:la; in his French ttanslation Rubinkiewicz uses pechi, wbile Philonenko-Sayar and Philonenko choose poul'l'~re and Y«nHßUI'g. The Hebrew equivalent snggested by Rubinkiewicz (nrc) is defmitely misspelled and probably should be read as nn111, see Ps 102 (103):4; Jonah 2:7. 74 On this word aDd its allusion to LXX Lev 16 and Pbilo on Vom Klppur, see the following paragraph. .. » ApocoiYJMe uf Abroht!m 13-14 according to Rubinkiewicz. "Tbe Apocalyplie of

:. ·Abraham."

94

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thoaght and Ritual

and oue good. 7fi Alexander Kulik translates "send" in 13:10 and connects the Sla-vonic word to ä.n:ootßUoo/n;!r1. 77 Tbis may allude to thesendingout of the scapegoat. Also the formulation "Go, .Azazel, into tbe untrodden parts ofthe earth" (14:5) i.s remiuiscent ofthe Septuagint version's trans-lation ofLeviticus 16:22 to El'ö yfiv Uflu,;ov78 and the expression chosen by Philo in his description of Yolll Kippur sie; ö:rptflfi mi t'iß«tov &ptJI.ttuv EIC~&~txetv i!p' tautcp ICO!lir;;ovta tÜ'ö irmlp t&v KÄ11111'EÄ11CJUV't01V cipci.!f.19 Ryszard Rubinkiewicz has shown that Zechariah 3 was also a source of inspiration for the Apocalypse oj Abraham.80 The basic scene in the two texts is very similar. A single human being stands before two angels, a good defender and a satanic accuser. The good angel rebukes the bad one.81 And, most i.mportantly, the central act is the same: the cbange of gannents symbolizing the change from an i.m.pure to a pure state. This shows that even though the author of Zechariah might not have bad Yom Kippurin mimt, h.is readers perceived his text as alluding to Leviticus 16. Compared to Zechariah 3, the Apocalypse oj Abraham embellishes tlie Yom Kippur imagery. The high priest does not put bis unclean clothes aside, as in Zechariah 3 or in Leviticus 16. but bis corruption is put on Azazel, as on the scapegoat in the temple ritual. llQMelchizedek, too, makes the connection ofthe escbatological myth to Yom Kippur moreex. plicit. Both texts show that even in groups tbat could not (any langer) celebrate Yom Kipp ur in the temple the scapegoat ritual served as a sow-ce of inspiration to describe the cosmological struggle against evil. Concluding Thoughts on 'Az'azel in the Apocalyptic Literature The mythopoetic power of Yom Kippur in apocalypticism is impressive. Wehaveseen that the myth ofthe origin and the escbatological end ofsin and Satan in lETlOch 10 was formulated with the ritual ofthe scapegoat in mind. Tbis myth was bighly influential in Second Temple Judaism and Christian Judaism. llQMelchizedek picked up this myth and depicted the Ieader ofthe good in high-priestly terms, and the day ofjudgment as Yom Kippur. Tbe Apocalypse ojAbraham employs the demonology of'Az'azel, 76 Phllonenko-Sayar and Philonenko translate Iot (Frencb) and Las (Genmm). In his Frencll translatio.._ Rubinkiewicz translates "ear Ia gloire d' Abraham est dans le ciel et ta gloire est sur Ia tem." He posmlates ,1:1:1 as tbe original reading. 17 Kulik, "Apocalypso of Abraham." p. 90. Rubinkiewic:t translates "allow." 11 Kulik, "Ap~ypse of Abraham." p. 90. 79 De spllcialibvs legilnls 1:188. fll Rubinkiewitz, Die &chato/ogie von Henoch 9-/1 und das Neue Testament, pp. 101-l and 110-113. 81 Rubillkiewia goes so far as to asswne behind the extant Slawllic 1:2 ,lU' the same Hebrewwording as in Zech 3.

lmaginalres ofYom KfpJNr

95

coxnbining elements from the scapegoat ritual in Leviticus with the scene of Zecbariah 3. I sball argue below that it is through this association of \'om K.ippur with Zechariah 3, with its high priest Joshua/Jesus. that christian Jewish thinkers before Hebrews justified the high priesthood of the non-Levite Jesus. 82

1.3 Etiologies Several etiologies for Vom Kippur ex.isted side by side in Second Temple JudaisJD. The biblical account has Levitleus 16 as part of the revelation of Mount Sinai after the sin ofthe golden ca1f(Exodus32-33), the covenant ienewal (Exodus 34), the construction of the tabemacle (Exodus 35-40). ihe consecration of Aaron {Leviticus 8-9), and the death of the two sons of Aaron. Nadav and Avihu (Leviticus 10), and before the census (Numbers 1). Leviticus 16:1 explicitly links the preparations for Vom K:ippur to the death of Aaron's sons. JEnach and 11QMelchizedek perceive Yom Kippur as an eschatological day of liberation of the good prisoners ftom the vanquished powers of evil.83 Jubilees mentions two etio1ogies of Yom K.ippur. According to cbapter S: 17-18, Noah' s tepentance before the flood was the pr:ecedent for ordering an annual day of repentance to achieve God's mercy: 5:17 And for tbe children of Israelit has beel:! written and ordained, "lfthey retwn to bim in rightcousness, he will forgive all of their sins and be will pardon all of their transgressions." 11a lt is writteo and it is ordained, "He will have mcr~ on all wbo retum ftom all tbeir error, once each year."14

This passage is the earliest evidence for an association of Yom Kippur with repentance. The other passage explains Yom Kippur as punishment for Jacob's sons, wbo caused their father to suffer and Bilhah and Dinah even to die, out of sorrow for Joseph: 8s Andin the seventh ycar oftbis week be seot Joseph fi'om his bouse to the land of Sbecbem in order that he might know about the welfäre of his brothers, and he found tbem in tbe land of Dotbao. 11 And lhey acted fi'audulently and made a plot against bim to kill bim, but they ropented aod sold him to a band oflsbmaelites. ADd they took him down to Egypt and sold him to Potiphar, a eunuch of Pharaoh, the chief guard, the priest .ofthe city of Heliopolis. :l4:1D

12

See pp. 194-197, below.

~- .., See pp. 85-·92, above .

. . _. ·Jubilull 5:17-18, translation by O.S. Wintermute, "Jubilees," in: J. Charles.worth (ed.), 'l'lw Old Testament Pseudepigrapho .2 (New Yo:rk, 1985; pp. 35-142). Ou this .• ~$sage, see Kraus, Der Tod Jen als Heilighlmsweihe, pp. 71-72, note 1. ·· ,,,. "· The death ofthe women is not funher induded in the etiol.ogy in Jubil~e~~ or in mo.dem ~es. See .Jubilees 34:18 itself.

96

Yom Kippu.r in Early Jewuh Tho11ght and Ritwal 34:1:2 And tbe sons of Jacob slaughtered a ldd 1.11d dipped Joseph's garment into the blood 1.11d sent (it) to Jaoob, their fatber, 0.11. the tenth of the seveath moniiJ.. 13 And he lameuted all of that nigbt, because they bad brougbt it to him in f11e evening. l.f:Jlb And he became fe'lerl$h in JamentiDg his death, and said that, "A cruel beast has eaten Joseph.'' And all of the men of his house lamented with hi.m on that day. And it happened as they were mourning and lamenting with 1lina all that day 1c that bis sons and bis dangbters rose up to comfort bim but he was oot comforted concil'IUing bis son. 15 And on that day Bilhah heard that Joseph bad perished. and she died wbüe mouming for bim. And she was dwclling in Qaftatef. And Dillah, his d8ugbter, also died after Joseph perished. And these three lamentatio.ns c:ame 11pon Israel in a single monrb. t4 And they buried Bilhah opposite the tomb of Raehel. and rhey also buried Dinah, his ~er. there. 11 And it happened, as they lamenled for Joseph one year, tbat he was not consoled, b~e he said, "I will go down to the grave lamenring for my son." 11 Tberefore it is decreed for the children of Israel tbat they moum on tbe Wath (day) oftbe seventh montb- on the day when tbat which c:auscd him to weep for Joseph came to Jac:ob. bis father- so that they might atonc for them(selves) with a young leid on the tentb (day) ofthe seventh month, once a year, on aecounc oftheir sin because lhey caused the affection of tlleir &.ther to grieve for 1o.seph, llis so.n. And this day is decreed so._that they migbl moum on it on account of tb.eir sins and on account of all their lnnsgressious end on account of all their erron in order to purify themselves on this day, onee a year.16

Jubilees does not use the term. Yom Kippur. but the date identifies tbe festival beyond doubt. According to Jubilees it is mouming that purifies from all kinds of sins. The wording evokes the three kinds of sins of Leviticus 16:21. lnterestingly, from a ritual point of view, is tbe emphasis on mouming in the night.81 Moreover, as in Jubilees 5:17-18. Jubilees 34:10 also connects repentance to Yom Kippur, albeit in a less explic:it way. Repentance prevents the brotben. from killing Joseph. Measure for measure, each year tbe descendants suffer for what tbeir ancestors caused. Similarly, the atoning sa.crifice of a young leid takes up the sl.aughtering of tbat kid whose blood colored Joseph•s garmcnt.aa Twice Jubilees emphasizes tbat the sin was the transmission of the bloody garment. 19 A remnant of this tradition appears again in post-temple Palestinian traditio.n..90 In its description of the highMpriestly garments the Palestinian Talmud mentions that tbe • Jabilets 34:12.13a.l3, transl. WiJrtennnte. Jt.hilus 34:13. 11 Both ltids could be alluded to. The brothen dip the prment in blood and tben HNf it to tbe filtbel" (J•bilee.s 34: 12). 1t Jubilee.s :34:13 (brougbt it} and 34:18 (came that which). 110 Pbilo mentions Joseph's coat conspicuously c1ose to an allegorization ofthe higbpriestly <:oat of tbe festive gannents, albeit without allusion to Josepb's death. See De solffnlls 1:220, and 213-219.

*'

IIIIIJf,inaires of Yom Kippur

91

n~lnJ ofthe high priest atones for bloodshed according to Genesis 37:21,

wbile some early Sidrei Avodah even embellish the allusion to Joseph and dle atonement for the faked murder.91 <: Quntran associates other mythological events with Yom Kippur without being an etiology in the stritt sense of the word. According 1o the higbly fragmentary lQWords ofMose$, Yom ~ppur is somehow connected to the crossing of the Jordan, i.e. the end of forty years of distress, the dependence on manna and the beginning ofhappier times in the land oflsrael:92 (BecauseJ your (fathen.) wandcred [in the wilderoess] umil tbe. te[utb.] day oftbe ruooth ... {a correctlon} [on tbe te]nth (day] ofthe montb {All work sh}aJI be forbiddeu md on the t[entb] day [ofJ the montb will be atoned ... "

üsually, this event is dated to 10 Nisan,!U but it seeans quitc certain that it Spc:aks of Yom Kippur as the references to abstention from work and •muement reveal. Unfortunatcly, tbe rest ofthe text (iii:I2- iv:ll) is too fraginentary. The connection between Yom Kippur and mannaalso appears in the Fesfilial Prayers andin Philo. 9' This parallel may point to a common uadition or to a common biblical source - the juxtapo.sition of manna with the root ;'I:W in Deuteronoroy 8:3~ which the three texts used independently :.: a less likely possibility."

JA Qumran: The Current Period ofPersecution as Yom Kippur

Despite the fact that so many ofthe Second Templesources on Yom Kippur were found in Qumran. it is difficult to formwate a synthesis of the conception of Yom K.ippur in the commun.ity.97 Often it is impossible to 91 · See e.g. 'Yose ben Yose's 'Aslir Gev~~rot 'Eioah (ed. Minlcy, p. 156, line 160); and .·'Ättah Konanta (ed. Mirsky, p. 192, line 98). See M. Swartz, ..The Semiones of the Priestly Vestments in Ancient Judaism" in A.l. Baumgarten (ed.), Socrifiu in Religim~~ üperience (Studies in the History of lleligiom [Numen Book Series] 93; Leiden, Boston, and Cologne, 2002; pp. 57-80), pP. 72-76. 9.\1 I would like to tbank Jan Willcm van Heuten for kindly dn.wing my attention to Ibis teXf. ·~ 91 IQ22WordJ of Moses iii:9-ll - my translatioa of the text in Milik, Discqveries in th11 Jordani1111 Daert 1 (1955) 94-95. See also Perrot, La Lt~cmrt de Ia Bible dans Ia $ynagogve., p. 156, note 27 and p. 268, note 4. " Josh 4:19 da~ this event to the tenth day of tb.e fi.tst month. .· ft See pp. 41 and 47. above, and .see bYoma 74b. ' "' Flll11Jer on, in the sec:tion on rabhini~ thougbt, I wiU refer to additional mythologiRl

:~wnts

uaociated with Yom Kippur. See pp. 1:21-124, below.

:. ~.J't Iu this short survey I have profited from tbe previoll!l suggestions by Baumgarten,

.~·vom Kippur in the Qumran Scrolls and Second Temple Sources"; Hacham, "Communal ]?asts in tbe Judeall Desert Scrolls and Associated Literature"; Falk, Daily, Sabhath, 1111d F~n.al P-,.qyus in the Dead Sea Sc,.olb; Grintt, "A Seder Avodah for Yom Kippur from .Qumran"; Wieder, The Juderm Scrolls al!d Koraism; Lehmann, '"Yom Kippur' in

98

Yom Ktppur in Early Je:wlrh Tlr.oaght o.nd Ritual

establish the Sitz im Leben of a certain text in the life of the community. The demonoJogy of llQMelchizedek, 4Q180 and 4Q181, which is connected to Yom Kippur, has already been briefly mentioned. These three texts indicate that even in the community of Qumran, which did not attend services in the temple and did not experieru:e the scapegoat ritual as an an. nual preenactment of the final victory over evil, the influence of Yom Kippur's temple ritual was persistent enough to Iead to creative Iiterary activity and produce myths. As in one ofPhilo's interpretations, the people from Qumran understood their own existence through the image of the two lots - they themselves are the people of God's Iot in opposition to the lot of Belial led by the wicked priest.98 •Az' azell' Azaz' el was clearly undetstood as a demon and purveyor of evil (4Q 180. and 4Q 181 ). Considering tbat it was probably on a Yom Kippur that the group's persecution started,9t this typology of Yom Kippur as a fight between the good and the evil forces must have reinforced the importance of tbe annual festival in detennining the identity ofthe community of Qumran. Yom Kippur had an ambivalent cbaracter. On the one hand, it recalled the beginning ofthe persec.ution and gave some meaning to current afflictions during tbe perseeution; on the other hand, the end of this persecution was expected to mark the beginning of the eschatological period of bliss and Iiberation from Belial's prison by the high priest Melchizedek. Such a perception ofthe sufferings ('1l'Y) of the current period (iYln) of persecution as affiictions of an ongoing Yom Kippur (n•Jl!n) is supported by two passages in 4Q171

Pesher on Psalms: "And the poor shall inherit theland and enjoy peace in plenty." (Psalms 37:l J) !11 interpretation concerns the c:ongregation of the poor who will tolerate the period of distress (n•Dtn;'l l:lllT.I) and will bc: rescued from all the snarc:s of Belia1. 100 ..And in lhe days of farnine tltey shall be re[plete]; for the wicked shall die." (Psalms 37: 19-20) lts interpretation: he willlteep them alive during the fitmioe of

Qwm:an"; L. SchiffiDan, ''The C11se of the Day of Atonement Ritual,.. Biblical Pers~c tives (1998) 181-188, whose worll: is direotly concemed with Yom Kippur in Qumran. \1t ll QMelchizedelc; Philo, Le.pm a11Bgoriae 2:5l; cf. Quis ru-um dit>inorum heres slt 179-187. " "'Woe to anyane making his companion drunk, spilling out hil anger! He evm makes him dnmk to Iook at their fcstivals!' {Hab 2:15)- lU interpretation concerns the Wiclced Priest who pursued the Teacher of Righteousness to consume him with the fero. city of bis anger in the place of bis banishment, in fcstival time, during the rest of lhe Day of Atonement. Ho paraded in front of them, to consume them and malte them fall on the day of fastiog, the Sabbath of their rest": lQPesher Habakkuk xi:2-8, transl. ili DSST. 100 4Q 171 ii:9:_11; transl. in DSST.

Jmaginaire.J ofYom Kippur

99

the time of [dis]tress (ll'lltn;z 1!1'1D), when mauy wiU die because of famine and pJap; all wbo did not leave [dlerel w:ith the COtlgRgation ofhis chosen ones. 101

In alllikelihood, the end oftbis period of affliction was viewed as the final victory of the powers of the good Iot against their opponents; some ex· pected that Melchizedek and the Qumranites would fight against their op-

pressors.1P2 The affiictions by the persecutors were probably perceived as a kind of jlagella Dei. 103 Such a perception of the current time as an extended Yom K.ippur is quite similar to that of Hebrews. 104 Joseph Bawngarten has revived Wieder's thesis that the Yom Kippur controversy between the Qumranites and the priests incharge ofthe temple concerned not only the date but also the character of the festival. 1os Accordingly. the Qumranites celebrated Yom Kippur as a day of mourning and aftliction, whi1e the more popul.ar Pbarisaic-rabbinic festival had an ambivalent character, including joy and moral purification. He provides two arguments for this. First. the tenn n•Jlln.i 1lll1J/Dl' (day/time of affiietion) appears only in souroe5 from Qumran. Second. Jubilees with its empbasis on mourning and suffering probably had canonical status in Qwnran. Wbile Baumga.rten's and Wieder's thesis is possible, there remains a methodological crux. The sources for the Jemsalem Yom Kippur at the time oftbe temple are few in number and rather complex. Baumgarten uses PhHo, the Mislmah and the inclusion of Leviticus 18 in the rabbinie readings of Yom Kippur. None of them descrlbes the attitudes of seeond· and first-century BCF. Pharisees. Putting a diaspora source together with posttemple destruction sources for a reconstruction of Yom Kippur in Jerusa\em at the time of the temple against the evidenee from the Qumra.n scrolls ·presupposes Qumran to be distinct from all the rest. Yet some of its scrolls are certainly closer to the Mishnah than is Philo. Furthennore) some Qumtexts seem to contradict Baumgarten's sharp distinetion. As Baumgarten hirnself remarks, 11QMelchizedek adds the ex:pectation of escbatological bliss and Iiberation of the Jubilee year to the demonie struggle on Yom Kippur. The inclusion of mouming in some piyyutim also contradicts such a sharp distinction into joyful, Pbarisaic, mainstream Yom KippLU aru:l sad, Qumranic~ sectarian Yom K.ippur.1osa

ran

101

4Ql7! üi:2-S; tnmsl. in DSST.

See pp. 41 and 90-92, above . See Baumgarten, "YoUI Kippur in the Qumrao Scrolts a.nd Second Temple · Sources," p. 188. · d01 Se~:p. 181, below. )05 Baumgarten, "Yom Kippur in the Qumran Scrolls a.nd Second Temple Source$,.. Jo:z .: 103

p.l91. 105•

See above, p. 34, note 98.

100

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Tlwught and Ritual

Fast and prayer determine the Yom Kippur worship of Qwnran, as iu Philo's diaspora and the land of Israel. For example, 1QPesher Habaklcuk describes Yom Kippur primarily as a day of fasting and abstention from work (xi:6-8). The place of fasting is underscored in llQTemple Scroll, which places Leviticus 23:27-32 before Leviticus 16 in its Yom Kippur rulings and therefore starts and ends with the precept of fasting. 106 Some of the motifs mentioned in the Festival Prayers on Yom K.ippur appear also in other texts fo!llld in Qumran that are connected to Yom Kippur: repen.. tance (Jubilees 5:17-18); sorrow and weeping causing divine mercy (Ju. bilees 34); the man.na (I QWords of Moses); punishment of the wicked (llQMelchizedek); and humankind divided into two lots (llQMelchizedek).

There is no explicit connection between the temple cult and Qumran's Yom K.ippur prayers. Hli The extant fragments do not mention priestly or hlgh-priestly sacrifices, incense, blood, animals or the temple. Yet thls does not mean that the Yom Kippu.r prayer service did not include texts with such practices or objects. An argumentum e silentio is weak: for Qumran and its fragmented library. Furthermore, we should not exclude the possibility of a solemn litllfgi.cal recital of Leviticus or of other texts connected to Yom Kippu.r in the temple, especially 4QTargum of Leviticus or llQTemple Scroll.

Conclusion Some apocalyptic sou.rces depict the vision of God as an ascent of the visionary to the heavenly holy of holie.s., using allusions to the entrance of the high priest on Yom Kippur (lEnoch 14, Testament of Levi). These visions may have been partially ritualized, as the Songs of the Sabbath Sacriflce suggest. We shall see below that Valentinian theologians and subsequently Clement of Alexandria adopted this imaginaire, reinforcing the Yom Kippur elements and, in the case of Valentinian Christianity, developing a ritual, too. Some apocalyptic sou.rces depict the demonie learler of the fallen an~ gels, the evil forces, in terms of tbe scapegoat. These evil forces are to be conquered by the Ieader of the good forces (I Enoch), who can be described

lO& ln his commentary, Milgrom has integrated explanatio!l.'l of the smaller digressions of IIQTem.ple Scroll from Leviticus. 107 The most important inform.ation about the Yom Kippur ritual in Qumran comes !Tom the Festival Prayers discussed above. Some ofthe concepts mentioned in the Yoot Kippur prayers are not found in connection with Y om Kippur in the Yom Kippur passages of the othet scrolla: God'!i omniscience, Yom Kippur as a special seasoo for God's mercy and indwelling, and the brokenness of human existence.

lmagilloiru of Yom Kippw

101

:With bigh-priestly imagery (11 QMelchizetkk). Expectations of such an eschatological, redeeming bigh priest, who conquers evil and liberates its prisoners, becom.es one of the messianic conceptions of Second Temple Judaism. Below, I analyze traces of this conception in Hebrews. I also argue that the association of the vision in Zechariah 3 with the imaginaire of y om Kippur bad a decisive influence on the early high-priest ChristoJogy before Hebrews. Many etiologjes in addition to these apocalyptic myths were corutected to Yom Kippur. Jubilees explains the fast as pu.nishment for the sins ofthe forefalhcrs entailing an obligation to cry and moum. Jtlbilees is also the first witness for the association of repentance with Yom Kippur, evidence fot a certain individualization of -the cult. Qumran probably connected the demonological mythology to a perception ofthe current time as Yom IGppur. and the aftlictions by the persecutors as suffering to achieve atonement. The creation of rationales for a ritual could take pl.ace independently of participation in the actual ritual, as is demonstrated by 11QMelchizetkk, 4Q180 and 4Ql81. wbich were written by Qumranites who most probably did not take part in the temple ritual, or by the Apocalypse ofAbraham, at which time the temple no Ionger existed. This does not mean that the apocalyptic Yom Kippur mythology implies the temple ritual was void in the eyes of its writers. On the contrary, existing ritual was given a deeper ·cosmological and eschatological meaning (IEnoch), the two main theo· logical intere.sts of apocalypticism.

2. Yom Kippurin the Greek Diaspora This section investigates Yom Kippur in tbe Septuagint, in Philo and in 4Macc.abees. These three Greek diaspora texts come from periods as different as the tbird century BCE, the fust century CE and tbe second to fourth centwies CE. The decision to group together texts that emerged over such wide a time span as 400 to 600 years was made mainly for pragmatic reasons. First, I did not want to fragment too severely the section on the imaginaire.s. Second, the three texts present three different attitudes to Yom Kippur in the Greek Mediterranean diaspora and therefore reflect the pluralism of diaspora Judaism., often seen in too monolithic: a perspective. The Septuagint translates Leviticus in a way that makes Jewish ritual understandable to pagans and Jews living in a pagan environment, without spiritualizing or allegorizing and, surprisingly, without taking into consideration the way Yom Kippur was celebrated in the diaspora. In this, tbe Septuagint differs from the Targumim. About 250 to 300 years later, Philo eompletely spiritualizes the temple ritual. Yom. K.ippur becomes the ..open

102

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Riillal

day" presenting the true Iifestyle of the wise man, who Jives evexy day as if it were Yom Kippur. Philo does not reject the temple ritual, but in his descriptions of the liturgy he focuses on the diaspora ritual of afflictions and prayers. 4Maccabees was written at a time when the temple no longer functioned and uses the temple ritual to explain the idea of vicarious atonement by martyrs. 2.1 The Septuaginl: Conservatism and Enculturation The earliest diaspora interpretation of Yom Kippur is the translation of Leviticus from the tbird century BCE. By comparing its vocabulary to the non-Jewish context and to the Masoretic Text we can learn much about the translators' ideology. Did they want to preserve the "uniqueness" or "distinctiveness" of Jewish religion by choosing distinct terminologies for Jewish and non-Jewish religions as e.g. Ji11:J and "lt.l1!1 in the Targumim? In her dissertation about the cultic vocabulary of the Septuagint, Su2.anne Daniel came to the opposite conclusion...Les traducteurs alexandrins, on le voit, n'eprouvent aucune difficulte a puiser largement dans le vocabulaire des Parens pour rendre les notions propres a Ia religion juive." 108 According to Daniel, most Septuagint neologisms can be explai.ned by means other than iso1ationism. In the following section I will briefly discuss the translations of 7nm7, 1!l:l and n11!J:J, three words central to the ritual of Yom Kippur, which were not included in Daniel's study. 109 '" S. Daniel, Recherehes :S'Ilr le vocabrdalre du culte dam lo Septanie (Etudes et wm· mentaires 61; Paris, 1966), p. 36S. 109 The thinkiug ofthe tnmslators is apparent also in the following instante$, whith, of eOUfSe, is far from being a eomplete Iist: a) Difficult words: •nll in Lev J6:2l a.s an attribute oftbe man leading away tho scapegoat is translated as itoip.oc; (ready, prepared), just a.s in the Targumim and in rabbinie sources. ':11n f1K '111: is translated as l!i.c; yqv iilla:1ov, i.e. "to an impassable I un· trodden land" (Lev 16:22). In Lev 16:31 the translator simply transcribed 11n:lV1 mw as ~1:o crolijloi-reilv, adding the trmslatlon ciwm~:\usto; (rest, repose}. b) Small glosses: At, in the Targumim and iD the opinion of Rabbi Aqiw_ the approacb of 1he sons of Aaron is specified a& arising from evil intern with "alien fire" (Lev 16:1; cf. Lev 10}. Tbe same adaption oec;urs in the Pesbitta to this verse. DJ. Lane, The Pe:Jhitta of Lwiticus (Monogmphs of the Peshitta Institute Leiden 6; Leiden, 1994 ), p. 115, Rfers to Num 3:4. The SeptuagiDt also specifies that the higb priest washes bis whole body (Lev 16:4). c) SJigbt changes: The gannent of the high priest is sanctified {frrwoJlhoo;) rather than sacred (iy1ocj (Lev 16:4). The Septuagint uavaryingly chooses O'IJ\IO.~ for the three different Hebrew terms for the collective (Lev 16:5.17.33). The traDslation O"tqco~~:l probably reflects a factitive vcx:alization of1Z>ll' (Lev 16:10). In Lev 16:15 the tnmslators limit the amount of blood used by writing d;ro to1l
lmagirrairea of Yom Kipp11r

103

1n Leviticus 16:8 and 16:10 7TIUY is translated as O.no1t0~uw.i.o<; and c'tnonop.'ltft. In their important commentary on Leviticus in the Septuagint, Paul Harle and Didier Pralon regarded this as a conscious avoidance of the widespread Greek religious teons ci'ltotflO'to.ioc; and O.nmpoxl«GJ.lÖf;. 110 I am not so sure. The tenn li1t01t0lf.'ltii. is attested for the first time in J.Socrates in the fourth century BCE as a rite to drive away pagan chthonic gods. 111 ApoJlodorus of Athens (second ccntury BCE) is claimed to bave called sorne gods O.~tonOJ11W.tm. 112 He i.s, of course, not eadier than the translation of Leviticus, but in this instance it is much more conceivable that the Septuagint adopted pagan religious tenns than vice versa. i\'ltOO:OJutaio~ and ä.nono111t~ are rare tenns, but as Renate Schlesier points out, the reason for this rarity lies in the ritual itself. "Kerutteichncnd ist dabei [for the ritual], daß die deskriptiven Wörter apopompe, apopompein usw. fast immer vermieden werden." 113 Both words, U'ltOltOlf."Tt and ci'ltotpo'lttO.OJLÖ<;, describe the same religious concept. I do not think an attempt to distinguish Judaism (Lev 16:20.24). ln Lev 2S:9-l0, the translation of:lnD'l77J as 1!1l~pi3a reflects a larger scale of geography - the slaves retum to their homeland, i.e. they bave wodced outside !heir coonlly. 110

0. Pralon and P. Harl~ (transl.), Le Livitique. Traductiort du tate grec de Iu

Septanie, introd!lcticm eJ flotes (La Bible d'Alexandrie 3; Paris, l988), p. 151. A search

in the TLG 8.0 gave about 8 pagan, 1 Jewish, and 16 Christian occunences of ii110tpo'uauJ,I.6o;; and 53 pagan, 2 Jewish aud 70 Christian instauces of lillOtfJOl'llliot; (without tbe lexicographers). Of the former, only one is prior to the Septuagint (Aesop, FDbulae S6;3). This, however, does not include inscriptions aad papyri. Ofthe lattcr, many iostances are prior to the Septuagint, the most famous be!ng probably the passage in Plato, Nomoi 8S4b. 111 "Nay, in the ease of th.e gods also we invoke as the 'Heavenly Ones' those who bless as with good things, wbile to those who are agents of calamilies and punishments we apply more hateful epithets; in bonour ofthe former, both private persoos and states erect temples and altars, whertll$ we honour the latter neither in our prayers nor in our sacrifices, but practice rites to drive 11way their evil presonce (to~ Ii' criit' tv ttttc; t\lxal<; oiiT' tv nt<; 8ucnCJu; T\1&~& vov.;, Ql.l.' ciKOxo~o; ttVt'«tv iJI!ftl; 11ot~ivov.;). lsocrates, Philippru (orQJio 5) 117; tnnsl. by 0. Norlin (ed.), l1ocraJU I (LCL 209; Cambridge {Mass.] and London, 1966). 112 Apollodorus of Athens, Peri Theon 6, fragment S apud Harpocration the Grammarian (flrst to second amtmies CE): ci~toxop1lll1oi nvEo; i:Kal.OO~~to eeot. ltlipi div i\xoUO&wpoc; av h:l'(l) ltq)i 8EmV 6u:ilo.enatj see K. Mfiller, Fragmenta historicon~m Graecontm (S vols; Paris, 1841-1370; vol. 1, pp. 428-469); or W. Dindod, Harpocrationis laicon in decem oratores A.lticos (Oxford, 1853; repr. Groningea, 1969), p. 49. The late antique lexitogJapher Hesychius (probably fifth century CE} knows of days called ci:n:O>COII!tUi, on which the people pe.rformed sac:rifices to divinities called ci1toxOJut..rot. See K. Latte, HeS]!chli A./erQIIdrini laicon (A-0) (2 vols; Copenhagen, 1953, 1966), alph11 6552: li1t01t0pmJ\: T)pipllt nvto;. h t~lo;;th.'Oilll t~tl.oVvto 'fOl~ a1tOif()fAaiou,; 88ott,;. m R. Schlesier, ~Apopompe." Handbuch religionswiss~I'Uchqftlicher Gnurdbegriffe 2 {1990) 38-41, here p. 39.

104

Yom Kippur i11 Early Jewlslr Thortght aJfd Ritual

from Greek re1igions was the reason for UJtO!tot.nr:lli.ot; being pi'eferred. Rather, it retlects the Hebrew n.,w (pi'el) mueh better. Ä:n:otpon:a~, is

eloser to ::11111 and :"'l!l.ll4 Only in Leviticus 16:26, do the translations deviate from the root

ci:n:orcoJ.l:n:l] for 'mmr. The Hebrew 'mcl117 .,.!I!Uit is translatcd as 't'Öv :xiJ.lapov töv Su;;cn:dJ.levov ei~ a~(ll V - "the goat, which was designated for the release." What are the reasons for this deviation? What does ei~ lirpootv mean here? In the Septuagint of Leviticus the word Q:q>itu.n usually implies the metaphysical rdease of sins. 11 s In Leviticus 16:10, G.epiru.n signifies the physical release of the goat. Paul Harte and Didier Pralon have suggested that the gloss in Leviticus 16:10 - citftoe• a.mov (Eit; tftv ipfJJ.lov) ~ m.ay have been added to prepare the reader for CicpS
release of sins. The difficult tenn n1l9:.l is conneeted to ,,,, "to atone.•• The translators chose to reflect this proximity by selec.ting the relatcd tcrms iMCJ'tiJplov and (s~)tlacn:oJ!«t, and not a transcription. In pagan sources (t~)tlclGXOJ.l«l means priJnarilyl11 "to appease" or ..to propitiate" - mosdy applied to god(s).ll 8 The compositum tl;tlitcn:oJ.lUt is mucb rarer than tbe simple form i.lcioteOJ.ltlt. Forthis verb, the idiolect of the Septuagint deviates from the pagan use. First, in tbe Septuagint the compositum. is morc com.mon than il.aaKolla.t. Adding b: usually indieates an intensification. Perhaps it was added here to better signify also the removal of tbe impurity. The same is truc for the neologism ß~tlO.GJ.L()'(i in fl iuui:pa; 1:oü t~t)..aapoü. 119 Second, God is almost never the object of (s~)IJ.4a1COJ.L0.1, 120 but he may be the subjecl This new meaning, "'God expiates sins,"' was coined by the Septuagint by translating literaJiy the Hebrew syntax of 19J (pi 'el). 121 The prepositions See .Hatcb lmd Redpath's eoneordance, s.v. ns E.g. in Lcv 4:20. In the conteXt of Vom .Kippur, ~ bears a second "social'" meaning, the release of slaves (,n,) in the Jubilee: Lelf 2S: I 0. 116 Pralon and Harl~. Le Livitlq11e, pp. 152 and 1S4. 114

117

Por other meanings, see Liddeli and Seott, s.v.; and F. Bfiebsel and I. Hemnann,

"Hileos, bilaskom.ai, hilasmos, bilasterion," TlreologiscJrea Jffilrterbuch zum Neuen Teatament 3 (1938) 306-324, bere pp. 314-3lS. 111 ~e gods wore not necessarily angry, neither did they have to be appeased because a human had previously committed a sin. Bücbsel and Henmann, "Hileos, llüaskomai, bilasmos, hilasterion," here pp. 314-315. 119

Lev 23:27.28.

° For the exc:eptions, see Bachsei and HeJ:Tl1181liL. "Hileos, bilaskomai, hilasmos. hila-

12

steriou," here p. 315. m Bfiehsel and Hernnann, "Hüeos, hilll.Skomai, hilasmo&, bilasterion," here pp. 316-317.

/IIIQg/nairill o{Yom Kipplll'

105

with (~)t).G.axoJ,uu refleet the Hebrew use. too. The resulting Semitisms roust bave been quite strange to the regular Greek speak.er. BUchsei states that this syntaxwas adopted by the readers ofthe Septuagint,'22 but Philo's and Josephus' use is closer to the regular pagan idiom with God as object. 123 The word for n11D:I, ilcxa'tt1ptov, is a neuter a.djective (functioning as a substantive) meaning ..the propitiating" or ''the expiating." 124 Outside of Jewish and Cbristian texts, the word is extremely rare. The use of ilatnft· ptov in Romans 3:25 caused a long and sometimes bitter discussion on its exact meaning - more generally "propitiatinglexpiating place or means" or specifically terminus technicus for l'l11,::J. In some instances, l~actrunov tnm.Slates words other tban m'!I::J. primarily in Ezekiel43:14-20, where it stands fi.ve times for :1,Tl1, a place at which atonement is achieved by pour~ ing blood. Here, therefore, it means gene:rally ••pJace of atonement." But for the reader of the Bible, the Torah was its center. On its first appearance in Exodus 25:17, \J.ac:n;ftptov appears as i).aati}ptov b:i&eJlU, "propitiating I expiating cover. 9 In the following twenty instances. ilaCJ'tfJplov is used exclusively for the cover of the ark.llS Tbis use of i).ao'tftp\.ov as terminus technicus is also reflected by PhiJo. the Testament of Solomon and Hebrews. Only 4Maccabees 17 and Josephus deviate from this use (and then only once). 126 Nevertheless, the Septuagint's translation of a specific cultic instrument by using an abstract adjective instead of a transliteration is the fast step toward a spiritualization, as will be seen in thc discussion of Romans 3:25 and 4Maccabees 17. Yet the choice of such a rare word as i).ttcm1ptov, wbich does not change the cbaracter of the word as distinct terminu.r technicus, mak.es this step a small one. Unlike the Targumim, the Septuagint did not specify balakhic regu" lations of the people's ritual (1i7Dlil mc mlY?). For ex.ample, it is unclear

· 122

Büchseland Hemnann, '"Hiteos, bilaskomai, hi1asmos, hilasterion."

m Sec IC..H. Rengstorf {ed.), ..4 CompJt# Concordance to Flavills Jmeplnl3 (Leiden, 1968-1983), vol. 2, pp. 123 and 382. lU Knw.s, Der Tod Jes~~ als Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 21-32, has the most extensive lillguistic ualysis of U.ao'(iJp\Ov. Now also Daniel P. Bailey, "Jesus as the Mucy Seat: The Semautks and lbeology ofPaurs Use ofHilasterion in RDID&Ils 3:25," (Ph.D. dis-

sertation; University ofCambridge, 1999} (non vid1}; dissertation summary: "Jesu• as lhe Merc:y Seat: 1be Semanlies aod 'Ibeology ofPaul's Use ofHilasterion in Romans :3:25," 'J)mdal• B11lletin Sl (2000) l.SS-158. [ would like to tltank Daniel Bailey for lchldly providing me with a copy of his bandout for lhe IeelUre ''Grtek Heroes Who Happen to Be Jewlsb: Tbe Meaning ofi.lllCtl:tjp\Ov in 4 Maccabees 17:22" be gave at tlte SBL 2002. 111 See especially Ex:od 25: 17-22; 38:S-3 LXX. 126 Fora disc:ussion oftlte non-Torah passages, see pP. 198-200, below.

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish ThOfl.ghi and Rirual

106

what stands behlnd 'tax~nv4aa't&127 and xcuc:mGil'tll 128 - fasting, mouming, sacke1oth and ashes, active asceticism? They could have written VfJO''t&iiaa't&, but chose the more literal equivalent. Finally, the Septnagint introduces a distinction between the cloud in which God will show himself(vecpii.TJ) and the smoke cloud ofthe incense sacrifice (cit1.Li<;), where the Masoretic Text twice uses llll. 129 In Exodus vetpsi.TJ refers to the divine cloud; citf.l,tt; usually signifies the smoke of frre or of bumed incense. 130 Thus according to the Septuagint God dwells in the divine cloud hovering on the iA.aatiJplov, and the smoke cloud of the incense sacrifice hides the divine appearance, whereas the Masoretic Text can also be understood in the sense that God dwells in the smoke cloud of the incense ~rifice. ConsequentJy, the Septuagint translation agrees .more closely with the Sadducee-Boethusian opdon to begin tbe incense sacrifice outside tbe sanctuary. 131 In sum, the Septuagint makes the biblical ritual intelligible to the Greek reader, Jewish and non-Jewish alike. Almostall the teuns are part of Greek religious tradition and therefore perfeetly comprehensible to outsiders. The purification of the san<.:tuary and the scapegoat ritual were most probably conceived of as analogous te various non·Jewish rituals refleeted by the Greek religious terms cbtOltOJ.utaioc; and ci1t07tOJlmi. However, the syntax, especially the syntax of the prepositions attached to s~t~aGJCOj.lllt., must have seemed odd to thc Greek reader and, consequcntly, also the theological conception of atonement as a divine act of expiation. A first step toward spiritualization may lie in the translation of the terminus technicu~· n11!l::l as the abstract adjec.1ive lÄ.aO'tTJPLOv instead of a transliteration. Finally, what is absent is also notable. Tbere is neither a demythologization ofthe scapegoat (as in Philo or in the Mishnah), for whom vocabulary from the Greek world of cbthonic gods is used, nor a significant embedding of diaspora ritual (fasting, praying), as in the Targumim.

121

Lev 16:29; 23:27.29.32.

121

Num 29:7.

Lev 16:2-3. Lev 16:13; Sir24:15; Ezek8:11. 131 See above pp. 30. On the understanding of Leviticus and on the rabbinie controversy, see Milgrom, LevitiCilS J-16, pp. 1014-1015 and 1028-103l; the classic article by Lauterbach, "A Significant Controversy between the Sadducees and the Pharisees"; and the more recent Iiterature listed in Tabory, Jf!llli.rh Ft.Gtil'al.r in t~ Time of iM Ml8hnoh and Talmvd, pp. 264-267. 119

130

lmagl11airu ofYom Kippur

107

2.2 Philo's Allsgorization ofYom Kippur 1 will begin by analyzing the two detailed descriptions of the Yom Kippur

iitual112 that are clearly written from a diaspora perspective, focusing on the ritual of the people. 133 I will then turn to allusions134 that allegorlze tbe temple ritual and reveal the mystical heights of Philo's theology in the figure of the high priest, who is simultaneously a symbol of the mediating Logosand ofthe rnystic•s soul, which ascends to heaven to view God.m 2.2.1 The Rationale ofthe Peopte•s Yom Kippur Rituals The two extensive descriptions of Yom Kippur are part of ds specialibu& legibus, Philo's interpretation ofthe laws ofthe Torah arranged acwrding to the Ten Commandmcnts. Tbe fll"St description is found in the context of the probibition of idolatzy, which occupies the whole of the first book with an analysis ofthe sacrificial cult and its institutions. 136 It is remarkable that in this context ofthe sacrificial cult, the way to celebrate Yom Kippurin the diaspora clearly dominates tbe text. Yom Kippur is "thc fast, .. not ''the day of propitiation"' as one would have expected from the Vorlogs of the 1:1:1 D11 specialifiJis legibru 1:186-188; 2:193-203. ,., How does this tally with Schwartz' thesis ("Philo's Ptiestly Descent") tbat Philo was of pdestly descent? De glgantibu.s 52; Despecialibus IBgibu.s 1:72.84.168; 2:41; Dt ebrietate 86; 135136; De somnils l:21S-216; 2:189.231; Qui.rrerum divinDI'ltm her4!.!" sit82-&4; 112; 179; 187; leg~~m allegorlae 2:52. 56; 3: 174; De plantatione 61; De posteritate Caini 48; 70-72; Legatio ad Gaium 306-307; De vita Mosis 2:23-24; De congressu en~ditionis gratia 89; 107-108; De decalogo 159. 13' On Yom Kippar in Philo, see J. Leon.hardt, Jewish Worship tn Philo of Alexandria (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 84, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck 2001), pp. 43-45, 127-135, 224-228, 230--233, 278-282; G. Deiana, "ll Oiorno del Kippfir in Filone di Alessandria," in: F. Vattioni (ed.). Sangut e antropologia. Riti e Clillto. A.tti della J' Settim.ma Roma, 26 nCl'lembre -I dicembre 1984 (Sangue e antropolos;ia. 5/2; Rome, 1987; pp. 891-905}; Scullio.n, "A Traditto-Historical Study of tb.e Day of AloDement," 1.52.186; J. Lapo~. "Sacrifice ~t~~d Forgiveoess in Philo of Alexandria,.. Studia Phi/unica Anmtal I (1989) 34-42, here pp. 36-38. Young, "The Impact of the Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament," 114-126; Baer, "The Secvice of Sa""rifice iD Second Temple Times," passim; H. Wenschkewitz, Die SpiritvolisiBrung Ihr Kultwhegriffc. Tttnpel, Priester und Opfer im Nnen Testamenr (Angelos - Arehiv filr neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte und Kulturkunde 4; Leipzig. 1932), pp. 67-76; 0. Schmitz, Ditt OP.f•ramchouung du sp4ten Jvdefltums vnd di• Opferaussagen du Neuen Tutaments (TObingen, 1910}, pp. 143-152. 136 This patt includes a short description of the temple (De specioltbus legibus 1:6678), two very detailed analyses ofthe priesthood (79-161} and tb.e sacrif~ees (162-256), l!ld a section about the sacrificers (257-298). The part about sacrifices deals witb the animals (162-167), the festivals (168-193)- among tht111 Yom Kippur (186-188)- and lhe different lypes of sacrifices (194-2S6).

I"

108

Yom Kippur fn Early Jewish Tho11ght and Ritual

Septuagint. 137 The central features of the temple ritual, the high priest, the holy of holies and the blood sprinkling rites are complctely absent ftom this description. The high pricst's absence is especia1ly noteworthy, since he is so central to PhiJo's theology. 138 Philo preferred to emphasize otber actors, the less or non-religious people, 139 who were apparently more important in Philo's diaspora community than was the high priest in distant JelUsalem. Even the repentance of those "juifs d'un jour," 140 is equal to sinlessness, 141 the quality characterizing the high priest. EyKpatt>l4, cipetl}. and Jl~•avma evoke divine forgiveness and come before the selective references to certain sacrifices, mainly the additional sacrifices from Nurobers and the two goats. Conceming these sacrifices, the numbers one and seven (from the one ram, one bull and seven lambs sacrificed) are allegorized and connected to the begi.nning and end of creation. This may be one of those rare eschatological expressions in Philo, reminiscent of the cosmogonic eschatological interpretation of Vom K.ippur i.n apocalyptic texts of the Second Temple period, that teil about the beginning and end of sin. Moreover, an inner process, repentance. is the decisive factor in the (outward) scapegoat ritual. The goat bears the curses of "those wlw changed for the better,"142 not those~who did not show repentance. Philo's second description of Yom Kippur appears under bis exposition of the commandment to honor the holidays.143 Vom Kippur is the nintb of ten holidays discussed. 144 All festivals are presented in their diaspora fonn. Consequendy, blood, sacrl:fice, inc:ense, the temple and the Aaronic pricsthood play no rote in this kind of Yom Kippur. Abstinence and prayer are .its principal features. Vom K.ippur is a window on the life ofthe wise man who displays eyKp•he14 every day (193-195). JnteiTUpting material intake enhances the flow of spiritual nourishment (200-202). Moreover, such an

137 N11o,;~icr: retlects Philo's common usage. Someti!Pes he employs i).oop6c;. Unlikc in the Septuagint the word "group," (~)llAia~~:oJ.lat, appears mely and most or the pusages speak of humQm propil!'ating God iastead of a divinely instigated purification. Consoqumtly we would have to translate "day ofpropitiation." ' 311 See below, pp. 109-112. 139 Pbilo names them oi acoT4 "t"ov iiU.ov Piov süu.ys.; miM11 5pö:ccn (De specia/ibw legilms 1:186). 140 See the nom to this passage in Suzanne Daniel, De specialibiiS legilnls I et ll (Les <Euvres de Phil.o.n d' Alexandrie 24; Paris, 1975). 141 Sins, however, Ieave sc:;ars ou the soul. 142 Cf. Deiana, "11 Gi0010 del Kippilr in Filone di Alessandria," p. 894. 141 De.specialibiiS legibus 2:39-222. 1 ~ De specitJltbus /egibus 2:193-203. The ten festivals are every day (!) (42-SS), Sabbatb (SI>-70), New Mooa (140-144), Passover (145-149), Mazzot (l.S0-161), Omer (162-175), Shavuot (176-187), Rosh Hashanab (188-192) and Suc:cot (204-213).

Imaginairu ofYom Kippur

109

jnterruption reminds us of its potential lack and thereby reinforces grati~ tude for its availability (203). 2.2.2 The Allegorizations ofYom Kippur's Temple Ritual

The most interesting passages on Yom Kippur are to be found among the more than twenty allusions to its institutions, foremost among them being tbe high priest. 145 We may distinguish two Ievels of allegorization: a macrocosmic, cosmological Level and a microcosmic, psychological level.t46 On a cosmological level, Philo interprets the temple as world and the high priest as divine Iogos. 147 On a psychological level, he compares the high priest to the man of truth (o ttp~ ai..r'!Setav O.vepcono<;) and the temple to the rational soul (7..oyuc:ft I!IUXT)). For there are, as is evident, lWo templcs of God: one of them thls universe, in whom there is also as High Priest His .First-born, the divine Word, and the otber the rational soul, whose Priest i.s the real man; the outward and visible irnage of wbom is he who offers tbe pra.yers md sacrifices handed down from oor fathers, to wbom it bas bee.o committed to wear the aforesai
Philo concentrates on the mediatory aspect of the high priest as an ambas· sador between God and humans. 149 Free from physical disabilities, he is also free from pathos, the origin of sins. In an idealized form, he is sinless. 150 Perhaps because of this exceptional purity, only the high priest can bear the view of the holy of holies.m These ideal qualities may have triggered the identification ofthe high priest with the heavenly logos. Con· versely, the human being who has these ideal qualities also becomes a high priest. This tums the wise men, fulfillers of the Torab, into high priests. Wenschkewitz described this as an oscillating movement between idealization of the priests and spiritualization of the priesthood}52 This highly 14s For Iiterature on Philo's spiritualization of rhe temple and its colt, see note 135, .above. See also V. N.ildprowetzky, "La spiritualisation des sacrifices et le culte sacrificie l 111.1 Temple de Jbusalem eh~ Phiion d'Alexandrie,.. Semitica 11 (1967) 97-116. 146 See J. Laporte, "'The High Priest in Philo of Alexandria," Studia Philonica Annual 3 (Earle Hilgert Festschrift) (1991) 71-82.

DevitoMoais2:95-13:5. De aomniis 1:215; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL, Pbilo 5:413. 149 Cf. the pagan writer Hecateu.s in bis A.egyptlco quoted by Diodoill5 Siculus 40:3:56, who describe$ the Jewisb high priest as a messenger (iiyyti.ov) of God's commandruents to ehe pcople: $ee Stern, Gnelc and Lotin Authors on Jf!Ws and JudaiSm, vol. 1, 147

· 1"'

number ll, pp. 2S and 31-32. uo De specialilnts legibus I :230. m De ebrietate 136• .n Wenschkewitz, Die Spiritt.laiiaienmg der Kultusbegrif{e, p. 76.

110

Yom Kippur in Ear/y Jewish Tlrought and Ritual

important mystical interpretation is tht: subject of the paragraphs lbat follow:

.....

IT: PHIL0: 153 Philo is the frrst to refer explicitly to Yom Kippur and quote Leviticus 16 in order to depict the mystical ascent ofthe soul to God in bis heavenly abode. Almost every passage conceming the high priest or the boly ofholies mentions bis entry, oftetus an encounter ofthe wise man's souJ with the divine; 134 this may have the character of a vision 1 ~ 5 or even of a meeting with the di vine. 156 Such an encounter includes a transfonnational element. Those who enter the holy of holies abandon their human nature and become godlike.IS7 This transformation is based on a textvariant in Leviticus 16:17, it recurs wi1h slight variations in all tbree citations of this verse in Philo. Dropping a xd<;, Philo scates "when the priest enters into the boly ofholies, he will 110t be o man until he teaves,.. instead of the regular text of the Septuagint "when the priest enters into the holy ofholies, there will not be any (other) ma11, until the priest leaves." All three instances lead Philo to a deification of the high priest or the wise and perfect man. 158 No extant Septuagint manuscript knt~wn to me Iw this reading, but we find it in Origen and most interestingly in Leviticua Rabbah. m HJGH-PRIESTLY VISlONS OF GOD

Again, acc:ording to Moses, th.e priest when he goes into the Holy of Holies "'will

not bB a man until he comes out" (Lev. xvi. 17); oo man, that is, in the movements of his soul thougll in the bodily sense he is still a man. For when then mind is ministering to God in purity, it is not human hut divinc. But when tt minister.s lo aught that is human, it tums ils c:ourse and descending from heaven, or rather falling to eanh, comes fonh. even though his body still remains within. 11l0 When he [the higb priest] is in line with otbers he is one of a few, but whm he stands alone he is a "many," a whole judgme.nt-court, a whole senate, a whole people, a whole multitude, a whole hlllDIUl race, or rather, to tell the real tntth, a belng whose nature is midway between {man and] God, less than God, superior to " 3 See C.R. Holladay, 'Theios A.ner' in Hellenistic-Judaism: a Critique ofthe Un oj this Category ;" New Testamenl Christoloii)' (Society of BiblicaL Literature Dissertation

Serie; 40; Mis.soula, 1977), bere pp. 170-173; E.R. Goodenough, "Literal Mystay in Hellenistic Judaism," in: P. Casey, S. Lake, A.K. Lake {eds.), Quantulacumque: Stvdies Presented to K. Lake by P~~pllJ, Colleagrzes ond Friends (London, 1937; pp. 227-241). 1-" De gigantibus 52; De specialibus legibus 1:72; De ebrietare 135-136; Qais rentm divinan~m heru sit 84.

's De specialilnls legilniS 1:72; De ebritttate 136.

1

l:!
" 7

I5J

1'9 160

Quis rerum divinarum hecs sit 84. Qui.J rerum divinan~m heres slt 84, De som'niis 2:189.231. See especially De somniis 2:230--231. See p. 125, nole 243, below. Quil ren~m divlnarum heres sil 84; transl. F.C.L. Colsou in LCL Philo 4:325.

Imagin(lif'U of Yom Kippur

111

man. "For when the high priest enters the Holy of Holies he sholl not be a mori'' (Lev. xvi. 1?). Wbo then, if he is not a man? A God? I will not say so, for this uune is a prerogative, assigued to tbe c:bief prophel, Mose.s, while he was still in Egypt. where he is enlitled tbe God of Pharaoh (Ex. vii. 1). Yet 110t a man either, but oo.e contiguous with both extremes, which form, as it we.re, one his head, the 161 other his But indeed so vast in its excess is the stability ofthe Dcity that Heimparts to chosen nlltllRs a sban: of His steadfastness to be tbeir riebest posses&ion.•.• See what is said of wise Abraham, how he was "standing in front of God (Gen. xviii. 22.), fur when should we expect a mind to .stand and no Ionger sway as on the balance save when it is opposite God, seeing and being seen.... [HeJ wbhes to indicate that the mind ofthe Sage, released fi'om storms and wars, with calm, still weather and profound peace around it, is superior to men, but Jess tbaD God .... Tbc good man indeed is on the border-line, so that we may say, quite properly, that he is neither God nor man, but bounded at either end by the two, by monality because of his manhood, by incorruption becau$e of his vinue. Similar to this is the OJacle given about tbe high priest: "When be enters," it says, ..into the Holy of Holies, he willnot be a man until he c:omes out" (Lev xvi. 17}. And if ho rben beeome.s no man, dearly neither is be God, but God's mini$ter, through t.he mortal in him in affmity with c1:11ation, through tbe immortal with the UDCreated, and ho retaios thiJ midway place until he comes out again to the realm of body and flesb. That it should be so is true to nature. When the mind is mastered by tbe Iove ofthe divine, when it strains its powers to reach the inmost sbrine, when it puts forth every effon and ardour on its fonvard march. 'llii.der tbe divine impeU ing force it forgers all eise, forgers itself, and .fixes il$ thoughts and memories on Him alone Whose attendant and servant it ls, to whom it dedicates not a palpable offerin&, but incense, the incense of consecrated virtues. But when the Inspintion is stayed, and the strong yeaming abates, it hastem baek fi:om the divine and becomes a man and meets the human intere$ts whicb lily waiting in the vestibule ready to seize upoa it, should it but shew its fa~ for a moment from within. 1Q

'*-

Yom Kippur becomes the mystical experience of the wise who have reached the high-priestly state of O:mi8Eta. The sentence "when it rninisters to augbt that is human, it tums its coUISe and descending from heaven, or rather falling to earth. comes forth, even though his body still remains within" 163 demonstrates tbat Philo is speaking of a heavenly ascent ofthe soul. Just as ascent is the entry into the holy of holies, so is descent the retum to the vestibule. 164 Tbe spiritual process of tuming away from the world and focusing on God is compared to the changing of clothes by the high priest.

161 lfil

D11. solltnii$ 2:188-189; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 5:529. De somniis 2:223-233; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 5:547-549.

Ml

Quis rerum divintU11111 lu!.res sit 84.

N4

Desomnifs 2:233.

112

Yom Kippur ;,. EtUly Jewi:rh Thought and Ritual The soul tbat loves God. havi.Dg disrobed itself of the body and the objects dear to the body aud fled abroad tar way from these, gains a fixed aud assured settlemeot in the perfect ordinances of virtue .••• This is why tbe high priest shall not enter the Holy of Holies in his robe (LeY. xvi. 1 ff), but laying aside the gumen.t of opinions aad impressions ofthe soul, and lea~ it behind for those that Iove outward things and value semblaru::e above reality, shall enter nabd with no coloured borders or sound ofbells, to pour as a libati011 the blood oftbe souland to offer as incense the whole mind. to God our Saviour and Benefactor.16S

The temple ritual is tumed upside down: The priest leaves bis clothes and enters naked instead of changing bis clothes, the blood is not sprinkled but poured, and the blood rite is performed before the incense rite and not after it. Rather than ignorance - Philo seems to be well infonned about the temple service 166 and may even have been a priest 167 - this transformation of the temple ritual demonstrates that Philo does not derive bis mysticism from the imagery of Yom Kippur. He merely uses the high-priestly en~ trance - a well-known image - to illustrate his ideas. Despite certain parallels, it is unlikely tbai Philo adopted this imaginaire from apocalypticism. First, he i.s quite anti-eschatological. Second~ wbile there are some par~ls bctwcen Pbilo's interpretation of Yom Kip-. pur and tbe apocalyptic imaginaire of the Day of Atonement, 168 thc differences in the imagery are signiticant: e.g. heaven is not surrounded by a fiery river, nor is there a fiery throne. The mystic is not accompanied by protecting angels. Philo is closer to Platonic idealism than to apocalyptic mythology. ALLEGORIZATlONS OF THE SACRIFICIAL RITES: Of the sacrificial rites of

Yom Kippur. only tbe incense sacrifice 169 and the scapegoat170 play a role I6S Legum allegoriae 2:SO-S6; transl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo I. This passage has been negleeted hy previoua investigators. It is the ooly allegoriz.ation of Yom Kippur' s blood rites known to me. However, it does Dot greatly change the general picture of Philo 's attitude to blood sacrifice. 1" Philo S"-ll'IS to bave ha.lllldü.c kDow!edge of the temple rites in the following cases: the high priest ligb.tiug the lnteii.Se before entering tbe holy of holies (De :rpecialilnu legibu.r 1:72; but cf. .De ebrietflle 13S-136); ths prayer of the high priest in the holy of bolifls (Legatio ad Gaium 306); the existence of a third ram (.De specialibus legibuJ 1: 18&); tbe throwing down of the scapegoat (De plantatione 61 ). 167 See Schwartz, "Philo':~ Priestly Descent•• Philo has at lea&t three intetpretations in cODllDOn with the apocalyptic imagii'II'Jire: the interpretarion oftbe higb-priestly entry as transformation and mysrical encollllterwith God; the two lots as two opposed classes of people; aod Ehe fall of the scapegoat. 169 lncense is mentioned a times: De speclalibiiS legibu3 1:72.84; legum allegoriae 2:S6; Legatio ad Goium 306-307; De somnii:r 2:232. 1711 Tbe scapegoat rite is mendoned four timea: Q11i.s ruum dMfU11'um heru Jil 179187; legvm allegoriae 2:S2; De plantatione 61; De posteritate Caini 70-72.

mw

113 among Pbilo's allegorizations. The bloodless sacrifice is superior to the sprinkling rites, w'hich Philo almost completely neglects. 111 This tendeocy can be demonstrated by the (apologetic) description of Yom Kippurin the Embassy to Gaius, in which incense a universal supplication prayer are the only rites in the holy of holies to be mentioned. 112 Agreeing with the Sadducean interpretation, the high priest carries tbe aheady-lighted incense into the holy of holies to conceal its beauty. 113 Yet it is unlikely tbat he knows about the dispute between Sadduceans and Pharisees. Philo does not attribute the divine presence to the material incense, and bis exegesis can be explained as being based on the Septuagint's distinction between vecpElll and Ö.tf1~. 174 The lots of the scapegoat and the sacrificial goat are interpreted as being images of two kinds of humans. The lot of the scapegoat stands for the people wbo a.re not free of pathos; the Iot of the sacrificial goat, for Iovers of God who inherit the lot of Levi, i.e. the spiritualized and democratized p.riesthood. 115 On the cosmological level, he connects the scapegoat with the creat.ion and the sacrificial goat with God. 176 The sendingout of the scapegoat becomes a metaphor for the inner fight agaiDSt the passions, the motto of the wise man's figbt. The source of evil js in the bearts of men, but confessing their passions hclps banish them.:

and

For "'o make atonement over" (tl;tltio•ctat) lhem (madnesses and infirmities, whicb are to be send away ('tel 6.-xOKOp-14 YOCI'i)pll'to: il.:ai oippmactito.1:CL}] is to confess (öpo).orJIOIJt) tbllt altho\lgh we have lhem li'\liug and persisting in our soul, we do not give in, but fight energetically and persistently, until weshall bave send them away (literally: ''to ZellS") (i.diOnOpltlJCKil!&Efla:) completely. m

The Iifestyle of the wise, the practice of iyKpch:sto: and d:1tci6eUl are of primary importance for Philo. One could even say that Yom Kippur is Jike an "open da.y" providing a glimpse of this life. One should live one's whole life without passion, humbling the soul- as one does on Yom Kippur, and as the wise person does all bis life. 17

*

t!.br/etate 87. in the inmost part of the temple in fhe special sanctuary itself, into whicb the Gr.uld Priest enten once a ye~ar only on the Fast as it is called to offer incense and to pray acc:ording m ancestral practice for a Cull supply of hlessin~ and prosperity and peace for aU mallkiod": Legatio ad Gafum 306; tnmsl. F.C.L. Colson in LCL Philo 10:155. · m De spec:ialilnu legilms 1:72. · 1 ~ See p. 106, above. . 175 Lepm allegoriae 2:52. cf. Quu rerum divinantm herusit119--181. · 171

/)t!.

I7Z " •••

116 177 . lil

De plantatiom~ 61. De posteritale Caini 1G-12, my traaslatioo. /)t!.

specialilnd legibus 2:195.

114

Yom Kippur in Eorly Jewish Thought and Ritual

Atonement is not an important factor in Philo's theology. Atonement by sacrifice is usually spiritualized. The confession atones, 179 as do repentance,180 aflliction181 and prayer. 112 He prefers to look to the future instead of the past and regards repentance more higbly than atonement. Philo betrays knowledge of the tradition describing the fall of the scapegoat. 183 His source may perhaps be an early liturgical reenactment of the Yom Kippur ritual. Another possible derivation is narrative sources close to the apocalyptic traditions previously discussed. Conclusion In sum, Philo presents a Yom Kippur that is in almost every respect adapted to the religious life of the diaspora. In the detailed descriptions of Yom Kippur, the people's service with fasting and p~aying is a central feature. Yom Kippur's temple ritual merely serves as a prooftext and as an illustration of Philo's mysticism and cosmological speculations. While he clearly prefers Yom Kippur's symbolic meanings, it is amazing to note that as a Platonist he holds on to the literal meanings and does not abolish Yom Kippur and its institutions. 184 Philo "de-Levitizes" the high priest so that every wise man can become a high priest, but he sets high moral and spiritual standards. Only he who lives the life of a wise man, i.e. who lives every day free from passions ("a-pathetic''), as on Yom Kippur, can qualify. In this state of apatheia the man embarks on his mystical joumey into the holy of holies, the transformation into a superhuman and the encounter with God. Yom Kippur is no Ionger connected to a particular date but to a special state. Philo spiritualizes the office and service of the high priest and tums them into symbols of the wise man and his soul's ascent to God.

De po~teritote Coini 70-72. De specialibw legibus 1:188. 111 Legum Allegoriae 3:174; De congressu eruditionis gratia 107: "[On Yom IGppuc, God] becomes propitious (i:U61<;), and propitious even at once without supplication {oiv&v i~eF:teillc;), to those who affiict and belittle themselves (1oic; i11V1oUc; ICO.ICOW\ ~eai avott7o..· >..ovcn) and arenot puffed up hy vaunting ;md self-pride." 182 De vita Mo.sis 2:24. 113 De plontatione 61. 184 I owe this point to Martha Himmelfarb. 179

110

Imaginaires ofYom Kippur

115

2.3 The Vicarious Atoning Death in 4Maccabees 17 and the Imaginaire of YomKippur Tbe book of 4Maccabees ends its story ofthe martyrdom ofthe seven sons and their mother with a theological interpretation of their deaths, in which several terms recall Yom Kippur: 115 11:20 These then, having consecrated (ayUlo&ivuc;) themselves for the sake of God, are now honored not only with this distinction but also by the fact that through them our enemies did not prevail against our nation, 21 and the tyrant was punished and our land purified (Ka8Gpl.otilvcu), since they became, as it were, a ransom ( liv~ivuxov) for the sin of our nation. 22 Through the blood of these rigbteous ones and through their propitiating (U.o.o'tl)piov) deatb 116 the divine providence rescued Israel, which bad been shamefully treated (xpoKatcm&iV'ta). 181

God, angry because of the sins of Israel, is placated by the atoning death of the righteous ones. The idea of the death of a martyr as vicarious atoneinent appears already in 6:28-29, and several key terms (~ea9apotov, a{J.ui lind avti'!I"UXOV) appear in both passages. The use of iÄacnftpt~ has long drawn attention to exegetes of Romans 3:25. Notwithstanding that in 4Maccabees iÄaotiJpto~ is probably used attributively and has the specific sense not of n,1!1:> but more generally of ''propitiating," the extremely rare word is very close to the terminus technicus and appears together with alJ.La and liJ.Laptia.l11 Moreover, two other ideas are reminiscent of the apocalyptic imaginaire of Yom K.ippur. The purification of the country motif (tiJv mtpilia Ka9apto9ijvat) plays an important role in the eschatological myth of JEnoch as an interpretation of the ritual of Yom Kippur. 189 Similarly, the Jas E.g., Klauck remarks that "Die Übernahme von Konzeptionen aus der atl. Opfertheologie und Opfersprache liegt auf der Hand.... i1..Gcn~pl0c; ln 17,22 zielt zusatzlieh auf das Ritual des jährlichen großen Versöhnungstags." See H.-J. Klauck (transl.), 4. Makkabäerbuch (Jüdische Schriften aus bellenistisc;her und römischer Zeit 3:6; Glltersloh, 1989), p. 671. Cf. E. Lobse, Märtyrer und Gottesknecht. Untersuchungen zur urchristlichen Jlerlciindigung vom Siihnetod Jesu Christi (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 64; Göttingen, 2 1963), p. 71. 116 lf one takes the reading of the Sinaiticus (with the article), the translation is: -''through the propitiation oftheir death," see Lohse, Märtyrer und Gotteslurecht, p. 71. 117 4Maccabees 17:20-22 in the translation of H. Anderson, "4 Maccabees," in: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha 2 (New York, 1985; pp. 531564). · 181 [f we follow the reading of the Sinaiticus (with the article before ibo'ti!p\ov) and lranslate "through the propitiation of their death" and i1..aoTiJpwc; has the more generat meaoing, the terminus technicus must bave jumped into the head of every reader acquainted with the Torah. _:,., JEnach 10:20; Milik also reconstructed the purification of the land motif for aliothertext connected to Yom Kippur, IQ22Word.s ofMoses iv:l, see DiscUIIeries in the Jorda~ian Desert 1 (1955) 95-96.

116

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

victory over the evil Lord recalls the victory of the eschatological high priest over the forces of evil, which appears in 1Enoch 10, 11 QMelchizedek and Hebrews 2:14-15. More tentatively, the term npo1Catc:ro9tvt11 for the mistreatment of tbe people recalls terminology for the afflictions of Yom Kippur, which can be tc:atc:oo as well as tanEtvoro. In sum, tbe combination of tbree terms from Leviticus 16 and two conceptions connected to Yom Kippur makes it very likely that the author wished to allude to the Day of Atonement. 190 Recent scholarship rejects tbe earlier dating of 4Maccabees to the first century BCE and favors a date after the destruction of the temple, in the second century CE or even later. 191 This new dating removes one of the most important texts from the hands of those scholars who used this passage to explain Romans 3:25 against the background of Jewish martyr theology. Both passages seem to be independent solutions for the same question: what significance does the death of innocent people have for their religious conviction? Both use sacrificial imagery to explain the vicarious atoning effect achieved by divine providence. Excursus: The Scapegoat as._Background for Vicarious Atoning Suffering in lsaiah and Josephus? Was Yom Kippur's sacrificial tenninology used to express vicarious atoning suffering in two other, non-Christian texts? Some scholars have suggested that tbe image ofthe surfering servant of God in Isaiah 53, which draws on some kind of sacrifice, 191 is based on

Contra Bailey, "Greek Heroes Who HappentoBe Jewish." Jan Willem van Heuten inan oral discussion in Jerusalem ofhis paper, ..Martyrdom and Persecution Revisited: The Case of 4 Maccabees," in: W. Ameling (ed.), Milrtyrer und Märtyrerakren (Aitertumswissenschaftliches Kolloquium 6; Stuttgart, 2002; pp. 5975). 192 See e.g. J. Scharbert, "Stellvertretendes Sillmeteiden in den Ebed-Jahwe-Liedem und in altorientalischen Ritualtexten," Biblische Zeitschrift [N.F.] 2 (1958) 190-213; and the Iist of other scholars in 8. Janowski, "Er trug unsere Silnden. Jesaja 53 und die Dra· matik der Stellvertretung," Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 90 (1993) 1-24, here p. 20. Janowski proposes a non-sacrificial baclcground ofthe servant. On Isa 53 in generat in early Judaism and early Christianity, see e.g. the papers in B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmacher (eds.), Der leidende Gotte.s/cnecht. Jesaja JJ und seine Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie zu Jes JJ (Forschungen zum Alten Testament 14; Ttlbingen, 1996)in particular M. Hengel, "Zur Wirlcungsgeschichte von les 53 in vorchristlicher Zeit," pp. 49-91; P. Stuhlmacher, "Jes 53 in den Evangelien und in der Apostelgeschichte," pp. 93-105; 0. Hofius, "Das vierte Gottesknechtslied in den Briefen des Neuen Testa· mentes," pp. 107-127; and J. Adna, "Der Gottesknecht als triumphierender und interzessorischer Messias. Die Rezeption von Jes 53 im Targum Jonathan untersucht mit beSOD· derer Berücksichtigung des Messiasbildes," pp. 129-158. 190 191

/maginaires of Yom Kippur

117

,the scapegoat. 193 Even ifthis allusion seems far-fetched, it makes a strict distinction be.tween either sacrifice, noble-death or the suffering servant in explanations for the background to tbe vicarious atonement of lesus difticult and subject to personal theological ' ferences. 194 preA passage in Josephus' Bellum judaicum, proposed by Michel and Bauemfeind, :seems more c:onvincing. 195 The high priest Ananus states: "If I was alone and, as it were, in the desert, I would offer my life for God." 196 This might allude to the sc:apegoat, wbo 'dies alone in the desert. Such an interpretation is supported by two further Observations the context. Directly before this episode, Josephus relates that lots are cast for the of~fic;e ofthe high priest197 - as for the two goats on Yom Kippur. Since such a custom for die election of high priests is unknown. the theological background seems noteworthy. Furthermore, Ananus is tortured and bears the pain silently as Isaiah's servant of God. 198 This passage is one ofthe few texts using the scapegoat as positive image. 199

.in

Conclusion: Yom Kippurin the Greek Diaspora The Septuagint of Leviticus translates the Jewish terminology of Yom K.ippur into pagan religious language; the demonology connected to the . scapegoat is equated with pagan terminology of sacrifices to chthonic gods. Until then, no spiritualizing tendency is evident and the ritual ofthe .'diaspora has not yet surfaced in the Greek version of Leviticus 16. The ·,focus on the temple ritual remains unchanged, the Septuagint of lsaiah pro:viding the fiiSt evidence for a shift from the temple to the Iocal communities by calling the day "the fast." See J.D.W. Watts, Isaiah 3446 (Word Biblical Commentary 25; Waco [Tex.], 1987), p. 231; J.N. Oswalt, The Book of/saiah. Chapters 40-66 (New International Commentary to the New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.] and Cambridge [UK], 1998), p. 377. Isaiah compares the servantto a lamb (:1111) led to tbe slaughter (53:7). The servant .bears the sicknesses and aftlictions vicariously for the c:ommunity in language reminiscent of the descriptions of the scapegoat carrying the sins of the community. The terminology for sins 'l7V1!1 (53:5.8.12), ]1'!7 (53:6.11), llli7K (53: 10) and Ktln (53:12) is similar t(l the three tenns of Lev 16 (iV1!1 , 1111 ,KDn). Like the scapegoat, the servant is tortured b~fore bis death. The formuJation D"n f1Kil "lTll (lsa 53:8) recalls :1111 Y1K (Lev 16:22). See e.g. D.R. Schwartz, "Two Pauline Allusions to the Redemptive Mechanism of the Ciucifixion," Journal of Biblical Literature 102 (1983) 259-283. Yet sacrific:ial concepts Cam.ot explain everything, since other tenninology in lsa 53 c:omes fi-om a rather nonc.idtic medical background. Is the ritual ofthe people perhaps alluded to by the mention · of :I:W (lsa S3:7)? Did the Septuagint reinforce tbis allusion by the use of ICEKcuc:41o11clt and 'tQ~~QvliKIEt in two successive verses {lsa 53:7-8)? :: ~ 94 On Isa 53, see the discussions ofGal3:I3; Jobn 1:29; 1Pet 2:22-24 below. ' ·195 0. Michel and 0. Bauernfeind (eds., transls.), Josephus, Fltniw, De bello Judaico. ·•f?er jüdische Krieg. Griechisch und deutsch. Hrsg. und mit einer Einleitung sowie mit iAiJmerkurrgen. (3 vols; Municb and Darmstadt, 1962-1969).• .,,.,!111 Bel/umjudaicum 4:164. \ 197 Bellumjudaicum 4:153. ' 11111 Bellumjudaicum 4:165 . .\')9!1 See the passage on Ravya bar Qisi discussed on p. 130, below. · 193

118

Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

Philo focuses on the diaspora way of celebrating Yom K.ippur, allegorizing the temple ritual to higher truths and spiritualizing priestly concepts to the ascetic life of the wise. He is the frrst to use the high-priestly entrance ofLeviticus 16 explicitly to describe the mystical ascent of the wise man's soul to God. His theology strongly influenced later Alexandrinians such as Clement and Origen. Philo's concept of Yom Kippur as an "open day" to the wise man's Iifestyle will be adopted by Christians such as Origen. Finally, 4Maccabees 17 and probably Josephus draw on the imaginaire of Yom Kippur to explain the rationale of vicarious suffering. Josephus might even be a rare example of a Jewish (non-Christian) text comparing the seapegoat to a positive figure.

3. The Christian Jewishlmaginaire ofYom Kippur Many of the texts discussed in parts 2 and 3 in fact belong here. Among them are Barnabas and Hebrews (despite their fierce anti-Jewish stanee) and Romans (and thdr sourees), lJohn, Matthew, Galatians and perhaps the Christological songs of Colossians and Philippians. The texts of Valentinian Christianity that are based on lost Jewish apocalyptic sources which were a bridge between the descriptions of ascent visions in apocalyptie and Hekhalot texts - also belong into this diseussion.

4. Aspects ofthe Rabbinie Imaginaire ofYom Kippur Any investigation of Judaisw in late antiquity (i.e. from the second to the fifth centuries) has to contend with a methodological dilemma: on the one hand, the rabbinie sources are almost the only extant textual evidence; on the other band, they frequently do not mateh the pieture that emerges from archaeological data, such as the findings of Dura Europos.200 How broad is the prism of Judaism represented in the rabbinie sources; i.e. how many different opinions and styles of life found their way into the rabbinie eolleetions, and how many did not? To what extent are texts Iike the later parts of the Jewish Sibyllines, 4Maccabees and Pseudo-Philo On Jonah evidenee of alternative traditions not contained in the rabbinie eorpus? How can we evaluate non-Jewish sources that do not fit the rabbinie data for our reconstruction? How ean we evaluate the eredibility of their de200

Cf. G. Stemberger, Einleitung in Talm11d 11nd Midrasch (Munich, 1 1992), pp. 55~5.

Imagi11aires ofYom Kippur

119

scriptions? What is the position of Christian Judaism? In a few instances, extra-rabbinical data confum minority opinions or deviant opinions in the rabbinie sources,201 but often no such deviant opinion is extant. 202 Furthermore, the original Sitz im Leben of each rabbinie source is not clear. Did it serve a certain community as a law codex or as a textbook for teaching purposes, or was it simply a collection of statements?203 The Mishnah received canonical status with its redaction around 200 CE - in certain circles of Palestine and in some Babylonian academies. The development from rabbinie Judaism to normative Judaism was a long process. We cannot simply presuppose that the ritual and thought in the commwlities of the Westem diaspora in Mediterranean Iands, or even in Palestine and Babylonia, followed the rulings of the sages of the Mishnah, or the Palestinian or Babylonian Talmud. We have to bear these unresolved methodological questions in mind during the brief analysis of rabbinical thought on Yom Kippur. I shall begin this outline of some generat aspects of the rabbinical imaginaire of Yom Kippur with mythological events linked to Yom Kippur, to give an impression ofthe general theological ideas connected to the festival. I shall then go on to analyze some part of the conceptions of the temple ritual, especially the high priest, the goats and the red ribbon. Finally, I shall turn to some general theological concepts ofthe people's ritual that received special attention in the rabbinie sources, primarily repentance. ldeally, each rabbinie tract should be allocated its own section. Such a detailed investigation of the concepts of Yom Kippur, the high priest, the scapegoat, the sacrifices, the high-priestly entrances, the afflictions, the synagogue service, etc., for each of the rabbinie tracts would be an interesting undertaking, but it goes far beyond the scope of this work. I have tried to avoid a monolithic presentation by referring to the collection (e.g. 201 This might be the case wilh Church Fathers, who polemicized against the sad character ofthe Jewish fast. 202 Judith Lieu has employed the portrayal of Trypho, the Jew, in Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho for reconstructing the Judaism of Asia Minor in the second century. Leaving one henneneutical circle she entered another. On the one band she rebels against using only or even primarily rabbinical sources for reconstructing the late antique Judaism of Asia Minor. On the other band her approach involves the methodological danger of giving up the only extant critetion for a countercheclc, since in the realm of concepts and prayers, archaeological evidence can only rarely help, and then only ~der fortunate circumstances. See J. Lieu, Image a11d Reality. The Jews i11 the World ofthe ChristiallS ;" the Seco11d Ce11tury (Edinburgh, 1996), pp. 103-1.54. 2113 See G. Stemberger, Ei11leitung i11 Talmud rmd Midrasch, pp. 140-143, regarding the different opinions about the Sitz im Leben ofthe Mishnah.

120

Yom

Kippr~r

in Ewly Jewi11h Tho11ght Q'fld Rihlal

Misbnah, Babylonian Talmud) with which, andin some instances to tbe. rabbi with whom. a certain statement is associated. Regarding the unre-. solved questions ofthe pseudepigraphy in the attribution of certain say.ings to certain sages, of redaction and of form history, and in view of the uncertainties caused by the lack of critical editions for most of the material, J have re:frained from advancing more concrete theses on the history.204 This is a task for future investigators. Despite his conservative approach. Ioseph Tabory's survey on Yom Kippür in the rabbinie period is a helpful collection of statements and scholarship.w On the conceptual backgtound of the sacrifices, Yitzhak Baer and Naftali Goldstein have done some promising pioneering work.lll6 Yet most aspects of the rabbinie theology of the temple ritual still await critical investigation, principaUy on the pereeptions of the role and figure of the high priest. The most interesting works on the rabbinie Yom Kippur liturgy are still the general models of the development of the ritual from the temple to the synagogue by Elbogen and Heinemann. 201 In popular opinion, Yom Kippur was the most important festivai.• When Yom Kippur fell on a Sabbath it was awarded a special sanctity, and the gravest sins were those eommitted on this day. 209 The special charactcr of Yom Kippur is demonstrated also by the fact that it is described as the 21M Even the most basic m.ethods are disputed among the main approaches. I follow the gea.eral lines pointed ou.t by Stemberger in bis Einleitr~ng in 1'almud und Midratclr, pp. SS-65 an.d 66-72, with refereru:es to further Jiterature. m> Tabory, Jewi1h Festiva/3 in the Time of the Mishnah and Talmud, pp. 259-306; Most or the secondary Iiterature accepts thc Mishnah and other rabbinie sources at face value without redaetion crities or form critics: Saftai, "Der Versöhnungstag io Tempel und Synagoge"; idem, "The Service ofYom Kippurin the Second Temple" [in Hebrew} Mahanayim 49 (1961) 122-125; idem, "On the History of the Service .in the Second Temple"; E.E. Urbach, The Sages. Tlreir Concepts fmd Belieft (2 vols; Jenw.lem, 1987"' 2 1979), especially pp. 420-436 and 462-471; K. Hruby, .. Le Yom Ha-Kippurint ou Jour de l'Expiation,... Orient Syrien 10 (196S) 41-74, 161-192, 413-442; A . .8tlchlcr, Struliu in Sin and A.tonement (Lon
lmoginoil'es ofYom Klpp•r

121

oolY fes1ival that will be observed in the eoming world.210 While Jubilees describes Yom Kippur as a festival of sadness and Phito•s Yom Kippur vacillates between a.ftliction and festival, th.e rabbinie sources tend more to the festival side. Yet the aspect of sadness surfaces here and there in the rabbinie sources and might have been the custom in some communities.211

4.1 Mythological Events Connected to Yom Kippur

The association of Yom Kippur witb redemption and judgment (llQMelchizedek) continued in rabbinie thought. Yom Kippur is not only an eschatological occasion but an annual day of divine judgment, concludi.ng the period of repentance during the ten day.s of awe from Rosh Hashanah, ascribed clearly in the Babylonian Talmud to Rosh Hashanah . ..All are judged on Rosh Hashanah and their sentence is signed on Yom K.ippur...:atz Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah are the days when God sits on bis judpent throne.211 In tbis heavenly judgment Satan is the accuser. Two traditions exist about the power of Satan on Yom Kippur. According to the Babylonian Talmud, Satan has power on all days but Yom Kippur.214 Acoording to Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46, Yom Kippur is the only day when the dcvil Samma'el has power over atl siDDers among Ismel (a disappointing experience. sinee Israel becomes sinless on just this day). The apocalyptic legend of the introduction of sin by the fallen angels and their Ieader 'Azaz'el, Samma'el, She.mihaza, etc. - is still (or again) told and the names appear in connection with Yom Kippm-215 but without explicitly dating the event to the fast. The earliest rabbinie text to connect a mytbological event to Yom K.ippur may be the Mekilta Rabbi Yishmae/. 216 Moses is said to have judged the pcople ..after the day" (Exodus 18:13), to whlch the Mekilta adds "(af· ter the day) ofatonement." It i.s not completely clear what event feil on the 210 Pirqe. Rabbi Elia(lr 46. This is a st:r.mge concept, since it assllnle$ the continuity of sin in tbe world to tome. 211 lbe extra-talmu.dic tracl Sofe.rim 19:4 prohibits lncluding the term "a good day" in tbe praycr of Yom Kippur, sincc a täst c:ao.not be ..a good day." Hence, a strict separarion .into sectari:aus and rabbis on lhis aspect is not possible. See the sourees IU1d the discussion oo p. 99, above. 112 bRH 16a by Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehudah states !hat the moment of each one's sentence is set indiYidually. 113 bRH 32b. Cf. also thc statement in Avot of Rabbi Nothan (A) 2S that it is a bad omen to die at the beginning ofYom Kippur and a good one to die at its eod. 114 bYoma 20a. ·. 2" See below, pp. 128-130. · 216 Meld/ta Rabbi Yishmael Amalek 4 to E:x:od 18:13 (ed. Horovitz, p. 196; ed. Lautez-

bacb, vol. 2, pp. 179).

122

Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Tho!4ght and Ritual

Day of Atonement. According to the traditional explanation,ll7 the events of the biblical narrative are out of order, and the judgment happened after Moses returned from Mount Sinai.m Yom K.ippur coincided with the giving of the Torah. This tradition is otherwise attested only in a (probably late) Baraita in the Babylonian Talmud.119 But is this the only possible reading of the Mekilta and Exodus 18? If we interpret the Mekilta on its own, and understand "after the day" in the context of its narrative, the previous event- the coming of Jethro and perbaps also the battle with Amalek - happened on the day (of atonement) prior to Moses' judgment The latter version matches the Melcilta, according to whicb the battle with Amalek is said to have tak:en place during a fast (1l'J!7n). 220 Jn both cases, the exegesis ofthe Melcilta is strange. Exodus 19:1 dates tbe giving of the Torah to the third month after the exodus, i.e. before Yom Kippur, and Jethro (Exodus 18) is supposed to bave arrived earlier, i.e. between Pesach and Shavuot. There must have been a special reason to deviate from the biblical chronology, either a conceptual reason or the weight of an existing tradition connecting some part of the narrative to Yom Kippur.221 Was it the moment of judgment? Was it the fight against evil, i.e. Amalek? Is it the association of Moses, the just judge, with collaboration in the creation? The idea of COIUlecting Yom Ki.ppur to salvation from the ultimate evil (Amalek) seems the most suggestive and matches the Mekilta's characterization of tbe battle as ta1dng place during a fast. The traditional interpretation is not drawn froru the Mekilta alone, bot rather interprets the Mekilta in the sense of the Baraita. A Baraita in tbe Babylonian Talmud reports in the name ofShim'on ben Gamliel that the second giving of tbe Torah took place on Yom Kippur, connecting the renewal of the covenant (Exodus 34) to Yom Kippur and perceiving Yom Kippur as atonement for the sin of the golden calf.222 Three traditions seem linked to this association of the golden calf and the second giving of the Torah with Yom Kippur. First, the high priest is not allowed to serve in golden garments in order not to remind God of the sin 217

E.g. Ruhion Exod 18:3.

Rasbi sugcsb this order: battle witb Amalek, Ton.h-gjving (on Yom Kippur). BITival of Jetlu:o, Moses' judgment; instead of the biblical order: battle with Amalek, BITival of Jethro, Moses• judgment, Tora.h·giving, 1.l&

21 ~ Cf. the traditiun of bTa;a11 JOb, discussed below. The mixture of Hebrew and Aramaie raises some suspicion about the age ofthe Baraita. 120 Mekilta Rllbbi Yi&hmael Amalek 1 to Exod 17:12 (ed. Horovitz, p. 180; ed. Lauterbach, vol. 2, pp. 145). Dl Migbt there be a guua shavvczh to BJCod 32:30? ln that ease the passage of the Mekilta refers to the golden calf. m bTa'an 30b. Pirqe Rabbi Elierer 46 malc:es this into a full story.

llnGginoires ofYorn Kippul'

123

of the golden calf. 223 Second, God's thirteen middot (Exodus 34:6-7), which were revealed on tbis occasion. play an important role in the liturgy of Yom K.ippur and, togetber with Leviticus 16:21, have the power to transform deliberate transgressions into unintended sins.224 Third, Exodus 32:11-14 and 34:1ffwere read in some Palestiniancommunities.:w The biblical account ofthe consecration ofthe First Temple can be understood as that part of the consecration wbich coincided with Yom Kippur. This interpretation depends on whetber the week of the dedication of the temple was celebrated hefore Sukkot or coincided exactly witb Sukkot.226 Thls point is discussed in Mo 'ed Qoton in the Babylonian Talmud, which asserts that tbe week of dedication indeed included Yom Kippur, celebrated not as a fast but as a feast227 Like the consecration of tbe temple, the Ordination of the priests is also associated witb Yom Kippur. The Talmudlm compare the week ofthe high priest's preparation with the ordination of Aaron and bis sons. and make the preparation week into one of (re-)ordination.221 According to tbe Jate Midrasb Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer, 229 the circurnci.sion of Abraham. which is described as having a vicarious atoning function, also took place on Yom Kippu.r.230 Earlier sources indicate tb.at it took plaec on Passover, bringing it into line with other events, which according to Genesis Rabboh and tbe Talmudim occurred either in Nisan or in Tishri. Genesis Rabbah and the Palestinian Talmud do mention the creation ofthe world,ll 1 and the Babylonian Talmud includes the birth and deatb of the forefatbers, and redemption. 232 However, these sources most probably have Rosh Hashanah in mind and not Yom Kippur. The vacillation between Ni-

m yYoma 7:3, 44b; cf. Leviticw Rabbah 21:10 (ed. Margulies, pp. 489-490). See also !he discuasion on tbe prooftexts for individual or general confessions iD yYoma 8:9, 45c. 324 yYoma 3:1, 40d; cf. bYoma 36b. w See above, p. SS. 1'llfi lKg~~ 8; 2Chr 6--7, especially 7:&-10. 2l'l bMQ 9a.- Cf. yMQ 1:7, 80d; Genesis Rabbah 35:3 (ed. Tbeodor/Albeck, p. 332), which discusses 2Chr 7 only with regard to an eventual collision of the consecration of the temple with Suk.kol $ans Vom Kippur. m yYoma l:l, 3Sa-c; bYorna 2a-6a. See also I. Knohl and S. Naeh, "Millu'im voKippurim" {in Hebrew] Tarbiz 62 (1993) 17-44. · 229 Unlike othcr carly .rabbinic lile.rature, this Mid.rash is usually considered thc work of a sing,te author, probably in Palestille in the eighth or nioth ceo.tw-y CE but contalning older t.raditions: Slemberg,er, Einleitflng in Talmvd 1111d MidrMch, pp. 3:21-323. ZJO Gen 17:23-27; Pirqe Rabbi Eliu:er 28. 231 Genesis Rabbah 22:3 to Gen 4:3 (ed. Thoodor/Aibeclt, p. 207). Cf.yRH 1, .S6b and bRH IOb-llb. m bRH lOb-llb.

124

Yom Kippur in EMly Jewlsh Thowght and Riwal

san and Tishri might perhaps be a readio.n to the Christia.n linkage of these events to Easter. Tbe Aqedah is usually dated to Pas.sover, but some sources link it with Rosh Hashanah and the blowiug of the Shofar. 2, 3 A late kahhalistic tradition dates the Aqedah happened to Yom Kippur. 234 Earlier, the ram is connected with the imaginaire of Y om Kippur by being depicted as ha.ng" ing from the bush with a red ribbon - resembling the scapegoat. 2l$ In sum, various rabbinie traditions (mostly Amoraic) date great events in the history of salvation (the circumcision of Abraham, the second giv.ing of the T orah and renewal of the covenant, and the consecration of the First Templef36 to Yom Kippur. Seoond Temple traditions are partially continued - for instance, the notion of Yom Kippur as a day of judgment aod redemption. 231 Is there a common denominator? The consecration of the temple, the giving ofthe Torah and circumcision are tbree cssct:ltial means of salvation and identity for Judaism. The golden calf signifies collective sin and repentance, botb ofwhich can be connected to judgment, whereas Abraham's circumcision and the second giving of the Totah mark tbe covenant and its renewal. ~

4..1 Rabbinie Interpretations of the Temple Ritual This .section deaJs with the area lell5t researched. I will touch on only a few points, for the sake of comparison (mainly the high-priestly entrance. the scapegoat and the red ribbon), having to neglect others that in a fuU-scale analysis of the rabbinie understanding of Yom Kippur would desetve much more attention. 4.2.1 The High Priests In the Tannaitic sources, the high priests are portrayed as having a history of corruption. The high priests of the First Temple and beginnings of the Second, wbo were still hereditary, are praised, especiaUy Simon the Ju.st. 23 ' See L. Gin.zberg, The Legelids of the JewJ, (7 vols; Philadelphia, 1909-1938, reprinted 1967-68}, hcre vol. :S, p. 252, notes 246-48. 234 see Gimberg, The Lagend:t of the JewJ, voL 5, p. 2Sl, note 248 for fw1her literature. Ginzberg himselfwrites that Pirqe .Rabbi Eliezer 3llet tbe Aqedah hsppen oo. Yom Kippur. Butthis does not appear expli.citly in the text thougb it may be deduced: Abraham is likened to the bigh priest and the heavenly voice comes from betwc:en the two Cherubim (on the ark ofthe covenant), Le. in the holy ofbolie.s. vs See p. 129, below. Fora link: betwccn the Aqedah and Yom Kippurin Bamabas, see p. 1S2, below. 236 And perhaps the battle witb Amalek. m I did not fmd rabbinie texts acco.rding to wbich the selling of Joseph, the cea.sing of the manna, and the entry iD.to the land of Israel bappened on Yom Kippur.

lmaginair~$

of Yom Kippur

125

Few in number, their justice is evidenced by constant miraclcs. 238 In contrast, thc numerous high priests after Simon, especially those of the Herodian period, arc portrayed as being stupid, conupt and ''selfish unto death...239 The Mishnah reflects tbis contcmptuous attitude by adding "lfbc [tbe high priest) was learned" to various rituaJs. The apparent superiority of rabbinie institutions over tbe priesthood is manifested in the heart· breaking scene of the high priest who has to swear loyalty to the court of the eiders. 240 This perception of the high pricsts as cJerks is COntradieted by those tra~ ditioos in Amoraic sources co.mparing the (high) priests to angels241 or their garments to those of angels. 2.u According to Leviticus Rabbah, the high priest became a superhuman figure on entering the holy of holies.243 The high-priestly entrance into the holy of holies is greatly mystified - as in the traditions of the apocalypses, Philo, the Valentinian texts and the Hekbalot. In the holy of hoUes, the high priest may encounter angelic figures, or even God.:M4 For example, Simon the Just was always accompanied by a mysterious figure, who was either an angel or God.24s The

m yYomo 1:1, 38c; cf. also yYoma 1:4, 39a; bYoma 8b.

m See especially the rclativization ofthe praise of tYoma 1:6 in yYoma 1:3, 39a and bYoma 18a; ct: mYoma 1:3.6; tYoma 1:'1.12; bYoma23a. <MO mYoma 1:.5 and Talmudim m this passage; IYoma 1:8. 241 Aln:ady in Mal2:7. 2<12 yYoma 7:3, 44b; Levilicus Rabbah 21:11 (ecl. Marguli~s, p. 492). A different tladition compares tbe people of Israel, who affiict their souls, to angels (Pil'qe Rabbi Eliezer 46), see above. p. 35. w LnftiCTII Rabbah 21:12 {ed. Mal'Julies, p. 493). The same tradition is found in Pbilo and Origen, based on a variant readi.og ofthe Septuagint to Lev 16:17. Perhaps. the rabbis adopted a Hdlenistlc Jewish exegetical tradition through the mediation ofOrigen or, as Yib:b.ak Baer has sugcsted. Philo retlects an earlier rabbinie tradition (Baer, "Tbe Service ofSacrifice in Sec
priest, i.e. DO man, and even the high priest is no Ionger a man. See the eommentary of Margulies. ln principle, the variant reading of the Septuagint can also appear in Heblew or it could have read "ti1K 1" or "D1K l'l" instead of"o-m 'T.n," i.e. "and a man! and like a man ho shall not be upon entering into tenl.." In fact, such a reading could have been one of ehe factors for the angelization of the high priest in thc apocalyptic and early mystical litcrature. ln any case, the variant reading did not survive in extant manuscripts of thc Septuagi11t or !he Masoretic Text (apart from the quotatioos in Philo and Origen). 244 1be opposite opinion, that upon ehe high priest' s c::otry even angels have lo leave tbe boly of holies, is ex:pressed in lhe name of Rabbi Abbahu (VYoma 1:5, 39a; yYoma 5;3, 42c; Leviticus Rabbah 21:12 (ed. Margulies, pp. 492-493). 245 tSotah 13:8; yYoma .5:3, 42c and Levilicus Rabbah ll:ll (ed. Margulie.s, pp. 492493); and the slightly different tradition in hYoma 39b and bMenah J09b. Many more

126

Yom Kippur in Eal'ly Jewish Tllo11ght and Ritu
Talmudim underscore the possible deadly consequences of this spiritual encounter. 246 lt is very likely this beliefthat lies behind the mishnaic ritual of giving a party upon exiting from the holy of holies.247 Lauterbach attempted to explain the famous Pharisees-Sadducees dispule over whether the incense should be Icindled inside or outside the holy of hoHes. He suggested that the Pharisees were contesting the Sadducees' ''primitive'' conception of the incense as a means of protection from directly witnessing thc presence ofOod who resides in the holy ofholies. 244 A further possible interprctation of the danger is the perception of the holy of holies as a divine bridal chamber where the cherubs make love - a sight that is prohibited to outside world. 249 What effected the atonement: the high priest hlmself, bis words, bis deeds, or the sacred artimcts he was using, i.e. ex opere operandi, ex opere operato or ex opere "instrumentorum"? All did; but according to tradition.' about Simon the Just. it was the priest's saintly nature 1hat bad special efficacy, and it was the com1pt nature of the last high priests before the destruction of the temple tbat spoiled the ritual. zso On the otber band, discussions of the temple ritual tend to attribute the atonement either to repentance and confessions or 10 the sacrlfices, with a preference for the fonner. 2s1 The Palestinian Talmud endows each of the high-priestly garments with the power to expiate a partiewar sin.252 For example, the priestly tunic (nl1n:>) atones for bloodshed.253 Finally, the focus on the

examples from the Talmudim were collected by J..auterbacb, '"A SignifiC8Jlt Coutroversy between the Sadducees and the Pharisees." 246 The "hen~tic" practice ofthe Sadducees/Boethusians ofkindling the inc.:enae before enteriiJg the holy of holies is regarded l1$ having a lethal outcome: see yYoma l:S, 39a;

bYomo 19b. 247 mYoma 7:4. Thc Sadd.ucees are therefore reponed to bave lighted the incense befol'e enteriDg. bYoma .S4a. See also A. De Coninck. ...Bnter.iJlg God's PreseD<:e. Sacramentalism in the Gospel of Pbüip," Society of8iblicol Literatlire SemintlJ' Papers 3"1: 1 (Atlanta [Ga.], 1998; pp. 483-523), pp. 505-509 and 510-S21, who assembled a few early texts and many late ones on this tradition to argue for its influenc:e on the Valentinian ritual ofthe brida.l cllamber. 2511 hYoma 39a-b; yYoma S:4, 42c; 6:3, 43c. 251 Cf. above pp. Sl-54; and below, pp. 132-134. m yYoma 1:5, 44b-c; cf. tbe comm.ent in Avemarie, Yoma- Versöhnungstag, pp. 192195 for parallels. :w lo this context, the tradition of JN.bileu surfaces with a reference to Gen 37:31, where Josef's mm::~ is dipped into the blood of a male goat. The sa.me tradition appears also in Targ~~.m Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 37:31 (see aLso above, pp. 6S-67). 24 24'

lmaginoira uf Yom Kipplll'

127

blood sprinkling ritual in the Mishnah as weil as in the Sidrei Avodah un.derlines the importance ofthe kapporet and ofthe blood.254 4.2.2 Goats

The first chapter of Mishnah Shevu 'ot distinguishes sharply between the sprinkling ofthe sacrific::iaJ goat's blood and the scapegoat ritual. The former rite purges the sanctuary from the impurities caused by sins and then reconsecrates it; the latter expiates the sins ofthe people. 255 The very next saying in Mishnah Shevu 'ol states that the confession over the scapegoat and the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrificial goat atone for the sins of Israel, while the confession over the calf and the sprinkling of its blood atone for the priests.2S6 Some modem scholars see these mishnayot as representing the system hehind tbe priestly souroe.257 Others go beyond that and apply it to non~rabbinical sources.251 Yet it was not the only rationale behind the ritual of the two goats.259 Conceptually, one would expect that the blood-sprinkling rite would be considered unnecessary in the ritual reenactments of the synagogue, since tbere is no longer a temple to be purified. Yet tbe verbal enactment of "sprinklings and confessions" is con· sidered equally important, and both are empbasized in tbe earliest liturgical reenactments. 260 Tbe mishnaic tracts Shevuot and Yoma seem to consider God as the addressee of both goats. God. however, is not always regarded as the addressee of the scapegoat, wbom we have seen associated witb tbe demonie Ieader of the evil furces in apocalyptic souroes. In Hebrew, male goats are ..good to tbink ~itb" Satan and the demons. since both are called 254 The exact way of sprinkling and nurober of movements is described in great detail in mYoma 5:2-4. For the blood sprinkllnp in Sidrei A.vodah see above, pp. ~9-60. m mSebu 1:3-1;bYoma61a,SifraA.hareMct4:S, heremS~bu 1:6. · 156 mSsbw 1:1. 257 Most notably, Jacob Milgrom, who adopted it in numerous instances iD his seminaL

commentaty on Le\liticus. N Wolfgang Kraus. Der Tod Jesu a(;s Httiligtllmsweihe, applied this rabbinie distinction to the proto-Christian interpretations of the blood sprink:ling rite in Hebrews and Romii!IS. B. Hudson McLean used it in bis investigarioo of the scapegoat in Pauline soteriology: The Cll.t"s'd Christ. Medüerranea" ~11lsion Rit11als and Pauline Soleriology {IOUI"Il$! for tbe Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series 126; Shef· field, 1996). . 1S9 Tbc more general methodological problern with this approach is the gencralization of the rabbinie interpretation's applicafion to Judaism of all times, streams and places, wbich overlooks that ritual can havc one meaning/rationale, none or multiple simultaneaus meanings/rationales {see e.g. Bemard Lang's critiquc on Milgro1n in Lang's entry on 1!t:! in the TheologiJche.s WiJrtttrbuch nm Alten Te.sttJment 4 (1984] 303-318). 2dQ See Goldschmidt, Sedv R(lt) 'Amr1m1 Ga'on, p. 168;7-8, and pp. 59-60 above.

Yom Kippurin Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

128 l'l1lU. 261

Yet in the spiritualizing Tannaitic sources there are no traces of a demonology behind the scapegoat. There, the scapegoat is no Ionger sent to 'Az'azel but to a cliffin the desert; it is no Ionger called ?iMil.l? l'l.llll but n?nllln l'l7TV. 262

The demonological concept must have survived in the rabbinie backyards during the Tannaitie period, since it reappears in later sourees. A passage of the Babylonian Talmud presents 'Az'azel as a dernon who atones for the :sins of 'Uzza (MTll.l) and 'Aza'el (?Mil.l), without going into further details. 263 Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer identifies 'Az'azel with the Ieader of the demons, Samma'el, and the seapegoat as a saerifiee to him.264 Apparently, some form of the myth from JEnach was familiar to some rabbis.265 In a passage in the late medieval collection Yalqut Shim 'oni,2 66 Shemihaza and 'Aza' eU' Az' azel appear in a form related to 1Enoch and to Yom Kipp ur. Shemihaza repented, and as penitence hanged hirnself upside down between heaven and earth. 'Aza'el [sie!] did not repent, and he still stands in bis conuption (l'nr?i':J) to incite humans to !ransgressions in the colorful garments ofwomen, and, therefore, Israel offered sacrifices on Yom Kippur. One ram (!) to God that he may atone for Israel and one ram (!) to 'Az'a.Zel [.tief] that he may bear the sins of Israel, and this is 'Az'azel oftbe Torah. 267

Notably, it is a ram that is saerifieed to 'Az'azel, not a male goat. Rams and male goats are not always sharply distinguished. This point is important for understanding the ritual of the kapparot; the demonie Ieader was assoeiated with rams and goats, with Yom K.ippur, and with the Aqedab. So for example in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Levitieus 9:3 on the afferings for Aaron's ordination: And you shall spea.k to the children of Israel, saying: 'You also are to ta.ke a male goat and offer it as a sin offering, lest Satan who is comparable to it speak.s with a

s/anderous tongue against you over the affair ofthe male goat which the rribes of

Demon: Lev 17:7; 2Chr 11:15; Isa 13:21; 34:14. Sifra presents tbe cliff in the desert as exegesis of the difficult words "' Az' azeJ'• and "Gezera": Sifra, Ahare Mot, eh. 2:8: "D'1;J:J ;,wp Olj;>Zl" and "?lliJ." A similar tradition entered Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Lev 16:10 "'111P1 'J'j;ln 11111" and 16:2lb-22 "ll'i::l 1l1K." 263 bYoma 67b attributed to tbe Tannaite Rabbi Yishmael. 264 Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46. 265 Cf. the (late) additions to Deuteronomy Rabbah 11:10 (ed. Mirkin, pp. 157-160; not in ed. Liebermann); Seder Eliyahu Zuta 25; see also Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 22; Rasbi on bNid 6la; Yalqut Shim 'oni, 1:44. 266 Steroberger dates this collection of Midrasbim to the thirteenth century. lt contains an abundance of old traditions that would otherwise bave been lost, Stemberger, Einleitung in Talmud und Midrasch, pp. 341-342. 267 My translation of Yalqut Shim 'oni 1:44. 261

261

lmaginairu ofYom Kippur

129

Jacob sloughtered in order to deceive their father. (Take) as a bumt offering a calf - because yort worshiped the calf- and a lamb, a yeac old, that the merit ofIsaac, whose father tied him liu a lamb, may be remembered on your behalf. Both of them (shall be) without blemisb.768

While Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Leviticus 9:3 is not directly linked to Yom Kippur, all ofthe traditions contained in this passage are sometimes associated with the Day of Atonement. First, the male goat is sacrificed to the Iord of the evil powers, Satan, to keep him from accusing Israel in the heavenly court for the vending of Joseph. Tbe vending of Joseph was connected with Yom Kippurin Jubilees,269 but it also appears in the Palestinian Talmud as a rationale for the atoning power of the high priest's tunic.270 Second, a calf is offered to atone for the sin of the golden calf. As noted above, Yom Kippur commemorates the second giving of the Torah on a day of repentance after the sin of the golden calf and the breaking of the first tablets. 211 Finally, a lamb is sacrificed to evoke God's mercy by reminding him of the merits of the lamb-like Isaac. The latter is strange, since it was a ram that was offered in Isaac's stead, not a lamb. Christian interpretations may be responsible for this irregularity. An early identification of the ram of the binding of Isaac and the scapegoat may be inferred from the fact that in the mosaics of the synagogues of Beit Alfa and Sepphoris the ram is banging from the tree with a reddish rope, reminiscent of the red ribbon ofthe scapegoat.272 2'1 Targum Psertdo-Jonathan Lev 9:3, translation of M. Maher, "Targum PseudoJonathan: Leviticus. Translated with Notes," in: M. McNamara (ed.), The Aramaie Bible (Edinburgh, 1994); the italics indicate the Aramaie additions as compared to the Masoretic Text. 269 "And the sons of Jacob slaugbtered a kid and dipped Joseph's garment into the blood and sent (it} to Jacob, their father, on the tenth of the seventh month. And he lamented all ofthat nigbt, because they bad brougbt it to him in the evening.... Therefore it is decreed for the children oflsrael that they moum on the tenth (day) ofthe seventh month - on tbe day when that wbich caused him to weep for Joseph came to Jacob, his father - so that tbey migbt atone for them(selves) with a young ldd on the tenth (day) of the seventh month, once a year, on account oftheir sin because they caused the affection oftheir father to grieve for Joseph, bis son." (Jrtbilees 34: 12.13a.18, transl. Wintennute). 210 yYoma 7:5, 44b. This traditionwas taken up in the anonymous 'Az be'Ein Kol (ed. Yabalom, p. 124, line 553) and embellished by Yose ben Yose. 271 See also bYoma 86a. 272 See Z.E. Weiss and E. Netzer (eds.), Promise and Rer:kmption. A Synagogue Mosaic from Sepphoris (Jerusalem, 1996), p. 31; and E.L. Sukenik. The Ancietrt Synagogrte of Beth Alpha. An Account ofthe ExctiVatlons Concmcted on Behalf of the Hebrew Universil:)l, Jerusalem (Jerusalem and London, 1932), plate XIX. I would like to express my gratitude to GUnter Stemberger, wbo drew my attention to these mosaics. Also Barnabas 7 migbt have known a tradition connecting the binding of lsaac to Yom Kippur. See also the Yom Kippur homily on Gen 22 in Levitleus Rabbah 20:2 (Margulies,

130

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

Also the death of righteous men can atone vicariously as Yom Kippur sacrifices. Leviticus Rabbah quotes the farnaus rabbinical saying that "just as Yom Kippur atones, so does the death of the righteous."273 Targum Pseudo..Jonathan and Genesis Rabbah compare the blood ofthe male goat to human blood. 274 Men could become scapegoats, too, as a passage from the Babylonian Talmud demonstrates: "On that day Ravya bar Qisi died, and they erected a sign: Ravya [bar] Qisi achieves atonement like [or: as] the goat that was sent away.'ms This must mean that the death ofthe righteous Ravya bar Qisi effected atonement vicariously. While the Statement remains in the realm of comparison, not identification, it demonstrates that as with Josephus' portrayal of Ananus, the idea of comparing the vicarious atonement of men to the ritual of the scapegoat was not foreign to rabbinie Judaism. 276 As Lauterbach has suggested, it is probably a similar complex association of ram and male goat, man and Satan, Joseph and Isaac, merit and apotropaic sacrifice, that stands behind the kapparot, especially if performed with a ram. 277 In sum, in the sources from the Amoraic period, there are two parallel rationales. The addressee of the scapegoat can be God (Tannaitic and Amoraic sources) or Satan {Amoraic sources). 278 4.2.3 Red Ribbons According to Mishnah Yoma, a red ribbon was tied to the head of the scapegoat to distinguish it from the sacrificial goat, and before the scapegoat was pushed offthe cliff, half ofthe ribbon was bound to a rock. 279 Already in the Mishnah, the rite is prooftexted with lsaiah 1: 18 ("though your sins are like scarlet they shall be [white] as snow"). 280 Though this Mishpp.445--451, esp.447--451), which ver:y similar to Pesiqta Rav Kohana26:3 (Mandelbaum, pp. 389-390). 27] Leviticus Rabbah 20:12 (ed. Margulies p. 472): tnn•ll 1::1 1!1Jil ll'11!l'::l;"' !:11'171 !:1171::1 n1!lJil ll'P'1ll'1171. This saying appears also in Pesiqta Rav Kahana 26: II (ed. Mandelbaum, p. 399). 274 Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 37:31; Genesis Rabbah 84:31 (ed. Theodor/Albeck:, p. 1024) on the sa.me verse. 27' My translation of bYoma 42a (n'1nl71ml 1'l1171J 1!lJll 'C? [1::1] K':l1). 276 See above, pp. 117. m See pp. 66-67, below. 271 Was there a transition from the fust to the second interpretation? The Babylonian Talmudattributes the demonological interpretation to Rabbi Yishmael, and ifthis is correct, the demonological interpretation survive not in esoteric Tannaitic circles but in the school of a major teacher. 279 mYoma 4:2, 6:6. 280 mSabb 9:3.

Imaginaires of Yom Kippur

131

nah does not explicitly refer to the whitening of the scapegoat ribbon, this seems to be assumed. The Babylonian Talmud hands down a different tradition. According to a Baraita in the name of Rabbi Yishmael evoking Isaiah 1:18.,281 the red ribbon was publicly displayed on the outside of the sanctuary door, signifying the transition to a sinless state when the scapegoat reached the desert. Another Baraita, in the name of "the rabbis," sets the two rites in a chronological sequence. First the red ribbon was bound to the outside ofthe door ofthe sanctuary; but it did not always turn white, so they decided to put it on the inside of the door, and only when it did not turn white was it bound to the scapegoat.282 The Palestiman Talmud has a similar Baraita.283 Here, people began by banging the red ribbon on the windows nf private houses, then they hung it on the door of the sanctuary and finally attached it to the rock (before pushing the scapegoat oft). In both traditions, the red ribbon on the scapegoat was presented as a final stage, after the wondrous oracle of the red ribbon tuming white began to fail. Regardless of whether the Baraitot reflect a historical development, 284 the change reflects a transition from a public to a secret act in the Palestinian Talmud, also from a popular to a personal ritual. Furthermore, it demonstrates the rabbinical opposition to a visible proof that atonement was indeed achieved. In addition, the red ribbon is associated with apotropaic powers in healing magic, attested in the Tosefta and in non-Jewish sources ofthis time.285 281 bYoma 68a. The tradition on the red ribbon on the door of the sanetuary, whieh in the printed editions ofthe Misbnah appears at the end ofthe sixth chapter, is not included in the best manuscripts: Rosenberg. "Mishna 'Kipurim','' vol. 2, p. 77; Goldstein, "Worship at the Temple in Jerusalem- Rabbinie Interpretation and Influenee,'' p. 125. 282 bYoma 67a. 283 yYoma 6:5, 43d. However, in tbe Leiden manuseript, these lines are an addition written in tbe margins. For the tradition, seealso Psalms Rabbah (on Ps 86:8; ed. Buber, p. 375), which explieitly connects this tradition to tbe effieacy of prayer, i.e. more in a post- or extra-temple context. 214 Three bistorieal seenarios can explain the Baraitot. They may refleet ritual ehanges during the Second Temple period: see Goldstein, "Worship at the Temple in JerusalemRabbinie Interpretation and lnfluence," 114-123. Ortbey may be a polemie against a contemporary popular eustom of the rabbinie period, which the rabbis preferred be performed only on the scapegoat (i.e. nowhere). Or they may be an etiology for the strange eombination of Isa 1: 18 and the red ribbon of the scapegoat as proposed by m~abb 9:3. :as See tSabb 6:1; ~abb 7:11; bSabb S3a; bGit 68b-70b; John Chrysostom, Twelfth Homily on First Corinthians, 7 (PG 6l:IOSD-106A), whieh uses ltOitiC\VCJC; ari)p.CDV; G. Veltri, Magie und Halalcha. Ansäl%e zu einem empirischen Wissefl&chaftsbegriffim spätantiken und frtlhmittelalterlichen Judeni'Um (Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 62; T1ibingen 1997), pp. 104-106, 145-146, 248. Cf. also tSotah 14:9 and bSotah 49b (Vellri, Magie und Halakha, pp. 145-146).

132

Yom Kippur in Early Jewish Thought and Ritual

4.3 Rabbinie Interpretation ofthe Ritual ofthe People Some rabbinie traditions connect the afflictions ofthe people to the temple ritual. E.g., abstention from sleep is presented as an imitation of the high priest's vigil. 286 And as (high) priests could be portrayed as angels, the afflictions to which people were submitting themselves could also be oonceived of as making them angelic. In Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer, Samma'el expresses his admiration and disappointment that the self-affliction of the people makes them angelic - they are barefooted, do not eat or drink, stand, have peace among them, are sinless, and pray. 287 The four prayer times correspond to the times of sacrifices in the . temple. The explanation for the additional prayer ofthe Ne'ila, however, is disputed. According to a "Caesarean tradition" in the Palestinian Talmud, Rav suggested that the Ne'ilah designates the time of closing of the doors ofheaven, while Rabbi Yohanan connects the prayer to the time of closing of the temple doors.288 The historical solution of Rabbi Yohanan is probably as purely theological as is the cosmological proposal by Rav. In rabbinie literature, in the absence ofthe temple ritual, repentance was regarded as highly significant,289 having been accorded a status akin to a hypostasis; it belongs to the thirlgs created before the world. 290 But already in Jubilees repentance had been one of the great, key elements of Yom Kippur. 291 The word il:mun is attested for the firsttime in Qumran. 292 Philo considers repentance a virtue and attributes great powers to it. 293 It is the central theme of Pseudo-Philo's sermon On Jonah. The Babylonian Tal286

bYoma 19b. Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer 46. 288 yBer 4:1, 1c;yTa'an4:l, 67c. 189 Among the vast Iiterature on repentance in rabbinie literature, see Büchler, Studies in Sin 011d Atonement; Urbach, The Sages, pp. 462-471. 290 bPesah S4a; bNed 39b. 291 See above, pp. 9S-97. 292 On repentance iD Qumran, see B. Nitzan, "Repentance in the Dead Sea Scrolls," in: P.W. Flint and J.C. Vandedcam (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrol/s after FiftY Year.s. A Comprehei'ISive A.s.ses.sment (Leiden, 1999; vol. 2, pp. 14S-170); S.J. Pfaon, "The Essene Yearly Renewal Ceremony and the Baptism ofRepentance," in: D.W. Pany and E. Ulrich (eds.), The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Technological /nnoYation.s, New Tats, and R.eformulated Issues (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 30; Leiden, 1999; pp. 337-352). The overview by Bell is tendentious but useful as a collection of sources: see R.H. Bell, "Teshubah: The Idea of Repentance in Ancient Iudaism," The Journal ofProgressive Judai.sm S (1995) 22-52. 293 On repentance in Philo, see D. WiDston, "Philo's Doctrine of Repentance," in: I.P. Kenoey (ed.), The School o[Mo.ses. Studies in Philo and Helleni.stic Religion in Memory of HOI'st R. Moehring (Studia Philonica Mo.nographs I; Brown Iudaic Studies 304; Atlanta [Ga.], 199S; pp. 29-40). 21?

lmaginaires of Yom Kippvr

133

mud of Yoma includes several instances of praise for repentance and its universal and cosmological effects of healing, often connected to Hosea 14.294 They culminate in Rabbi Meir's statement: ''GTeat is repentance that for one who repents, the whole world is forgiven"- i.e. the revolutionary idea of vicarious repentance, which did not become mainstream thought. In another of these passages, repentance is equated with sacrifices, using for the firsttime the Masoretic Text ofHosea 14:3: "And we will offer the bulls with our lips," the text that will become the standard prooftext for the substitution of sacrifice by prayer. According to a similar statement in Cantieies Rabbah, Hosea 14:3 refers directly to the bull and the scapegoat. 29s These two are the only early usages of this verse, and both appear in the context of Yom Kippur. Apparently, the need to fmd a theological solution for substituting sacrifices with prayer was most urgently feit for the Day of Atonement. So high a status of repentance raises questions about the importance of Yom Kippur and its afflictions. Does one need a Yom Kippur ifthe repentance of one member can vicariously achieve forgiveness for the whole world? Other rahbis discuss the opposite question. Does Yom Kippur achieve atonement ez opere operato, or is an inner attitude such as repentance an indispensable element ofYom Kippur? An (anonymous) Mishnah. gives repentance the power to atone for minor transgressions only, while graver transgressions need the atoning power of Yom Kippur, too. Still, repentance is indispensable for the atoning power of Yom Kippur and death. 296 Accordingly, in Tannaitic sources, Yom K.ippur and repentance are mutually dependent. The Talmudim include a more radical Statement, attributed to Rabbi297 that Yom K.ippur or death may effect atonement even without repentance- ez opere operato or even ez die. 298 Despite both Talmndirn continuing the discussion and disregarding Rabbi's option, the Babylonian Talmud may be understood to agree with him. The Tosefta and the Talmudim contain a tradition according to which Rabbi Yishmael distinguishes between four different kinds of sins and

m bYoma 86a-b. m Cantieies Rabbah on Cant 4:4, sign 9. The Statement is in the name of Rabbi Abhahu (d. ca. 309). Similar ideas ofsubstituting verbal acts for sacrifice can he found in bMenah 106b; bMeg 3lb; bTa'an 27b. 296 mYoma 8:8. The Tosefta goes in the same direction as the Mishnah, with the exception that Rabbi Yehudah states ambiguously that death is like repentance: see tYoma4:9. 197 Albeit with problems in the attribution and the contents in the Palestinian Talmud: see Avemarie, Yoma- Yersllhnungstag, pp. 225-226. 191 yYoma 8:6, 45b; bYoma B.Sb.

134

Yom Kippurin Eorly Jew&IJ Thougbt ond Ritual

their corresponding atonement.299 Repentance atones (without Yom Kippur) only for the transgression of minor commandments. It delays the punishment for transgressing minor prohibitions until Yom Kippur7 which atones. Deliberate transgressions of grave commandments are partly atoned for by repentance and Yom Kippur, and partly by tonnents during the year. 300 Blaspherny, however, is atoned for one third by repentance and Yorn Kippur, one third by the tonnents (during the rest of one's life) and one third by death. Here again the concept is closer to tbat of the Tannaitic sources (Yorn Kippur and repentance are mutually interdependent), with the a.ddition oftbe atoning function oftheflagella Dei. Finally, in addition to repentance, death and suffering, cbarity and good deeds bave an atoning effect. 301 In sum. tbe singular importance of repentance does not make Yom Kippur superfluous, because the Day of Atonement is conceived of as having an intrinsic atoning power for major sins, in some cases even witbout repentance. God's meroy is the all-deciding factor.

5. High-Priest.J.y Visions ofGod III: Aspects of Yom Kippur in the Hekhalot Literature Jewish mystical texts collected under the heading "Hekhalot literature" use the high-priestly entrance as an image to describe the mystical ascent vision. 302 Regretfully, the unresolved chronological problem impedes a sa.tisfactory discourse on their exact relationship to Second Temple and early Christian and Gnostic literature. The dates proposed for these tex:ts range from the Second Templeperiod to the Gaonic period and later.303 299 t.Yoma4:6-&;yYoma 8:6, 4Sb-e; bYonra 86a. • One could say tbat the hardships cause tbe other days of tht year to bec:ome like Yom Kippur with its afflictioos. 301 See e:.g. bBer 5b. lill I quote: the various texts oftbis genre according to section numbers in Scbafer, Schiliter and von Mutius, Synopu :t.ur Helchalot-Literatur. lOJ G.G. Scholem, Jr.vi8h Gn0$tlci8m, Merkaboh Mjsticism, and Tolmudic Tradition.

Basedon the Israel Goltbtein Lect11res, Delivereil at the Jr.vi3h Theologico/ Seminary uf A.111erica, New .York (New Yorlc, 1960). See also R. Elior, "From Earthly Temple to Heavenly Sbrines. Prayer and Sacred Song in the Hekhalot Literature and 11:8 &llation to Temple Traditions,'' Jewi3h Studies Quarterly 4 (1991) 217-167, for tbe more recent literatiD'Il, especially note:s 3, 9, 12, 13, 22. And see idcm, "The Merkavah Tradition and the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism," in: A. OppeRheimer (ed.), Sinf)-Judaica. Jews rmd

Chinese in Historkai D;alogw. A" lnternalional 1996 (Tel Aviv, 1999; pp. 101-158}.

Colloqult~m

Ntmjing. 11-19 October

lmGginairu ofYotrr Kippur

135

In the 1960s, Johann Maier deduced early Jewish mysticism from priestly speculations on the Jerusalem temple cult.304 Rache! Elior has picked up tbis line of thought and developed it further, suggesting a close relationship between the upsurge in the output of early Jewish mysticalliterature, priestly circles and visions evoked by acute distress after the destruction of Jerusalem's temple and the cessation of its cult.305 Notably. Elior does not make any explicit claim about the specific influence ofYom Kippur but is eoncemed with alt motifs in the Hekhalot Iiterature that evoke the temple service and priesthood. Our conce.tn is only with those motifs related to Yom Kippur. Tbe Helchalot Iiterature contains various ascent deseriptions, with numerous detaits corresponding to the bigh-priestly entrance on Yom Kippur. The two protagonists of the Helchalet texts, Rabbi Yishmael (ben Elisha} and Metatron, axe ftequently porttayed as high priests or as executing bigh-priestly functions.~ The heavenly sanctuary is described in rough analogy to Jerusalem's temple, with areas of increasing sanctity, usually seven. In the heavenly prayerl07 the heavenly creatures (and the participating mystics) have -like priests or high priests- to prepare themselves for the presence ofGod's glory by protection rites: sanctification, purification and the wearing of special gmnents.308 The center ofthe heavenly ritual is the pronoWlcing of God's name, often jn the fonn of the Qedusha, upon which the heavenly creatures answer "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdonl to all etemity,"309 andin some cases. the heavenly hosts react by prostrating themselves;310 trumpets may be blown and a benediction said.311

104 J. Maier, Vom Kultus zur G11osis. BtAn.deslade, Gottesthron und M4r'kabah (Salzburg, 1964). 305 Elior, ..From. Eanhly Temple to Heaveoly Sbrioes." 306 Elior, ''From Eartbly Temple to Heavenly Sbrines," pp. 227-230. X17 Elior distingui:sbes between three k:inds of prayer, heaveoly, sbared and lll)'$i:ieal, according 10 the performer, the firSt being by far the mos:t ftequeutly desaibed. Elior, "from Earthly Temple to Heavenly Shrines,.. p. 243, referring to JEnach 36 (Synopsis §§54); Hekhalot Rahball §§181.184-185; Hrtkhalot Rabbati §2~~; Hekhalot Zutarli §424; SBder Rabba d•Ber1 '.thit §§811.814-816. 309 Elior, "From Eartbly Temple to Heavenly Shrines," pp. 261-263, referring toShi'ur Qomah §384; Metafron §390; Ma'fl$th Merkavah §SSS; and 3Enoch 39 (Synopsis §S7). A glance at Schilifer's concordance reveals that the benediction , ..,O::I17:::t appears vcry often, about 30 times according to the synopsis. 310 Elior, "from Earthly Temple to Heavenly Shrines," p. 263, refening to 3Enoch (Synops~ §S7). m Elior, "From Barthly Temple to Heavenly Sbrines," pp. 23S-242, refettlng to Hekhalot Zutarti §411; Hekha/Qt.Rabbati §192.

*

136

Yonr KipJNF in Early Jewish Th021ghl and Ritaal

A tradition in Hekhalot Zutarti explicitly linlcs the mystics' ascent practices to Yom Kippur: Rabbi Aqiva said: "Bverybody who wanr. to study tbis Mishnah and intequet lhe Name in Its interpretarionm sball sit fastiDg for 40 days and lay his head betwceu. bis thigbs Wltil the f'.ist controls him.... And he shall be acquainted with it from month to month and from year to year, 30 days before Rosh Hashanah begianing with the New Moou of Elul until Yom Kippur so that Satan migbt not lay blame on him and spoil the whole year. 313

References to 40 days of fasting arefrequent in the Hekhalot literature.314 However, Yom K.ippur and the period of repentance preceding it are particularly effective in protecting the mystic from evil powers. Th.e Uturgical custom ofpronouncing the divine name opeoly only on Yom Kippur and the apocal)'pti.c/proto-mystic tradition connecting the vision of God to tbe high priest's encounter with God in the ho1y of hoHes may have been tactors in thls development. To what extent do these motifs refl.ect priestly knowledge of the historical temple ritual or the influence of the contemporary ptayer service of Yom Kippur? To what extent are they the heritage of the apoeal:yptic imaginoire of Yom Kippur, ud to what extent did the mystics behind these texts recognize a connection to the high priest's entrance and add further allusion.s? Descriptions of mystic visions in the Hekhalot Iiterature and Second Temple ascent texts share the following motifs: allusions to the highpriestly function of the ascending; a heavenly sanctuary with increasing levels of sanctity; a heavenly liturgy by angels; prostration, sanctification and purification; and the putting on of special, ftesh gannents. 315 Three motifs - the pronounciation of God's na.me, the benediction "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom to all etemity" and tbe prostration of tbe people - are not contained in the apocalyptic ascent descriptions. According to Elior. they recall the descriptions of the high priest's performance in Sirach 50 and Misb.nah Tomid 7, and his confession with the people's answers in the common text of Mishnah Yomo. 316 However. Sirach 50 and Tamid 7 describe the daily ritual. In the temple. God's namewas pronounced not only on Yom Kippur but every day. 317

m Or: "pronounce the Name openly." m My translation of Hdhalot Zutarti §424 (ms Oxford I S31 ). 314 E.g. Hekhalot Rabb
I111aginafru ofYom KippUI'

137

Furthermore. the pronunciation of God' s n.ame accompanied by prostration by the people appears for the fliSt time in the early Sidrei A.vodah and ftom there appears to havc entered the Mishnah Yoma 6:2, ·since it is missing in tbe best manuscripts and not commented upon in the Talmud.im.318 I do not k:now of a Second Temple ascent tradition focusing on the pronunciation of God's name with the CWJtomary answer benediction,319 neither do I know of such a tradition mentioning trumpets or a concluding benediction. Although these elements were probably not part of the actual Yom Kippur ritual, they were regarded as such by many paytanim who wrote the fll'St Sidrei Avodah. Compared to depictions of Philo, Hebrews and the Valentinians, which add specific Yom Kippur elem.ents, the Hekhalot seem tobe less influenced by the historical Yom Kippur temple ritual but more by its imagi111Jire mixed with that of the daily temple cult. Michael Swartz has analyzed prayers from the high holidays found in the Hekhalot tradition Mo 'oseh Merlcavah. '.Attah Yodea' Razey 'Oiam, for example, appears only slightly tran.c;formed in §548 as part of a long mystical prayer.320 The mystical prayer is too Jong to be quoted here in fuU. 321 lt calls on God using a divine name,322 pnüses God's might, kingship and esoteric knowledge, describes the heavenly court and emphasizes God's mercy. The tablethat follows cornpares the version of 'A.ttah Yodea • Razey 'Olam in &der Rav Sa'adia Ga 'on with the relevant part of the mystical prayer according to two manuscripts of Ma 'aseh Merkavah §548, New York JTS 8128 and Munich Codex Hebr. 22: MunichCQd.

Hebr. zjJZ$

You know

You know

the mysteries of the universe and the de.pest seuets of all the livfng.

the mysteries of the universe

and examine wisdom and hid· den ways. You

Who is like you, who

Youknow

and examine the wisdom of ltiddeu. ways. Who is like you,

who

* See p. 59, !lOte 242. above.

11

In Tllata111ent of Levl 5:5, Levi asks God to teach him his name. See Swartz, .A()'.rtical Prayer in A.ncient Judai&m, pp. 111·-llS, esp. pp. 115-118. 321 Ma'aseh Merkavah §548-549. m '7K1V1' ":'''JK :lr.l' •n, (New York 8128). Tlris name is definitdy connected to the root

119 320

11 ("mystery''). lU 124 311

S11der Rav Sa 'odia Ga 'on (ed. Davidson, Asaf and Yoel, p. 258), my translation. Ma'aseh Merkavah §54&, m.anuscript NY 8128, my translation. Ma'aseh Mukavah §548, manuscript M22, my translation.

138 ehedes

checks

se.areh alllhe inner bowel.s and see kidneys

bearts

hearts

aud examines

and

kidneys?

kidneys?

andheart. Among the thoughts

Nothing is eoncealed from you aad nothing is hidden from ure es.

there is nothing coneealed from you and nothing is bidden from s.

Contrary to the accent on human secrets in sa•adia's confession. the .mystical prayer empbasizes esoteric divine knowledge.32' The New York manuscript is closer to 'Attah Yodea ' R.azey 'Oiam in Seder R.av Sa 'adia Ga 'on than the other manuscripts. Swart2 concludes that the scribe ofthe New York manuscript was influenced by the Yom Kippur liturgy. 327 Using a confession as a mystical prayer is probably grounded in the coneeption that the mystic has to ..cleanse hlmself of iniquity and falsehood, and of alt evil"na to approach God, and inclusion of the divine name is supposed to protect the mystic.329 Moreover: almost certainly, the traditional concept of the holy of holies as the place and of Y om Kippur as the day to directly encounter God was an important factor in this development. Interestingly, the ritual of the sacrificial goat fmds its .mythological echo in an eschatological passage in Hekhalot R.ahbati. ..He [Samael] will be slaughtered and killed, he and all ministers of the kingdoms in the heights, like the Ieids (C"'ll) and lambs (CI'!ll::l:l) of Yom Kippur.":no Samael is punished for having killed ten righteous men to avenge the vending of Josef by their forefathers. As the name of the dernon indicates. this is a transfonned version ofthe 'Asa'el mytb. The 'Asa'el myth, however, typologizes the scapegoar.J'Jl This story with the Josef motiv as ftame J» Swartz, Mystical PrtlJ!u irr A.rrcient Judaism, p. 116. m Swa.rtz, Mystlcal Prayer in A.ncient Judalsm, pp. 116-J 17. m Ma't13ehMerkiw1Jh §547. 329 Swa.rtz, M}lsrical Prayer in A.ncient Judaism, pp. 117-11& and p. 218. 330 Hekhalot RabbtJti §108. Why does llekhalot R11bbati talk of kids and lambs, which allud.es to Passover, instead of goau? ls this a polomical reectioo. to Christian traditioos as in Joha I :29? J would likc to thank Ra'auan Abusch tor this observation and suggestion. ~ 1 Beyond tbis, lhe legend of 'Uzza', 'Azza' and 'Aza'el appears in 3Enoch 4-S (Synopsis §§5-8). Oo the history ofthe tradition from JEnach to JE11och, set~ A.Y. Recd, "From Aueland Sn~ihazah to U:z:zah, Az2ab, and Azael: 3 Enoch 5 (§§ 7-8) and Jewish Reeeption-Hmory of I Enocb," Jewish Stildies Qrlarlerly 8 (2001} lOS-136, wbo

Imaginairu of Yom KippMT

139

appears also in the medieval Midrash The Story of the Ten Martyrs ( ii,W nl:)?1l 'l11i1). the poetic torm of which. 'Eleh Ezkerah, became part of the Yom Kippur service in some communities.332 In several recensions, (the eve ot) Yom Kippur was the execution day of Eli•ezer ben Shammua333 or Rabbi Aqiva. 334 Here, tbe execution ofthe righteous (not Samael) serves as a Yom Kippur sacrifice for the original sin of the forefathers who kitled Josef.m In sum, the paylanim and the writers ofthe Hekhalot texts may have the same priestly provenance. However, 1 hesitate to oonclude that the traditions in the Hekhalot Iiterature retlect esoterical priestly knowledge of the historical temple ritual. As the secondary adaption of 'Attah Yodea' Razey 'Olam in manuscript New York and of the benediction "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom to all etemity,. in the Mishnah show, new motifs oonnecti.ng the mystical .experience with Yom Kippur but not appearing in Second Temple ascent texts can be the result ofthe influence of the oontemporary prayer ritual of Y om Kippur on the mystic's imagination: "How it should have been" rather than the historical memory of ''How it was ... The question remains open as to whether the scribes of the Hek:halot texts were actual priests or merely wanted to be priestlike.

Concluding Thoughts to Part One Wbile the destru.ction of the temple brought the high priest's ritual to an abrupt end, the prayers and affiictions of the people oontinued. To be sure. proposes that 3Enodl S is dependent ou I Enoch 6-ll, perhaps via Christian sources such

as Syncell\1$. 332 'Eleh 'Ezkerah (:n:m~: :1'1K, wrhese I sball recall"). Althougb the story is not apart of the texts traditioaaUy regardod as Helchalot literature, there are &ome interconnections. These Midrasbilll bave been convenieotly published in synoptic form by G. Reeg, Die Gßchichte 110n den Zehn Mlirtyrem (Texts and Swdies in Anclent Judaism 10; TO.bi.agen, 198.S). This tradition has been serutiniT.ed by R. Abusch, ..Rabbi Isbmael's Mira· culous Ccncoption. 1ewish Redemption History in Anti-Christian Polemic," in: A.H. Bec;ker and A. Reed (eds.), The Ways That Never Parted: Jews ond Cluistion:r '" Anfit.ptll)J and the Early Middle Agil$. (Texts and Studies in Ancient J'udaism 95; Tllbingen, 2003; pp. 307-345). I would like to express my appreciation to R,a•anan Abusch for sending mc a copy of his paper prior to it.s publication. A poetic form of the story, 'Eleh 'Ezkerah, became part oftbe Ashkenazy Yom Kippur liturgy: see Ooldachmidt, Mahz:or for the Day:r ofAwe, vot 2, pp. 56&-:574. ' 33 The Story of the Ten Martyr~ I S 1:2.7. '1!4 The Story ofthe Ten Martyrs JII 33:12; Vn 31:34; IX 31:33. 335 Cf. tbe rabbinic:al statemcnt f'I1D:Iia l:!·~·u'>w lM'tl 1' "1!1:11.> D"1l!l.,:l al'W D111:1, Ufiticus Ro.bbah 20:12 (ed. Margulies, p. 472): see above p. 130, note 273.

140

rom Kippur in Eorly JiTWish 111oughl and Ritual

the rituals in and outside the temple were affiliated. The high priest prayed at the end of his ceremony (possibly being the forerunner of Qumran's Festival Prayers). In addition, ritual reenactments ofthe high priest's ritual were probably aiready part of the service in some synagogues of the Second Temple period, especiaUy as readings ofthe biblical descriptions or a translation or a parapb.rase of them. There is a sligbt possibility that some Second Temple communities used a kind of Setkr Avadah. lhe motifs shared by Qumranic, Philonic and rabbinie prayers, bowever, are neither close nor numerous enough to point to a geographically extensive and chronologically continuous com.nron tradition. Beyond that, the emergence, spread and success of the kt:lpparot against all the learned rabbis' objections manifest the extent of the psychological pressure and the pe<>ple's attachment to the idea of atonement through the blood and death of an animaL Prayer, afflictions such as fasting, and repentance, which had become the means of atonement (e.g. Philo, Qumran and the rabbis), were apparently not enough for some people.336 Aspects of the ritual encounter with the divine in the high-priestly entrance to the holy of holies were transformed into a kind of ritual in some forms of mysticism, especially among the group that produced the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and, as we shall see, in Valentinian Gnosticism; perhaps also among the apocalyptic visionaries and in Hekhalot mysticism. Etiological legends connect Yom Kippur to the mythological events of its biblical context (the giving ofthe Torah at Mount Sinai, the golden calf, the ordination of Aaron), to the consecration of the First Temple, and to events in the Iives of the forefathers (Noah's repentance, Abraham's cil:cumcision, Joseph's vending). The central ideas of the rabbinie imaginaire of Yom Kippur - the day of judgment and eschatological redemption - had already emerged in Second Temple Judaism, especiaUy in apocalyptic circles. The scapegoat was usually ronsidered an embodiment of sin or of the evil forces. Its ritual killing is linked to the myth of the fallen angels and the punishment of their demonic leader. Scant evidence exists for associating the scapegoat with positive figures (Ananus, Ravya bar Qisi). The high priest's entrance into the holy of holies was widely used for describing the encounter with God. Prophetie, apocalyptic and Hekhalot texts (and Hebrews) hint at a scene that Philo and the Valentinian Christian texts describe more explicitly. While all texts except those of Philo are dependent on some sort of common tradition, they also draw independently on Yom K.ippur as a source of inspiration. 336 An anthropologic:al study ofthe motivation for performing the kapparot today could perhaps help to hypothesize abaut the reasons for its success in the Middle Ages.

lmaglnaire.s ofYom Kippur

141

Conversely, these conceptions served as a rationale for the Yom Kippur rituals. The bigh-priestly entrance was unde:rstood as a dangerous encounter with God, demanding spiritual and ritual preparation. Tbc scapegoat ritual was conceived of as an expiation of the demonie powers, annualy pr:eenacting tlte eschatological destruction of the evil forces and Iiberation oftheir good prisoners by an angeHe, high-priestly redeemer. Accordingly, eschatological expectations must have been particularly high around Yom K.ippur. A related form of the eschatl)logical atmosphere comes to the fore in Qumran's conception of the current period of persecution as a prolonged Yom Kippur that would end with the coming ofthe high-priestly redeemer and the destruction of evil. The myth of JEnach 10 served among other purposes as a rationale for the temple ritual in a priestly group interested in Jerusalem's temple cult. The creation of such texts as 4Q180, 4Q181 and IlQMelchizedek in a temple-less envirooment attests that the myths around •Az'azel and the ••combat" between scapegoat and high priest could develop even in a group not necessarily participating in the te.mple ritual but living (in) the same imaginaire. While Qumran disregarded the contemporaneous Jerusalem temple, it did not consider the idea of a material temple and blood sacrifices invalid but waited for tbe retum to lerusalem.

Part Two

The Impact ofYom Kippur on Early Christianity in the First and Second Centuries

Chapter 4

y om Kippur Imagery in the Early Christian lmaginaire Part 2 investigates the impact of the rituals and concepts of Yom K.ippur on early Christian beliefs and practices. The Christian myth par excellence (i.e. nanative with foundational status) is the account ofthe death of Jesus and the various meanings attached to it. especially vicarious atonement. 1 The earliest myths of Cbristianity were formulated by Christian Jews. who used their collective (Jewish) memory, their collective repertoires of motifs, to understand the death of their leader. For them, Yom K.ippur was one of the principal features of their religious life. A number of Jewish rnyths about a messianie redeemer were coonected to the imaginaire of Yom Kippur, and at a very early stage Iesus' death was understood as baving the same pwpose as Yom Kippur: the atonement ofthe collective. Regarding this constellation., it would have been odd if the most important festival of Second Temple Judaism and the essential theological concepts coanected to it bad not influenced the inte.rpretations of Jesus' death. ln the pages that follow. I will investigate several passages from the literatute of earliest Christianity tbat have been explained against the background of Yom Kippur and provide evidence for the extensive impact of that festivaL The imagery of the temple ritual of Yom Kippur inspited not only typologies of Christ. but also the fonnulation of the Matthean Passion narrative, being used in partiewar to illustrate the atoning power of bis death. Some of the passages discussed below emerged in the earliest, prePauline circles (the traditions used by Paul in Romans 3:25-26, the high prlesthood before Hebrews, an.d perhaps the proto-typology used by Barnabas). Several tex.ts belong to the most central and influential verses of the New Testament. among them Romans 3:24-26. Galatians 3-4. Hebrews 9 and Matthew 27:15-26. Many of these passages, but not all, have been discussed in the earlier, llltpllblished works ofNonnan H. Young and J.P. Scullion.2 Young's work, 1 For the sodological definitions of lmaginaire myth aad mythology used here, see above pp. 7-10. · ·.. 2 YoUDg, "The Impact of the lewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New

Testament"; ScuUion, '"A Traditio-Historica1 Study ofthe Day of Atonement." See also now the generat investigation of atoa.ement in the New Testament by T. Kn6ppler, Sihne

146 The Impact ofYom KippiiT on ChTistianity in the First ond Second Centuries

in particular, laid the foundations for future research. The work of Wolfgang Kraus suggests interesting interpretations for Romans 3:25 and Hebrews.3 Yet all these studies disregard, either partially or completely, the non-canonical texts. Barnabas and the Gospel of Peter, which date to around tbe sa.me time as such late canonical texts as 2Peter and even bad canonical status in some places. 4 The work:s of Helmut Koester and John Dominic Crossan are important in filling this gap. 5 The integration of this recent resea:rch on the non-canonical sources into a comprehensive analysis of the influence of Yom Kippur on early C~tianity is one of the main pmposes of tbis chapter. I ·will also offer a number of fresh read.ings of New Testamentpassagesand will especiaUy relate to Matthew's Barabbes episode. 6 In my analysis I focus on four guiding questions: Which elements of Yom Kippur can be pe:rceived as having bad an influence, and where? What kind of Yom Kippur (apocalyptic imoginaire, ritual, Leviticus 16) im Neuen Testament. Studien :;11m urchristlichen Yerstlindnis der Heilsbede11hmg desTo-

des Jesu (Wissenscllaftllche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 88; Neukirc:hen-Vluyn, 2001). , l Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtum:sweihe, passim. 4 R.E. Srown, AJt lntroduction to the New Testament (New York, 1998), p. 767, suggests tb.e years t2o-140 CE as most Iikely for 2Peter. For the dates dis~ussed for Bornabas, see note ll, below. Signific:antly, Young, "The Impact of the Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought ofthe New Testament," and Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtums-weihe, relcgate their quite brief discussions of Barnabat to the appendlx and in tbeir conclusions do not really pay heed to its implications. Even such an outstanding expert on Apocrypha u Klaus Berger docs not indude Barnabas in bis recent Theologiegeschichte des Urchristentunu. The subtitle, Theologie des NT, comc:s closer to the contents. Knöppler, Stlhne im Neuen Testament, does not deal with non-canonical early Chrlstian literature. ' See H. K.öster [Koester}, Synapti$che Obuliefentng bei den Apostoli$chen Yaterlf (Texte und Untersuchungen 65; Berlin, 1957); H. Koester, "Apocryphal and C4nonica1 Gospels," Ha,-..ard Theological Review 73 (1980) 105-130; idem, lntroduction ID the New Tuta".ent. Jfolume One: History, Cuit11re, and Religion of the He/leni$tic Age. Yolume Two: History and Lituature of Early Christianity (Berlin, New York. and Philadelphia, 1982); idem, Ancient Chri.,tian Gospels. Their Hittory and Development (Philadelphia and London, 1990); J.D. Crossan, Four Other Gospels (Minneapolis, 198S); J.D. Crossao, ''The Cross That Spote. The Barliest Narralive of tbe Passion aud ResurreccioR," FORUM 3/2 (1987) 3-12; J.D. Crossan, The Cros:~ That Spoke. Tlte Origlns of the Passion Narrat~e (San Francisco, 1988}. See my criticism of bis theory, below, pp. 161-165. ' The suggestion of K.A. Strand, "An Overlooted Old-Testament Background to Rev 11:1," AfUirewa Univer.JitySemillar Studles 22 (1984) 317-325, to see Lev 16 against the background of Rev 11:1 has been rightly rejected by D. Aune, Re11elation (3 vols; Word. Bibli.cal Commentary 52A-C; Nash~ille [Tenn.], 1997-1998), vol. 2, p. 604, as too subtle and imprecise.

Yom Kippur lmagV)I in tlte Early Cltristian Imogillaire

141

influenced the Christian text? What function does Yom K.ippur have in the Christian teKt'l What is the bistorical Sitz im Leben of this text? The investigation is structured in the following way: The first four sectians deal with the typologica.l passages. those that compare Jesus to (1) certain animals (sacrificial goat, scapegoat) ofthe Yom Kippur temple rite, (2) its central sacrificer (the high priest), (3) its central cultic object (the kapporet; iAUOt~ptov) and (4) its aim (i.Ao.o~Oc;). The fifth section briefly discusses the theses of scholars who link two early Christian hym.ns to the ritual of Yom K.ippur. The final section places these investigations in historical context and provides a synthesis.

1:· Christ and the Scapegoat: Barnabas, Matthew and Galatians The imagery of the scapegoat rite of Yom Kippur bad a tremendous i.m.pact on the devclopment of the early narratives and interpretations of Jesus• death. The Epistle of Barnabas explicitly compares Jesus' Passion and Parousia to the scapegoat and the sacrificial goat. Implicit allusions are probably bebind the scapegoat in the Barabbas episode ofMatthew27:1523 and behind Galatians 3:10.13. The scapegoat probabiy influenced also the ••tamb of God.. in John 1:29 and the Christological interpretation of the suffering servant in 1Peter 2:24. Here, an influence, if any, can be discerned only through a very wide understanding of the scapegoat rite and the Mediterranean rite ofthe pharmalws as catalysts. I will refer also to the theories of two other ~holars who attributed an especially strong influence to the scapegoat. John Crossan claims that the imagery of the scapegoat rite influenced an earlier form of the Gospel of Peter !hat was the source for all canonical passion accounts. 7 And according to A.H. Wratislaw, alt four canonical versions ofthe Barabbas episode were in:fluenced by tb.e scapegoat rite. 8 The section proceeds from the explicit to the implicit. I start (1.1) with a discussion of Barnabas and its proto-typology and an excursus on Crossan's thcory; an analysis of Matthew 27:15-23 follows (1.2); tb.en comes an excursus on the pharmakos and an interpretation ofGalatians 3-4 (1.3); and the section ends with an investigation of those passages in which there are few traces of the scapegoat rite' s influence: John 1:29 and lPeter 2:2224 (1.4). The first two cover the passagestbat come closest to being narratives, while the last three refer to theologoumena.

See bclow, pp. 161-165. See pp. 165-171, below.

148 The Impact of Ycm Kipprtl' on ChristiDnity in the First and Second Ctml.uriu

1.1 The Tradition ofBarnabas

'Ibe Epistle of Barnabas has a special place in this inquiry, since it interpret.s. extensively and in depth, the link between Jesus' death and Yom Kippur. 9 It is no surprise that Bultmannchose the typologies of Barnabas and Hebrews as the foremost exa.mples of eady Christian mythology. 141 No other text better exemplifies the crisis of the sc:andal of a messiab' s death on the cross and the central role of typological interpretation in overc:oming this calamity. Unfortunately, the central questions of authorship, place and time are points of controversy. 11 &me ofthe historical implications ilierefore remain hypothetical. Yet, since the Christian myth is .still typological exege.sis, not yet a narrative, its form. points to an early time of composition, earlier than the earliest Passion Narrative (i.e. before 65). According to Helmut Koester, Barnabas 7 reflects the earliest stage of ' In recent years. Barnabas has been intensively studie
Yom Kippur Imagery in the Early Christian Imaginaire

149

Christian (Jewish) attempts to develop a narrative of Jesus' death with the help of exegesis. One can assume tb.at thc ouly lüstorical infollDation about Icsus' suffering, crucifixioll, and death was that he was condemned to death by Pilate and crucified. The details and individual scenes cftbc n3.!7ative do not rest on historical memory, but were devdoped on the basis cf an aliegorical Interpretation of Scripturc. The ear· liest stage and, at the same time, the bc$t examp Ie of such scriprural interpretation is pn~served in the Epistle of Bornabas. 12

Koester is countered by such scholars as Douglas Moo, Joel Green and Raymond Brown, who argue that the impact of exegetical-Iiturgical creativity on the invention of "facts" in the earliest Passion narratives was

rn.inimal. 13 The interpretation of Yom Kippur in ßarnabas 7 appears in the first part ( chapters 2-16), which starts by elaborating the futility of the Jewish cult of .sacrifice and fasting (cbapters 2-3) and continues with a number of int.erpretations of the Passion ( chapters 5-6). The suffering of the messiah is also the topic of chapters 7 and 8, which give a typological interpretation of the goats of Yom Kippur and the Red Reifer. Yet while the common topic connects chapters 5-8, the perspective and method of exegesis change as between chapters 1--6 and 7-8. In chapters l-6. Barnabas has usoo variou:r Old Testament prooftexts to expound on a single theme. In chapters 7 and 8, he uses a sing/e prototype from the Jewish temple on which to base a broad Christologicai exegesis. In chapters 1-6, Barnabas argues from the books ojrhe Bible; in chapters 7 and 8, he draws onrituals as text-like, interpretable units, ä Ia Cliffurd Geertz. This is hlghly remarkable, since the use ofpost- or un-biblical Jewish tradition endows the Jewish cultic and literal interpretation of the Bible with prophetic qualities, and this stands in diroot opposition to Barnabas' anti-Jewisb henneneutics. whlcb repudiate attaching any soteriological significance to IsraeL 14 On Koester, ll.ncient Christirm Gospels, p. 224. n D.I. Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Shefi"reld, 1983}; J.B. Green, "Tbe Go$pel of Peter: Source for a pre-canonical Passion Narrative?," Zeitschrift ftir die nelttestamentliche WisseMchaft und di11 K11nde du älteren Kirche 1& (1987} 293~30!; idem., The Death of JeSIJ.S. Tradition and Interpretation in the Passion Narrative (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Ncuen Testament, second series 33; Tllbingen, 1988); R.E. Brown, The De.ath ofthe Messiah. From Gethse.mone tc the Grave (The Anchor Bible Reference Libra:ry; New Yor.k,. 1994), 14 On the lieJllleneutics of Bllrnabas, sec Hvalvik, The Struggle for Scriptime and Covenanl:, pp. 103-131; Horbury, "Jewish-Christian Relations in Barnabas and Justin Martyr"; and PT~ent and Kraft, Epltre de Barnabe, pp. 30-33. Contrary to Paul or Hebrews, for Barna/xu the people of braellost their coven.ant already with the golden calf at Mount Sinai. Barnabas maintains that the authority of the Bible is timeless an.d 12

150 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrisrianity in the First and Second Centuries this basis, the primary investigators of Barnabos' traditions, Pierre Prigent, Robert Kraft, and, more recently, James Cadeton Paget, concluded that Barnabas implemented an already existing typology. 15 I call tbis preM Bamabian typology the "proto-typology" to distinguisb it fi:om the extao.t typology in Barnabas. Use of this proto-typology is attested in Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Hippolytus and perhaps some later exegetes, a point tbat wiU be investigated below. 1.1.1 The First Pietute (Barnabas 7:3-5)

Barnabas 7 contains two distinct pictures, with minor digressions. which are constructed as question and answer like a cateche.sis: 16 Vlhy did X happen? -In order to prophecy Y. The first picture starts with a goat, which is sacrificed on Yom Kippur for all the sins (7:4a). While the people moum and fast, the priests alone eat tbis goat, "unwashed with vinegar." This goat, most probably the third goat sacrificed for the sins, had to be eaten by the priests. 17 The preparation with vinegar. however, is not mentioned elsewhere. 18 unchanging, a literal interpretation of'the commandments regarding tbe tabernaele and lbc sacriflcial cult has ne~~er been conect. The con$lruction of the temple and the maintenanc:e of its sacrifieial cult were a misinterpretation. Tlle only function orthe Old Testament is to prophl:$}' the advent of the messiah. The typologies of Barnabas differ lherefore from the usual concept of typology, in that the question or lhe historicity of the prolOtype is c:ompletely irrelevant. Bven if the protoeype may in some instances be consldered historically, its only signiflQilce lies in its prophetic dimension. " Prigent, Les testimonia daiU le chriiJtianisme primirif, pp. 99-110; R.A. Kraft, "1be Epistle of Barnaba:s: lts Quotations and Their Source$," (Ph.D. dis5ertation, Harvard University, 1961) (nopr vidi); Prigeat and Kraft, ipitre de Barnabe on this verse; aud Carleton Paget, Ths Epistle qf Barnabas, pp. 133-140. See also 0. Slwsaune. The Proof from Prophecy (Supplements to Novum Testamentum S6; Leiden, 1987), 307-313. Countering their approach, Wc:ngst, Tradition und Theologie du Bornabasbri;ifu, suggests a :u:hool tradition, bot he negleccs the disparity of attitudes amoog the various traditioD$. James Carleton Paget combines both lheSe$, elaborating the cf'eati'Wl theology of the compiler Bornabas. 16 On Barn.abas 7, see Cadeton Paset, The Epistl• ofBornabas, pp; 134-140; Prigeut, Les testimonia dan1 le christianisme primitif. pp. 99-110; Wengst, Tradition und Thflologie des Barnabasbriflfos, pp. 29-32; Crossan, Tht. Cro$.t That Spoke, pp. 115-233; and tbe commentaries, e.g. Prostmeier. However, the important article by Alon, "The

Halakhah in tbe Epistle of Barnabas," appears in Prostmeier's bibliograpby, but not in his exposition of Bornabos 7. Also, Prostilleier notes similarities to the G011pel of Peter, but he does not reftlr to tbe important implic:ations of Crowm's thesis. 17 Nwn 29:11; mMenah 11:7 aod Philo, De specialibus Jegibll3 1:190 (lectio difficilior), see p. 32 note 77, above. 18 Cf. the suggestions by Windisch and by Prigent, Les testimo11ia .:kln.t le chri:stianJsme primitif, p. 102, referring 10 tbe paschallamb.

Yom Kipplil' Imagery in tlte Ear/y Christian lmaginaire

151

la But moreover when he was crucified he was given to drink vinegar aod gall (öt;E1 ni xot11). 3b Listen how the priest$ of the temple foretold this. Despite1' the fact that a commandmcnt was wriltu rhat ''whosoever does not keep the fast shall die tbe death," (cf. Lev 23:29]3c the Lord commandcd this (i.e. to eat), because b.e hirnself was going to oflcr thc vessel of the spirit as a sacrifice for our sins, :ld in order that the type established in Jsaac, wbo was offercd upon the altar, mighl be . fulfilled. What then does be say in the Prophet? ..And Iet tlaem eat ofthe goal which is olfered in tlre fast for alltheil' 11ins!' ~b Attend carefully,- "and Iet alltht priest11 alone ellt thil illllrails unwuhed witlr
•a

The following table demonstrates the corresponding elements of the typology: Cullic prototv11e 3b Whosoever does not keep the fast shall die the tleath 4 .And let tbem eat of the gost whic:b is offered in the fast fur all their sins. ••. And Iet all the priests alo.ne eat the entrail~

ChrutitJR Mvth Deatb. of Jesus Jesos driuks ~>inegar and galP1

1mwashetl with vinegar.

4 ADd Iet them eat of the goat which is affered in thejiZ!Itfor a/1 thelr sms. . .• And Iet alt the priests alone eat the enttails unwashed with vinegar. 4 And Iet them eat ofIM goat which is offered in the fast for alt their sins.•.. And Iet alt the pricsts alone eat the entrails unwashed with vinegar. 4 And let them eat of the goat which is

Je.sus' death as vicarious alonemilltl

Eating qf Juus 'flesh, most probably

the Eucharist22 andfor not fas1ing on Yom Kippor ··:---

Eating only by the new (priut/Y)

19 The adversative meaning of the G«ttltivlls Ab~oiiiM was rigb.tly remarked. by Wengst, Didache (Apostel/ehre), Bamabasbritif, Zweiter Klemensbrie/. Schrift an Diog~ net; and Prostmeier, Der Bamaba.llbrief, in their c:o.mmentaries on this vuse. 211 Slightly adapted tr.msl. of Kirsopp Lake in LCL; I made use of the Ofeek in Prigent and Kraft, Epitre. de BfR'nabi.

ll This typology agrees with its prototype only under the condition that the unwashed Status of the entrails implies that they still contain the gall: see L. Helln. Studien nr typologischen Schriftau!llegung im zweiten Jahrhundert. BartuJbas 11nd Justin (Heidelberg, 1971), p. 12 (fl(}n l'idi), quoted in Wengst. DidQche (Ap01tellehre), Barnabosbrief. Zweiter Klemensbrief, Schrift a11 Diogttet, p. 199, note 113. The same strong allusion to Ps 69 (68):22 is containcd only in the Go1pcl ofPeter .5:16. zz Tbi.s c:onclusion is draw.u also by Carleton Paget, The Eputle of Barnabas, p. 136, an.d Prige.nt, .Les te!ltimania rkm le christiani:sme primitif, pp. 109-llO. See tbe interpretation ofTertullian, below, pp. 1.56-JSS.

] 52 The Impact of Yom Klppul' on Chr&tianil)' in the Fir.JI and Second Centul'ies people, i.e. the Christians

The eating of the flesh of the goat by the priests - i.e. probably the Eucharist - has a twofold funclion here. On the one band, it commemorates the atoning effect of Jesus death as a sjn offering. thus fulfilling the function of Yom Kippur. On the other hand. it distinguishes the identity of Barnabas' priestly conununity, which eats the Eucharist, from that of the fasting people (Jews), wbich does not. This picture would be impossible if Barnabas' community (still) observed the fast of Yom Kippur. We can, thcreforet understand this passage as a poletnie against Jews or Cbristi.an Jews observing Yom Kippur. This impression is confirmed by the oam.e Barnabas uses for Yom Kippur, "the fasf' and not "the Day of Atonement," as would be appropriate for a typology ofthe temple ritual). The reference to the Aqedah (7:3d) Iooks like an interpolation into an earlier tradition. 24 Nevertheless, it is important, being one ofthe few early links between Yom KiPPur and the Aqedah.l$ ~

1.1.2 The Second Picture (Barnabas 7:6-11) The second picture (7:6--11) identifies Jesus with the scapegoat and with the sin-offering goat whlch is mixed up with the sacrificial goat. The comparison is one~sided, since the typology of the scapegoat is of much greater import. 6a Notic:e wbat was commandcd: "Take two goats, beautiM and similar, and offer them, and Iet rhe priest takc tb.e one as a burnt offering for sins." 6b(7) Bat wbat are they to do with the other? ..The other," he says, "is acc:ursed (m~~:a"tli,lu'toc;) ... 1 Notice how the type of Jesus is manifestcd: aa "ADd do ye alt spit (ipntOOv.-re) on it, and pierc:c: (ICm"taiCE\I'tlloan) it, and bind the scarlct wool (to lptov "to Ko..:a:tvov) about is head, and so Iet it be cast into the desert. '" And when it is so done, he who talces thc goat into the wildemess, drives it forth, and takes away the wool,

23 G03pel of Peter 7:25-27; Luke 23:48. 24 Jt interrupts the flow of the text, and the question in 7:4a conti11ues the atoning death themo of 7:3c. The Aqedab could bc droppod without causing a break. The text would then be: "The I..ord commanded this because he bimself was going to offer tbe vei!el of the spirit as a saerifice for our si.as. ~ What then does be say in thc Propbet? •And Iet tbem eat of the goat wh!ch is offered in the fast fur all their sins.'" Also, the Aqedah does not appear in the olber witnesses to the pre-Bamabian traditlon. Howevc:r, it may bave been the author of Bamabas who insertcd it iDto hi!l tradition, and not a later intetpolator. Even ifTertullian is dependent on Barnabos, he bad good reason to skip this line, which distwbs the flow. 2S See p. 129, above, espe<:ially note 272.

Yonz Kipprtr lm~ry in the Ewly Chl'illian /m(lginaire

153

and puts it upon a shrub which is called Racl1el,2' of whicb we are accustomed to eat the shoots when we imd them in the countryside: thus only the ftuits of Racbel are sweet."9& What does tbis mean? Notice, "that the fust (gaat) is for the altar, bot tho olher is acci.U'Sed, and that the one tbat is acc11tsed is crowned ... 911 Because then they will see him on tbat day with the scarlet (high·priestly) robe (dljp11) on bis body, and they will say, ''Is not this he whom we om:e crucified and rejected (~01141cVllo11VIEIO) and pierced and spat upon? Truly, it was he wbo then said that he hiJJtselfwas the Son ofGod." 1oa But how is be like (to the goat}? Fortbis reasoa; "lbe goats shall be similar, beautilul, and equal (o11oioV<; t:oU.; 'tptiyO"UI; JCai JCllM!1i<;. i~)," in orderthat when tb.ey see him come at that time tbey may be astonisbed at tb.e similarity of the goat. 1Gb See tben the type of Jesus destined to suffer. llo But why is it that they put the wool in the middle ofthc thoms (b:cntiY}i 1t is a type of Jesus ptaced in the Church, beeause whoever wishes to take away the .seulet woo[ must suffer mucb because tbe thorns are tem"ble and be can gain it only through pain. m Thus be says, "those who will sec me, and attain to my kingdom must lay hold of me through pain and suffering.,."

The typology is again best grasped in a table: Cultic oroto~e

6a Take two goats, boauti.ful and s~ilar, and offer tbem, and let tlte priesttake the 01111 a.!J

a bw'nt offering for .silrs. .

6b The other is acC111'sed (&~~:uttttä.pa
Christi(Jif Mvth

{9a the tirst (goat) is for tbe altar} (refers back to the previous typology of tbe sin-offering goat and viearious atonementl 9b Is not Ibis he whom we once crucifled (6o-.:aupmaa11av} and

reje~;led (tl;ookviJoaY't~) and and goad it (ranztrevrliuarE), and bind the scarlet wool about ils head, and so Iet pien:ed (Ktnatrevn7orzvt$"~ and 1pat it be cast into the desert. . .. !,2011 {t~tm.~oans-}? 9a But the other is ateursed, and the one 9b Because then they will see ltim on tbat is accursed is crowned ... that day with the long scarlet (oriestlv) robe on his body •.• 6a Take two goats, beautiful and similar, l Oa in order tbat whell they see him and offer tbem, ... come at tbar time tbey may be lOa The goats sball be similar, beautiful, 8$l0nished at the similarity of ihe

and equal.

goat.

8h And when it is so done, be who takes the goat i.nto the wildemess. drives it forth. and takcs away tbe wool, and puts it upon a shrub which is c:alled Rac:hel, of which we are accustomed to eil tbe $hoots when we rmd tbem in tbe couotry; tbus of Radlei alone is the fruit .sweet.

lla It is a type of Jesus placed in the Chutch, becau&e whoever wishes to take away the scarlet wool must au:ffer mucb because the tboms arc terrible aud he ean gain it only through pain. J l b Thus be says, "Tbose wbo will see me, and attain to my kingdom must lay hold of'me tb.rough pain and sufferinf;."

~ 11

There are many variant rcadings for this word. Sligbtly altered !ranslation by Lake in LCL, based oa SC.

1S4

The Impact afYom Kippw" on Christionily in thcr First ond Second Centuries

Barnabas compares Jesus' way of suffering to that of the scapegoat. The goat is accursed (inuc:o:ttipc11<>t;), which reflects Jesus being cursed by dying on the cross. 28 Both suffer the same torments - spitting and piercing.29 The scarlet wool placed on the scapegoat' s head represents the highpriestly scarlet rohe of Christ at bis Second Parousia. The role of the sacrificial goat is marginal. lts sole signiticance lies in its similarity to the scapegoat, througb w'bich it will be recogni:zed at the Second Parousia as identical to the one sacrificed. Here the author seems to have mixed tv.'O recognition motifs: by the sc-arlet robe and by similarity.30 The end of the chapter is an. ec:clesiological typology of the scarlet wool placed in the thomy sbrub. which refers to the suiTering and martyrdom of those who choose to follow Jesus. The scarlet wool therefore connects Yom Kippur, the atoning death of Jesus, martyrdom and the future ldngdom.

As can be seen from tbe table, some of the details of tbe cultic prototype mentioned in the typology are not connected explicitly to a specific element of the Passion narrative. On the one band, the presence of uninterpreted cultic elements - such as the fact that the goats have to be xa:A.oi demonstrates that Barnabas did not invent his cultic knowledge in order to match bis interpretation. In some instances, such uninterpreted cultic elements may mean that their interpretation was assumed to be self-evident to educated readers and they were therefore "included implicitly." The more obvious an association, the slighter the allusion can be. For example, the curse of the goat is uninterpreted, but the crucifixion of Christ also does not have a prototype. Both are "loose ends," most probabJy presuming tbat the readers Icnew tbe connection between curse and cross and the interpretation of Deuteronomy 21:23 and 27:26. Another example is tbe casting of the scapegoat into the desert, which could easily have been interpreted by Jesus• suffering on Golgotha, outside of the city, as in Hebrews and Hippolytus, an Interpretation not mentioned by Barnaba.s. Moreover, Barnabas does not exploit the death of the scapegoat, although this would have stressed the proximity to Jesus. Perhaps the way the 28 Cf. Deut 21:23 and 27:26; and Gal 3:10.13. Barnabas most probably did not kllow Galati.ans: see oote 93, p. 164, betow. 19 This is n:flCi:ted in the parallel use 8~tnt\loa~e 1 tp.J<-ti!Oavt~ and xa-rax~ijao.te I ICa'taQvn'!oavt~ for Jesus and the scapegoat. 30 Prigent has suggested that Bornabos mixes two t:ypologies, one of which can be found in Justin (Passion plus Parousia) and the other in Tertullian (Passion plus Eucbacist). TertuUian also mentions both typologies, but bis depictio.o is clem:r.

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Chrilllan /rnaginaire

155

scapegoat met its death - by bcing hurled over a precipice - was too dissimilar from Jesus' form of death on the cross. Nevertheless, pagan and Jewish readers knew that the scapegoatlpharmakos bad to die, as Jesus did. But, probably for the sa:me reason that bis readers presumed this anyhow, Bornabos does not choose to explicitly connect such notions as vicarious atonement to the picture ofYom Kippur. 1.1.3 The lnteipretation ofthe Proto-Typology in Justin, Tertullian and Hippolytu." The following analysis heads simultaneously in two directions on the time

scale: chronologica.lly forward to the intetpretations of Barnabas' tradition in the second century, and chronologically backward to the proto-typology, Barnabas' source. Histo-ry of impact and history of tradition will then complement each other. Jusmo~: Justin refers to the typology in his Dialogue with Trypho, a v.'Ork written around 160.31 Jn the context of chapter 40, Trypho asks Justin for proofs that Jesus was the Messiah, who had to suffer and is expected to retum gloriously (39). Justin answers with a typological exegesis of the Passover sacrifice (40) and the goats of Yom Kippur (40) and continues with typologies on the shewbread as Eucharist (41) and the twelve bells on the high-priestly vestment as apostles (42).

40:4 And the two goats of the fast were ordered to be similar. One- of thern was the scapegoat (u~ronoiiRO.t~). the other was to be an offering. They were prophec:ies for tbe two appearances (11111pD'IIO'Idiv) of Christ. For the fust appearancc, at whicb the elders of yow- [Jewish] people and the priests sent him away u a scapegoat, laid hllllds an him and killed him; and for his second appearanee, since you will rec:opize at this very place of Jerusalem him wbo was dishonored by you a.nd [made] an otfering for all those sitmei$ who want to repent and fast wbat Isaiah calts a fast and tear asuo.der the strangling of ellforced contra.c:ts [Isaiah S8: 6], and obseTVe the other things that are simiiar to those that have been reckoned by llim, which also I myself inquired abou1, {and) those things that the believers in Jesus do. s And Icnow that eveo the offeriug of the two goats, which had to be otrered on the wt, similarly took place ll(lwhere except in Jerusalem!'2

Justin's Yom Kippur typology is clearJy more c:oncise than that in Barnabas, better organized and less ambiguous. The referenee to the two appearances of Christ is unmistakablet and the typology gives equal attention On Justin and Judaism, see Slcarsaune, The Prooffrom Prophecy. My tra.nslation of Dlalope with Trypho 40:4-S; Greek text in M. Marcovich (ed.), lustini Martyris Dialogus cunr Tryphone (Patristische Texte und Studien 47; Berlin, Ncw York, 1997). Justin refers back to this typology in Diologue with Trypho 46:2 and 111: I. Dialoptt with Trypho 15 includes a long pessage from Isa SS on the fast. '1

31

156 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Christianit}' ln the First and Second Ce11hlries to both goats. The scapegoat refers only to the Passion. the saerificial goat to the Second Parousia. Some motifs from Barnabas are missing, e.g. thc eating of the goat and the scarlet wool. Apparently, Justin's text is not a reworking of Bamabas but depends directly on the proto-typology. This is shown, for exa:mple, by the reference to the death of the scapegoat, a fact Justin could not have learot from the Bible or from Barnabas, but only from Jewish tradition. 33 Justin explicitly intcrprets the theological implications of the sacrificial goat typology of Christ as vicarious atonement for all sinners. This is somewhat strange considering the association of the scapegoat, not the sacrificial goat, with the Passion. The ceference to Jerusalem as merely a sacrificial place is a favorite idea of Justin's and was therefore most probably inserted by him. 34 Furthennore, Justin refers to lsaiah 58 in the context of Yom K.ippur and is the earllest text to do so. Was Isaiah 58:6 a.lready part ofthe Jewish Haftarah, at least in some synagogues?35 Finally. compared to Barnaba3, Justin inverts the role of tbe priests and the fasting. The priests are the evil faction, 36 whereas the people who fast are oounted a:mong the repenting believers. Yet Justin underscores that these believers fast a real fast - i.e. oile of the kind Isaiah described and not one aooording to the common Jewish practice - a fact suggesting that this reference is not only a typology of past rituals but also ajibe at the observance ofYom Klppur's fast.by Justin's Jewish and Jewish-Christian neighbors.

In Against Marcion, the Yom Kippur tradition (3:7:7-8) is part of a long complex of Christological typologies of the Otd Testament.37 The same passage also appears, almost word for word, in .Against the Jews 14:9-10. Both works were written in the first decades of the third century, and most scholars agree that the two are mutua.lly dependent; but they disagreee as to which ofthe two deserves priority.311 For our purposes, this dispute is less relevant. In both books Tertullian's aim is to prove that Jesus is the Messiah of the Old Testament. While Mareion argues that Jesus could not be the Messiah ofthe Old Testament because the Jews. the experts in understanding the Old Testament, still expect the glorious coming of a Messiah, Tertul-

TERTULLIAN:

"

See all couuncntators besides We.ngst.

,. Skan.aune, The Prooffrom Prophecy, P- 310. ~ Cf. Justin, Dialogue witlt Trypho l5; and see tbe section on the readings, above, pp. '4-59, especially p. SS-S6. Do the elders in this contm rcflect an oral tndition similar to Matt 27:20? Tertullian, A.gain$t Mareion 3:~24. 38 H. l"rlnkle (ed.), Edition de QSF TerhtlUani Ad~ersii.S lwda11os (Wiesbaden, l964). pp. xlix-liii, favors the priority of Againrt tlle Jews, dating it before 207/S. 36 37

Yom KippiD' lmogery in the Eorly Chrls.tian lmaginaire

157

tian claims that the Messiah came and died in a humble way, but that he

will come again, gloriously. lf I may, moreover, give an interpretatiou of the two goats, which were offered on lhe fast, do they not also prefigure the two modes of Christ? Thcy were alike (paru}, and very similar (colfSimiles) to the appearance of lhe Lord, since he will not come in any otber form. having to he recognized by those by whom he bad been woo.nded (/auw e.rt). One of these [goats], however, was bound witlt scarJet (cirCr.t.mdatw coccirro), cursed (maledi~)., spat upon (conspr~tatw), pulled around (com~adsus), and pierced (comprmctus), and driven by ·the people out of the city into perdition (perditionem), being thus marlced with the visible signs of the Lord's pa.ssioo.39 Yet the other [goat], by being otfered up for sim a.ad given to lhe priests ofthe temple for food (pabulvm), signiti•d indications ofthll second appearance, wbeaafter aii sins bave been. expiated- the priests of lhe spiritual temple, i.e. the church - feast as a sort of flesh offering (fi*tul r~ist:t:l'atione} of the Lord's grace, wltile tbe otbm fast from• salvation.41

The identity of a humble and tb.en glorious Messiah is proven for Tertu1lian by the similarity of the two goats. The maltreated, expelled scapegoat :represents the Passion of Jesus; the sacrificial goat, eaten by the priests, symbolizes simultaneously the eschatological meal at the Second Parousia as well as its ritual anticipation, tbe Eucharist.42 Like Barnabos, Tertullian polemicizes against participation in the Jewish fast an.d enjoins participation in the Christian Eucharist instead. Ritual, here, has the :function of defming the borders ofthe collective. Tertullian certa.inly knew Justin's writings and used them. However, scholarship is divided over the question of whether Tertullian was acquainted with Barnabas or with the proto-typology. Their typologies are " The parallel tradilion in AgQiMt tlrs Jew:s 14:9 adds: "qui coccinea circumdatus ucste ct conspulatus et omoibus contumeliis adßic:tus extra ciuitatem cruc:ift.Xus est." 40 An important manuscript of the parallel ttadition in Agalnst the Jew:s 14:9 reads "ad salutem" ("for sa1vation") instead of "a salute;+ as given in Against MQrciOI'I. The Jatter matche:s the context better, the former may bave entered tbe text lhrougb a sc:ribe in Tertullian's rigoristic traditioll.. 41 My translation of the text .from R. Braun (ed.), .T111111.IIien Contre Marcion. Tome 11/ (LiW'e 111) (SC .399; Paris, 1994). Oo this pa.ssagc, and its relation to Barnabas and Justin, see the notes in the te-xt Nitions aad the discussiom in Windisch, Die apostCJii:schen Y6ter 111. Der Barnabasbrief, pp. 346-347; Prigent. .l..es te.tilimonia dans le christianismfl primmf, pp. 107-108; and Carleton Paget, Tbe Epütle of Barnabtu, pp. 13&-140; A. Lou( "Caper emissarius ut typus Redemptoris apud Patres," Yerbum Domini 38 (1960)

262-277, bere pp. 26S-270, and CrOisan, The Cross That Spoke, pp. 131-133. ~~ See V.A. Gramaglia, "Visceratio: semantica eucaristic:a in Tertulliano?," in; .F. Vattioni (ed..), Sanpe e antropo/ogica nella tsologia. Atti della Yl settimana, RomD 2J28 nov. 1987 (Rome, 1989; vol. 3, pp. 138S-1417), p. 1416, wbo invcstigated the collective, sacrificial ud eschatological connotations of this pagan tedmical term.

15 8 The Impact of Yom Kippur 011 Christianity in the First and Second Cenlllries very similar and the relevant differences are few in nurnber. 43 Tränkle assumes that Tertullian knew Barnabas. Against this, Prigent and (more hesitantly) Carleton Paget argue that Tertullian is based on the prototypology and on Justin. 44 We cannot exclude a third possibility - that Tertullian knew all tbree- the proto-typology, Justin and Barnabas. HIPPOLYTUS: Hippolytos of Rome (d. 235) was one of the most prolific Christian authors of his time. A fragment in the Catenae on Proverbs contains bis interpretation of Proverbs 30:3lb (LXX), which views "the goat leading the flock" simultapeously as sacrificial goat and as scapegoat, and both as types of Christ: 45 lind a goat as Ieader oftheflock Since, it says, this is who was slaughtered for the sins of the world and affered as a sacrifice and sent away to the Gentiles as in the desert and crowned with scarlet wool on the head by the unbelievers and made to be a ransom for the humans and manifestedas life for a!L 46 ~

The mention of the "scarlet wool" (K6utvov &ptov) makes very plausible that it is a variety ofthe Yom Kippur typology known to Barnabas, Justin and Tertullian; however, the poetic form and the brevity of the fcagment render an exact comparison difticult. Two elements of the interpretation 4:1 Tertullian has two further details: (a) conuulsus (tornlpulled); and (b) the mention of perditio as the destination ofthe scapegoat. Tertulliao Iacks two other elemeots: (a) an Interpretation of the scarlet ribbon (the ribboo itself is iocluded); and (b) details of the Eucharist (unwashed entrails with vinegar). Finally, Tertullian inverts the order of presentation (f"II'st Passion/scapegoat, then Parousia/Eucharistlsacrificial goat). 44 Tränkle, Edition de QSF Tertulliani Aduersus Iudaeos, pp. lxxvi-lxxxii; Prigent, Les testimonia dans le christianisme primiti/. p. 108; and Carleton Paget, The Epistle of Barnabas, pp. 139-140. 4s Hippolytus, fragment 75. The fll'st to connect this passage to the Yom Kippur typology was A. Zaoi, "Tracce di un'interessante, ma sconosciuta, esegesi midra!ica giudeo-cristiana di Lev 16 in un frammento di ippolito," Bibbia e Oriente 24 (1982) 157166, whose perceptive article escaped the meticulous bibliographical reseai-ches of" Carleton Paget and Hvalvik. · 46 My translation of Kai TpQYO(; ljrorlpevor; aitroAlOII. 06-to<; ytip. cp1JO\v. todv o Vrtip ci11ap·tiac; I!:OOI.LO'U acpays~ teai eile; ev11a 11poaaxes~ ~~:ai. eile; EP~IolfP sie; f&YT) u~o~cpOsic; teai. ICOIC· KlYOV ipcov abd ~~:ecpal!lv im:o 1:1ö" ci11iotm" crn:cpavCJJ&Eic; teai aivepcilKCD" 1.ircpov YEVYT)kic; Kai ·r;mit miv'tGlV lietxeEic;. Text in M. Richard, "Les fragments du commentaire de S. Hippolyte sur les Proverbes de Salomon," Le Mweon 79 (1966) 65-94, here p. 94. Cf. also the shorter version preserved in Pseu~Anastasius: T pciyac; tiYoV)IEVO<; ai!lol.iou ö mp 'tWY ai)lapnlllv 'tov KOa)lov a cpllytaakic; (quoted ibidem). The same tradition is also printed under the name of Cluysostom, Fragmenta in Prouerbia (PG 64:737C-D).

Yom Kippur Jmagery inthe Early Christianlmaginaire

159

are not found in Barnabas. Justin or Tertullian and may from the pen of Hippolytus himself: (a) the explanation of the scapegoat as ransom for humankind; and (b) the sending away as the mission to the Gentiles. 47 As in Hebrews 13:11-13 the "sending away" is based on an inversion ofthe conception that abandoning the camp entails ritual pollution. In the new epoch of salvation history. salvation is no Iongerinside the camp but in the previously impure desert among the previously impure Gentiles.

After this brief survey of the history of the proto-typology's impact, I want to retum to its pre-history. A reconstruction of the extent and content ofthe Christian Jewish proto-typology brings us back to an earlier period, before the composition of Bornabos. Barnabas refers to a source that its author calls "the prophet." Another reference to a source may be entailed in the expression "the priests of the temple foretold this." 48 It is relatively easy to reconstruct the elements of the (Jewish) halakhic regulations for the ritual, which were part also of the Christian Jewish proto-typology. Since acquaintance with halakhic traditions is more likely for the Christian Jewish proto-typology than for later generations, those elements that go beyond Leviticus 16 and exist in later Halakhah are most probably ancient. 49 If this supposition holds, then the following elements form parts ofthe proto-typology: a) the similarity between the goats50 b) their beautiful appearance 51 c) the mistreatment of the scapegoat52 d) the cursing of the scapegoat53 e) the killing of the scapegoat54 f) the red woolen ribbon placed on the scapegoat's head 55

THE PROTO-TYPOLOGY AND lTS INTERPRETATION OF YOM KIPPUR:

47 The former comes ftom Mark 10:45. The idea ofChrist the scapegoat being sent on a mission to the Gentiles appears in Origen, Homily 011 Leviticus 9:3:2 (SC 287:80-82); cf. also the positive interpretation of the desert in Homily on Levitleus 9:4:1 (SC 287:84). 48 Barnabas 7:4a and 7:3b; but 7:3b is a much more ambiguous phrase and could refer to the content ofthe sentence rather than its speakers. 4' See especially Alon, "The Halakhah in the Epistle of Barnabas," pp. 302-305. ~ Barnabas 7:6a.10a; Justin, Tertullian; mYoma 6:1. 51 Barnabas 7:6a; yYoma 6:1, 43bc. s2 Barnabas 7:8a (spitting and piercing}; Tertullian (spitting, piercing, pulling around); mYoma 6:6 (pulling hair). Zech 12:10; Isa 50:6 and Gospel of Peter 5:16. Sl Barnabas 7:6b(7).9a; Gal3:10.13; mYoma 6:4. 54 Justin; mYoma 6:6; cf. Tertullian (driven into perdition). ss Barnabas 7:8a; Tertullian; Hippolytus; mYoma 4:2.

160 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Chrilltianity in the First and Sec()nd Centuries g} before pushing the scapegoat over tbe precipice, the ribbon is put on something eise~ h) the eating of the sin-offering goat, probably in a special manner7 In addition, elem.ents in one or two traditions. wbich appear in the biblical descriptions, are probably part of.the proto-typoJogy: i) the offering of the sacrificial goat58 j) the sending out of the scapegoats9 k) the fasting of the people60 Perhaps the motif of the people's mouming, which is missing the Bible, but appears in some early Jewish traditions, was also patt of the prototypology.61 In addition, a reference to Zechariab 3 seems to have been part of tbe proto-typology.62 Barnabas mentions the high priest's -no8itJ'lK appearing in Zechariah 3.63 Tertullian interprets Zecbariah 3 extensively in direct juxtaposition to the Yom Kippur passage. Justin k:nows it as well.64 An assoeiation of Zechariah 3 and Yom K.ippur also exists in Jewish (nonChristian) sources. '~ As we shall see, tbis point is extremely important to understand the earliest stage ofthe high-priestly Christology.66 It is more difficult to detennine the interpretations that the Christian Jewish proto-typology connected to the halakh.ic regulatio:ns of Yom Kippur, since the interpretation.~ of Barnabas and Ju.<~t.in are very different. and since Tertullian might be acquainted with Justin and perhaps Barnabas and therefore not be an independent witoess. However, we can be sure that the link between the abused scapegoat and the Passion was part of the prototypology. The motif of the similarity between the goats was definitely connected to the Second Parousia, yet it is unclear wbich goat. 67 The tie

m

so Barnabas 7:8b.ll a; mYoma 6:6. Bar11abas 7:4b; Tertullian; Nwn 29:11; mMenab 11:7; De speciallbus legilms 1:190 (lectio difficilior). 57

" Lev 16:15; Ius.tin, Tertullian. . Lev 16: 10.20-22; mYoma 6; Bart~abtu Sa; Justin, Tertullian. 6G Lev 16:29-34; 23:27-32; Barnab08 7:5a; Justin; Tertullian. 111 Bamaba.Y 7:Sa; Justin (repenting, fasting, lsa 58:6); on 1he mouming, see Jubilees 34; Jonith; IUld see above, p. 34, note 98. GZ Sk.arsaune, The Prooffrom Prophecy, p. 309. 59

413

Barnabas 1:9.

111

Tertullian. A.gai~~SI Mareion 3:7:8; Iustin, Dialogue with Trypho 116-1.17.

., See pp. 92-94, above. 116

See pp. 194-197, below.

BarnahM seems to link the scapegoat and the red ribbon not only witb the Passion but also witb the Second Parousia; Justin clearly refers to the Sil(;ri.ficial goat, wbile Tertulli8Jl may be iDterpreted as referring to the third, sin-offering goat. wbich was eacen (a:nd wbich according to Halathah did not bave tobe similar to tbe other two). 61

Yom K.ippur /magery in the Early Christialt lmaginaire

161

betWeen the intriguing consumption of another (specially prepared) goat and the Eucharist, mentioned by Barnabas and Tertullian, may belong to the origioal strand, especially if Tertullian is independent of Barnabas. Because the proto-typology shows an intimate knowledge ofthe detaHs ofthe scapegoat ritual. it is possible that bis source used an eyewitness account6' or even an early sort of Seder Avodah. 69

E:xcursus: Did the Scapegoat Rite lnjluence the Earliest A.ccount ofthe Pas.fiora? John D. Crosaan's Thesis In his jngenious and hlghly eontroversial "The Cross Spoke" (1988), lohn Dominic Crossan implies tbat the scapegoat ritual influenced tbe canonical Passion narratives, via what he calls tbe "Cross Gospel," tbe earliest Passion a~ount, which he has rccoastructed, a redacled venion of which is conmned in the Gospel of Peter. 70 According to Crossan's theory, tbe formati.on oftbis Cross Gospel proueded in four stages." 'lbe starting point (stage I) is that the commuoity does not know details beyond the generai1Uiderstanding that people are scourged and tortured before being crudfied. This understallding is eonfirmed and further enhanced by such propheti.c texts as lsaiah 50:6 aud Zechariab 12:10, which add some derans (c.g. &triking, spitting, and piercing) to the description cf the

Grabbe, "'lbe Scapegoat Tradition,,. p. 16S. This idea was suggested to me by Timothy Thomton at the 13..., Oxford Patristic Conference 1999. I he.silated for a Ion& time before adopting the suggesti011, but it is difficult to account otherwise for the wealth of precise halakhic regulations in BartmiHis. Sil:nllarly, Pbilo betrays an intriguing acquaintanee with the halukhic: rules of Yom Kip· pur. In gcnentl, the need to occupy the fasting people with prayers makes some type of liturgic:al reea.ac:tmcnt probable. K.ister's recent article "5Ql3 and lbe '.A:11odah," poiats in the same direction. See the discussion above, p. 44-45. The po:ssibility of an eyewilness for the rite of l.'emoving thc red ribbon ftom tbe scapegoat and binding it to something eise is less likely. 10 For introductory questions to this work. see the introductiOJl to the edition of M.G. Mara, Evangile. de Pierre. (SC 201; Paris, 1973); the appendix in Brown, The De.ath ofthe MUJi(lh, pp. 1317-1349, wbooo bibliography .includes older works; and c:f. Crossan, Four Other Gospels, pp. 124-181. The urmfnus ad quem of lhe Gospel of Peler is the time ofSerapion of Antioch around. 200 CE. A date arouod l00-150 is opinio commrmis: see Brown, The Dealh ofthe Meuialt, pp. 1341-43; 1.D. Crossan, The. Historica/ JuJis. 17te Life of a Mediterranean Je.wish Peasant (Sau Franciseo, 1991), pp. 433-434. Some scbolars date it even earlier, to lbe tirst century: see Koester, ..ApoCI)'phal and Canonical Gospels." For the plac:e, Anlioch is favored by Brown, while Mara, Evangile de. Plerre, pn::fers Asia Minor. The papyrl usually come ftom Egypt. 71 Crossan follows earlier suggestioos of Martia Dibtllius, 11lrgen Denker and Helmut Koester. See M. Dibetius, "Die alttestamentlichen Motive in der Leide.nsge.scb.ichte des Petrus- und loha!lDesevangeliums,'' Beihefte nn Zeitschrift fiJr die tlbte~taMenlliche Wiuentchaft 33 (1918) 125-150; J. Dellker, Die. theologieg&sclr.lchtliche Snll1111g des Petnuwangeliuwu (Europäische Hoc:hschulscbriften, 23. R.cihe, 36; Bern, Franld\ut am Main, 197S); Koester, "'Apocrypbal an<1 Canonical Gospels," pp. 126-130. 61

19

162

The Impact of Yom Kipp'IH' cm Chrillianlty in the First ond Secemd Cmturies

turtvres (stage 2). 71 Jn tho third stage, the rite ofthe two Yom Kippur goatsjoins th~ prophetie sources with further deraib and adds a primary narrative sequenee. This stage is the first to be preserved in an extant text of Barnabas.73 In the fourtb stage, a fully· fledged narr-cttive is formed aud the sceae ofthe mocked king wilh the motifs ofwearing a robe and being crowning are included. However, the explicit allusions to Jes\lt as sca.pegoat 11re dropped. This slage is reflec::ted in the Cross Gospel,74 which was used by the pre-Marlc:an Passion Nanative. Both were used by the other c:anonical Gospels (stage 5). Crossan's claim that all c::anonical and extra-eanonical Passion narratives are ulthnately dependent on 8Jl exegeti<:al reworking of Yom Kippur's ritual is probably the most far-reaching thesis proffered to date regarding the influence of Yom Kippur on early C.hdstianity. Crossan's theory has sparlced mainly critical responses.75 His aitics concentrate on ret\J.ting the priority accorded to the Cross Gospel over the canonical Passion narratives, i.e. the transition from the fourth to a fifth stage. Their argumentation is based on the contention that the similarities between the Go3peJ of Peter and Mark (only these two) are too few to suppose that they share a direct literary dependency (in either dir«tioo). 76 The vocabulary and word order of no c:anonical gospel follows t.he Gospel of Petu for more tban two or tbree words.17 Furthennore, Mark, Manhew and Jotm preserved the "primitive traditions" of Barnafxls, which arenot ~ of Crossan's Cross Gospet. 11 On the other band, roany details of the Gospel of Peter that would suit t.he narratives of the

•

12 This Stage contmued into the time ofthe formation ofthe Canonic:al Gospels. For ananalysis of some selected passages, see already Moo, The 0/d Testament in tlre Gospel Passion Narrattves, esp. pp. 139-144, who objecl$ to Kocster's and Crossan's approacb. 13 CrosSIJl, The Cross ThatSpoke, pp. ll4-159.208-217. 74 Crossan, The Cro.'s That Spoke, pp. 122 and 157, and see the tables on p. 143 and p. 158. A short ve.rsion ofhis theory, albeit withou.t reflection on Barnabas, ean be found in Crossan's article, "The Cross That Spuke." " See the discussion of CrosS8Jl's theory iD Brown, The Dealh of the Messiah, pp. 1317-1348, especially 1332-3&. Cf. A. Kirk, "Examinin8 Priorities: ADother Look at the Gospel of Peter's Relationship to t.he New Testament Gospels," New Testament St11dies 40 {1994) 572-595; G.W. NickelsbW'g, "Review of: lohn Dominic: Crossan, The Cross that Spolce. Tbc Origins ofthe Passion Narrative (San Francisco: Karper and Row, 1988)." Jqurntll ofdte Ämeric(lll Academy af Religion 59 (1991) 15~162; R.H. Fuller, ..Review of: lohn Dominic Crossan, The Ctou That SJWA:e. The Origins of the PaSifon Narrative (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988)" lnlerprelation 45 (1991} 71-73; J.C. Treat, "Tbe Two Manuscript Witnesses to the Gospel of Peter," in: D.J. Lull (ed.). Society of Biblical Literalrtre 199() Seminar Papers (Atlanta {Ga.). 1990; pp. 391-399); Green, ..Tbc Gospel of Pe.ter: Source for a pre-c:anonical Passion Narrative?"; alld. F. Neirynck, "Review of: Jobn Dominic Crossao. Who Killed Jesus'l Exposing the Roots of Anti-Scmitism in the Gospel Story of the Deatb of 1esus (San Francisco, CA: HapetCollins, 1995)," Ephemeridtls Theologicae Lovanienses 71 (1995) 455-4.57. There are far fewer voices in favor of Crossan's theory, most notably Koester, A.nc:ient Christfan Gospels, pp. 216-240, but note his critique on pp. 219-220. 76 Brown, Tlre Death ofthe Mes&i(lh, pp. 1327-2&. 11 Brown, The Death ofthe Messiah, pp. 1332-33. 711 Nickelsburg, "Review of: John Dominic Crossan, The Cross that Spolce,'' here p. 161.

Yom Kippur lmagery in the EtJF/y ChrisltGJI!maginaire

163

eanonical gospels are omitted by all of them. '19 Finally, if Matthew, Luke and John had indeed used the Go1pel of Peter in addition to Mark. one would have expected SOJ'Dll agreement between two of the canoc.ical gospels against Marle (in the style of Q), but thcre is none. 811 These argwnents undermine Cmssan's thesis of an influence ofthe scepegoat rite on every early Passion account. 'f et what is the relationship between the 'f om Kippur typology in Bornabtu and the Gospel of Peter? Sehola.n have long recognized a conspicuous proximity between Barnabas Sand 7 and two scenes in the Gospel ofPeter: the mocking (3:6-9) and the drinking on tbe eross (5:15-16}. 81 l'he f!J'st pa.ssage reads: u But having taken the Lord, lllllDing {tpf;xoYtE~). they were pushing (oo6ouv) him and saylng, "Let us drag along (oopwJ.I.tv) the Son of God now tbat we bave power over him!' 1 And tbey clothed him with purple (1ropcpilpav) and sat him on a chair of judgment, saying, "Judge justiy, King of Israel." s And a certain one of them, having brought a thomy crown (at*vov a~eciv&tvov), put it oo the head of dte Lord. 9 And otbers who were standing there were spitting (6vkltruov) in his face, and others slapped (~amoav) bis cheelcs. Others were jabbiD& him with a reed (.:~ iY\JOoov); and some scourged (~u;ov) hiOl, saying, "Widt such l!onor let us honor the Son of God.'' 112 Most of the details of the moc:king of Jesus as reconnted in the Gospel ofPetu appear in Barnaba!l.rl Matthew and John each bring only part oftbe traditions, which are common to Barnabas and the Gospel of Peter.&~ Mark and Lukeare cven more different ti:om Barnabcu and the Gospel of Peter. Therefore, Koester can co:nclude: "lt is evident that the mocking scene in this gospel [tbe Gospel of Peter} is a narrative version !hat is directly dependent upon the exegetical tradition which is visible in Barnaba.f."M Beyond the elear correspondences, John Doininic Cro$san snggests tbree further connections between motifs in the Gospel of Peter and Barn.abas. The Yom Kippur traditions of Bamabas were transfomed by the Gospel of Pcter. First, the scarlet wool ofthe scapegoat was combined with tlte priestly cloak (1t0til)p11~) from Zechariah 3:1-5 and became the purple robe of the mocked k:ing." Second, the scarlet wool on the head of the

79

Brown, Tha Death ofthe Messiah, p. 13 33.

Browo, The Deoth oftht~ Messiah, p. 1333. E.g. Mara, E11anglle de Piure, p. 21, note 2. n Slightly chaoged translation from Brown, The Deoth ofthe Mu:;iah, pp. 1318--19; Greek text in Mara, Evonglle de Pierre. • 3 a) spitting [if!m:\Jw) Go.sJH!I o/ Peter 3:9, Barnabcu 7:8a; b) piercing [vtiaaco] Gospel of Peter 3:9, [uTa:avtiw] Btlrnabas 7:8a; c) crowning Gospel of Petu 3:8, Barnabas 7:8; d) clothing in (red) robe Gospel of Peter 3:7; Bornabos 7:9; e) slapping the cheeks {Pani~"' 1i1<; omyov.xo;] Gospel of Peter 3:9; Barnobas 5: 14; scourging [J.I.Il
tt

164 The Impact of Yom KippJU on Chri11tianity irr the Fi,.at and Second CelllJJP'iu scapegoat, whieh was put on the thorns in the bnsh, became the crown ofthoms on the head of the moeked king.'1 Finally, Crossan hypothesizes that th~ P'eed piercißg the side of Jesu.s rettects the instrummt in the bistorical temple rituaL with which the scapegoat wu pierced." Helm11t Koester ac;cepts Crossan's two fo:rmer points aad, more besitantly, also Crossan's interpretation of the reed, yet he wams that the two m.anuscripts of the Gospel of Peter show great variation" and any philological arguments with respect to tbe text bave tobe viewed with reservations.90 Parallelsexist also in the !<:el!.e of giving gall and vinegar to Jesus on the cross (Go.rpel of Peter 5:15-16);

s:u But it was midday, and darlaiess held fast all Judea; and tbey were distreased and arucious lest the sun bad set, sinu he was still liviug. [ForJ it is wri.tte.n for them; "Let not the sun set on one put to death... 16 And som.eone of them said, "Give him to drink: pll witb vinegar (aotioo-ct: o.inov xo11\v !1810: ~ou.;}." Alld baving made a mixture, tbey gave to drink:. ' 1 Again, tbe Gospel of Peter and Barnabi'JS are more similar to each otber than to tbe canonical gospels. First, JesWI is given gall am/vinegar, matehing Psalm 69 (61):22 only in. the Gospel of Peter and in Burnabas, not in lhe (:8JIODical gospels. Pli Second, Deuterooomy 21:23 is quoted only in Peter's Passion nam~tive. not in tbe canonical Passion narratives. Barnahas does not quote Deuteronomy 21:23, but he refers to tbe consequence ofthe dealh on the wood- tb.e curse. Galadans 3:10-13 mentions both expJicitly, · hut it is unlikely that either the Go.spel of Pcter or Bornabos depended on Galalians. Probably, all three knew independently tbe tradition of the crucified as clllSed scapegoat." Crossan 's own ohservation that "explic:it allusions to Jesns as scapegoat do not remain. in the tradition as it pr~eds and develops- impedes $C11ltinizing his argurnent for evidence ofthe Yom Kippur traditions. The details of tbe abuse in tb.e Gospel of Peter are based on prophetic passages. None of them necessarily depend$ on the seapegoat Gospel ofPeter 3:8; Santaboa 7:8.11. Ba,.rrabas 7:8 mentio.IIS only lhe act not the Instrument. Crossan bases bis elaim on the Sibylli1ttt Oraclts 1:360-75 and 8:285--309, independc:m: of the canonical Passion namttives, but drawing 011 lhe earliest Christian Passion traditions conneeted to lhe scapegoat rite. Ac:cordingto Crossan,. Sibylline Oracles I :360-75 depends on &:28$-309. Since the fonner passage was written before 150 CE, the latter has to be earlier than 1~0 CE: see Crossan, Tlte c,.oss That Spoke, pp. 133-139, espeaally 135. 19 Treat, '"'Ibe Two .Manusllript Witne.sses to the Gospel ofPeter." 110 Koester, Ancient Christiall Go.sp1ls, pp. 224-225. 91 Slightly changed translatiOB from Brown, The JJeath of the Mes11iah, p. 1319; Oreek text in Mara. EvtJtrgi/e de Pleme. 92 Gospel ofPete,. 5:16; BMnabtZJ 7:3.5. 93 J. Carleton Paget, "Paul and die Epistle of BarnabM," Nfllntlm Testamemum 38 (1996) 359-381, does not discuss this specific passage but concludes tbat Barnabas bad no knowledge of Paul. It is not impossible that the view of crueified saints as cursed scapegoats is pre-Christian and was applied to other crucifixio.os before Jesus. Tbe polemical weight of tbe argument against proto-Christianity would bave been slighter but the existence of a counterargument does not silence the argume.nt. 94 Crossan, Th• c,.oss ThatSpofce, p. 142. 87

81

Yom Kipp11r lmagery 111 the Early Christfan Jmaginaire

l6S

ritll!ll." Crossan's theoxy coucemiug the transfonnation of the three motifs of the scarlet ribbon, tbe thorns aad the reod is too speculative. For example, regarding the association ofthucadet ribboa with the cloak oftb.e soldiets, Matthew is closer to Barnabas than to bis presumed soun:e, the Cross Gospel, -as weshall see in the following section. 96 CrosSall suggests that the scapegoat ritual introduced a flfllt narrative sequence into the various propbetic passages. Yet tbe sequence ofthose details ofthe scapegoat rite mentioned in the proto-typology (abuse, leadiog out of the city, killing) is very similar to those basic fac:ts that could be ltuown historically. As I show in the seclion that follows, Matthew probably pen:eivcd exactly rbe same prox:imity of the hi5torical evenu as ginn in his soun:e, Marle, to the ritual sequence of the scapegoat rite and decided to formulate the Barabbas episode aloog the llne5 of the ..lottery"!l7 between the goatt that constitutes the mtraduction to the Yom Kippur rituaL The ritual of Yom Kippur did not inttuence nery early Passion account, as Crossan suwsted.91 Tbe Yom Kippur typology or Barnabas is one of the b~cbes in the dewlopment of the canonical Passio:n narratives, rather than their root. However, it is a very early branch and it displays a great sim.ilarity to the Gospel of Pe.ter, yet wirbout eDtailing a direct ioterdependence between them. The evidence suggests that the relationsllip to the canonical gospels and to the Gosp11l of Pete.r was based on sh~nd oral tradirions ofpropbet.ic: typological exege.sis, not on the Yom Kippur typology.

1.2 Barabhas as Scapegoat in MaJJhew 27:15-23 27:1~ Now at the festival the govemor was acc:ustomed to release a prisoner for the crowd, whom they wanted. 16 At that time they bad a notorious pri50ner, called Jesus Barabbas. 11 So after they bad gathered. Pilate said to them, "Whom do you want me to release for you, Jesut Barabbas or Jesus who is called tbe Mess.iah?" 18 For he reali:r:ed that it was out of jealousy that they bad handed him over. t9 Whüe be was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent word to him, "Have nothing to do with that innocent man, for today I have suffi:ml a ~at deal because of a dream about him." 20 :Now tbe c.hief priests and rbe elders persuaded the crowds to ask: for Barabbasand to bave ]eSU$ killed. 21 'The govemor again 5aid to them, ..Which of the two do you want me to release for you?" And they said. "Banlbbas." n Pilate said to them, 14Then what should I do with Jesus who is called the .Mcssiah?" All of them said, "Let him be crucifiedl" 23 Then he asked, "Why, what evil h-as he done?" .But they shouted an the more, ".Let him be crucified.!" ~4 So when Pllate saw that he could do nothin& but rather that a riot

" lsa 50:6: spitting, scourging, slapping the cheeks..Zech 3: clothing with the robe {thollgh not red). The Heh~w text of Zech 12:10 mentions pien:ing (Vf). While the LXX misread (1p,), the other Greek: versions traJislated ,p1. Gospel of Peter and Banrafxu reflect two different translations. John 19:34.37 givcs hoth Greek verbs. " Matt 27:28 Iabels the red of the cloak that the soldiers put aro1111d Jesus .co~e•d.v11, like rbe crim.son of Banrabas' scapegoat, while the Gospel of Peter uses purple (lMp~). Manhew is closer to &rnabas than is the Gospel ofPeter. " Interestingly, Crossan does not regard the scapegoat lottery 1111 background to the Barabbas epi50de, tho11gh this could bave embellished bis thesis fu.rther. " For different reasons, I object to Ren~ Girard's highly reductionist theses, e.g. in The Scopegoat (Baltimore, 1986), that see the scapegoat in ptaetically every realm of life.

166 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in the First and Second Centuries was beginning, he took some water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying: "I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves." 2s Then the people as a whole answered, "His blood be on us and on our children!" 26 So he released Barabbas for them; and afterflogging Jesus, he handed him over tobe crucified. 99

The episode ofBarabbas in the Matthean version gains depth when understood vis-ä-vis the lottery of the goats in the Yom K.ippur ritual. 100 The release of Barabbas has caused some trouble for historians as well as exegetes. 101 On the literary Ievel, the change in the people's attitude toward Jesus from the exulta.tions upon his entry to the release of Barabbas seems too abrupt, and the explanation that the high priests and scribes brought about this conversion with only a few words seems flimsy. The brevity of the exposition is disconcerting; the people are manipulated too easily. Matthew abolishes the careful distinction regarding the responsibility for the death ofthe Messiah that he had kept up to this point, between the neutral disposition of the people and the evil inclination of its Ieaders. The notorious statement: "His blood be on us and on our children!" transfers the responsibility to the whole people. With this involvement of the bystanders, the ~arrator accuses them of being of the same party as the active perpetrators. On the historical Ievel, apart from what is related in the Gospels, no evidence for a privilegium paschalis, the release of prisoners before festivals, especially Pesach, has yet been found. Even such conservative scholars as Raymond Brown, who want to preserve the historicity of the story, state: "There is no good analogy supporting the historicallikelihood ofthe custom in Judea of regularly releasing a prisoner at althe feast [of Passover]."102 Brown suggests a historical nucleus behind the story: a certain Jesus Barabbas, who was subjected to similar claims of revolt, was re99

Matt 27: 15-26, NRSV.

On generat questions relating to the Barabbas epi.sode I used the commentaries by Brown, The Death ofthe Messiah; U. Luz, Das Evangelium nach MatthällS (Mt 26-28) 100

(Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 114; Neukirchen-VIuyn, 2002); D.C. Allison and W.D. Davies, A Critical and begetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew. Yo/. 111 Commentary on Matthew XJX-XXY/11 (International Christian Commentary; Edinburgh, 1997}; and D.A. Hager, Matthew 14-28 (Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas [Tex.], 1995). 101 On this passage, see the artic1es by H.A. Rigg, "Barabbas," Journal of Biblical Literatlire 66 (1945) 417-456; and H.Z. Maccoby, "Jesus and Barabbas," New Testament Studies 16 (1969/70) 55-60; and the long discussion in the commentary by Brown, The Death ofthe Messiah. See also J. Merke), "Die Begnadigung am Passahfeste," Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wi33enschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 6 (1905) 293316. 102 Brown, The Death ofthe Me3siah, pp. 818 and 819.

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christion Imaginaire

167

}eased at the same time as the crucifixion of Christ. 103 Against this, skeptical scholars such as John Crossan object that so isolated an incident would be higbly improbable under Pilate, who was well known to be rig· orous in pursuing his activities against the religious authorities and would not have retreated in the face of local powers. Crossan gives theological· literary reasons for the emergence of the story of Barabbas. For him, the scene illustrates a double mistake - of the Romans on the political Ievel and ofthe high priests on religious Ievel. "The Jewish authorities chose the (religiously) wrong person to release. The Roman authorities chose the (politically) wrong person to crucify. n104 More than a hundred years ago A.H. Wratislaw proposed an exegetical basis for the Barabbas episodes, 10' a typology that is based on the two goats ofYom Kippur. He enumerates these points ofsimilarity: a) Two "victims" are presented {Jesus-Barabbas). b) They are similar to each other (both are named Jesus and Son ofthe Father). c) They symbolize opposed powers (Jesus, the peaceful Messiah of God; Barabbas, the murderer, as Messiah ofthe people). d) There is a lottery/election between the two as to who is to be released and who is to be killed. e) A "confession" is pronounced ("His blood be on us"). Wratislaw's theory of an exegetical genesis for the Barabbas storywas not accepted in the commentaries and fell into oblivion. 106 However. if one applies the typology not generally to all passion accounts but only to Matthew, the quality of the argument improves considerably. A comparison between Matthew and its Vorlage, Mark, reveals some highly interesting redactional changes. Only in Matthew do the people choose 103 The same unconvincing conclusion is drawn by Allison and Davies, A Critical ond Exegetica/ Commentary 011 the Gospel According to Saint Matthew, vol. 3, p. 583. The data about amnesties in ancient Assyria and Greece in R.L. Meritt, "Jesus Barabbas and the Pascha! Pardon," Journal of Biblical Literature 104 (1985) 57-68, are too early to be relevant historically but may still have been influential as a literary model. 104 J.D. Crossan, Who Killed Je:sw? Exposing the Rools of Antisemitism in the Gospel Story ofthe Death ofJesw (San Francisco, 1995), p. 112. 105 A.H. Wratislaw, "The Scapegoat·Barrabas," Expo:sitory Times 3 (1891/92) 400403. 106 In fact, Wratislaw was not the III'St to interpret the Barabbas episode against the background ofthe scapegoat rite. Origen had already made this connection: see Homily 011 Levitleus 10:2:2 (SC 287:134). This exegesis is also found in Pseudo·Jerome's seventh-century Commentary on Mark 15:11 (CSL 82:71): see the translation and notes in M. Cahill (transi.), The First Commentary on Mark: An Annotated Translation (New York, Oxford, 1998). On the medieval influence of this exegesis, see Louf, "Caper emissarius ut typus Redemptoris apud Patres,'' p. 274.

168 The lmpDCt of Yom Kippur 011 Cltri!tianity in the First r.rnd Second C1nturiu between two figures with the same first name, Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus Barabbas. This reading, put in parentheses in Nestle-Alan~ 7 , is preserved by important witnesses and is accepted as original in most commentaries. 107 The identity of tbe ruunes of Christ and Barabbas, preserved only by Matthew and not in thc other Gospels, has two mutually exclusive explanations. Bither he bad access to an original tradition about the historical Jesus Barabbas and the other Gospels kept silent about the identity of the names because it was offensive to thetn- as it was, for example, to the copyists and to Origen 108 (the objections against the historicity of the story have already been mentioned}, or Matthew embellished his Vorlage by introducing na.mes foc the muneless. 109 He thereby deliberateiy reinfotced the similarity between the two opposed prisoners. Three further Gbanges by Matthew, compared to bis Vorlage, foster tbi: impression that he wanted to emphasize the choice: eilher Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus Barabbas (see lable). While he usually followed closely 1h.e wording of Mark in the Passion account, here he changes tbree sentences. He reformulates {1) the question by Pilate; (2) the description of the propaganda of the high priests and the elders~ and (3) the repetition ofthe question by Pilate: ~ Mark lS

Matthew27

9: &C:4u aMloow-ilp.'iv tov llclaaU. 1:1'l>v

17: Ti vo eiJ..~:u liMJ..Vom \lt&lv· 1'1fTOi1v r6v &tpa/Jfltiv lj Iquofiv'töv 1\ey~v

'lov&li111V;

XpLOtov;

Do you want me torelease for you the King ofthel"ews?

Whom do you want me to releaee for you, JeSU$ Barabbo& or Jesus who is called the Messiah?

U: ivo..-.öJ..).ov rov Ba:paJIIlilY UMÄilo:nj CL~Oll;

20: iv11 a.i·ti\Clt:oVCou nhrBapaflflü:v niv &'lllolriiY cim;,llo(I)Cilv

(But the chiefpriest3 stirred up tlle crowd) to have him release Barabbas for them inscead. (Now the chief priest3 arul the eldm persuaded the crowds) to ast for BCirobbaJ and to bave J.sus killed. 21:'rlvllti:tv;t li.~rJ -rdlv 6do im4iiom vp.tv. Whidl of 1111! two do you want m.c to relcase f'or you?

-· .

107 The appar.ttus of Nestle-AJand27 gives the foltowing witnesses: the Old Syriac, 0, tbe ferrara-group, 700• and some other uaeials in Mau 27: 16; also some manuscrlpes of Origeo ofMatt 27:17, who COßlnlents on this. •• E.g. AJiison and Davies, Commentary on Matthew, vol. 3, p. 584, !lote 20. 1~ He does this also in other instances, e.g. Matt 9:9; 26:3.57.

Tom KipJNrlmagery in tlte EDrly Christion lmaginalre

169

In so doing, Matthew underscores the contrast between the two homonymaus mcn (both called Jesus) and the choice bctween two si:rnilar entities. The pcople choose between Jesus A and Jesus B, who are very si:rnilar in na.me but extremely difterent in character. This description agrees with the halaldüc ruling regarding the two goats on Yom Kippur. On the one band the Misbnah dernands similarity in look and value, on the other band the ritual destin.ations ofthe two goats are totally different. Whilc the one goat is slaughtered and its blood brought into the holy of holies, the other go.at is sent from lhe sanctuary into the desert. Of the three further Matthean additions to hls Markan Vorlage (the dream of Pilate's wife; Pilate washing bis hands at the end of lhe act; and the double confession, announcing Pilate•s innocence and the guilt of the people), the Iatter two may be · connected to Yom Kippur.U0 Usually, Pilate's washing of hands and the confession are explained against the background of the ritual of the heifer in Deuteronomy 21:1-9. On the detection of a murder by unknown persons, representatives of 1he suspected villagc have to wa.sh their hands and announce a confes.sion of innoce.nce similar to that of Pilate: "Our bands did not shed this blood, nor were we witnesses to it. Absolve. 0 Lord, your people Israel, whom you redeemed; do not let the guilt of innocent blood remain in the midst of your people Iscael.'' 111 Yet, like the heifer ritual of Deuteronomy 21:1--9, the sc;apegoat ritual, too, ends with a confession and a subsequent wasb~ ing. 112 Among the biblical descriptions of temple rituals, Yom Kippur stands out as the only ritual with a washing tifter the procedures.m Reganfing the distinct connections between the Barabbas story and the scapegoat ritual, and presuming that Yom K.ippur was an important event and conception for every Jew, I suggest that these features of the Matthean Barabbas story were formed not only by Deuteronomy 21 but also bad the ritual ofthe goats ofYom K.ippur as a catalyst. In view of this evidence I also suggest that :five halakhic prescriptions of Yom Kjppur played a role in Matthew' s formulation of the passage: a) The lottery of the two goats b) The similarity of tbese goats c) Their contrasting destinations d) The confession over the scapegoat e) The washing ofthe hands at the end ofthe ritual 110 Tbe dream ofPilate's wife has no meauing against the backgr:ound ofthc ritual of YomKippur. 111

Deut 21:7-8.

112

Lev 16:21-24.

113

In reaHty, of course, priests would bave wasbed themselves after the temple servicc.

170 The Impact ofYom Kippr.rr on Christianity in th• First and Second Centurles The reasons for connecting the fust three prescriptions are much stronger tban for the last two, which may be explained by referring to Deuteronomy 21 but closely match the typology of the Yom K.ippur ritual. When set against tbe historical reading by Brown, it illustrates most of the Matthean Sondergut and redactional changes in the Batabbas stocy. 114 In addition, Koester suggests there is an allusion to the scapegoat rite in Mattbew's version of the mocking of Jesus, which follows the Barabbas episode. Matthew 27:28 changes Mark's term for the red cloak the soldiers put around Jesus> from xopcpupa {pwple) to tconiV'fl (scarlet). Koester pro· poses that Matthew wanted to allude to the scarlet wool tied around the scapegoat, which in Bornabos 7 is called tO eptOV tO ICQICIC1VOV. 11 s In generell. xoxteivl'lhlli' carries a notion of atonement. 116 Commentaries usually refer to the eheaper price of scarlet, wbich is made from worms and not snails and matches better the mocking by simple soldiers and not rieb generals. However, a search for the expression ;tl.aJ.1iJI; lCOtCdVl'\ in TLG 8 yielded only Matthew 27:28 and its commentaries. It is therefore an exceptional combination of words. Date C. Allison suggests a third ex.planation, referring to Targum Onkelos Genesis 49:11) where the messianic gannent is made from scarl.et (t'11i1T SJ:J.:!). 117 The three interpretations ar:e not mutually exclusive. Yet Koester's thesis implies a transition from the typology of Jesus with the sacrificial goat in the Barabbas episode to a scapegoat typology in the mocking. What theological idea did Matthew wanl to convey witb bis allusions to the scapegoat rite in the mocking scene? I suggest tbat he embellished his Vorlage in order to include aspects of the people's guilt and how the believers achieve atonement. The Iabels Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus Barabbas symbolize two aspects of the historica!Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, as God wants him to be, while Jesus Barabbas is the Messiah as the people want him to be. The people uswp the role of God on Yom 114 For thi$ reading, the question of historicity is almost irrelevant- with the exc::eption of a po»ible historical tradition of the namc Jesus Barabbas. While the conclusions suggest that the cpisode is not historical, the theory - that Matthew reformed his tradition on tbe basis of the Iottory between the goat$ 011. Yom Kippur - is not dependent on 8ßY ahis-torieity of the story. m Koester, Ancient Christiarr Gospttll, pp. 225-226. 116 See R. Gt:adwohl, Die Farben Im A.hen Testament (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift filr die alttestamentliche Wissensc:haft 83; Berlin, 1963), pp. 73-73; 0. Michel, "Kokkinos," Theologüches Wörterbuch :r~m Neuen T.stoment 3 (1938) 812-815; and K.-M. Beyse. "•w" Theologisches WorJerbuch zgm Alten Testament 8 (1995) 346-342; and Gen 38:30; Lev 14; Num 19. Also ~topp:\Jpa has cultic connotatloi!S iB.cluding lhe high-priestly garments (Exod 25:4; 26:1.31, etc.; Sir 45:10}, but not atonement. 11 , Alluon and Davies, Co~t~~~tentary on Saint Manhew. vol. 3, p. 602.

Yom Kipp11r Jmoq.9 i11 the Early Chrillian Imaginaire

171

Kippur in choosing betvveen the two goats. Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus Barabbas. As scapegoat tbey choose the wrong goat, Jesus Barabbas, who is released in their midst (and consequently pollutes them). an.d bence as sacri.ficial goat, tbe wrong goat, Jesus ofNazareth, whose blood, spilled at the wrang place, also pollutes them. Matthew mocks tbe temple ritual, and tbe people disregard the atonement in Jesus. 111

Excursus: The Catalytic Function ofthe Pharmakos and the Scapegoar .Many Greek cities bad collective purification rites- which scholars term "phDl'mukcn rites"- showirlg some parallels to the biblical scapegoat rite. 11 ~ Usually, the rite inclwles the expulsion {somerimes even the ldllin&) of a marginal member of soeiety, ideally a king or a virgin, in reality more lilrely a betgar or a stranger.' 20 In Athens af the festival of Tbargelion and in thnes of distress, two ugly meQ were fud for a certain time - one witb blac:k figs as purification for the women, the other with white figs as puritication for tbe men - tben killed or driven across tbe border. In Massilia in cascs of epidemic, a poor man was fed and elothed expensively for one year and then led round the walls of the city and thrown from a prec:ipice or c:based away. Similar ricuals existed in Abdera, Lellkas and other c:ities of the Meditertanean and the Middle East. B. Hudson McLean suggests that this eommon Mediterranean rationale stands behind thtee Pauline passages, Romans 8:3, Galatians 3:13 and 2Corinthiil115 5:2.1.121 Sinee he dou not claim spceifically influence by Vom Kipp11l, I will not delve further into hi$ thesis. _Some Chw-ch Fathers indeed provide evidence for an awarenes:s by Christians of ehe plrarm.aios rituals ftom at least tbe second century. 122 They compare Jesus' death not

118 .For the salre of comprehensiveness, l wouJd like to rne:ntion another thesis regarding Matthew and Vom Kippur, put forward by J. Massingberd Ford. She suggests seeiq the whole Sermon on the Mount and partieularly tbe Pater Noster as a composition "on the occasiQQ ofVom Kippur." However, her arguments are insubstantial: see J. Massingberd Ford, "The Forgiveness Clause in the Matt.hean Form ofthe Our Father," Zeiuchriftfiir die neutestamentliche Wisunschqft t~nd die Kunde der iille"n Kirche 59 (1968) 127--· 131. At the end ofthe short artide she sunnnarizes tlte arguments of, "Vom Kippur and the Matthean Form ofthe PaterNoster," Worship 41 (1967) 609-619 (raon vidi). 119 See I. Bremmer. "Seapegoat Rituals in Aneient Greece," HQ71!a'd St11diu ;" Clossical Philology 81 {1983) 299-320; and McLean, The C11rsed Christ, pp. 6S-104. 120 "In historical reaUty the community sacriticed the least valuable members of the polis. who were represented, however, as very valuable persons. In the mythic:al tal.es ••. we always fmd beauliful or important persons, although even then tbese scapegoats remain marginal flgures: young men and women, and a king": Bremrocr, "Scapegoat Rituals in Ancient Greece," p. 307. Moreover, most heroes of rhe Greek myths oft'er them· selves volUlltarily. For a eomparison with earlier studies of tbe scapegoat see bis extensive bibliography in note 2, p. 299. It may be inten:stinß that an opposite relationship between myth and ritual practice exists between the Misbnah Yoma ("the ritual") and l.ev 16 ("the myth''). 111 See McLean, The Cursed Chrin, pp. 105-145. 121 A fully elabomc versionoftbis argument can be found in D. St!lkl, "The Christian Ex.egesis of tbe Scapegoat between Iews and Pagans," in: A.l. Baumgarten (cd.),

172 The Impact of Yom Kipp11r on Christianity 111 the Prlr.st and Secon.d Cent~wies only to the sc:apegoat and all other biblical sacrific:es but also to legends about lcinp sacrificing their lives to •vett epidcmics or natural catasttophies, i.e. to avert eviJ. These mythical tales are closely connec:ted to the pharmako: ritw1ls. 1n Clement of Rome writes: Let us also bring forward examples from the heathen. Many kinp aud rulcrs_ when a time of pesti)encc has set in, have followed tbe couuseJ of otacles, and given themselves up w death, tbat they might rescue their subjec:ts through tfleir own blood. Many h•ve gone away ft"om their own cities, th.t scdition might ha\'e ancnd •••• 1214

Origen answers Celsus: They {the disciples) dared not only to show to the Iews from tbe s.ayings of rhe propbets tbat he was the one to whom tbe pr-ophets referred, but also showed to the o!her nations tbat he who was crucifled quite recently accepted this death williagly for the human mc:e, like those wbo have died for their country to checlc epidcmics ofplague, or fami.nes, or sto.rmy sea.s. For it is probable tbat in thc nature ofthinp there are c:ertain mysterious causcs which are hard for the rnultitude to underslarui, wbicb are responsible for the fact that one righleous mm dymg voluntarily for the community may avert the aetivities of evil d~ons by expiation, siace it is they wbo bring about plagues, or famines, or stormy seas, or anything simUar. Let pco. ple therefore who do not want to believe that lesus died on a c:ross formen, teU us whether tbey would not aooe_pt the many Greek and barbarian stmies about some wbo have died for the commÖnity to destroy evils that bad taken hold of cities aod nations. Or do they think !hat, whilc !hese stories are bistorically true, yet there is nothiug plausible about this man {as people suppw; him to be) to suggest that he dted to destroy a great daemon, in fact tbe ruler of daemons, who held in Sllbjection all the souls of men tbat havc come to eartb? 1~ Alexander of Lycopolis coofums llüs line of tbought ftom a p11gan perspective in Egypt around 300 CE: For to maintain, according to tbe Chwc:h doctrine, tbat be {Jesus] gave bimself up for the remission of sins gains some belief in the eycs of many people iu view of the stories told among the Greek.s about some persans wbo gave themselves op 10r the safety of their citics.174 I bave argued elsewhere that thc rise of the sc:apcgoat-ty:pology was probably fostered by the f•r.:l that its rationale was easily llßderstan.dable to non-Jewish converts betause of its

Sacriftce in Religious E.xperience (Studies in tbe Histoey of Religions [Numen Book Series}93; Leiden, SostoD and Cologne, 2002; pp. 207-232). 123 See Bremmer, "Scapegoat Rituals in Ancient (hee(:e," pp. 300-307. U4 lCJement SS:l - Kirsopp Lake'~ ttanslatiön in LCL. lt was H.S. Versnel's fascinating article "Quid Atbenis et Hierosolymis," in: J.W. van Henten (ed.), Die Entstehtmg der fildl#chen Mizrtyriologie (Leiden, 1989; pp. l62-l96), that drsw my attention to these passages. •zs Origen, A.goinst Cel;sus l :3l. 1211 Alexander of Lycopolis. Contra Manichaei Opinlon.u Disputatio 24, quoted aceording to Stern, Greek and Latirt Authors 011 Jews cmd Judai'sm, vol. 2, pp. 486-487.

Yom KipP"r Jmaguy in the EIW/y Christion lmaginaire

173

comparability to their own cultural institution of pharmakos rites and the etiological tales

connected to these rites. 127

].3 The Redemptive Curse: A.n A.llusion to the Scapegoat in Galatians 3? In the eyes of ancient Jews, evcry person crucified was cursed: Deuteronomy 21:23 states ••anyone hung on a tree is under Ood's curse." 128 Accord· ingly, the earliest followers of Jesus bad to find an answer to the cognitive dissonance of a cursed Messiah: How can a cursed Messiah bring sai'IJQ· tion? Paul ad.dresses this question only in Oalatians 3, e.specially in verses

13-14:129 3:U1For all who rely on the works ofthe law are under a eurse (~eo"~:ä,:Hrv}; for it is written, "Cursed (EKtiCaNpu1'0<;) is everyone wbo does not observe and obey all tbe things written in the book of the law." (Deut 27:26 LXX) 130 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law; for "The one wbo is righteous wiU live by faith ... {Hab 2:4]12 But thc law does not rest on wtb; on the contnuy, "Whoever does the works of the law will live by tbem." [Lev 18:_.5) ll Christ bought w; free ftom thc eurse (tar:täpu~) oftbe law by becowiog a curse {KO~apu) for (wip) us- for it is wrltten, 'Cursed (Enu:cmii)CitO<;) is everyone wbo hangs on a tree' [cf. Deut 21:23]- 14 in orderthat in Christ leSilS tbe blessirlg of Abralwn might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of tbe Spirit tbrougb faith.lll

Paul does not explicitly answer the "how" question oftbe salvific curse of Christ. Some (mostly e.arlier) commentators exp:ress the opinion that bc:hind Galatians 3:13 stands tbe concept of Jesus as a scapegoat. 132 The point of dcparture is the paradoxical description of Christ having bewme In

See Stak!, "The Cbristian Bxegesis oflhe Scapegoat between Jews and Pagans."

LXX: Kn:o·nlpcq.tboc; ;"ro 8EoO !!4~;; KpeJ.lG~~-&voc; t.n ~vlml. A number of exegetes see a parallel ia the concept expressed in 2Cor 5:21. Fora survey of interpreters who saw bere m Illusion to the scapegoat, see Young, "The Impact of tbe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the lb.ought of the New Testament," pp. 344--349; and L. Sabouri11, "Christ made 'sin' (2 Cor .5:21). Sacrifice and redemption in the history of a fomwla," in: idew and S. Lyonnet, Sin, Redemption anti SQt:rijice. A Biblical arrd Patrlstic Shldy (Azralecta Biblica 48; Rome, 1970; pp. 187-296), especially pp. 269-289. Among new exegetes are McLean, Thte Crsed Christ, 103--113; and 1.D.G. Dunn, The 'l'lleology ofPaul the A.postle {Grand Rapids [Mich.] and Cambridge (UK], 1998}, p. 217. I do not see :my philol<~gieal basis for endoning this elaim and rder to the discussion in YoWlg. Even if &paptia is understood e.gainst a cultic. bac.lcground, i.e. naull'l, the c;onoection is to Lev 4 rather tbm to Lev 16. 130 Note, that P•ul changes the verb slightly and !hat be omits the explieit referenee um 8co11, sinc;e this would notmatchbis understanding of Christ fulfilling God's will. 131 NRSV, slightly altered. JJZ See the Iist in McLean, Tlre Ctt.rsed ChriJt, pp. 111-19, and add, most impoiUDtly for their extemive interpretation, Young, "The Impact ofthe Jewish Day of Atoaemeat upon tbe Thought of the New Testall\ent," pp. 344--349; and Schwanz, "Two Pauline Allusions to the Redemptivc Mec:hanism of the Crucifixion." Il.D. Betz, Galatimu. A 111

rl!l

174

The lmpacr of Yom Kippllr on Chrisli'onlty in the First and Second Centuries

of departure is the paradoxical description of Christ having become x:atQ.pa as a substitute "for us" (imsp ijj16)v). Yet these comrnentators do not offer philological explana.tions beyond the general similarity in the theological ideas. Almost 20 years ago, Daniel Schwartz proposed an ingenious philological argument, which regrettably has not been awarded due attention in subsequent commentaries. 133 He based bis claim on Paul's pecutiar use of the verb ~a1tOG'ts>.Ä6l in Galatians 4:4-7, a passage related to Galatians 3:13-14. 134 4:• But wh~Sn tbe fu.llneu oftime bad come, Ood sent ((~ulrion:l1ev) his Son, bom. of a woman, bom under the law, s in order to redeem (i~ayoplioiJ) those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. 115 ' And because you are cltildren, Ood has sent (il;.ultiO"ttl.An) the Spirit ofhis Son into our hearts, «ying.. ..Abba! Father!" ; So you are no Ionger a slave but a chitd, and if a child then also an heir, through Ood. Only here (Galatians 4:4 and 4:6) does Paul Use kt;o:1tOG'ts~>.ro. It proclairns

two different paths to Salvation for Gentiles and for Jews by the sending Christ. God saved the Gentiles by sending Christ to declare that the furmer slaves (Gentiles) have becoxne sons and co-heirs. Paul does not expound (to the Galatian Gentile audience?) on how the Jews were saved by the sending of Christ. Schwartztpoints to Paul's peculiar use of E:l;anoott~>.lD fo.r expressing sending. whereas in all other instances Paul employs

Commentory on PQJI/'s Letur to the Churchu in Golotia (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, 1979}, p. ISl, suggests an intermediate solu1io11: "Most likely, the Statement is based upon apre-Pauline intcrpn:tation of Jesus' deaih as a self-sacrifice aDd atonement (see also Gall :4; 2:20) .... Jesus death interpreled by means of the Jewish concept of tbe

meritorious death of tbe righteous and its atoning benefits." m Among the more recent connnentaries, I cheeked J.L. Martyn, Galatiam. A New Tram/ation with Jntroducrion a11d Commentary (AIIc:hor Bible 33A; New York., 1997); J.D.O. Dunn, The Epist/e to the Galatians (Biack's New Testament Commentary Peabody [Mass.), 1993); R.N. Longenecker. Oalatians {Word Bibikai Commentary 41; Dallas [Tex.], 1990). Only R. Y.K. Fung. Tht. Epistle to the Ga/atian.t {The New Intematioaal Com.mentary on lhe New Testament; G.nmd 1\apids [Mich.], 1988), refers to Schwanzio a note, witho1.1t Mtber discussion. Also McLean, The Cwsed Christ, does not refet to Schwanz. though he would have supported bis thesis. Tbe only S)'Dlpathetic referl!llcc I found was R.G. Hamerton.-Kelly, "Saered. Violence and the Curse of the Law (GalaliaDS 3.13). The Oeatb of Christ as a Sacrifidal Traversy," New Testament Stud;es 36 (1990) 93-118, bere pp. 114-115. 134 Themarlcally and stylistically 3:13-14 is cannected to 4:4-S: Jesus buys the Jews free; tbe verb ~ayopcll;l'il appears only bete in Paul; the Sl!lltenc:c has a parallel stfucture (double iY~t). SM Schwartz, ''Two Pauline Allusions to the Redemptive Mec:hanism ofthe Crucifixion''; and e.g. Dunn, The Epliltle Ia the OalatiaM, p. 216. 1" The NRSV tnmslaces vi.Oc; as child and the plural as children.

175

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christion lmaginaire

1tliJ.L'lC(I)I36 or a1tOOtSU(I). 137 Schwartz suggests that Paul is alluding to the Septuagint, where AJ;u:rwcnsA>.a:~ appears frequently. althongb only twice in a siDlilar context to Galatians 4 (the sending ofX redeems Y): Leviticus 14 (the sending of the bird in the purification of the leper) and Leviticus 16 (tbe sending of the scapegoat), two rituals that are intimately connected. 'fhis context may have triggered Paul's choice of E<;curocn&U.(I). "Paul. does not need to explain how sending forth Christ saved the Jews, for already tbe word t#;o.X.Sotetlev. at least in his own mind ifnot in that ofhis readers, carried the meaning: Christ's actionwas that of a scapegoat." 138 A perceptive reader of the Septuagint and of Paul may notice this connotation of ~a.noG'til.l(l) in the context of salvation. , · McLean ten1atively suggests another philological connecti.on to Yom IGppur. Paul's use of S1ttKC:t6.po.to<; in:stead of 'ICS'KO.'tTJP«JlS\IOC; in the quo-

tation ofDeuteronomy 21:23 might refer to the scapegoat, since Barnabas uses this word in his deSGription of the scapegoat and this verse probably belonged to his halakbic source. 139 Although. as McLean bimself states,

Paul's choice of ~1m;:.a:tclp1noc; may be strongly influenced by Deutero11oroy 27:26, the independent references to this tradition in Barnabas and in the Gospel ofPeter speak for Paul using an existing tradition. 140 I would like to add a third suggestion: tbat the use of f.l;f\yopaoev in Galatians 3:13 might perhaps be a pun on the similar sound of the rare verb ~ayopö'i10e:t in Leviticus 16:21. t.ev 16:21 !AaPQJv) Gall:l3

Xpuni)c;

~llyopricn::l

&!iTtTOpO:Of;V

tl<•

to:

cltuco;ripo:Toul

«VtO'O (Tpliyov

mi
tlilv villtv lopcz.1Jl

t'ljc; mTiipar:;

'tOi! VÖjlOU

1\l'd<;

In the first covenant, Aaron confesse.s, 011 the (cursed) scapegoat, the iniquities of the children of Israel. In the second covenant, Christ redeetns the (Jewish) sinners; he renders them free frotn the curse of the law and tums bimself into their scapegoat. While I hesitate to interpret the release ofthe believers as a higb-priestly act. the language suggests that Paul used this inverting pun. 136 Paul nses :~~i;pl!O) elc:vell times in lhe authentic letters: Rom 8:3; lCor 4:17; 16:3; 2Cor 9:3; Phil2:19.23.2S.28; 4:16; lTh~ 3:2.5; threc: timu in tbe epistlc:s of doubtful authenticity: Eph 6:22; Col4:S; 2Thess 2:! 1; and the composita in lhe fullowing vmes: 1tpo:dp11•: Rom lS:24; lCor 16:6.11; 2Cor 1:16 (four times); ooJl~l(Q) 2Cor 8:18.22 (twice); G;valrip-in Phlm 12 (om:e). m Rom 10:15; lCor 1:17; 2Cor 12:17. 131 Schwart:z, "Two Pauline Allusions to the Rcdemptive Mt(:hanism of the Crucifixion," p. 26l. 199 See pp. 159-160, above. 140 McLeiln, 1'he C11rsed Christ, p. 136.

176 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrilltian1iy in the First tmd Second Centuries

Schwanz bimself remar.k.s that bis thes.is works only with respect to those readers who are weil acquainted with the Greek Bible. Galatians is addressed to a completely Gentile community, however, Paul clearly presumes in other parts of the Epistle that bis addressees are able to understand a quite complex exegetical argumentation. 141 McLean's argu.ment for a cross-cultural apotropaic rite as background to this passage supports Schwartz. in that most Mediterranean people, pagans and Jews, knew some form ofthe widespread concept that the sending ofX (a "scapegoaf' or pharmakos) provides a relea.se from impurity, sin and/or divine punishment.142 In any case, the alternative explanations to Gal.atians 3:10.13 do not explain the strange idea of a curse havi.ng a redemptive function. References to the vicarious deaths ofmartyrs explain neither Paul's use of a curse at this point nor the question of how a curse could possibly bave a salvific function. If Paul bad wanted to refer to the concept of vicarious atonement in Jewish martyrdom ideology. he would probably have preferred other concepts than a curse. Tbe suggestion of Schwartz and bis prede~ cessoJ:S, slight as the basis for lheir argument is. looks the most plausible. 1.4 The ScapegOQt as Catalyst?,John 1:29 and lPeter 2:24

In two other New Testament passages, the Lamb of God in John 1:29 and the Servant Song in IPeter 2:24, the idea of Jesus expiating sin by its re. moval has been explained by some against the background of the scapegoat rite. 143 1.4.1 John 1:29 Three backgrounds have been suggested for the origin of the concept of the "Lamb ofGod who takes away the sin ofthe world" 144 - the suffering servant, Passover and the scapegoat. 14S Each has its merits and demerits. The 141 U. Sehnelle, Einleitung i11 das Neue Testament (UTB fiir Wissenschaft: UniTaschenblicher 1830; Göttingen, 1 1996), p. 123 {mainly Gentile Christians; probably Hellcnistic citizens). 1012 A more definitive answer can be given after an eKtensive disc\lssion about the importance of sacrificial connotatiMs. There is bardly an issue, more hotly discussed in Pauline studies. See examples of lhe opposing views - in favor of tbe saerificial aton.ement concept is Dwm, The Theology of Pt:nll the Apostle. pp. 212-223; against it are C. Breytenbach, YentJhnung. E;ne Studie zvr paulinüchen Soterlofogie (Wisse.oscllaftliche Monographien :zum Alten und Neueo Testament 60; Neukirchen, 1919), passim; and McLean, The Cursed Christ, pp. 22--64. 1 For aaother possible 1lllusion in Uohn 4:10, see p. 206, below. 144 1St 6 G:iJ.vOc.: "loii 8aoCI ö ~Jip(ov njv Ö.J.laptitlv too KD
°

Yom Kippur Jmogery iiJ the Early Ch1'istitmlmt~gintzl1'e

177

5utTering servant of Isaiah 53 is compared to a lamb (5.3:7), whieh vicariously bears (53:5.8.10-12) the sins (5.3:4) and :finally dies (53:12). C.F. :Burney has suggested tha.t an Aramaie version of Isaiah 53 using tc•'ro, wbich means servant as well as lamb miglrt bc responsible for the term. "Lamb of God."146 According to the second theory, the Passover Lamb plays a centml role in John's description of the death of the Messiah in 19:36. However, the question of an expiatory function of the paschallamb i.s highly controversial. 1~7 The third suggested background is the scapegoat.148 Tbe scapegoat is said to bear the sins. Yet the scapegoat is not a lamb, and furthermore, any specific reference to sending out or cursing is missing in John 1}~9

Testament Studies I (1954-55) 210-21&; and see idcm. Das Evangelium nach Jolra111ta (Kritiseh-exegetischer Konunentar Ober das Neue TestamCJJt; Göttingeo, 1990), p. 200. See J. Frcy, "Die 'tbeologia cruciflXi' des Johaonesevangeliums," in: A. Dettwiler and J. Zamstei.n (eds.), Kre11Ze1theologie im Nerten Testament (Wisseoscbaftliche UotersuchungCJJ Zllm Neue.n Testament lSl; Ttlbingen 2002; pp. 169-238), e$pecially pp. 208209, for the reasoos against a fift:h background, the Tamid, a theory recently revived by P. Stuhlma.cher, "Das Lamm Gottes - eine Skizze," io: H. Caoeik:, H. Lichteuberger u.d P. Scblfer (eds.), GeschiChte- Tradition- Rtiflexion (FS M. Hengel) (Titbingen, 1996; vol. 3, pp. 529-542). 1"' C.F. Bumey, The Aramale Origin of the Fourth GOJpel (Oxford, 1922), pp. 104108); ~;f. J. Jeremiu, "Amnos, srCo, amion," Theologisches W6rterbta:h Jum Newen TeJ:tament I (1933) 342-345. 1' 7 The blood ot the paschal lamb has an apotropaie fimetion in Jubüees 49:3 aad Heb 11:28. Some refer to 2Cbr 30:15--20, Josephus, Anliquitatesjlldaicae 2:312 and the late Midrasll Exotba Rabhah J5: 12 ( od. MirkiD 174) as eonceiviog ofthe paschallamb as atoniog but only the last passage ftom &odus Robbah elearly mekes this association. For arguments against the existence of this eonception in the first eenrury, see Stnhlmadwr, "Das Lamm Gottes - eine Skiu:e," pp. .529-531. Frey, "Die 'theologia cnrcifixi' des Jobannesevangeliums," p. 210, points out that Jobn might be the earliest iostaoee of ao atoning understanding of the .Passover sacritice. 1" On this argumentatioo, see Young, "Tbe lmpaet of thc Jewish Day of Atonement upon the TI1ought of tbe New Testament," pp. 352.-256 and lhe eommentaries quotcd there. Barrett, Dm Evangelium nach Johtmnes, is more hesitant. Among newer coJDIIICnt.aries K. Wengst, DU$ Johanneswangelfum (Theologischer Kommentar Zllm Neuen Testameot 4/1; StuUgart; Berlin; Köln. 2000), pp. 83-84, assumes that the scapegoat, the .Passover lamb, and lsa 53 stand io the background. lA9 R.. Sebnacke.oburg, The Gospel.4.&cof'ding toSt. John (4 vols; Herder's Theologic:al Commeo.tary on the New Testament I; Kent, 196&), vol. 1, p. 300 (explicitly); and R.E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (i-'Xii). lntroduction, Trorr:slation, and Hore~ (Anchor Btble Guden City, N.Y., 1966), pp. 58-63 (implidtly) do not regard tbe scapegoat u bei.ng among tbe motits in the badtground. However, the philological arguments, that the verbs 115ed in Lev 16:22 (l.aJIIIä.M) and Isa 53:4.12 (Qtpl.il, üv~) do not match ulpm in John I :29 and that tbe Passover lamb was c:aUed not allvo.;; but ltpÖ~ jknov, are not very strong, eoosidering tbe Aramaie background of tbe author of the

178 The Impact o[Yom Kippur on Christianity in the First and Second Cenlllries

In sum, Isaiah 53 explains best the JobanDine tradition. The paschal lamb and especially the popular scapegoat rite may have served as catalysts. Unless we find an early Jewish source connecting Isaiah 53 to the imaginaire of Yom Kippur, the assumption of such a catalytic function remains completely hypothetical. That later Johannine tradition conceives of Jesus' death as atoning, probably with Yom Kippur looming in the background, becomes clearer in lJohn 2:2 and 4:10, as is discussed below. 150 1.4.2 1Peter 2:22-24 Admonishing bis community in their own time of affliction to take Jesus' suffering as an example, the author of 1Peter reworks the fourth song of the Servant ofGod in Isaiah 53: He committedno sin and no deceit was found in bis mouth. [Isaiah 53 :9bJ 23 When he was insulted ().o\liopoiljL~oc;), he did not retum insult (avtsl.ol&ipEt); when he suffered (maxliiV), he did not tbreaten (~i4t); he entrusted bimself to the one who judges justly. 24 He himself carried (avl\vsro:sv) our sins in his body upon the wood [cross] (iKi'to !;vl.ov) [lsaiab 53:4.11.12], ~ so that ftee ftom sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed [lsaiab 53:5]. 2:22

Some exegetes have connected the Christological song in lPeter 2:22-24 to the imagery of the scapegoat, referring to the mention of insu1t, vicarious suffering, and the strange notion of Jesus carrying sins "upon the wood." 151 Furthennore, some see a connection to Deuteronomy 21:23 in the use or••wood" to refer to the Cross (as in Galatians 3: 13). 152

Gospel. See Schnackenburg, The Gospel According toSt. John, vol. 1, pp. 105-111, on the various theories on the exact character oftbis Aramaie background. 150 See pp. 205-207, below. 1' 1 See the Iist of exegetes wbo see here an allusion to the scapegoat, in Young, "The Impact of the Jewisb Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament," pp. 349-352; also K.H. Schelkle, Die PetriiSbriefe, der Judasbrief(Herden theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 1312; Freiburg, Basel, Vie.ona,__ I96I); and, more hesitantly, N. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar 21; Zürich, Einsiedeln, Köln, Neukircben-Vluyn, 2 1986), p. 138 "Vielleicht ist auch das Bild vom ehrlosen, verfluchten, aber schuldlosen Sllndenbock (Lev 16,2()-.22) im Spiel, jedenfalls aber der Gedanke der SOhne." m E.g. C. Bigg, Critical and Ezegetica/ Commentary on the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude (International Critical Commentary; New York, 1901), p. 147.

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christian Imaginaire

179

However, there is no indication here of a direct influence of the scapegoat imagery.m The correspondence to the scapegoat imagery stems from the passage being a reworking oflsaiah 53, which in turn may be based on the scapegoat ritual. 154 This pertains to the motif of the silence, the vicarious suffering and the bearing of sins upon the wood. In the peculiar formulation that Jesus carried the sins in bis body upon the wood ( tdc; UJ.Laptiac; iJ11rov uirt~ civitwrttv iv tcp OOI!«n o.irtaü im 'tÖ ~1).. lov), lPeter employs a word with a cultic notion, civa.cpSpco, usually alluding to an offering on an altar. It was adopted from the Greek oflsaiah 53:12. Since a presentation of sins is unimaginable, the author is most likely referring to Jesus' body as offering. Unlike Barnabas or Galatians, however, IPeter 2:22-24 does not inention the sending or the curse.lSS While in Acts 5:30 and 10:39 and Galatians 3:13 the use of~ulov for "cross" clearly alludes to Deuteronomy 21 :23, this is not so in all passages, as its occurrence in Acts 13:29 shows. In lPeter 2:24, any connotation of curse is missing (lot&opouJ.Levoc; in Greek has no undertone of curse); I do therefore see an allusion to Deuteronomy 21:23 as a possible but not necessary conclusion. While "insult" does not appear in Isaiah 53, I do not see any reason to suppose that the author included it in order to allude thereby to the scapegoat. It is probably based on a Passiontradition and Jesus' ethical message of non-retaliation in Matthew 5:38-48, in connection with the silence ofthe lamb in Isaiah 53:7. 156 In sum, the scapegoat ritual may, at most, have served as a catalyst for applying Isaiah 53 to Christ, similar to the instance of the Lamb of God in. John I :29. 157 ISJ Against the scapegoat as background, see e.g. J.H. Elliott, 1 Peter. .4. New Translation with lntroduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible 378; New York, 2000), p. 352; P.J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter (Henneneia; Minneapolis, 1996), p. 202; L. Goppelt, Der Erste Petrwbrief(edited by Ferdinand Hahn; Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar Uber das Neue Testament 12/1; Göttingen, 1978), p. 210, note 71. 154 On the scapegoat ritual behind Isa 53, see above, pp. 116-117. The connection of IPet 2:22-24 to lsa 53 is clear: lPet 2:22- Isa 53:9 ön O:voJ.ltav oi11c t~~:o\J106Y o1i8& cilpteJt 6öl.oc; tv •i; o'tOJ.lll'tl a.ütoo. 1Pet 2:24- Isa 53:4: oitoc; •O:c; cipa.p'tiac; fJpcliv ~pf:pet. lsa 53:11: •ac; opop'tiao;aütö>v aütoc; ävoton. lsa 53:12: a.,ncic; ciJ.lap•i~ xoUö>v äYI\veyxev. lPet 2:25Isa 53: S: •ci 11ml.
180 The Impact cfYom Kippur on Clrrißtianity in tbe First and Second Cent/Q'iu

2. Christ as High Priest: Hebrews A quick glanoe at the Epistle to the Hebrews makes it obvious that this is a Yom Kippur typology. The high priest entering the holy of holies with blood once a year undoubtedly refers to Yom Kippur. I soggest tbat some additional motifs may be connected to Yom Kippur, in particular the high priest's victory over the powers of evil, and his confession, intercession and exit from the holy of holies. Moreover, I argue for an apocalyptic background to some Yom Kippur motifs. In the final subsection, I propose a new explanation for the development of the earllest stage of the high~ priestly Christology- namely, that it derives from apocalyptic conceptions of Yom Kippur in connection with Zecbariah 3. Rather than writing its myth in a narrative sequence. Hebrews evo.kes several scenes in a typological exegesis. The character of Hebrews• myth differs from the texts hitherto discussed, as a comparison with BornabtU reveals. Barnabas fleshes out earthly events with typologized ritual; H~ brews ventures into cosmological dimensions. While Barnabas and Mat~ thew use the scapegoat ritua! to elaborate details of the earthly aspects of Christ•s Passion and again hi's Parousia on earth, Hebrews employs the entrance ofthe high priest into the holy ofholies to develop the twin concepts of Jesus' destruction of the devil and his ascent to the presence of God in the heavenly sanctuary. For this, Hebrews uses several acts of the high priest's ritual from the biblical Yom K:ippur: the entrance. the blood sacrifice and sprinkling, and perhaps the confession. Othet aspects refer rather to the temple ritual, such as the high priest's intercession and perhaps the role ofthe people as spectators of the high priest's rite. The basic setting, however, is apocalyptic: the heavenly temple, the eschatological concept of time and the motif of the high-priestly redeemer who destroys the Lord of the evil powers. liberates bis good prisoners an.d ascends to God. The first part of these inquiries outlines the chronological and geo· graphical frame. The second patt investigates the high priest and his vari~ ous works. ISS The third part explores the rote of the people as spectators of the high priest's performance and finally as his eschatological imitators.

Ist Deslrucdoh of the evil powers, confessloo, enirance, blood sacrifice md spriukling,

and intercession.

Yom Kippur Imagery i11 the Early Christian lmaginaire

181

2.1 The Setting 2.1.1 Sacred Time: lbe Present Eschaton as Yom K.ippur

Hebrews cleacly distinguishes between its own, esehatological time, IS9 which is close to the end of world, 160 and the period preceding it. The eschaton begins with the high priest's self-sacrifice on Golgotha, (z~p}iina~ 161 coonects Christ's sac.rifice once in history to the Yom K.ippur ritual performed once a year162 and characterizes Chri.st's sacrifice as an act accomplished in tbe past163 rather than as a ritual continued in the present in the beavenly sanctuary. It is not the sacrifice that continues but Cbrist's heavenly intercession for his followers in the presence of God {7:2S). The writer admonishes the community, asking them to wait for the Second Parousia (9:28), whose delay causes some discontent among the addressees. Some exegetes suggest that the author is refening to the Parousia in tenns ofthe high priest's exit from the holy ofholies. 164 Thls intetpretation is appealing, especially in the frameworlc of a Yom Kipput typology. In tb.is escbatological oonception of time, the author does not refer explicitly to a special (future) Day of Atonement. rather the final time period ofthe universe has arrived. 16s Considering that the comniunity is prese1ltly suftering and ex.pecting the high priest to reappear, the whole eschaton has bwome a period of atonement, analogaus to the period of affliction at Qumran.I66

159 Jlill

E.g., wvi in 8:6 and vuvi 54 inaf; itti
1'1 Heb 7:27; 9:(7).12.26.28; lO:lQ . . te Heb 9:7; Lev 16:34. l6l All instances are in the perfect or aorist tense. - 164 Cf. lhe Greek: 6 Xpun{x; ä.mf; KPOGI:V8X8d~ ~\<; to 'IOU.Z.v av8VIl}'1C6iv c}U!Pfia.<; b: liE111:ipo1.1 XGIP~ cjiGp"C\o.; 0.81\Gctcu Wl<; a.inöv ciua:6qOji.SYOL.; si.; G(l)'l!l')piuv. W.L. Lane, HeIR-ews 9-13 (Word Biblical Commentary 47B; Dall~ {Tex.), 1991), p. 250 (following wrious predecessors), refe11> to Lev 16:17 and Sir SO:S-10.24-28; contrary to H.W. _Attridge, The Episrle to the Hebrews (Hermenda; .Philadephia, 1989), p. 266, note 72.ln · iiiy opiniou, Lane's case is much stronger, since Yom K.ippur is the main topic ofthe

·tcintext.

·_,~ '" Heb 9:9-10 seems to distinguisb between the present and tbe eschatological future, ·. bUt tbe rest of 1he Epistle makes clear thal the author conside11> bi:mse1f and his addres._.~ tobe in the escbaton: see Attridge, Tlre Epistle to tlul Hebnws, p. 241. •- ;1!!1 For the sld'ferings, see e.g. 10:32-39; 12:1-12; 13:13. For the expectation of ';Cbrist's retum, see 9:28, md cf. p. 99, abow:.

182 The lm[Jßct ofYom Kippur on Chfiltianil)l in the First and Second Centuries

2.2.2 Sacred Space: The Heavenly Sanctuary Hebrews uses geographical aspccts of Yom Kippur in its typology: a sanctuary with a holy of bolies, and the camp and area outside it. 167 Schotars are divided about the background oftbis conception of a heavenly sanctuary, especially about the comparison of the earthly tabemacle to its heavenly counterpart. Wbile a number of scholars opt for a Platonic background, 168 the conception seems to be closer to apocalyptic thought. 169 Only this would explain tbe heavenly sanctuary being the place of God's fiery presence, where he is SUlTounded by angels, the righteous and Jesus. 170 lt is the place of a superior liturgy .171 Corresponding roughly172 to tbe eartbly sanctuary, the heavenly sanctuary has two parts 173 separated by 161 See Attridge, The Epin/e to tlre Hebrews, pp. 222-224; C.K. Barrett, '"''ho Esc;batology of the Epistle to tbe Hebrews," in: D. Da\lbe and W.D. Davies (eds.), The Background of the New Testament and lt!l &chotology. Festschrift for C.H. Dodti (Cambridge [UK], 1956; pp. 363-393), pp. 383-390. C.R. Koestec, Tlte Dwelling ofGod. 17Je Tabernacle in th• 0/d Testament, /nterteatamental Jewi.Jh Literature and the New Testamertt (Catbolic Biblical Quanerly, Monograph Series 22; Washington, D.C., 1989); 0. Hofius, Der Jlorhllng vor dem Thron Gotte!I.,Elne exegetlsch-religio11$geschichtliclre Untersuchung zu HebriJer 6,19 f. und 10,19f. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuehungen zum Neuen Testament 14; Tübingen, 1972), pp. S0-72. Unfortuoately, A. Cody, Heavenly S1171CIIIQI)' and Liturgy in the EpistJe to the Hebrews (St. Meinrad, 1960) was not available to 111r1. 1" Most notably C. Spicq, L ·tpitre aw: Hebreux (2 vots; Etudes Bibliqucs; Paris, 1952/53); and Koester, The JJwelling ofGod, passim. C. Koester has a(ljusted bis views bis recent commentary, Hebrew:s. A New Translation with Introduction anJ Commentory (Anchor Bible 36; New York, 2001}1 pp. 97-100. 10!9 The main promoters of apocal}'Pricism as baekground are Barrett, "Tbe Eschatology of the Epistle to the Hebrews"; 0. Michel, Der Brief an die Hebr4er (Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar ü.b&r das Neue Testament 13; Göttingen, 1960); and especially L.O. Hurst, Tlre Epistle to tlre Hebrr:ws. lts Backgro~~nd of 1'1wught (Society for New Testament Studies, Monograph Serie& 65; Cambridge [UK), 1990), who overstates the evidence in denying any Platonic influence. 110 Heb 10:12; 12:22-24.29. 111 Heb 8:2.6 aad Attridge, The Epistle to the HBbrews, p. 262. 112 See Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish qnd Christian Apocalyp:su, p. 16, for the suggestion tbat the superior heavenly sanctua.ry cannot be an exact model of tbe earthly one. 113 See W.R.G. Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Ne~~en Testament 53; Neuki.rchen-Vluyn, 1981), p. 183; and M. Rissi,Die Theologie du Hebräerbrieft (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchua_gen zum Neuen Testameat 41; Tilbingen, 1981), pp. 37-41. Heb 9:11-12 describes Jesus passing through the tent (~,a. 't1\>ll&i.l:ov~ Jtai 'CE1.Elo-rlip~t<; oa:T(vflc;) and entering the boly ofbolies (d.; -cO. 4y~a). The same imagery probably stands behind the two expressions in Heb 8:2 ('tmv ci-rlow Mlto\lj)Yoc; ~rai tl\.; GltT(vi\1; tf\t; Ü1J8lvfl.;}. Hofius, ~r J'orh11ng vor dem Thron Galtes, pp. 59-60, bas demonstrmd tbat tbe mention ot' the holy of bolies before tbe sanctuacy retlects the same order as in tbe purificatioll of the tabemacle on Yom Kippur.

Yom Kippur Jmogery in th~ Early Chriltian Imaglnaire

183

a veil.l 74 These features appear in such apocalyptic texts as 1Enoch and Testament of uvi. 115 A Platonic conception would demand an exact correspondence between the earthly type and its heavenly idea. Hebrews• terminology certainly bas a (midd.le-)Platonic ring. 176 On tbe otber band, the use of other terms is not consistent with conventional (middle-)Platonism. 177 Hebrews may even use a word with the opposite meaning, such as vno21Etrl111 for the earthl:y copy instead of the heavenly idea, 178 causing Gregory Sterling to comment: "lts use would force a phiLev 16: 16.20 even uses the same pect1liar words, m iiyux, for the holy of holies. This explanation is mach ·more cogent thau is interpreting ihd in 9:11 lnsrrwnentally and 8:2 as a hendiadys. !7<1 On the veil, see the classi.c by Hofias, Der Yorhong YOI' dem Thron Gottes; Rissi, Die Th4ologie des Hebriierhrieft, pp. 41-43; Loader, Solmund Hoherpriutel', pp. 174178; and the commentaries to Heb 6:19-20; 10:1~20. m See above, pp. 82-84. However, it is unclear how many heavens exist in the cosmology of the author of Hebrews. and whether or not the sanctuazy is Jocated in a speeific place. i.e. the highest heaven. This was suggested by Hotius, Der YorbQ11g vor dem Thron Gotte1, pp. 70-71, basing his proposition on the sudden use of the singular of ~.,.~ in 9:24, similaT to Testament of Levi 5:1. Otherwise Hebrews uses the plural (1:10; 4:14; 7:26; 8:1; 9:23; 12:23.25). The two other uses ofthe singular are euily explained: Heb 11:12 may reßect that the stars belong to a certain beaven, while 12:26 is a qootation of Hag 2:26. 8oth passage.s consider this heaven to be part of lower lrausitory creation ("der vergänglichen &höpfung"). However, it is more difficult tn explaia the pllll'al in 8:1, where Christ, the bigh priest and minister of the true h':nt, slts to the right of God, i.r:. supposedly in the highest heaven. 176 The earthly tabemacleis a shadow ofthe image ofthe things (aircliv njv ehcovucliv 1q)IE1'1l•how), s.k:etc::h and shadow (imoaah!IC'Ct .:o.i ox:tif.) of the true hcavenly tent (o~tllvft 1U.""vil), or a man-made anti-type of the true (O.vd.tvltll ti&v ilT\~hvillv), divinely constructed model ( nm~). Cf. the cxpressions o:Vtd tci iurovpö.vto: and e~inov töv 01ipav0v (Heb 8:1-5; 9:23-24; 10:1). Seo Attridge, Tlur Epiltle to tlre Hebrews, pp. 261-263. For similarlti~s to Philonic Platonism, see e.g. H.-F. Weiss, Dt:r Brief an die H"brt'Ju (Ktitiseh-exegetiscber Kon:uneutu Ober das Neue Testament 13; 6öttingen. 1991), p.438. 177 See Hurst, The Epi1tle to the Hebrew1, pp. 7-42, especially 13-21. He pointsout e.g. that ill19~VI) is not neccssarily Platonie (20-21) and that inro&elr1111 is not ased in this sense by Philo or Plato, the cOinJDon word being 11:Dpli&tYflll (13) (see next note). 111 Heb 8:5; 9:23. Platonists may use -imo&hflo to describe tbe heavenly idea ratber than tbe earthly shadow. The LXX prefers MpliktYWl wben taJicing of the heavenly pattem (Exod25:9 [2*], see David's "'plan" in 1Cbr2S:Il.l2.18.19) or t~ (Exod 25:~). 8oth terms are more coo.sistent with Platonic tmninology. On the other band, wo8eiypa in Hobrews may r11tleet E1.ek 42:15, who speab in bis vision ofmeasuring the escbatological modelt example of the temple (&tq.~t•pqomr TÖ im63etyf1a toll oi~r::011). See 6.E. Sterling, "Oatology versus Eschatology: Tettsions between Author and Comm.unity in Hebrews," Silldia Philonica A.nnual 13 (111 the Spirit of Failh. Studiu i11 Philo arrd EIJ1'ly Christianity in Honor of Dtwid Hay) (Leiden, 2001; pp. 190-211) (1 only had a

184 The Impact of Yom K.lppur on Cnri3tianity in the First (llt.d Sec01td Centurin losopher to grimace." 119 If llcbrews' use of ilno&li:yJ.UI was influenced by the Septuagint (Eze.ldel42:1.5), then this is simply another argwnent for thc influcnce of apocalyptic conceptions of a heavenly temple, E7..ekiel's vision. Moreover, the statement that the beavenly sanctuary was pitcbcd by God and bad to he cleansed speaks against tbe PJatonic conception of eternal ideals. 180 In sum, llebrews' concept of a heavenly sanctuary can be cbaracterized as apocalyptic thought disguised as the lan.guage of popular Platonism. 2.2 The High Priest and His A.ctions The central argument of Hebrews 7 is the superiority of Christ's high priesthood ..according to the order of Melchizedek" over the Levitical high priests. Christ is thc one and etemal bigh priest.111 as opposed to the great nurober of mortal Levitical priests and high priests, wbo change frequently. Christ the high priest is holy, blameless, undefiled (7:26). Other chapters add further attributes: Christ is merciful and trustful (2:17), sinJess (4:15), and perfect (5:8). While he has been tempted like other humans and been subjected to painful affiictions, he resisted and has no part in sin (5:8).

..

pre-published versi011 availableJ. But al$o in E.zekiel imo3e:iTI1« sigoifie!l the envisaged escbatological sanctuary not an existing buildi.ng. J"/j) Sterling, "Ontology versus Eschatology." 110 See Heb 8:2 tbr the pitching and 9:23 for the clcansing. It ls W!.Clear wllen exactly it was erected. It bad ex.isted at least .sinc:e Moses (8:5). 1he elcansing is a strange idea, but only if one considers the heavenly holy of holies perfect and unc:ballgeable. lbe ooly reason for defilement'ofthe heavenly sanctuary can be human sins. Ifsins cao defile the earthly holy of holies, which is never e.ntered other than to be purified, the concept that sins can equally defile a heavenly holy ofholies is only a small step further. Accordingly, Christ's sacrifice purifies not our earthly bodies but our couscienee. which equa.lly cannot be reached by blood. ondthe true sanctuary {1:3; 9:14). 111 Christ's lügh pdeslhood is e;~ Tov q.ifbvtr (5:6), but not titro ..:tilv G.irl!YCDv, i.e. bis high priesthood is not preexistent, since he was appointed (3:2; 5:5} - a aux in lhe Arian eontroversy. Wheo did it begin? With his incamation (see lhe Iist of scholars give11 by Loader, SO'hn und Hoherpriester, p. 246, note 24, including himselr, p.247), or wilh his death(11ee tbe list ofscholars given by Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriuter, p. 24S, note II)? Loader and Attridgc, The Epi5tle to the Hebrews, p. 146, arcne agai.J:tst the widely be!d opinion that the exaltation was the begilming. We cannot reach a definite answer. Possibly, Hebrews combined contradic:ting traditions. Moreover, if Christ is high priest after the order of Melcbizedek, this presupposes, fhere once was a (high) priest Melchizedek, iE~ si!; TÖ litl}vtK~ I d~ -.:ov ciGivu (Heb 7;3.17; Ps 110:4). Was a Michael-li.ke Melchlzedek serving in the heavcmly sanctuary? lf not he, who elsc, if anyone at all? Before Enoch entered the holiest area ofthe heavenly sanctuary, there does not seem to bave bcen an earlier high priest.

Yom Kippur ImQgery in the Early Cbrislian lmaginaire

185

Hebrews describes this high priest as performing five acts that can be associated w.ith Yom Kippur: (1) victory over the forces of evil, 182 (2) the confession, {3) the one-time atoning and purifying offering183 of hls own blood and its sprinkling, 184 (4} the entry into the heavenly holy ofholies 135 and (5) the permanent intercession for bis followers.U'' Acts 3 and 4 appear in all commentaries as high-priestly works, acts 2 and 5 in some, and act 1 i!l mY addition. 1. Earlier, we investigated tbe apocalyptic myth of an esc.hatological Yom Kippur in I Enoch and 11 QMe/chizedek. 181 A similar pictu.re of a redeemer who defeats the Iord of the evil forces and liberates bis prisoners is founcl

in Hebrews: 118 14 Since, therefo~, tbe chilcben share ftesb and blood, he bimself li.k.ewise shared

the sam.e lhings, so that through death he might destroy (a:ltTIIPYiJcru) the one wbo has the power of deatb, that is, the devil (tov 61.0Po7..ov), 15 and fi:ee (ällol.).ci~~) those wbo all their U'\'cs were held in slavery by lhe fear of deatb. 1u

Of course, the generat concept of an esc.batological conquest of evil u wiclespread in Jewish apocalyptic circles. 190 and similar ideas appear else-

m Heb 2:14-I.S; aud probably 9:26. W Heb 7:27; 9:14; 9:25; IO:ll-1&, cf. also e.g. 10:10. IM Heb 10:22; cf. 9:13.19.21; 12:24. 1" Heb 6:19; 9:24; 10:19. IM Heb 7:2S; aod more subtle 2:18; 4:14; 9:24. 1" See above, pp. S.S-92. •• Otto Michel asswnes that Hebrews adopted a tradition in 2:14-lS (&5) without greatly refonnuladD& it. He gives two reasons for this a.sumption. There are a nwnber of words Hebrews does not use elsewhere. aJid tbe exact "b.ow" of the Iiberation renwias i)paque. (Michel mentioas xctapyic.> and 6uijk)lo.;; and one could add 4inuJ.lo.oioow, iovl.&ia aad lqllito.;;. But of course this is not a certain indication, since Hebrews eould be usillg a special voc:abulary to express a spedal idea.) 119

.190

Heb2:14-15;NRSV •

Lohse, Märtyrer und Gottesknecht, pp. l63-167; Loader. Sohn und Hoherpriester,

pp. 112-llS, espccially p. 113; and Attridge, '111e Episrle to the .Hebrews, p. 92. Test(llllllnl ofSirrton 6:6; Tatament of Levil I; Testament ofDan S: l D-11; Turament fJ/ 2ebulon 9:8; lEnoclr 10:13; llQMelchizedek; Will' Scroll i:ll-17. I do not see any reason to suppose a Gnostic background for these verses, as has been suggosled by E. Kase-

marm, Dfl!l 'IWJndemde GottesvolA;. Eine Unters11chtmg Zlllfl Hebräerbrief (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten uud Neuen Testaments 5S; GöUingcn, 3 1959). pp. 99-100, and as Erich Grässer has reeently stressed Mew: see E. Grässer, An die Hrrbrifer. Yol. I; Hebr J-6 (Evangeliach-Kat.bolischer Komm.eatal 17/1; NeukircbenVIuyn and ZGrich, 1990). Any proximity to Gnostic text.s rather points to the Jewisb. apocalyptic backgroUDd, whicb inßuem:ed Hebrews as weil as Gnosticism.

186 The /1t1pact ufYon~ Kipp11r on Chri4tianity ilf the First and &cond Cenhtries where in tbe New Testament. 191 The closest parallels to Hebrews, however, which talk of destruction of the dark forces and liberation of their prisoners, ale 1Enoch 10 and 11 QMelchizedek. In Hebrews as weil as in the latter two texts the redeemer is a high priest and the act of redemption is connected to an eschatological Yom Kippur .192 The central difference between 1Enoch 10 and 11 QMelchizedek on the one band md Hebrews on the other is that in the former two it is not the death of the redeemer .figure that destroys the Iord of evil and liberates his prisoners, but bis military power. The idea of the high priest sacrificing bimself is a development of Hebrews, which clothed the traditional imagery of an eschatological Yom K.ippur in the Christianproprium of a messia.nic self-sacrifice. The situation of the addressees of Hebrews makes it clear that the battle has onJy just begun and victory over the forces of evil is not yet complete. 193 The community faces the danger of apostates, who have no opportunity for a second repentance, have lost my chance of salvation. and are counted among the adversaries (oi i>JtEvav'tio\) of Christ. 194 T:be heav" enly Christ is still awaiting the time in which "bis enemies" (o\ EX,9poi amoü) wilJ be made a footstool for his feet. 19s This ambivalent already-be" gun-but-not-yet-resumed redemption resembles tbe eschaton in the past of JEnach 10. 2. Some exegetes see in Hebrews 5:7, where Christ implores God to save him from death, a reference to the high priest's confession of his own sins on Yom Kippur. 196 Jn the days of bis ßesh, Jesus oft'ered up ( xpoatvtr~~:o.~;) prayers and supplications 'fE mi lKE111Pin~, w.ith loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, aud he was heard because of bis revereot submission. 197 (8Et'!t~~:lc;

191 The destruction of sin without Iiberation appears with quite similar wording (a combination of ICU1"CIJI'I'ia~ and ecal'li~CH;) in ·acor 15:26 and 2Tim I: 10. ," Hebrews' verses would align even better witb Yom Kippur if t'he destructi011 of evil included the destruction of sin as for example in JEnoch 10:1~16. Some exegetes see "death" io Heb 2:14-15 as a kind ofPa.uline metaphorforsin. Attridge, TheEpütls ro the Ht.brews, pp. 92-93, tums against this reading. Hebrews connccts lhe destruction of sin to his self-saerifice, as he st.ates later: "B ut as it is, he ·~ appeared onc.c for all at the end ofthe agc to put away (e~ ii.eit'lalv) sin by the sacrific:e ofhintseU" (9:26b). 1" Michel, Der Briefon die Hebrtier, pp. 226-227. 194 Heb 10:27; cf.lsa 26:11 LXX. 1" Heb 10:13; er. Ps 11 0: 1. Paul, too, uses Ps 110:1 to describe the eschatological victory (lCor 15:25); for him bowcver, the battle is yct to begin. 196 See the Iist of scholars in Attridge, The Epi$tle to the Hebrew&, p. 149, note lS2. and add Grasser, An die Hebräer, vol. l, p. 298. • 97 Heb S:7, NRSV.

Yom Kippvr Imagery in the Eariy Chrislian lmaginaire

187

According to this view, Christ actually performed a hlgh-priestly action on eartb before hls crucifixion. This inter:pretation is explicitly denied in Hebrews 8:4a, which states: ''Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all.,. Nevertheless, the high-priestly figure wen matches the context ofHebrews 4:15-5:10, wh.ere the author juxtaposes the Levitical high priest with Cluist. We should not measure the consistency ofthe Epistle to the Hebrews by the standards of a systematic theologian. The verb 7tpootjt€poo, which often appears in a cultic context, invites a cultic inter~ pretation. By depicting Christ as sinless, Hebrews amplifies the polemical overtones in the juxtaposition of Christ with Aaron. 19~ The imagery of the high-priestly action may hover in the background, yet Jesus (before bis death) was most probably not conceived a high priest.

3 and 4. Christ's blood sacrifice (re)inaugurates the sanctuary and purifies and atones tbc believers. However, purification and atonemcnt seem to be "only" the means for achieving the •'real" plll])ose, entry into the holy of hoHes. The special blood rite in the holy ofholies, central to Second Temple Judaism. has been completely transformed and con:flated with other rites involving the sprinkling of blood. Christ's high-priestly, purifying self-sacrifice is merely preparation for the opening of the previously concealed entrance to God's presence in the real holy of hoHes. 199 This will purify the believers, enabling them to follow their rcpooro~-to<; Christ into the holy of holies.zoo Rather than alluding to Yom Kippur's sprink:ling on the veil and on the kapporet, Hebrews typologizes a con:flation of four rituals or events: Yom Kippur (Leviticus 16), the Red Reifer (Numbers 19), the institution ofthe covenant (Exodus 24), and the ordination ofthe priests (Leviticus 8). 201 19 For when every commandmeot bad been tr:>ld to all the people by Moses in accordance with the law, he took the blood of calves and goata, with water and scarlet wool and.bys~op, i.nd sprinkled bolh lhe scroll itself and alllhe people, 20 sayiog, "Thi.s is the blood oftbe CO>'enant !hat God has ordai~d for you." l1 And in the same way he sprinlded with the blood both tbe tent and alllhe vessels used in worship. 22 lDdeed, under lhe law abnost everything is purified wilh blood, and without the shedding ofblood there is no forgiveness ofsius.

198

Grässer, An diß Hebraer, vol. 1, p. 298 contl'l:l Attridge, The Epistle: w the Hebrews,

p. 149.

Heb 9:9; 10:19Heb 1:3.13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; see below, p. 189. 101 Heb 9:15-22, cf. 9:13.19.21; Heb 10:22; 12:24. Cf. Ezek 36:25-26, which reflects a similar mixture of Lev 16, Num 19 and Exod 24: see Zimmerli, E:echiel, p. 879; Young, "The Impact of tb.e Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thought of the New Testament," pp. 214-242. rw

200

188 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christi®lty in the First ond Second Centvries Some exegete.s have accused Hebrews of displaying ignnrance, but Horbury, in particular, has argued convincingly that the author often uses Second Temple traditions.202 The Red Reifer, the institution of thc covenant, and thc ordination of Aaron and his sons were often associated with Yom Kippur. 203 In the temple ritual, the high priest was sprinkled with water mixed with the ashes ofthe Red Heifer during the preparation week. 204 The Red Heifer appears as a high-priestly ritual in close juxtaposition with Yom K.ippur,205 and was probably perfonned by the high priest.206 Qumran and the rabbinie texts connect the ordination ofthe priests and Yom Kippur,107 while in Tannaitic sources the renewal of the covenant after the golden calf was clearly associated with Yom Kippur.l08 Deviation from the ritual of Yom Kippur is therefore only relative. The motifs connected to the ritual are not detennined solely by Hebrews' theological exigencies, but they do reflect Yom Kippur traditions present in Second Temple

Judaism. There are further deviations from the temple ritual. For instance, Hebrews does not specify the place in which the blood is sprinkled. It is not the holy of holies. The sprinkling is perfotmed neither by the high priest nor by Moses, but by the ~ believers themselves. Tbe object of this sprinlding is spirituali.zed as the conscience of the believers (10:22bc): "having sprinkled our hearts from an evil conscience and washed our bodies with pure water." This passage almost certainly links the sprinkling of the blood to baptism, the initiation ritual of the new covenant. 200 The new people are prepared by a purification ritual that cleanses body, hearts and conscience prior to entering the holy of hoJies and the presence of God (see below). From the opening verses of the Epistle, which refer to the purification of the incense altar on Yom Kippur as described in Exodus 30:10, it becomes clear that for Hebrews tbe entry into the ho.ly of holies is

~ W. Horbury, "The Aaronie Priesthood in the Epistle to the Hebrews," Jo~~mal ft>r the Shldy ofthe New Testament 19 (1983) 43-7L m On the R.ed Helfer and Yom Kippur. see espeeially Horbury, "The Aaronic Priesthood in the Epistle to tbe Hebrews," pp. S l-52. 1V4 mParah 3:1, cf. p. 29 note 46. 2115

*

E.g. Bamaba.! 7-8.

See 1osephus, A.ntiquitates juda/cae 4:79; and Philo, De .specia/ibu.s Iegtbus I :268, who ascribe different parts of the ritual to the high priest. According to Josephus he slays the heifer aru:l according to Philo hc sprinkles its blood. N'l See Knohl and Naeh, "Milu'im veKippurim." 201 See above, p. 122. 20!1 Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrew.s, p. 289; Lane. Hebre'wk 9-13, p. 287.

Yom

Kippt~,. Imagery

in the Early Chri:ttian Imagir~aire

189

secondary to the purification of the sanctuary and the followers by the blood rlte:210 ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, in these last days he has spolcen to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of alt things, througb wbom he also created the worlds. 3 He is the refleetion of God's glory and tbe ex.act imprint ofGod's very beiDg, and he suslains all things by his powerful Wßrd. When he had mtJtk purlfiC4t10fl for sins (Kilhptopov 't'oitV dpapn&v AOilJaG~Jt:YtM;), he sat down at the right haod of the Majesty on high (sKii8t"." i.v ~11;. 't'1K pr:ya~ iiv mr'l).ot.;), • having beoome as muc:h superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent tban tbeirs. 211 1 Long

2 but

The purification of the incense altar signities the end of the purification rites.l 12 The use ofthe aorist 1t:Ott}OÖ.f.L&Vo<; underscores this. 213 Accordingly, the puri.fication was completed before Christ sat down in the holy of holies.214 This tums upside dnwn Leviticus 16, where the entry is the precondition :tor the purification sprinkling. Also, the intercessiona.ry prayer does not follow the order of the temple ritual. lt is supposed to take pJace in the last act ofthe frrst entrance before the blood rites in the second and thitd en1Iances.21s Both inversions of the ritual sequence demoostrate that the typology is subject to the main aim of Hebrews, the entrance into the presence of God in the heavenly holy of holies.

5. In the holy of holies, the lenoupy(K; Christ performs a beaven1y litmgy (8:2.6) and intercedes pennanently for his followers. 216 Intercession was 11• Cf. B. Helninger. "Sundenreinigung (Hebr ],3). Christologische Anmerkungen zum Exordium des Hebrkrbriefs," Biblische Zeitschrift [N.F.] 41 (1997) S4~8, especially p. 61; Attridge, '11tll Epistle to the Hebrew:s, p. 46, note 132. It may also mean tlult the people were ordained as priests ofthe prlestly people, as perhaps in lPet 1:2; 2:4-S? 211 Heb 1:1-4, NRSV. 311 On Yom Kippur, t'he purification ofthe inc:ense altar, which is usuall;y eonceived of as standin,g outside the holy of bolies, happens tJftO' the entnmce to a:nd pmification of the holy ofholies (Lev 16:18-20). In Hebrews, the alter of .incease stands in the holy of holies (Heb 9:3-4). This may be based on tnJdition - 2BtJrllch 6:7, 2Ma<:c: 2:5 and the Samaritan Pentateuch, which places Exod 30: I-10 between venes 35 and 36 ofExod 26. !bis caused some scholars 10 assume a Samarita:n origin of tbe Epistle; against this see the c:hapter on possible Samarium iufluences in Hurst, 71te Eplstle to the Jlebrews. zn While in Exod 30:10 the object of purification is clearly tbe altar of incense. Hebrews doe.s not in this sentem:e mention a spec:ific: objec:t of purification, i.e. tbe people or the sanctuary. This purification includes both: seeHeb 9:23 and 10:22. 214 See Young, "The Impact ofthe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thougbl ofthe New Testament," pp. 217-218. 215 See above, p. 30. l16 "When:fore, he [Christ} is able also to save completely those who apptoach
190 The [mpllct qfYom Kippur on Chrlstianity in the First fllfd Second Centurle1 not ex:clusively connected to Yom K.ippur since many religious actor~ 1 -~·8· prophets and martyrs, could intercede before God. But intercession' belonged primarily among the hlgh-priestly acts and especially to Yom Kippur. "C'est surtout autour de laliturgie de Kippur, et cela probablemeilt deja a date ancienne, que se developperon1 les themes de l'intercession sacerdotale." 211 Moreover, the generat fi:amework. of the Epistle makes the Yom K.ippur connection highly probable. This permanent intercession complements the once-and-for-all atonement sacrifice. Since it is not stated anywhere that the intercession is for the sins, it does not entail a contradiction to the once-and-for-all atonement by sacrifice. Thus Christ's intercession may be concemed with divine support of the community in its present suffering and suppression.:lll

2.3 The Participation ofthe People Three s:cenes express th.e involvement of the community in the highpriestly ritual: the spectators waiting for the high priest's exit from the holy ofholies., a second, escbatological, entiy ofthe people into the holy of holies, and the imitation of the assistant who leaves the camp to burn the remains of the cow and the goat. 1. Hebrews describes the Second Parousia, evok.ing the imagery of the people waiting for the exit of the high priest from the holy of holies: ..so Christ ... will appear a second time ... to save those who are eagerly wait· ing for him ('tote; ain:öv ciltEXÖtlXOf.levOt<; E\t; oc:ot11Pl.«v)."219 In this instance. Hebrews used extra-biblical knowledge about Yom Kippur. 22()

2. A main concem of Hebrews is to describe the people joining the high priest in his entrance.221 10:19 Therefore, brothers, slnce we bave the boltiness (m:LPP'IIG~v) for an entrance into the holy of holies (ti!v dooaov t"tilv ayi~Dv) by means of the blood of Jeaus, 20 which he inaugurated for us as & new and livi.ng way tbrough tbe curtain, i.e. his ßesh, 11 and [since we have] a great priest {ttpiu pi-yo.v) ovet tbe bouse (olEov) of

also in 2:1&; 4: 14-16; 9:24. For the tradition of Christ u heavenly advocate, seealso Rom 8:34; 1John2:1. 117 R. Le Deaut, "Aspec:ts de l'intm;ession dans le judaisme ancien," Jo11rnal for tlte Study ofJud4ism l (1970) 35-57, hcre p. 46. 211 Loader, Sohn. vnd Hoherpriester, pp. !42-15 l, especially 147. 219 Heb 9:28; Sir S0:5. This obsenoation wasmadealso by Lane, Hebrtows 9-13, p. 2SO. 210 The author al$o exhibirs elsewbere acquaintance witb extra-biblical tRditions, even about Yom Kippur, e.g. the high-priestly intetcession (Heb 7:25) or the victory over tbe ruler ofthe foroes ofdarkness (Heb 2:14-JS). 221 Heb 4:16; 6:20: 10:22.

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Earty Christian lmaginaire

191

God, 12 (tberefore] Iet us approach (l
with pure water.m

Jesus represents both the way (~) to the holy of hoHes and the curtain (teu'tan:e-taoJJ.a.)m before it. As the way, Jesus has a "positive," opening function. while the curtain, bis flesh, obstructs or conceals. The enttance opened by Jesus' blood helps to overcome the obstacle of the flesh,2:z4 in order to enter into the p.resence of God. The atonement is therefore only a neces.sa.ry preparatory step to tbe true aim, the entrance to the presence of God in the heavenly sanctua.ty. The cultic cbaracter of the picture is supported by two words, oh:~ and n:pooep:x.IDJ.&E8u, which point to a cultic context.225 The author exhorts the baptized/ordained to participate in the worship led by the high priest Christ and to "not neglect the common meetings" (10:25). Does tbe worship oftbis Christian Jewish community encompass a ritual symbolizing the joining of the community of Christ in bis approach to God?226 Tbe interpretation tbat the approach is effected by Chrlstian Jewish ritual already in present time is countered by an eschatologicalline as proposed by Heb.rews 6:19-20: Wehave tbis bope, a sure and steadfast anc:bor oftbe soul, a hope that euters the inner sb.r iDe behind the curtain (eir; to i;QQrr:tiJ)Ov toil 1auu11Ctao!14.:ot;), 20 where Jesus, a forerunocr on our behalf. has entered, having ber.;ome a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.m

6:19

Jesus is the forerunner of the community, which is to follow later on. A similar oscillation between present mystic ritual and eschatological redemption also appears in the Valentinia.n texts di.scussed below. As we sball see, the alternatives need not be mutually exclusive. 3. A third depiction of the community is the exit of the assi.stant who bumed the fat of the sin offerings outside the camp (13:13), which is transferred to Jesus and the people.

m My translation ofHeb 10:19--22 b1$ed onNRSV and Atttidge. Has tbe liui to be understood instnunentally to the verb (a way inaugurated by means of the c:urtain) or !ocally to the noun (a way across tbe curtain)? The usual interpretation is tbc fonner. See tbe commcntaries oll tbis passage. 224 A word also associated elsewbere in Hebrews with negative tenns: seeHeb 2:14; 5:7; 7:16; 9:10. Few exegetes tak.e ~o11'f ~ttv 1:11t; G~Zpx:Ot,; ainoG tobe an apposition to oobl;; instead of~t(JT
192 The Impact ojYQm Kippur Qn Christianil)l in the First and Second Centuries 11 For the bodies of tholli! ani.mals whose blood is brought into the holy of holies (ail; 1:a iyur) by the high priest as a sacrific:e for sin (lti!Pi liJlaptl~) are bwned outside the camp (f!;m 'tflr; MpeJlßol.i\1,;). ·~ Therefore Jesus also suffend outside lhe city gate in order to sauctify the poople by his own blood. u Let us then go to him oußide the camp(~ Ti!<; ~~~~~~ol.fl;;) and bear bis insult (1:ov o~lOIIirllttinoO 'PE· povr~}- 1~ For he.re we have no Iasting city, but we an: loolcing for the city tbat is tocome.m

A(:cording to Leviticus 16:27, the remains of the sacrijicial goat are bumed outside the camp in order to preserve its sanctity. Hebrews applies this to Jesus, who sanctified the people (in the camp) by suffering outside it. Yet, as Helmut Koester poi.nted out, this also refers to Leviticus 16:28, which speaks of the person wbo bad to leave the camp in order to bum those bodies. 229 Anybody who left tbe camp became unclean and could return only after being sanctified by washing his clothes and his body. Hebrews inverts these categories. The author exhorts his readers to leave the camp after Jesus sanctified tbem by his suffering outside tbe camp. Tb.e sanctification is no longer a condition to entet the camp but to leave it. Such a rentrifugal concept of sacred space is a parody of tbe conventional wtderstanding of sacred geograpby built on centripetal increase. What does the author meari by "leaving the camp..? Most commentaries mention two possible interpretations: a) leaving Judaisrn or b) leaving the sensual world. In my opinion, the next verse (13:14), with the admonition to wait for the wtworldly city, makes a th.ird option possible, allowing for the possibility that the addressee of tbe Epistle was tbe C
121

Heb 13:11-14, NRSV, slightly altered.

~ H. Koester, "'Oulside the Camp': Hebrews 13:9-14," Harva1d Theological

Rniew

SS (1962) 299-317. Cf., in contrast, M.E. Isaacs, "Hebrews 13.9-16 Revisited," New Testament Studies 43 (1997) 268-284. 230 Anolher question is whether ~epxoii11.c~ ~ a:btov f~CD 1:1\; napc)lßolll~ 1ov ovllt5ttti1Öv o.iotoo 'l'iJ!ovre~ has to bc undetstood as imitation of Cbrist as a sacrifi~ial goat or is a typo!ogy of the scapegoat_ The Iatter interpmation may be valid, but there are few indica.tions of it other than tbe man:h outside the camp carrying
sacrificial goat.

Yo~tr Kippur l"'oguy

in the EQrly Christian Imagi11aiTI

193

2.4 Conclusions Regarding the High Priest in Hebrews

According to tbe myth of Hebrews, by his death, tb.e high priest Christ conquered the devu,:m "passed tbrough the heavens,"232 a.ud somehow purified the heavenly sanctu.al'y233 on entering with his blood the heavenly holy of hoHes.234 There he took his place to the right of God and intercedes on behalf of his followers.l35 He is expected to come back at the end of days in the not too distant future, 236 in order to resume the fight against the evil powets and to liberate bis affiicted comrnunity,2.37 purified by baptism, and lead them into the presence of God in the holy of bolies. 231 The author of Hebrews employs various sources in creating bis typological myth. He is inspired by the Bib)e, as can be seen in the focus on the tabemacle (and not the temple) andin formulations imitating Leviticus 16. Yet the Bible is by no means the only fount of his wisdom.239 Tbe intercession, the solemn exit from the holy of holies and the conflation of the sprinklings belong to Second Temple ritual and the imaginaire of Yom Kippur. and he probably borrowed the victory over the Iord of evil and the liberation of his good prisoners from the apocalyptic imaginaire of Yom Kippur. As in Qumran, Hebrews sees the current period of afDictions as a Mo'ed Klppur, a period of atonement, which began with Jesus' death and· will end with his Parousia. Despite the extensive use of Yom Kippur typology in Hebrews, it is clear that its author did not intend to provide a complete typology of Yom Kippur. 2<141 Central issues of Yom KippUl' are absent: there is no mention of the incense sacrlfice,241 the scapegoat or the high priest's changing of clothes. The Old Testament tim~ rarely caused Hebrews to add a biblical detail to its myth.Z42 The author ofHebrews has chosen those elements that Heb 2:14-IS. n 2 Heb4:14. :z:JJ Heb 9:23. ZM Heb9. D' Heb 7:2.5. :136 Heb 9:28. :z:J1 Heb 2:14-lS. m Heb 10:19-22. m Many scbolars accused the author of Hebrews of ignorance of Jewish matters, but most of hia peculiar material is based on S«ond Temple traditions. See HorbUlj', 1"he Aaronic Priesthood in the Epistle to the Hebrews." 240 Loader, Soh11 ""d Hoherpriester, p. 244. " 1 Does the unusual menrion ofthe iDcense altar among the fumishings ofthe holy of holies (Heb 9:4) allude to tbe high·priestly inunse sacrifice (Lev 16: 12-13)? 242 Weiss on Heb 9:23: "Daß im Rahmen dieser EntsprechUJJg von irdischen und himmlischen Dingen b~. im Rahmen der Ent$prednmg von Urbild und Abbild unter der Oberschrift du A. YUY"'l oilv {muv} aucll die oi;novp(t~rUl 1einer ,.Reinigung" bedürfen, ist in 231

194

The Impact of Yom Kippur on Cluistianity i'n the Firzt Dlld Second Crmhlrtes

suit his aims: to comfort thc affiicted community by revealing that the period of suiTering is a temporary one of awaiting the retum of the high priest after he has completed bis intercessionacy prayer in the presence of God. 2. S History ofTradition: The Role ofZechariah 3 in the Justification ofthe High-Priestly Christology before Hebrews

In this section I want to suggest that Zechariah 3 and its connection to the apoc::alyptic imaginaire of Yom Kippur was one of the key texts in the earIiest stage in the development of the concep1 of a high-priestly Christology before Hebrews.l'n In bis detailed analysis of the tradition of the high priesthood. William Loader suggested tb.at Yom Kippur entered this tradition at a late stage and then served as a frame for binding tagether atonement and the interceding high priest.244 In contrast. I propose that Yom Kippur played a fonnative role for the high-priestly Cbristology already before Hebrews. Two observations strongly suggest that the high-priestly Christology was not invented by the author of Hebrews but adopted from tradition.24' First. Hebrews introduces Christ as a high priest in 2:17-18 without previous preparation or explanation. The concept seems therefore to have been known to its readers, most probably as part of a creed formula (3:1). Second, a nwnber of passages in early Christian texts that are independeut from Hebrews mention or allude to Christ as (high) priest,l'16 which is not surprising, since it was not uncomm.on for Jews of the Second Temple period to envisage a redeemer in (high) priestly terms. 247 Yet how could Jesus, a Davidide, possibly be a high priest? Hebrews states explicitly: "It der Tat ein eigenartiger Gedanke, als solcher am Ende nur von daher zu verstehen, daß auch hier noch die Darstellung des irdischen ,Abbildes' in den VV. 19-22 die Aussagen über das ,Urbild' bestimmt, Anzeichen zugleich dafilr, daß der Autor des Rebr dettt logischen Zwang eines lconsequ~nt durchgeftlhrten EniSprechungsgedankens unterliegt." (Weiss, Der Briefan die Hebr4er, pp. 483-484). 20 Forthis argument, see StOkl. "Yom K.ippur in the Apocalyptic lmaginaire and the R.oots of Jesus' High Priestbood." pp. 362-366. m Loader, Sohn vrrd Holterpriester, pp. 200-202. '"' Cf. Attt:idge, The Epistle to the Hebrew1. p. 102. 146 lgnatius, .To the Philade/phians 9:1; Polyearp, To the Philippians 12:2; Mtutyrdorn oj Polycarp 14:3; JClement 36; 61:3; 64. Some consider IClement 36 and 61:3; 64 tobe dependent on Rebrews. According to Loader they are fixed liturgical formulae, which refer back to the same backgrOUJid a.s Hebrews: Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester, p. 237. Usually, Rev 1:13 and Barnabaa 1:9 are conceived ofas alluding to the high priesthood: see e.g. Prostmeier, Der Bamabasbrie/, pp. 310-311. . t-~? See the passages and Iiterature discUS$ed in Attridge, 1'he Epistle to the Hebrews. pp. 97-101.

Yom Kippw Imagery in the Early Christian lmaginalre

195

is manifest that our Lord has been sprung out of (the tribe of) Judah.. (7:14) and a.s Hebrews immediately goes on to say, tbis was a major obstacle to any priestly career: "in regard to which tribe Moses said nothingabout priests." One ofthe main pwposes of Hebrews is to resolve this difficulty and to justify Jesus' high priesthood by "de-Levitizing" itthe author simply inventcd another priesthood JCil-tci tftV ta~tv Ms)..xu,EiiE~~:. This ingenious solution solved the problern for the author of Hebrews. But how did those Christian Jews before Hebrews justify the high priest· hood of Jesus? Hebrews' ..de-Levitization" was a.s yet unknown. Another possibility would have been to introduce a Levitical element into Jesus' pedigree., i.e. to "Levitize" Jesu.s. This approach was indeed taken. e.g. by Hippolytus,248 but it was not yet suggested in the time of Hebrews and is found only from the end oftbe second centucy. I suggest that a third possible justification ex:isted: a namesake of Jesus in the Bible who is a high priest - such as Jesus/Joshua son of Jehozadak, builder of the Second Temple in tbe time of Zerubbabel - could have been used. Just as Jesus/Joshua son of Nun conferred characteristics and functions on his namesake lesus of Nazareth, the high priest lesus son of Jehozadak could also have conferred bis qualities and functions on him.249 The high priest Jesus/Joshua son of Jebozadak, the only other important Old Testament namesake of Jesus,250 is mentioned in several Old Testament passages. 2s1 Yet certain details suggest that among all the texts mentioning Jesus son of Jehozadak, it was the third chapter of Zecharlah that was used as a high-priestly Christological prooftext before Hebrews. Had only the similarity of name been important, other passages meotioning Joshua son of Jehozadak would have been referred to more often in the New Testament However, it is particularly the third chapter of Zechariah tbat is alluded to or quoted in early Christian literature. Being the ollly biblical sourc:e for a priesdy Messiah, it must have had a special significance for Christians Jews interest.ed in a priestly Christology. 252 This cao. be supported by further arguments. lAi See ehe Iiterature given in Stökl, ..Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic Imaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High Priesthood," p. 364, note 36. z41) See e.g. G.G. Stroumsa, "Tbe Early Cbristian Fish SymbolReconsidcred," in: idem. I. Omenwald and S. Shaked (eds.), .Me.ssioh and Chrutos. StJtdi~s in the Jewish Origins o/Christianity [Festschrift D. Flflsser] (TObingen, 1992; pp. 199-205). ~ In the f1rst century CE, Jesu.s was a vccy eouunon uame. See Stükl, "Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic Jmaginaire and the Roots of Iesus' High Priesthood," pp. 364-365, note 58, for other Old Testameat namesalces of Jesus having mere "walk-on parts. n z.!l Zech l; 6:9-15; Hag 1-2; Ezra 3-S. :u2 The significance of the Jesus/Joshua son of Jehomdak type has long been acknowledged. However, scholars often asswne that the earliest ezplicit and utended

196 The Impact of Y(lm Kippw on Christitznity in the First and Suond CentUTies First, among the other New Testament passages alluding to Christ's high priesthood, the Apocalypse of John 1:13, which mentions 11:<>atipJt<;;, has the widest support. 253 Usually Zechariah 3 is reclconed to be one of the texts that form the background to tbis complex passage.154 Second, the Yom Kippur typology in Bornabas, too, mentions 11:oOftpTJc; and alludes to Zechariah 3 and Jesus' high priesthood.255 Thls allusion bad most probably already appeared as pa.rt of the proto-typology, since in Tertullian, Zechariah 3 is found in directjuxtaposition to the Yom K.ippur typology. and in Justin closely connected to it.25' Wbile the evidence for the use of Zechariah 3 from the Apocalypse dates only as far back as the end of the first century, the proto-typology emerged before the destruction ofthe temple, perhaps as early as the tbirties or forties. 257 Third. if Christian Jews imagined Christ as high priest, this was alm.ost certainly within the categories customarily a.ssociated with tbe rolc of a messianic high-priestly figure, a redeeming high priest close to 1Enoch, 11 QMelchizedek and the Apocalypse of Abraham on an eschatological Yom Kippur. At. we have seen, the scene of the Apocalypse of Abraham

.

meutions in Justin an.d Tertullian Ol{e also the earliest evidence of all. See J. Lecuyer, "J6sus, fils de Jos6dec, et le Sacudoc:e du Christ," Recltuches de Sci«nce Iüligieuse 43 (1955) 82-103; and C.·K. Woug. "The Interpretation of Zechariah 3,4 and 6 in the New Testament aod Early Christianity" (Ph.D. dissertation, Westininster Tb.eological Seminary, 1992). Tbe only scbolar Jcnown to mc who co1111ects Hebrews and Zechariab is F.C. Synge, Hebrew1 andthe Scriptrires (Londou. 1959), pp. 19-21. 2SJ Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester, p. 226. 1S4 The strengest case against a ptiestly influen<:e on Rev 1:1:3 has been made in tbe recent commenta.ry b)' David Aune. He raises the following points: The Septuagint translates 110lliwt\10 with five different items, ':I•J!), ,:1, "!»t, nls;nl3, }vnn; therefore, it is not a tenni~JUS technicus. Second Templesources (Testament of Le~~/8:2-10; Philo, De 111ita Mosis 2:109-110) use other Greek tenns also to signify the priest's gannent. Against Aune, 1 would point out that all five Hebrew words bellind the Septuagint 110~~ refer to a prlestly item. The Sec:ond Temple 5011n:es refened to do not sustain his. vgument Te.stament of Ll111i 8:2-10 does not seem to understand mtlch about the aetual priestly "estments, and Philo usually prefers mJ3qp1)1;, as Aune bimself states. There are Yery few eases in Jewisb texts where •rollljpqc; does not refer to a priestly garment or artifact. Then:fore., the allll$iOD to the high priesthood was clear for aoy Greek reader of the Septuagillt. See now also B. Lupieri. "Apocalisse, sacerdozio e Yom Kippur,"' Annali di Storia delf' E,;egesi 19 (2002) 11-21. us BarnabQJI 7:9; see especially the excellent pages in Prostmeier, Der /J(II'flabasbrief. pp. 310-31 l; or e.g. Carleton Paget.. The Epist/e ofBanrabos, p. 140. 256 Skarsauoe, The Proofftom Propllecy, pp. 309-310. m See above, pp. 159·-161. The names :nr- and )1V1'1;'1' are close enough to be assoeiated with eaeh other evea in Hebrew. There is therefore no support for the assumption that this association of Jesus ofNUIU"eth and Jesus son of Jehozadak was. ftrst perc;eived in Greek writi~ (and therefore pemaps Jater).

Yorn Kippur Image#')' ln lhe Eorly Christian Imaglnaire

191

links Zeehariah 3 to the a.pocalyptic imaginaire of Yom Kippur. 258 If we consider therefore that (non-Christian) Jews who belonged to an apocalyptic stream of thought used Zechariah 3 in association with Yom Kippur, then a usage for typological purposes by Christia.n Jews, who betray an influence of apocalypticism.~9 becomes even more likely. In light of these argwnents, we ca.n return to the central question of this investigation. At what time did Yom Kippur become associated with the high-priestly Christology. and what was the function of this association? Against Loader's model, which argues for a Iate point and a subordinate framing function, my investigation suggests that Yom K.ippur lies at the root of Cluist•s high priesthood, wbich belongs to the Jewish tradition of the eschatological bigb-priestly redeemer.

3. Christ as kapporet (il.«CJ'tTJplov): Romans 3:25-26 Romans 3:21-26 are among the mo.st influential verses not only of Paul but of the whole New Testament. Protestant exegesis. especially, regard.s tbem as tbe apex of the theology of justification.uo There are few verses in the New Testament about which mote ink has been spilled.

:zsa See above, pp. 92-94. "" E.g. the remains of die apo~::alyptic: image of the higb~priestly tedeemer, who con· quers thepowers ofeviJ (sec above, pp. 185-185, on Heb 2:14-IS). 260 My main sourc.es for this section have been Kraus, Der Tod Jem als Heiligtumsweihe; idem, "Der Jom Kippur, der Tod Jesu und die 'Biblische Theologie'. Ein Versuch, die jildische Tradition in die Auslegung von ROm 3,2Sf einzubezidlen," in: I. Baldermann (ed.),lllles Testament und christlicher Glaube (Jahrbuch fllr Biblische Theologie 6; Neukireben-VIuyn, 1991; pp. 157-172}; Breytenbach, YersiJhnung, pp. 166-169; H. Merklein. "Der Stl!metod Jesu nach dem Zeugnis des Neuen Testaments," in: H.P. Heinz (ed.), Ve,..ti11mung in der jiidischen ul'fd dtrisllichen Liturgie (Quaestiones Disputa..e 124; Freiburg im Breisgau, 1990; pp. 155-183); H. Merklem, "Der Tod Jesu a1s stellvertreteoder Slihnetod," in: id.em, Stvdien Ju Jes'lls und Paulus (Wissenecbaftliche Untermchuqen zum Neu.en TC$tament 43; TübiDgeu, 1987; pp. 181-191); idem, "Die Bedeutung des Kreuzestodes Christi fllr die paulinische Ge~btig.lceits- und Gesel:zesthelll&tik," in: idem, Stildien zu Juw und Pau.lu (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen ZIID'l Neuen Teslament 43; Tllbingen, 1987; pp. 1-106); P. Stuhlmach.er, «zw neueren Exegese von Riim 3,24-26," in: idem, Yer.siJimung, Gesetz •I'MI Gerechtigbit. Aufratte :Z'IIr biblischen Tluologie (Göttinge.o, 1981; pp. 117-135) {who disousses all older readings); Young, "The ImplWt of tbe Jewish Day of Atonement upon the Thougb.t ofthe New Testament," pp. 274-339; Lohse, Mlirtyrer vnd GottrJsknecht. See also D. Moo, The Epi.stle to the Rornant (New Intematio.nal CollllllCDtary to tbe New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1996); now also K.llOppler, Sfihne im Noen Testament, pp. 112-172 and 314.

198 The. lmpaci o[Yom Kippur on Christianily in the First and Second Centuries But now, apart from the law, the rigb.teousness of God ha.s been disclosed and is attestcd "Y the law ao.d the prophets, 22 the righccoume.ss of God through faith inJoP" Jesus Christ fcr alt who believe. For there is no distine~ion, 21 since all have slnned and fall short o{ the glory of God; 24 tbey are justified by bis graee as a gift, through the redemption tb.at is in Christ Jesus, 2S whom God put forward as atoning [cover of the ark ofthe covenant] (l:l.ncm]plov) by his blood, effective through [the]m faith. He did this to show his righteousness, 26 because in his divine forbca:ranu he had passed over the sin' previously eornmitted; it was to prove at the present time that he bimself is righteoWI and that he justifies the one who has filith in Jesus. 16' R- 3,21

Wolfgang Kraus devoted a dissertation to these verses. 264 Therefore, much of my discussion will engage with hls work. My discussion focuses on the arguments for an association with Yom Kippur, especially via an analysis of the meaning of tlao-nlptov. Unlike most exegetes, who favor reading this passage against the background of Yom Kippur, I do not see compelling reasons for understanding the passage as postulating an anti-temple attitude or the abolishment of Yom Kippur by Paul. Yet it isanother demonstration of the immense influence of Yom Kippur on the development of the early Cbristian imaginaire of Jesus• death and its atoning function .

• on Romans 3:2)-16 3.1 The Injluence ofYom Kippur Two opposing views have been proposed to explain the background of Romans 3:25-26. The first assumes a fonnative role for Leviticus 16, referring to the cluster of kapparet, blood and sin (i.J..a.cr·n1ptov, atJ.Ia. and «t-uiptf1J.1Cl.), which evokes the blood sprinkling in the holy of holies. The second view rejects any involvement of "cultic" concepts and suggests as background the idea of a vicarious atoning death of rnart)Ts as expressed in 4Maccabees. This debate centers around two different interpretations of 261 lt is po.ssible t~ Interpret the genitive as eilher suhjeclivu$ ( of) or objecti'llttS (in). The context, however, malces the objectivus more probable. w The evidence is equally good for both readings. With the article: Pa~ 40 (third century), Vaticao.us {B, fourth cent.), and probably also 0219 (fourth to fifth. unt.), the third corrector of Codex Epbraemi rescriptus (C), the second eorrector of the Claromontanus (D}, Codex Athous L11urensis ('1', eightb-nintll cent.).llld the minuscel 33 and the majority text. Without the article: Sinaiticus (fourth cent.), the fmt hands of the Codices Ephraemi rescriptus (C, fifth cent.) and Claromontanus {D, sixth cent.), the Codices Augiensis (F, ninth cent) and Boemerianus (0, ni.nth cent.), aod a munber of minuscels (among them 1739). 1 would add the important find at Tura (Papyrus Cair. 88748) of Origen's commentary on Romans. written at the beginning of the seventh century, but an indirect witness to Origen' s text in the third century, which is strangely missing in Nestle--Aland27 • 263 Rom 3 :21-26; my translation. 264 Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtumsweihe. Now also Bailey, "lesus as the Mercy Seat'' (non ~idi).

Yom Kipp11r lMagery in the Early Chri&tialllmaginalrc

199

i).a.CJ-r;f!ptov. The fxrst perceives it as a terminus technicus referring to the kapporet from the holy of holies. 26.5 The second interprets it more generally as "atoning sacrifice,. (Lohse). 266 I will therefore start with a discussion of the meaning of ilaotiiptov, arguing strongly for the first group of scholars, those who understand it as lw.ppore:t. 261 The word i.bottiptov is quite rare. Kraus lists five examples in pagan texts and 40 in Jewish ones. The pagan texts include one passage each in Dio Chrysostomus and Aelius Herodianus, two inscriptions, and one papyrus.268 The two inscriptions and Dio use iA.aottiptov with the meaning of a propitiating votive offering. The meaning in the papyrus and in Herodianus is unclear.269 Ofthe 40 ..Jewish" instances, U.CXo>liPtov appears 21 times in the Torah, five tilnes in Ezekiel 43, once in Amos, six times in Philo, once in 4Maccabees, twice in Symmachus. once in Josephus and once in the Testament of Solomon. In Jewish-Cbristian Iiterature (which I included under Jewish literature), it appears twice, onee in Hebrews and once in Romans. All 21 instances in the Torah are translations of kappQret:of these, seven appear in Leviticus 16; and all six instances in Philo plus the one in the Testament ofSolomon and the one in the Epistle to the Hebrews clearly :refer to the lwppQret, totaling 29.270 In three further instances l.J.aa"ti]pwv refers most probably to the kapporet: In two of them, Symmachus translates n19.:n ("you will make watertight") not as a verb but as a noun in appositjon to "the ark of Noab," and therefore makes Noab's ark into a kapporet (Genesis 6:15.16). Amos 9:1 translates 11n!l;) with l).aott)ptov, referring to some place in the temple. 8oth authors probably read (or wanted to read) rm!l::l or n1!>;) in their Vorlage. 211 The instances in Jewish texts where ii..aG'ttlJnov clearly does not refer to lrappQret are few; altogether seven times in tbe works of three authors: 216 See the Iist of exegetes in Moo, The Epittle to the RomQns, p. 232, notes 66 and 67. '" For the reterem;es,see ~ The Epistle to the Romrzns,. p. 234. 267 The most recent and most melic:ulous analy:si:s of all occurrences o( \1acst'I1P10v was undertakeu by Wolfgang Kraw;: Der Tod Jesv als Heiligtumnveihe, pp. 21-32; now also Bailey, ..1esus as the Mercy Seat" (non vidz). Eartier i.nve.sligatlons were undertakeo by many scholars, wbo are discussed in his book. u. Oio ChrysostomWl, 01atione& 11:121; Aelius Herodianus, De prosodia catholica (ed. Len~. vot. .3:1, p. 365); inscriptio.ns ofCos 81 and 347 (ed. Paton/Hicks}; papyru.i Fayum 337 (ed. Grenfell/Huat, p. 313). 2H See Kraus, Dei' Tod Juu als Heillgtumsweih«, pp. 27-28. 270 Pbilo, De cherubim 25; De vita Moais 2:95.97; D~fogo et i11Ventione 100.101; Quis rerum divinarum heres sit 166; Testament ofSolomon 21:2. Cf. Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als He.illgtumsweihe, pp. 26-27. 271 See tbe various comm.entators mentioned in Krau.s, Der Tod Jel'll. als Heiligtums-

weihe, p. 24. note 14.

200

The lmpur:r of Yom Kippu,. on Clvistionity in the Fif'st and Second Centuriu

Ezelciel43 uses i).aat~ptov five times to translate i1"'1TY. The Greek reader of Ezekiel understood thls as some place in the sanctuary connected to atonement, most probably the b8$e of the altar upon which the blood was applied. 272 Josephus reports the erection by Herod of an «atoning memorial" to placate the wrath of Ood. 273 This pagan use most probably rests on the fact that losephus' addressees are mainly pagan. 4Maccabees 17:22 in its present fomt uses i).aatiunov in a general sense, i.e. "tbeir propitiatory death" or "the propitiation of tbeir death" (even if originally Yom Kippur migbt be envisaged as background). I find it hard to imagine that Greek~speakin,g Christian Jews, who were supposedly familiar with the Septuagint, did not immediately make an association \\
Ezek 43:13 (3•].14.17.

m lfntiquitatesjut!Dicae 16:Ja2. 174 Repdlas of wbether lhe translators read 1UI!l:l or zrn!l:l, foc a Greet reader of Amos 9 thia was simply a referem:e to the i~aat~p,ov near tbe altar, Le. the n'"I10J. :m Cf. tbe condu.sion in Kraus, Der Tod Ju11 als Heiligtllmsweihe, pp. 3 1-32. 11' Contra Bailey, "Greek Heroes Who Happen to Be Jewish." -m Stuhlmacher, "Zilf neueren Exegese von Röm 3,24--26." On Stublmacher's dieses reg~~rding other relevant New Testament passages, see thc other papers in his collection.

Yo-. Kippurlmagery in rhe Early Christian lmagirtaire

201

However, typology is often limited in its coberence; e.g., in the Epistle to the Hebrews. the high priest enters the holy of holies carrying his own blood. Lohse's second argument is tbat the kapporet was concealed, wbereas Romans exposes Jesus as \Aa.o'tt;pmv. This, however, may weil be a polemical pun, and the argument becomes stronger for those who prc~ sume that the group behind Romans .3 :24/25-26* fastered an anti-temple abolition theology. Tb.ird, Lohse points out that ilac:n:ilptov is used without the article; but this is for grammatical reasons, since it Stands as predicativum. Finally, Iet us for thc sake of argument accept for a moment Lobse's suggestion that Romans 3:24/25-26• depends on a concept in 4Maccabees 11 according to which the death of martyrs is a vica.rious atoning death. Kraus• suggestion tbat Leviticus 16 and 4Maccabees a.re not mutually exclusive alternatives is very tempting.278 As l argued ea.rlier, 4Maccabees 17:2~22 itself may be based on a reinterpretation of Yom Kippur.279 Yet a direct dependence ofthe pre~Pauline tradition or of Paul on 4Maccabees is excluded by the current dating of 4Maccabees to the end of the fJJ'$t century CE - or possibly even later - according to the most recent suggcstions by Jan Willem van Henten.280 On tbe other band, a cultic interpretation of Romans 3:25-26 may be supported by further argwncnts. Possibly, the context of Romans 3 contains two further allusions to Yom Kippur. 1n one, God will judge the secret thoughts of all (Romans 2:16). 1bis might be based on the mention ofGod's omniscience and of the hidden tbings in the Yom Kippur prayers from Qumran. 281 In the other. n:iatt~ in Romans 3:21-26 has a function similar to repentance in the rabbinie and Philonic passages on Yom K.ip~ pur. the performance of vicariously atoning work by someone (the high priest in the temple/Jesus), which becomes effectivc for everyone wbo identifies bimself with this wodc. by ~ti.o1:1.qrepentance (cf. also Romans 2:4-5). In sum, the allusion to the V.a;cs-c(}pt.ov in the holy of holies according to the usage in the G:reek Torah must have been clear not only to Paul but to everybody familiar with the Greek Torah. Sim:e Paul does not distinguish di:f'&rent levels of biblical a.rgumentation for Gentile and Jewish reader-

1"

Kraus, "Der Jom Kippur, der Tod Jesu l1ßd die 'Biblische Theologie';' pp. 157-

ISS. See abovo, pp. 115-117. H.-1. Kl1111Ck, "Hellenistische Rhetorik im Diasporajudeatum. Das Exordium des vierten Makkabäerbudvs (4Makk 1,1-12)," New Testame11t Studie.s 3.S (1989) 4Sl-46S. 279

210

here p. 452; for vaa Renten, sec above, notc l91 on p. 116. 211 See above, pp. 3&--42.

202 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity l11 the First ond Second Centurieö ships, it can be assumed tbat educated Gentiles, who were associated in some way with synagogues, also understood Paul•s allusion2S2 to one of the most central texts ofthe Torah. 283 3. 2 Interpretation of Romans 3:25-26

The most challenging exegesis of this passage in recent research is that proposed by Wolfgang Kraus.:U4 He suggests understandiog Romans 3:2526 and Hebrews not as atonement but exclusively as inauguration of a sanctuary. He bases bis thesis on the rabbinie view that it is the blood ritual wbich cleanses and reinaugurates the temple, while it is the laying of hands on the scapegoat and on the bull that has the atoning function. He concludes that since Romans 3:25 (an<;llikewise Hebrews) mentions only blood, Paul (and Hebrews) refers · only to the sanctifying aspect of the ritual. I have three objections to Klaus' intetpretation.285 First, Kraus cannot prove that the concept oftwo separate functions ofthe rituals at Yom Kippur, which appears for the firsttime in the Mishnah, was valid in the time of the Second Temple. Bven if this were the case, it is probably only one of many interpretations. Did the Mishnah preserve the Sadducean or the Pharisean view on this detail? It is perhaps more pertinent to distinguish between the ritual and its rationale and therefore to perceive the ritual interpretations in the Misbnah as post-temple understandings. If th.is assumption holds true then the interpretations of the Mishnah contribute no more to the historical reconstruction of the way the temple ritual was interpreted during the Second Temple than do the ioterpretations of modern exegetes. Moreover, Kraus presents the evidente of Second Templesources in a reductive way. In contrast, Josephus does not support the mishnaic interpretation of tbe ritual, whereas bis description of the ritual procedure is similar tothat in the Misbnah. 236 Jubilees 34:12-19 does not distinguish between the two goats and thejr functions. 2117 Kraus unjustifiably down-

m This is equally true for the reception of tbe allusion in the tradition before Paul. 10 tht. Romam, p. 233. This argument would be even stronger if we mew that alteady in f~rst-century ROllle pel)ple used Sidrei AwJdah, since in tbat ctiSe the description of the high priest's ritual would be even more deeply rooted in their thought. 2114 Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Hei/igtu'lrJSweihe. w Additional crilique in Knöppler, SiJime im Neuen Testament, pp. 22-24. »<; Kraus, Der Tod JeSll als Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 72-73. m As Kraus bimself observes- Der Ted Jesu als Heiligiumsweihe, pp. 71-72, note 1.

w See e.g. Moo, The Epistle

.Yom Ktppur lmagezy in the Early Clrristla11lmagi11aire

203

plays the evidence of 11 QTemple Scroll xxv-xxvii, which contradicts his interpretation.288 Third, while there is purification terminology in Hebrews, it is missing in Romans 3, which spea.ks about sins. It is hard therefore to fit the New Testament texts into the rabbinie scheme. 219 The inauguration of the sanctuary and the atonement are ·not mutually exclusive. Jesus is inaugurated as ilaotrunov and he atones as such. He functions as an alternative to the central instrument of atonement in the biblical ritual of the Day of Atonement. Unlike the cover of the ark of the First Temple, whi<:h was bidden in the holy of holies, this iAao'tftp•ov is public (Jrpo-tO&'tO). The focus on the Uao-cftptov demonstrates that, as in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Romans proposes a sacrificial conception of atonement referring to the biblical foundation and not to the Se<:ond Temple, which had no U,.o.rnftptov. Yet cultic concepts are much less centrat to Paul than to Hebrews. The formula describes an eschatological action ofGod and distinguishes between the current era of righteousness. in whicll Jesus has been inaugu· rated by God as l.lao'tftp\ov (cf. Romans 5:6-11), and the previous time of God's forbearance, in whicb sins werc passed over. i\.voxft refers back to the time of God's forbearance. in which allsins were set aside in order to enable all to repent before the final judgment (Romans 2:4-5) and avoid God's inuninent wrath (Romans 1:18). Although God's wrath is mentioned in the previous chapter the act does not entail an aspect of propitiation because God bimself is the actor and could not possibly propitiate himself. Why did Paul and his Vorlage employ the picture of Yom K.ippur? Jesus' death ("in his blood") fulfills the same function as the blood sprinkling rite oo Yom Kippur in the temple. Paul is thc first to put forward such an interpretation of the U..ao'tiu)lov. Does the idea of an inauguration of Jesus as ilao'tl\ptov encompass a simultaneous aboli1ion of the temple and its priestly cult in the group behlnd tbis tradition? Most interpreters seem to take this for granted, blit it is not necessarily the case. Romans 3:25-26 is at the very least ambiguous. Paul enumerate.'! the temple service (q ~a,;pei.a) positively among the God-given gifts (Romans 9:4), and earlier he states three times that Jesus' inauguration as ilao1:~pLov serves to demonstrate the righteousness ofGod (3:21.25.26). God's righteousness in the eschaton lies in proposing a just way of salvation for both l'a Kraus states "Die in Lev 16 und der jildisehen Traditionsliteratur festzustellende Unterscheidung von Heiligtumssllhne und Person[eu]sühne scheint hier keine Rolle m spielen": Kraus, ikT Tod Jesu als HeiligtutMWelhe, pp. 75-73, here p. 76. 289 See also lhe reviews to Kraus, e.g. by D.P. Bailey, in Journal ofTheological Shldiu 45 (1994) 247-252; and Dunn, The TheQ/ogy o/PaJJI the Apostle, p. 221, note 77.

204 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chri.stianity in the First and Second Centurie:s Jews and Gentiles, although this way cannot be the law, which concerns only Jews. Yet nianc,; is the same for both. Jews and Gentiles continue living according to their statutes, i.e. Christian Jews continue observing Yom Kippur. In Jesus' death God instituted an additional eschatological Yom Kippur, the spiritual blood rite of which equally affects those Jews and Gentiles who manifest niotl<;. If Paul bad wanted to express that this supplement to the temple cult was also a Substitution for it, he could have formulated his sentence differently, underscoring the substitutive effect. 290 In the end, abolition is what is going to happen and the interpretation of Jesus as eschatological i1aat1lpwv was one of the preparatory steps on this path, similar to an Alexandrian Jewish allegoxy. But I doubt that Paul envisaged this, given bis short-term eschatological perspective.

3.3 Paul's Predecessor: The Pre-Pauline Formula Romans 3:24/25-26a* The majority of scholars assume that Romans 3 :24/25-26a is based on a pre-Pauline formula. 291 They base their assumption on the occmrence of a considerable number of hapaxlegomena and some un- or pre-Pauline concepts.292 The exact Iimits and wording oftbis formula arenot agreed upon. While I accept the assumption that Paul is using traditional material, I find that in the modern reconstructions neither the wording of the passage nor its extent are sound enough to form the basis for any further conclusions.293 Paul's Vorlage belongs to a provenance of Greek-speaking Christian Jews, since it is vexy difficult to translate the Greek back to Hebrew I Aramaic. But which Hellenistic Christian Jews? There are crucial differ290 Contra Knöppler, Siihne im Neuen Testament, p. 321, who also speaks of Jesus' death as an eschatological Yom IGppur (p. 320); Merklein, "Der Tod Jesu als stellvertretender Slibnetod," p. 190; U. Wilckens, Der Brief an die Römer (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar 6:1-3; Neukirchen-VIuyn and Zürich, 1978, 1980, 1982), vol. 1, p. 239. 2111 But see e.g. Moo, The Epist/e to the Romai!S, p. 220, who opts for a Pauline origin. 292 See the commentaries for the details. 293 An example ofa maximalist reconstruction is Fitzmyer, who follows Bultmann and Käsemann by beginning with verse 24. To the argwnents mentioned above, Käsemann adds a "rupture" in the strange phrase beginning with a participle. The following is my retranslation of J.A. Fitzmyer's reconstruction in, Roma"s. A New Translation with lntroduction and Commentary (The Anchor Bible 33; New York, 1992), p. 342: "being justitied freely through redemption (wbich comes) in Christ Jesus. wbom God presented as means of expiating sin through bis blood, as a manifestation of bis uprightness for the pardon of past sins committed in the time of bis forbearance." His Greek reconstruction ofthe pre-Pauline formula reads: litKato~avot limpaciv litci 'tfl~ cimlutp.ao--ritPtov sv tijl u.in-ov ai11u.n .e\c; iv&t~w Tfl~ litKil\OO"Vvq~ Qtrtcrii liui "t~Y 1tapacnv "tliiV 1tPGYEYOVO"t(l)Y li.J-LO:Pfl]J-La'tmV iv TTJ ci:vox1J 'tcni 8tcni.

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christian lmaginaire

205

ences among the various pre~Pauline Hellenistic Christian Jewish groups. We know about Stephen's circle, the group behind Hebrews, and communities in Antioch, Damascus, Alexandria and Rome. The group behind the Epistle to the Hebrews is unlikely to have been its author, since Hebrews leaves precisely the key word U.aa't~ptov without Christological interpretation. Stuhlmacher's suggestion ofRo.mans 3:25 having the same origin as Mark 10:45 and Stephen was refuted by Kraus. 294 Paul, however, could have heard an Alexandrian tradition from Apollos or he could even have repeated a reworked Roman tradition that he heard from Aquila and Prisca during his time in Antiach or Damascus and adopted it. Unfortunately, the brevity of the passage precludes taking a more definite position on this important question.

4. Christ as Atonement (i.A.aaJJ.Ö<;): lJohn The first Epistle of John from around 95 CE295 twice uses the term il..aaJI.oc; (Uohn 2:2; 4:10) as an epithet for Christ: 1:7 But if we walk in the light as he hirnself is in the light we have fellowship with one another, and the b1ood of Jesus bis Son cleanses (.:a8api~El) us from all sin. a If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourse1ves, and the truth is not in us. 9 Ifwe confess (Ö!loloyiilll.ev) our sins, he who is faithful andjust will forgive (ö.q,!)) us our sins and cleanse (lc:a8up~) us from all unrighteo11sness. 10 lf we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone sins, we have an advocate (mpÖ.d.lJlov) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and he is the atonement (ilaa11ö~) for (upi) o11r sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

In this is Iove, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atonement (cintan:ll11v lOV viciv airtoil i).aa11civ) for (1relli) our sins.

4:\o

Many scholars view this passage of Hohn against the background of the Day of Atonement. 296 Yom Kippur as background is supported by the 294 Cf. Kraus, Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 194-234, especially pp. 194-200. m Schnelle, Einleitung in d~ Neue Testament, p. S22. 2911 Most of all, R. Brown, The Epistles of John (Anchor Bible 30; Garden City [NY] 1982}, p. 217. J. Ro!off, "Hilasmos," Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament 2

(1990) 186, states: "In the background stands the idea, though it is weakened in comparison to Rom 3:25, of Good Friday as the great eschatological Day of Atonement." R. Bultmann, The Johannine Epistles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, '1978), p. 23, also coonects the tradition to Rom 3:2S but attributes it to the ecclesiastical redactor. J. Lieu, The Theology oftheJohannine Epi.st/es (New Testament Theology; Cambridge [UK], 1991), p. 64, prefers to see here a non-sacriticial understanding.

206 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Christlanity in the First and Second Cenllll'ies mention of purification and coofession in 1:9 and by ilaa116<;. which Philo sometimes uses to refer to Yom Kippur.297 What part ofthe Yom Kippur ritual is alluded to? The mention ofblood in 1 :7 leads some scholars to see a saerificial background behind the concept of atonement. However, the immediate context of I lohn 2:2 calling Jesus a Mp6.d1lt<><; is closer to the notion of an interceding high priest. Raymond Brown connect.s this concept to the Babylonian Jewish tradition, according to wbich the high priest is an advocate before God against aca~ sations by Satan.29' Pbilo, too, portrays the high priest in bis interceding role.299 But as Georg Streckerpoints out, the second interpretation does not invalidate the first.l 00 A further connection to Yom Kippur may be perceived in Uohn 4:10 in the idea of an atoning sending that is reminiscent of the scapegoat t}11ology of Galatians 3:10-14 and 4:4-6; however. lJohn uses not the peculiar

tl;u7t00t6Um but 0:1toodUm.301 The universal aspect of the atonement is new in comparison to all passages discussed bitherto (e.g. Barnabas, Matthew, Hebrews and Romans 3:25).302 llohn emphasizes the abilitY of Jesus to intercede for the (confessed) sins of baptized Christians and clearly refleets a later stagc in the development of early Cbristian thought than the author of Hebrews, who does not admit a second opportunity to repent. Hebrews leaves open the content ofthe high priest's heavenly intercession. Uobn associates the heavenly intercession explicitly with atonement. Assuming the writer of Uohn was familiar with the concept of the once~and-for-all atonement of the heavenly high priest, he adjusted it to his readers, who were in need of an explanation ofwhat happens to post-baptism.al sins.

5. Yom Kippur as Background to Early Cbristological Hymns? Two scholars, Ernst Lobmeyer and James Charlesworth, bave suggested understanding the Christological hymns of Colossians 1: 13-20 and Philippians 2:6-11 against tbe bac.kground of Yom Kippur. The scapegoat as 197 De congressv 6rudiiionis grotia 89.107; Quis reriUJI divillflnlm heres sit 179; De posteritale Coini 48. · m bYoma 20a, cf. Brown, The Epistles ofJohn, p. 217; see above, p. 121. 199 De -vita Mosis 2:26. :lOII Slze(;k:er, The }()ha"nine Lette.rs. A Commentary on 1. 1, and 3 John (Hem~eneia;

Philadelphia, 1996), p. 39.

On tbe typology in Gallltians, sec the discllSSion above, pp. 173-17CS. Howevct, it is not a Cbristian invention, sinc:e it alteady appears in Philo, IAg4tio ad Gai11111 306. 301

302

Yom Kippur lmClgery in the Early Christion Imaginoire

207

possible background to a third hymn, lPeter 2:22-24, was discussed

ea:rlier.3{)3 5.1 Colossians 1:12-20 Ernst Lohmeyer suggested that Yom Kippur lies behind a Christological hymn he located in Colossians 1:13-20.304 Today, most scholars consider 1: 15 as the inception of the hymn and 1:12-14 as an introductory phcase composed by the author of Colossians.305 Many different versions as to how to structure the hymn compete with one another. 306 I will quote the passage, including the frame 1:12(-14) and 1:21-23: 12He [who !ives a life worthy ofthe Lord] thanks the Father, who bas qualitied. you to take part in tbe Iot ofthe saÜ!l\9, (whicb is) in the light. u He [God) b.as rescued (tppilou.1o} us ftom the power of darlcness and transferred (jl€1:iCJUl04V) us into tb.e kingdom @nmÄ.Iliav) of bis beloved Son, 1~ in whom we have the redemption (uno).mpoxnv), the forgiveness (icpeow) of lhe sins. u He [Christ] is tbe image (tia:.ilv) ofthe invisible God, the fli'Stbom (RP!MO~OKOt;) of all creation (Klic:rsm.;); 1~ for in (i;v) him all things were created in heaven and on earth, See p, 178, above. E. Lohmeyer, Der Brief a11 die Kalosser (Kritisch-t!JCegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament; Göttingen, 1961, fll'St edition 1930), pp, 41--68, especially 43-47 and 66-68. For rece.ut Iiterature on Col 1:13-20, see C. Stettler, Der Koiossuhyl11n'IIS. Untersuchungen Zll Form, traditionsgeschichtlichem Hintergrund und Aussage wm Ko/1,15-10 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuc:hungen zum Neuen Testament, second series 131; TUbingen, 2000); 0. Hofius, '"Erstgeborener vor aller SchOpfuog'- 'Erstgeborener aus den Toten.' Erwägungen :zu Struktur und Aussage des Christushymnus Kol 1,15-20," in: idem, Paulrmtudien Il (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen z;wn Neuen Testament 143; Tübingen, 2002; pp. 215-233). JOS Stettfer, Der Kolosserhymnus, pp. 76-94; M. Barth and H. Blanke, Colossians. A New Trans/(lllon with inrroduclion and Commentary (Anchor Bible 34B; New York, 1994), pp. 193-217; P.T. O'Brien, Colos:tians, Philemon (Word Biblical Commentary 44; Waco [Tex.), 1984), pp. 25 a.nd 31-63, esp. pp. 32-37, with much additional litecature; I.-N. Aletti, Colassiena 1,/S-20. Genre et uegbe du texte. Fonction de Ia thilriCltique sapientitl/e (Analccta Biblica 91; Rome, 1981), pp. 1-45; K Schweizer, Der Brief an die Kolroser (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testamenl; Neukirchen-Vluyn and Zllrich, 1976), pp. 44-50. 306 O'Brien, Colossiam, pp. 33-37, gives an overview of various attempts to define stanz.as; the begillning ofthe hymn v. 13, 14, or 15 is debated. Various pans of the hynm have been regardc.d as additlons by tbe writer of Coiossians. For discussion of both questions, soe Hofius, "'Erstgeborener vor aller SchOpfung'," pp. 217-223, wbo regards ''the chun;h" in 1:18 and "through the blood of his UOS$" m 1:20 a.s additions; and Stettler, Der Mlosserhymnu.r, pp. 94-100, who convinci.ngly argues agaiast n~essarily seeing any parts ofthe passage as additlorus. 300

104

208 The Impact ofY()m Kipp11r on Chrislifl11ity in the Fir:ll and Sec()fld Centlll'iu things visible md invisible, wbetber lbro.aes (9p6vo1) or dominions (lCllJl!Onttl':;) wbether JUlers (~ai) or powers (~•n)all tbings bave been created tbrough (1518) him and for (~ bim. n He bimselfis before all lhings, and in him all things hold togelher (~1:ev). " He bimselfis the head ofthe body, the churcb; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might c:ome to have frrst place in everything. 1t For in him all the tullness (lldv"tolfi.'fuxlll,la) was pleased to dwell (K~'Cottc:flGUt), :o and to rec:oncile (liwo~~:a'Eul.l.ä!;.G
Lohmeyer's starting point is his translation of ci1WKiltllllciooiD with "ver~ söhnete" (to reconcile), Which in Gennan is immediately associated with "Versöhnungstag," the Day of Atonement. He understands (uxo)~~:a-cuAMlc:r~ aiD as a synonym for (tl;)llcicncoJla.L. As he considers Colossians a Pauline Ietter, Colossians has to be interpreted against the backgroun.d of the passages containing either of these words and against the background of the Day of Atonement.307 For example, the sacrificial goat308 of Yom Kippur lies bebind the idea of general atonement by the blood of Jesus. Most interesting certainly is Lohmeyer's observation that the combination of creation and atonement reflects the central theme of the festival cycle of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippw. Moreover, in hls opinion, the hymn comhines these themes: indwelling ofGod,ldngdom, condemnation ofthe forces of eviJ, universal forgiveness and redemption -themes counected to tbe days spanning Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippurin rabbinie and liturgical texts.309 Lobmeyer's thesis was modified and expanded by Stanislas Lyonnet. who investigated the relationship of this hymn to the special additions in

Lohmoyer, Der Brief an die Kolosser, p. 66. Lohmeyer refcrs to 1he sacdficiallamb! An obvious Japse of a Christian theologiao used ta Passover terminology and Isa !13. Did somelhing similar happen to the autbor of the Gospel of 1o1m? 30!1 Lohmeyer, Der Briefon die Kolosser, p. 43-46. 3'" 3111

YOIII Kippurlmagery m the Early Christia" lmaginaire

r.1he New Year Amidah, Malfchuyyot,

209

Zikluonot and Shofarot, 310 which in

:;.:~ became c::losely linked with the Yom Kippur liturgy.m Lyonnet, ~;pointed out that p~or to Colossians

1:20 the verb el~t)vono~ appears only ~~~ce, in a Philomc passage on Rosh Hashanah and 1n Proverbs.m ~;:., ~ l.,ohJneyer's thesis did not win wide approval, and Lyonnet is not even ~;quoted in manyrecent.commentaries and studies on C~Jossians.~ 13 Eduard :-;;-s.chweizer argued agam.st Lohmeyer that the Yom Kippur motJfs appear ~~'bnly in the frame ofthe hymn (1:13-14), not in the text ofwhat cameto be l?~een in seholarship as the hymn itself (1:15-20). 314 Christian Stettler's ~ more recent. extensive study argues that tb.e textual basis for the con~ ~ ~ptual association of creation, atonement and recreation with New Year ~' ..d Yom Kippur, and the relationship of both festivals in Second Temple 0;texts ~· ' is too slight to serve as evidence.m Accorciing to him, texts about r:R.osh Hashanah predating the destruction of the temple do not speak about ::; reeonciliation in the sense of forgiveness of sins, and texts about Yom \~':,kippur hardly at all about creation. 31 ' Moreover, the two festivals should ('notbe regarded as a unit since they are separated by 10 days. '~';';' Unfortunately, very few data are available on the festival of Rosh ~5Ha!ibanah in the time of the Second Temple.317 Philo emphasizes the :-.

; ''·ste n"1!lW ,:nm-ot .m~'m ("kingdoms," "commemorations.," "trumpe13"). Oa tbe eady

:•:Jnstocy ofthese additionJ to the Amidah, see the literatlll"e given above, p. 49, note 179.

-'2 sn. S. Lyonnet. "L'hymne christologiq_ue de 1'6pitre aux Colossiens et la fete juive du :''uouvel an," Recherehes de. Science Religieuse 48 (1960) 93-100. . . JU. Philo, De :specialib11S /egibus 2:188·192; the other passage is Prov 10:.10; cf. also ' Matt 5:9; lhe substantive appears also in Xenopbon, Hellenico 6:3:4. See LyoBDet, ('1-"hymne cbristologit{ue de l'llpilre aux Colossiens," pp. 96-97.

i' }0

Exa:ptiom are Leonhardt, JtMish Wor8hip i1l Philo of A.lezWiilria, p. 42; Aletti.

:>Colossiensl.IS-20, p. 91. ·' ~·,~• Schweizer, Der BriefIJ1I dte J(olosser, p. SS. Jl~ See Stettler, Der Kolonerhyrnmu, pp. 6-10 on Lohmeyer, pp. 266-299 on : '\V!Iß!lbnung und Frilden," and pp. 32G-323 on Rosb Huhauah and Yom Kippar as : _blckground. He concludes: "Die Textbasis ist ••• zu .schmal, so dass wir kaum davon ::, liuJgehea ktlnnen, dass der Schöpfer des HymDUS besagten Festzyklus (from Rosh :\Hash1lllah to Yom Kippur] beWilSSt im Auge gehabt hätte, oder auch nur, dass die in ~'imserem Christuspsalm verarbeiteten Tn~ditionen voo Schöpfung, Stlbne und Nelir;$cböptimg schon. in jenem jüdischen Festzyklus in einem inneren Zusammenbang ~: ~standen bitten." (pp. 322-323). ~;?14 Stettler, Der Ko/QiserhymmiS, refers to Sir 50:22 as the only text Unlc.ing Yom ?/.<:fGj1pur and creation. ~!:'317 E.g., 1QS Rule of the Commvnity x:6; llQTemple Scroll xxv:l-10. Soru of !be f~;FiWiYal Prayer fragments may belong to Rosh Hashanab. Philo mentions lhe festival in ~~pe s~ecialibus legibus, 2:138-192. See LeO.Dbardt, JtMish Worship in Phüo of Alu~ ~'/prdna, p.41; Pseudo·Philo, Liber Antiquitatum Biblican~m 13:6. In general, see ),

210 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chriatitlnity in the First and Secoml Centuries trumpets and links the festival with the UDiversal significance and blessing of the lawgiving at Sinai and God as peacemak:er between the powers of the world and nature. The Liber .Antiquitatum Biblicarum states that on New Year "I will declare the number ofthose who are to die and who are born.,'318 Although it does not speak explicitly about judgment it clearly goes beyond creation, taking up the well-known theme of God deciding on New Year who istolive and who to die. 319 This calls to mind two Festival Prayers from Qumran that were probably used on Yom Kippur in and beyond the Qumran community and refer to creation and the indwelling of God in the commUDity.320 Moreover, the langnage ofthe "lot ofthe saints in the light" ( 1: 12) is strongly reminiscent of Qumran texts, and the victocy over the powers of darkness and evil is a strong theme expressed in 1Enoch 10, llQMelchizedek and Hebrews on Yom Kippur.~1 None of these elements are univocal markers; they appear also in texts with no connection to Yom Kippur. Deutero-Isaiab abounds in references corubining creation and atonement. And Acts 26:18 mentions the redemption ofthe saints ftom the powers of darkness. However, Colossians 1:12-23, in particular 1:15-20, combines many elements associated with Yom Kippur. Finally. as Stettler hirnself rem.arks, the fact that the author of Colossians framed the hymn by taking up the words ''redemption,. ( bo:A.t!tpmat v) and «forgiveness" (iiqn>otv) of sins in 1:14 and "reconcile,. (
P. Lenhardt, "Neujahrsfest. Jll. Judentum," Theologische Realenzyldopädie 24 (1994) 322-324. 3 " Liber Antiquitatufll Biblican~fll 13:6, tnmsl. DJ. Harrington, ..Pseudo-Phllo," in: J. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old TestaMent P3eudepigraplra. Yol. 2. (New York, J9U; pp. 297-317), here p 321. See also Jacobson, A Com.mentary on Pse11do-Philo's Liber Antiqultatum Biblicarum, vol. l, pp. 512-S 15. 319 See bRH 16b; ef. tRH 1:13;yRH1:3, 57a. l2ll 1Q34 3 ii // 4QS09 97+98 i includes the motif of f.rcation, and 4QS08 2 1-6 explieitly mentions God's indwelling in the commUDity. See above pp. 42-43. m See pp. 85-92 and 185-187, above. 3n Stettler, Der Ko/Q!Iserlrymnus, pp. 102-103. He sees baptism or the Euf.harist as the most likely candidates. This is obviously a post-Jewish perspective.

Yom Kippr~r lmagery in the Early Christian /maginaire

211

5.2 Philippians 1:6-1 I

James Charlesworth has suggested Yom K.ippur as a baekground to Philippians 2:6--11 :323 [Christ Jesus] 6 being in the form of God, did not regard as robbery (oiplarrpov), to be equal with God324 1 hut emptied bimself, taking dte form of a slave, being bom in human likeness. And being found in buman fonn, 1 he humbled bimself {"IUU!i- OO.utöv) md became obedicn( to the poi.ot of death [even deatb on a cross. ].W 9 Therefore God also higbly exalted hlm and gave bim the name that is above every name, 10 so that at lhe name of Jesus every lcnee should beud, in heaven and on cri aod under the earth, 11 and every tonguc should eonfeu (~011~1): lhe Lord Jesus Christ to the glory of God the Father.

m J.H. Charlesworth, "A Prolegomenon to a New Study of the Jewish Background of the Hymns and Prayers in the N~ Testament," Journal ofJewish Studies 33 (1982) 26528:5, here p. 279, note 46. The Iiterature on this passage is vast. Recent treatments include 0. Hoflus, Du Christushymnw; Phillppu 2,6-1 l (Wissenschaftliche UnteBuchungeo zum Neuen Testament 17; Tilbingen. '1991); G.D. Fee, Pm~l's Letter to the Philippians (New International Commentary to the New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1995}, pp. 24-38 and 191-229; M. Boclanuehl, '"The Form ofGod' (Phil. 2:6) Variations on a Theme of Jewish Mysticism," Jownal ofTheological St.dies 48 (1997) 1-23; S. Vollenwcider, "'Der 'Raub' der Gottgleichheit: Bin Religionsgeschicbtlicher Vom:hlag zu Phil2.6-(ll)," New Tutame11t Sl11diu 45 (1999) 413-433. That the hymnal charaaer is now hotly debated does not affett the discussion of i&S background See in particolar R. Bruelcner, 'Christushymnen' oder 'epldeilctische' Pt18sagen? Studien zum Stilwechsel im Neuen Testament t11td seiner UIJfWelt (FoBchu:ngen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neueu Testaments 176; G6ttingen, 1997); and G. Kennel, Frlihchristliche Hymnen? Gathlngskrftlrche Studien :ntr Frage nach den Liedern der frühen Clvistrmheit (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 71; Ne~hen Vluyn, 199S). especially, pp. 22-46 on the history of the research. m For various solutions to trauslating this difticult verse, see N.H. Young, "An Aristophanic Cantrast to Philippians 2:6-7," New Testament Stu.dles 45 (1999) 153-15:5. 325 This line breaks the rbythm ofthree lines; ifthe song is pre-Pauline, the Une may be a Pauline addition; see Lohmeyer, Kyrios Jesus, p. 44.

212 The Impact ofYom KipJ111r on Christiontty in the First and Second Centuries Cbarlesworth did not expound thc basis for bis suggestion, but some mot.ifs might indeed refer to Yom Kippur. in particular the pronunciation of the divine name (2:9), the universal prostration (2:10) and the solemn confession in the last line (2:11). The humbling (2:8) may be connected to Leviticus 16:29-34. AJthougb God's namewas probably pronounced evcry day in the temple with people prostrating, a universal prostration matcbes the image oftheSeder Avodah, where not only those present in the temple fall on their knees. However, we do not know if a Seder Avodah was already part of some synagogue liturgies in the time of tbe Second Temple. The background oould be any solemn pronunciation of tbe divine nam.e. A oonnection of Philippians 2:6-11 to Yom Kippur's liturgy is possibie but speculative.

6. Historical Synthesis Wehave now come to the point ofbaving to put the fmdings ofthe various investigations into their historical context. Before discussing what can be leamt from these texts ab<M the various attitudes toward the ritual and imaginaire of Yom Kippur (6.3), we need to examine who among l:he Christian Jews in tbe first century were observing Yom K.ippur (6.1) and who not, and why they wcre not (6.2)?326 It is commonly assumed tbat Yom Kippur - together witb the other Jewish festivals of autumn - ceascd to be observed from the vcry beginning of Christianity, except by ..abnormal"' Jewish·Christians. 327 No n6 For additional thoughts on this topic, see now Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra, "'Christians' Celebrating 'Jewish' Festivals of Autumn," in: P.1. Tomsoo' and D. Lamben-Petry (c:ds.), The Image of tlre Judaeo-Christi(I1U in Ancient Jewish 011tl Christion Llterature. Papers Delh>ered at the Coilaqui11.m ofthe llutit&~tum Iutlaicum, Bruuel618-19 November,1001 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchwlgen zum Neuen Testament 1SS; TnbiDgen, 2003; pp. 5373) {in print]. ~ 7 M<mly, Yom Kippur is not even mentio.ned among early ChristiliD- i.e. as being a Christian Jewish observancc: seo e.g. T. Schramm, ..Fescc. IV. Urchristentum," Religion in Geschlchu und Gegenwart' 3 (2000) 91-93; H.·D. Wendland, "Feste und Feiern m. Im Urchristentum.,. Religion ill Geschichte 1111tl Gegenwort3 2 (1958) 917-919. George Buclumau, one of the few scholars to have addressed thc festival elllendars of Jewish Cbristians. reveals a Gentile Christian perspecrive when he admits, witb rcluctance, lhe possibiltty that tbey observcd Yom Kippur; see G.W. Buchanan, "Worship, Feasts and Ceremonies in tbe Early Jewish-Cbristian Chun:h," New TestDment Sffldie.s 26 (1980) 279-297: "The church fathers accused tbe Jcwish·Christians of observing the feast days of the Jews. lhis docs not mean that all Jewish-Christians observed all tbe feasts of popular Judaism or tbat they rejected all the feasts observed by Gentilo-Christiaos. They observed the Sabbadt and also tbe Lord's Day. They eelebrated Passover on lhe

Yom KippiiT lmagery in the EIZI'Iy Clll'isti<m lmaginolre

213

less an authority _than Martin Hengel, the nestor of New Testament scholarship, recently affinned tbat the author of Luke--Acts considered Yom K.ippur tobe obsolete: "Ich kann mir [nur] ... schwer vorstellen, daß nach dem Tag auf Golgatha für Lukas wie für die Judencluisten am Jom Kippur fl1r Israel noch Silbne gewirkt wurde."328 Two arguments are usually raised to support tbis conclusion. First, theologically, the typc>logizations of Vom Kippur in Hebrews and in Romans 3:25 are Ullde:rstood to entail the abolishment of Yom Kippur- the great high priest -Jesus bad already completed tbis task. Second, the New Testament does not describe any individual or group observing Yom K.ippur.

6.1 The Observance of Yom Kippur by First-Century Christians :Let os start with the second argument. I want to emphasize that all the data about fue ''what" and the "how., of worsbip in earliest Christianity are essentially circumstantial and relatively scant. To claim from an argumentum e silentio, therefore, that a certain festival was no longer obsen'ed is a weak argument. Pentecost, for example, seems to have played a prominent role in Jaying the foundation of the Churcb, yet the evidence for actual celebration of this festival in the first and second centuries is very scant. ll9 How then can we be sure that one or more of tbe communities represeoted by the New Testament writings or some second-century Jewish Cbristian communities did not observe the central Jewish feasts and fasts? It is true that neither Jesus nor bis disclples are ever described as observing Yom Kippur; but neither are they depicted as transgressing its commandments. Statements in the Gospels about fasting refer to weekly fasts and to the ascetic Iifestyle of overachievers like lohn the Baptist. Regarding the temple cult we can infer from the so-called "cleansing" of $e temple tbat Jesus seems to have regarded the temple primarily as a place of prayer. But passageil such as Matthew 5:24 provide evidence that fourteenth of Nisan, but they may also have celebrated the resurrection at Easter. They may or may not have observed the Jewish Feaat of Wecks instead of, or in addition to, Pentecost. lt i& uncertain whether they observed New Year~ Doy, the Day qfAJooement, fl1rd the Feast ofTabernaclu withpopular Judaism in thefall" (p. 297; empblsis added). Unfurtunatcly, even the laudable Theologische Realenzykloplldle, which for tße most part hQ excel!ent entries on topies related to Judaism will not have aseparate entry on Vom Kippur when it is publisbed. JD M. Hengel, "Der Jude Paulas und sein Volk. Zu einem neoen Acta-Kommentar" Th11ologische R11nd&chcru 66 {2001) 338-368, here p. 358, rcferring to Luke 22:19-20 and Acts 8;32-33 and 20:28, discussing whether Luke assigns an atoning function to the doath of lcsus. Rengel also rcfers to a habilitation of U. Mittmann-R.ichert (2002) {noo vidi). · -~ G. Rouwhorst, "The Origins and Evolution of Eady Christian Pentecost," Studia J!atri.dica 3S (2001) 309-322.

214 Tht I111poct ofYom Kippw' on Chri:ftianity in the First aml Second Celtluries Jesus regarded also the purification and sin offerings in the temple as part of his conception of Judaism. In the introduction, I mentioned antbropological arguments that turn upside down the common presumption that Christians immediately ceased observing Jewish festivals: the conservatism of ritual in general and of collective ritual in particular.330 Without evidence to the contrary, the working assumption sb.ould be that most Christian Jews, after hearing about Jesus, continued to observe the same fcstivals 8S they bad done beforc. Philo and Josephus boa.st that many Godfearers observed Yom K.ippur. 331 Accordingly, there is no reason to assume that either Jesus or his immediate followers did not observe the abstentions of Yom Kippur orthat they disregarded the temple ritual. Unambiguous support for the thesis that at least one Christian community, that of Luk:e-Acts, observed Yom Kippur's fast, can be deduced ftom tbe only New Testament passage explieitly mentioning Yom Kippur. Aets 27:9: 332 Sec above, pp. 6-7. Philo, De vila .Mosts 2:20-23; Josophus, Contra Apicmem 2;282. A f.unous Amorak Pale.stiDian legend about Ant.oninus ifnplies that many God-fearers wore inferior shoes (mn!l ?:Vlll) on Yom Kippur: see yMeg 3:2, 14a;ySanh 10:8, 29e. 332 Some c:onuu.entators have noted that Luke uses the Jewish calendar, albeit without drawing conclusions regarding the observanee of Yom Kippur by Luke and bis addressees: see 1.A. Fitzmyer, The Acls of the Apastles. A New Translation wlth lntTodvctlon and Commentary (Anchor Bib1e Commentary 31A; New Yorlc, 1998), p. 715; B. Witherington. The Act.s of the Apostles. A. Socio-Rhethorical Commentary (Grmd Rapids (Mic:h.), 1998), p. 762. See also DJ. Williams,Acu (A Good News Commentaty; San Pnncisco, 1985), p. 432; W. Schmithals, Die Apostelgeschichte des Lvkas (Zillcher Bibelkommentare, Neues Testament 3,2; Zürich, 1982), p. 236; K. Lake and lU. CadbUl)', The Begirrnings ofChristianity Plll'tl. The:Acts oftlre Aposrlu. Yol. JY &glüh Translation and Commetttary (Grmd Rapids (Mich.], 196.5- repr. 1932), p. 328; and,. way back, H.B. Haclc::ett, A Commentary on lhe Original Tut ofthe Acts ofthe Apoat/e$ (Bosm11, 1367), p. 418. . However, somc oommentators queslion here whether Paul observed Yom Kippur: see R.P.C. Haoson, The Acts in the Revised StQttdard Yeriion. With lntrocluction and Com~ me111ary (The New Clarendon Bible; Oxford, 1967), p. 24.5; J.D.G. Dunn, The Acts ofthe Apo:~tlu (NiUTI.tive Commentaries; Valley Forge [Penn.), 1996), p. 333; H. Conzelmann, Acts ofihe A.postles (Henneneia; Pblladelpnia, 1987), p. 216; and, much earli.er, E. Jacquier, Le.' Actelf des A.potl"es (Etudes bibliques lll; Paris, 1926), p. 726. lbis possibility that Paul observed Yom Kippw: il; categorically denied by C.K. Barrett, A Critic<~l and Exeglllical Comm~ntary on the Acts of the Apostles (2 vols; International Ccitical Commentary 44; Edinburgb, 1994, 1998). Amoog more recent commentaries, see also R. Pescb, Die Apostelge.schichte. (Evangelisch Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament S; Zürich, NeuldrchenVluyn, 1986); F.F. Bruce, The Book ofthe Acts (New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grmd Rapids [Mich.], 1988); J. Jervel~ Die Apostelgeschichte. 0be1'setzt vnd erldlJrt (Kritisch·exegetischer Kommentar Ober d\l$ Neue Test.ament 3; GöttinJlO

331

Yom Kippur lrnaguy in th« EIJI'ly Christion /rnaglnaire

21 S

27:~ Sioce

much time had beeo lost and sailiag was now dangerous, because even the Fast .bad already gone by (5ui. '<Ö .:ai .:ijv -vqon:iav li3tl apclttl.-ueiv~n), Paul advised them, 10 saying, "Sirs, I can see tbat the voyage will be with danger and much heavy loss, not only ofthe cargo aod tbe ship, but abo of our lives."'

Luke may have been a God-fearer writing to God-fearers. 333 Wben he employed 1\ VTJG'ttia as a ehronological reference he apparently presumed his readers would understand what he was talking about. 334 Commentators are unanimous in interpreting -.; VIJO'tsia as referring to the fast of Yom Kippur. The word Vl}O'teia appears with complete neutrality in the context, without polentical or pejorative accretions. In the same way, a modern Jew would understand a friend saying in late summer that he will retum ..after the holidays" as meaning at the end of Sukkot. We can therefore assume that the attitude ofLuke and his addressees to the fast ofthe Day of Atonement wastothat of a revered and observed festival. Moreover, supporting this opinion, Luke does not include interpretations of Jesus' death as atonement and even elimioates them fiom bis source, Mark. 335 Aeoordingly, one of the theological reasons to abolish Yom Kippur did not exist for Luke. Consequently, this reading of Acts 27:9 refutes the second argument for the thesis tbat Christians immediately stopped observing Yom Kippur namely, tbat the New Testament does not describe any individual or group observing thls festival. Paul's Episde to the Romans 14:5-{i provides further evidence for "Christians" observing "Jewish" festivals:

gen. 1998); W. Eckey, Die Apostelgeschichte. Der Weg dtt~ Evangeli11m:s von Jerwalem

nacJr Rom (Neukirclteo-Vluyn, 2000). :m See J. Tyson, Imoge:s of JrlliQi:sm in Lulce-Act:~ (Columbia, 1992), pp. 19-41; and idem, "lcws and Judaism ln Luke-At:ts: Read!ng a:1 a Godfearer," New TesttJmeht St11dies 41 (1995) 19-38. 3)4 Again.st lhe argument tbat Luke may have copied a souree without attention (in this case the "we-sour~:e"), I would polnt to other verses where Luke-Aets betrays a cllliSe aequaintauce with Jewish tradition: e.g. Aets I: 12 (a Sabbath day' s joumey); and I 8: 18; 21:24 (Nazirite vow); and see 6:1 var. lect. {the :second-first [?] Sabbath). It ls illumiDatiDg ro compare commentators on the Lulce-Acts u.se of Passover (Acts 12:4; 20:6; 22:1; ef. 18:21 vor. lect.), Pe.utecost (Acts20:16) or the Sabbath (Luke 4:31-32; 6:6; 13:10; 23:56; Aces !3:14.42.44; 15:13; 17:2; 18:4; 20;7) ar measures oftirne and the question as to the observan~:e of each of these festivaJs by Luke or Paul. m What might have boen Luke's opinion regarding the higll-priestly ritual? Luke connects the proto-ChristJan community vecy closely wilh the Jerusalem temple. They visit tbe temple daily. Even Paul demonstrates his respec:t for the temple by bringing offerings. Luke claims !hat a group of priests joiDcd tbe Je$US movement. But the temple was no Ionger atanding at the time Luke was w:ritiDg the GOiSpei Bild Acts, and his positive attitude to the temple is therefore rather nostalgic.

.:i

216 The Impact ofYom Kipptzr 011 Clrristiarril:y in lhe First and Secon4 Cemu,.it:s

14:s Some jud.&e one day tobe better tban another, whi1e others judge all days to be -~ alilal. Le.t ~II be t\dly convinced in their own minds. 6a Those wbo observe the day;.~ observe tt m houor of the Lord. 336 .·:.

Accordingly, whoever wants either to observe or not observe festivaJs is-,' free to do so, as lang as he/she is consistent and is doing so on behalf God (and not e.g. for social or economic reasons). There is no reason to'5 assume that for some members ofthe community Yom Kippur was not one ;~ of these "days... Paul apparently assumed that part of the Roman commun;. ::: ity observed Jewish festivals, and he gave it the freedom to do so. How~) ever. this passage reveals a conception that is an important step away froni ·: regarding the observance offestivaJs as obligatory. 331 ? Tbc author of Colossians rails against people, perhaps (Christian) Jew~ •·: ish missionaries,3~' who demand from Christian Gentiles the observan" of•.:! such Jewish rites as kasbrut, the Sabbathand the New Moon. · •;;

od

er)

Therefore nobody sha.ll judge (~qn..m.) you with regard to food and drink eoncetniD& a festival, New Moou, or sabbaths. 11 These aTe a shadow (G!Cii) of·': what was to come, the body (CJiils.uz) of Cbrist. 11 Nobody shall disqualifY yoJ!i ;; delighting in self·abasemellt and worship of tbe a~~&els, which he has seen opoli. :;~ enteriog, puffed up with~u.t cause by his tleshly mind, 19 aod not holding fast tO\; the head, ftom whom the whole body, nourished and held together by its joints and , ; Iigaments. grows with the growth tbat is from God. 339 · .<

1:16

Accordingly, these missionaries observed the regular Jewish festivals - · almost certainly including Yom Kippur. The author of Colossians regarded · ; such observance as improper if it was based on tbe cosmologicaJ presup- :-: positions criticized by him. However. he "is not condemning the use of _: ,,. Rom 14:5-6, NRSV. ~7

:

(n Gal4: 10, Paul warns bis readers not to "'observe special days, and months, and ·:: seasons. and ycar.s.," probllbly refi)rring to pagan festivals with an astrological back'- ', grouttd. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the refer~ce to "spccial y~" 11gailut Ii -) Jewish background in the Diaspora, as Sabbath years and Jubilees are valid only in the ..' land of Israel. Another, less probable but very c::ommon reading is to understand this ·.: passage as refening to Jewish festivals that Jewish..Chcistian missioDllries tried to impo3e : on Gentile Christians. similac to the situation pertaining in Colossians. In this case, it is . almost c:enain lhat these Jewi.sh-Christian missionaries obsel'\led the festivals dleY ; wanted to impose on others, includillg Yom Kippur. .· .· 331 T.he exact identity of the opponents of the author of Colossians is tl>nlrOVCI."$iaJ .. ; Barthand Blanke, Colos&ians (pp. 37&-387) assUI)le that the opponents consider them,. S selves to be Christians and have a strong affinity to the Old Testautent but are outside lhe :) Colossian community. Stettler, Der Koloaserhymn11s, pp. 58-74, sees Jewish mystics and") Torab·faithful Jews outside the community as opponents ofthe Epistle. ·· l$9 Col2:16-20, my translation based on the NRSV. On this passage, see O'BrieD,.. ·: ColossiaM, Phtlemon, pp. 135-1!16; SchweiZer, Der Briefan die Kolosser, pp. 118-130(~ Barthand BlaDke, Colossia118, pp. 336-355. ·:1

Yom KippJJI'lmagery I• the Eorl, Chriatian ImagiMire

217

;~ days or seasons ~ such; it is ~e wrong moti~~ involved when the [bbsen'ance of the days 1s bound up wtth the recogrut1on of the eiemental ? . 'irits."340

~-Neville

Tidwell suggests that Didache 14:1 attests to an observance of ~(;~ IGppur by this community. 341

f·'

1.t 1 On tbe Lord's Day of the LORD (~~:crcli JNPI«Ja\v öi JeqJiov) gather togethcr and break bread and give tbanks, having fust confes.sed your sins so lbat your sacrifice -,.__ -- tll8Y be pUR. 1 But let no one who hu a quam:l with a companion join you uotil •- · lhey bave been rcconciled, solbat your saerifice may not be detiled. l Fortbis is the sacrifice conceming which has beeil said by the LOlD (\lrlö lC'UPiov). "In every ::r; ·• place and time offer UJ.e a pure sac:rifice, for I am a great king, says the LoRD ~.' · (Ml'o. ~ and my name is JDan'elous (8o.up.oiROv) among the oations" ~tr (Maladli I : 11.14).342

i.\' _

:f .

:~rding to

Tidwell, the hapaxlegomenon md lectio difficilior m-ui lCU::~~v &t JCUPiou in the Hierosolymitanus of Didache 14:1 is a pleonastic :~tism imitating 11n:1111 n::1111, one ofthe names ofYom Kippur.343 The use ~fli:UPiov without t.he article corresponds to the Septuagint's translati0118 of ~:.~Pecial superlative found in the Hebrew Bible using the Tetragrammaton: i-~ÖA the Lord's Day of the LoRD," meaning "the most solem.n day of the iUnd's days." The Syrian ChristiBn term Kt!pto:dj distinguishes the l!bristian holiday from the Jewish Sabbath.344 Didache 14:1 is therefore ;~:St ~derstood as equivalent to "Sabbath of Sabbatbs," i.e. Yom Kippur. the major topic of Didache 14. confession and reconciliation, matches the :~ement in Mishnah Yoma 8:9 tbat "Yom Kippur atones for transgres" :$iQns between a man and bis fellow man only after Ire has placated the fel_:iöw Jl}811." Furthennore, the marvelous name of the LORD plays an impor" -~t rote in Didache 14 as weil as during t.he Yom Kippur temple ritual. /fhe ritual meal alluded to would bave taken place on the eve of Yom

::tGppur. ~~: Tidwall's SUggestion does not convince me. While the confession, the .feconciliation and the significance assigned to God' s name evoke the as-

j~ciation of Yom Kippur, the sacrificial common meal seems to take place ~~fi~:''tbe Lord's Day of the LoRD" ifjjelf and therefore comes closer to an ~~: .. :.-·.

;~~-

O'Brien, Colotsiant, Philemon, p. 139. N. Tidwell., "Didache XIV:l (KATA KYPIAKHN &E KYPIOY) revisited," Jligiliae ~fhi'i$tianal1 53 (1999} 197--207. *;~,. Didache 14:1-3, 1ransl. Holmes adapted to Tidwell's article. ;~\~ Seubove, pp. 16-17. ~~~ · This tenll appears also in cf. Rev 1:10; Ignatius. To th11 Magnuia/'18 9:1; Gospel of ~P~kr 9:35; 12:50; Aposto/ic CoMtitution& 7:30:1- for tbe text and a French translatfon (,~ee M:. Metzger, Les Constitutions apostoliquu (3 :vols; SC 320, 329, 336; Paris 1985. ~!J&6, 1987), here SC 336, pp. 60-61.

:(}'1 .

218

Th~ Impact

o/YDM Kippur on Christionity in the First ond Second Centvries

anti-ritual against Yom K.ippur similar to the pork barbeque that some

secular Jews hold on the Day of Atonement in our times.145 Furthermore, though ''the Lord's Day of the LoRD" could be a pun on 11n:n11 n::1t11, the sentence does not give any date. lt could a.s weil be Easter. If we under-

stand Jeatci 1Cllpta10\v oo K\ll)tOU in a pleonastic sense, as do the majority of commentators. the meal takes place on a Sunday.346 Moreover, the addition to the quotation of Malachi "in every place and time••341 supports such an interpretation much better than does an understandlog of the day as being Yom Kippu.r. Therefore, if there is any connection to Yom K.ippur in Didache 14, it seems to me more likely tbat it presents Sunday a.s a substitut.ion for Yom Kippur-an interpretation that matches other Halakhot in the Didache on fasting and the Sabbath as distinguishing the community from (other) Jews.141 If Luke's community, parts of the Roman community and the opponents of Colossians observed Yom Kippur,349 what about the various Jewish Christian groups of the second and subsequent centuries? Even here, we are entirely dependent on hypotheses, since the sources are not explicit about any festival observed by Jewish Christians. Jam.es, tbe brother of Jesus, one of the leaders of the Aramaic-speaking Christian Jewish community in Jerusalem until bis lyncbing in 62 ca, is closely assooiated with the temple. As will become clear below, Hegesippus' depiction of James a.s a permanently interceding high priest in tbe holy of holies might be understood as polemicizing against the Jewish Cbristian observation of the fast of Yom K.ippur as a single day of intercession.350 It appears that some Jewish Christians stiU observed the Day of Atonement while others, even some ciose to Jewish Christianity, considered the day obsolete for Cbristians.

Was the confession public as portrayed in Didache 4:14'2 See, e.g. K. Nieckrwinuner, Di~ Didoche (Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vätern 1; Göltingen, 1993), pp. 234-240,esp. p. 23S; W. RordorfandA. Tuilier,Ladoctrine des do11Z1 apdtru (Didacltl). l11troduction, Texte, Traduction, Notu, Appendice lll Inda (SC 248; Paris, 1978), p. 6~. ,., See R.P. Gordon, "Targumic Parallels lo Acts XIII18 and Didaehe XIV 3,.. Novum Teslamentum 16 (1974) 285-289, here p. 287 referring to Targum Jonathan Mall:ll. ""' The Dtdache q11otes onlyMall:ll and 1:14, omitting 1:12-13, v~es that are often used in anti-Jewish polemic:s: see Niederwimmer, Die Didach~, p. 240. However, verses 12 and 13 would not mateh the pr-esent Eucharistie context. 349 Unfornmatt.>ly, it remains unclear to wbich "appointed times and hours" (q,~u; ~~:alp(li; ~~:ai mpa~) lClement 40:1·-S is referring. ar which the Cbri.stian offerings are to bc performed. 3 ~ See below, pp. 246-2.50. 34!1 3~

Yom Kippur Imagery in the Eorly Christian lmaginflirt

219

6.2 The Abolition of Yom Kippur by First- and Second-Century ChristiariS At some point after Jesus' death, in different communities at different times, some followers of Jesus ceased to obscrve Yom Kipp ur. Again. our data are circumstantial and consist mainly of explicit polemies against Yom Kippur. Herewe have to distinguish, however, between the negative attitudes toward the Y om Kippur temple ritual and attitudes toward the ritual of the people. Disregarding the temple ritual does not mean neglecting the popular abstentions such as the fast. In other words. even if a tex:t considers Christ's death as abolishing or replacing the temple ritual, this says nothing about the attitude of its author and its readers toward the fast of Yom K..ippur. Hengel made his above-cited statement in a discussion about the attitude of Luke to the temple and the sacrificial cult of Yom Kippur and deduced from this Luke's attitude toward the festival as such.:m However, even though the author of Luke-Acts polemicized against the sacrificial cult he continued to respect the fast and prayer ofthe people on Yom Kippur. Moreover, theory and practice do not always conveJ:ge. Even if Luke rcgarded Chrlst's death as atoning - and this assumption is controversial - he may have continued to observe the communal fast and prayer of Yom K.ippur- just as other Jews and God~fearers fasted and participated in the prayer services of the Second Temple perlod when the high priest was actually effecting atonement on behalf of them in the temple. Of the first-century texts. only Barnahaa explicitly argues against the popular participation in the fast, substituting for it the Eucharist: Deapite the fact that a commandment was wrltten that "whosoever does not keep the fast shall die the death,''332 tbe Lord coiDIIUUlded this [i.e. to eat], because be himself w-<11 going to offer the vessel ofthe spirit as a sacrificc for our :.ins •.. you alone shall eat, while the people fast and mourn in sackeioth and asttes." 3

This substitution may have been part of the proto-typology, i.e. it may have occWTed very early. Beyond this passage, it is possible that the author of Colossians is propagating the abolition of all festivals. 354 Nevertheless. we cannot extrapolate froro these texts an anti-Yom Kippur attitude in other communities - as shown in Luke and Romans. Only in lhe second century are more voices raised explicitly against the fast ofYom Kippur.m The anonymous Epistle to Diognet (second or third century CE) holds forth: m See above, p. 213. s Cf. Lev 23:29. m BarnubtJS 7:3.S.

3 2

See also above, p. 216, note 337,on Gal4:10. See my earlier analy.sis of tbe ambiguous pbrase of Tertullian (above, p. 157, note 40). Justin, notably, does not polcmicize against the "obsolete "fast ofYom Kippur. , 54

)5S

220 The i.tllpact uf Yom Kipp~~r on Christianil)l mthe Fir!lt and SecOf'ld Centuri(Q

:"·~

;;~!

And um I supposc that you are espec:ially anxious to hear why Christians do aot .:,J worship in the .same way as the Jews. The Jews indeed, iruofar as they from the kind of {pagan] worship described above, rightly clai.:n:l to we~rship tlii •) one God ofthe universe aod tothink ofbim. a.s Master.... But with regard to tbeir ;~ qualms (voq103u.;) regarding mcats, and the super$tition (ÖiltGlÖO.q.lomv) concem~ -:: the Sabbath, and the false pretension (~~iclv) in cir<:umcision, and the hypo.·:'; crisy (liipmniuv) about the Fast (11\tö vqcrcsia~) aod the New Moon, I do not thinit. j that you need to learn from me that they are ridiculous and not wonh a word. ,,. :3

abstain't

.·.'~

Likewise Arlstides {117-161 CE):

'·

;j

Nevenheless they [the Jews] too emd from true lcnowledge and in lhe.it Imagination they think to serve God, wherea.s by their mode of observaoce it is tO .;: the augels and not to God tbat their service is re.adered - as wben they celebratc . 1 Sabbatbs and New Moons, and feasts of Uoleavened Bread, and the Grea.t Fasr, ; and Casting and circumcision aud the purification of food -things, however, which ·,; ' ·: lhey do oot observe perfectly.357

These are clear-cut polemies against observances regarded as Jewish anif._,;

therefore non-Cbristian, inclnding the fast of Yom Kippur. We do not, ;: however, have lhe means to cstimatc how many people stood behind the .: one position or the other in the second century. ' Further evidence in favbr of the abolition of Y om Kippur has been seen ' in the typological interpretations of the temple cult. Certainly, this tllcl> logical argument has some weight to it as mademanifest by the polem.iGs in Barnabas. Origen and Chrysostom, too, will use this argument to try to convince Christians observing Yom Kippur not to do so.3s8 Regarding ~ first-century texts with allegorical and typological interpretations of thc : Yom Kippur temple ritual, however. we cannot simply read into all o(' them a negative stance toward the Jewish ritual. At this point. I would like ·,; to recall the list of four possible relationships between a ritual and its inter- · pretation, mentioned in the introduction:359 • a) Interest in and support for the ritual by proposing a new rationale . ·:: b) Nentral disinterest in the realities, sometimes in favor of a. more \ spiritualized Ievel ) c) Substitution of the ritual for temporary constraints , ~: d) Substitution ofthe ritual for theological and sociological reasoas

Dlf1gnet 3:1--4:1, transl. Holmes. Syriac Aristides, Apf1logy, 14:4, my ttanslation after ANF. Cf. the ltalian translation in C. Alpigiano, Aristide di Atene. Apologia (Biblioteca Patristica 11; Florem:e, 1988), p. 113; and the German in E. Hennecke, Dte Apologie da Arl8tides (Texte und Untersu"' cbungeo 4:3; Leipzig, 1893), p. 35. 3!f6 357

3"' See below, pp. 265--272 aD.d278-279. ss' See above, pp. 6-7.

·•

~:}

Yom KippKT Jmag~~ry fnthe .Early Clvlrtian lmaginaire

221

~one of the CbJ!stian .Jewish writings invest~gated ~splays the first atti~~.

as exemphfied

Ul

1Enoch, nor the third attitude, favored by the

~t.bbls. Yet Paul. who considered the t~~pl~ ~rvice to be among t~e God-

~S;:vc:n gifts (R~mans 9:4) when allegonzmg It tn Roman~ 3:25 and tn ?alaf~tiaDS3:10.13, IS

probably an example ofthe second atbtude, supporting a ~kaore spiritual worship- simila.r to Philo.360 As noted above, Paul does not ~~bolisb

the observance of Jewish festivals in Rome. Most of the Christian ~~Wrilings invcstigated in thls chapter belon~ to the f~urth group. We b~ve ~:·8lreadY seen that Barnabas and Tertulhan combmed harsh polem1cs ~~st the temple with criticism of the fast. We ha~e no information ~ ~ilud.irlg tbe stance of Hebrews or 1John towar~ Jewtsh ~rayer assembhes ~fo~ide tbe temple or toward the fast, yet therr typolog~es take a clearly ~ti-'temple stand ~ their imaginaires strive to consbuct a substitute foc ~~t."Perllaps. the same lS true for Matthew.

fi:~Prd the following four reasons as responsible for the decline of Yom

~~Kippur io the liturgical calendar of Christianity: [;;-:;;,; Historically, the destruction of the temple ended the most solemn part b;ftbe cult, the celebration of the high-priestly ritual. The destruction of the bi~ple could be used not only as a theological argument, validating the t:;:;Jttedictions of Jesus Or being interpreted IIS punishment for bis crucifixion. ~·'A:ccording to Luke's portrayal in Acts, the temple was the center ofworr~·:·~bip ·fur many Christian Jews. In the temple. however, tbey bad to follow :(tbe religious calendar of the establishment, particularly on Yom K.ippur. : .; : •. Theologically, the vicarious atoning death of Christ decreased the im!:;p.ommce of other means of atonement and in tbe eyes of some made them Fentirely void. At the beginning ofthe seeond century, the myth ofChrist as (>high priest permanently interceding for bis followers in the heavenly holy ~-·()fbolies had won quite widespread attention and was considered by some ~-iiln appropriate and superior substitution. However, we should not ex.agif~ the weight of the theological argument. A considerable number of 0~1hltd- and fourth-century Christians in Syria-Palestine celebrated Yom ~-)Qppur together with their Jewish neighbors. Origen. Chrysostom and ~:.":!i.'~:·.·

~~·~~~~~

:

~~~

Phllo and 4Moccabees 17 solved tbe question how to achieve atonement in a place o11t of reach in most in.stances in a i'j\;~lar way to Paul in Romans 3:25. This was true also for the proto-Christian com.m1111. · · I)Utside Palestine and especially for thosc who disregarded the temple. The discus. !•. . 'aii to whether "the theology of the cross" led to an mti-temple attitude or an aoti~~le attitude led to a theology of the cross narrows the histodcal situation to a theo~~ question. But tbere arc DlaSlY more factors - historical, liturgical aod sociological ~~-·I argue below. ~f:(?hilo) or t~ (4Maccabees), wherc lhc temple is

222

The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chri:stianity in the First and Second Centuries

Byzantine legal texts provide ample evidence for this. 361 While these texts demonstrate that the leading theologians considered observation of Yom Kippur to be anti-Christian, a large part of the population continued to be attracted to this means of atonement without perceiving the observation to be theologically problematic. This is true, as weil, for Jewish Christians who may have regarded the death of Jesus as atoning and yet kept on observing Yom Kippur. Liturgically, a fast and intercessionary prayers could be observed on any given day in the year, prefcrably on a theologically meaningful datesuch as around the memorial day of Jesus' death. Jesus' intercession in the heavenly holy of holies was ongoing and could be remernbered at any place or time, making not only the geographical but also the chronological anchoring of Yom Kippur u.nnecessary. Fasting and prayer for atonement, too, were possible throughout the whole year. Consequently, communal fast could be moved to any other date, preferably one of religious importance. The phenornenon of a pre-pascbal fast from Frlday to Sunday moming (the only early Christian complete abstention from fbod and drink Iasting more than 24 hours)362 probably has to be tmderstood in this way, as a transformed continuation -of the fast accompanying the atoning service ofthe Christian high priest in the heavenly holy ofholies.363 Sociologically, Gentiles who became Christians without an intermediate station as God-fearers via the synagogue reinforced the introduction of pagan religious behavior unconnected to Jewish festivals. 364 The Iatter point is important for understanding the difference between Christian Jewish, Jewish Christian and Gentile ChristiBn communities. The question of whether to observe the Jewish autumn festivals was one not onJy of theology but also of collective tradition, otherwise it is difficult to explain See pp. 273-277, below. I would lilte to thank Stephane Verbeist for drawing my attention to this point. 363 On the pre-pascbal fast and Yom Kippur, see Tertulliau, On FtL!fting 2:13-14; On Praysr 18. In general, see Irenaeus apud Eusebius, Hi.ftory of the Chvch 5;24:17tf; Justin, First Apology 61; Traditio Apostotica 33 ( ed. Botte, SC llbls, pp. 114-115); .Apa~tolic_ Con:tfrutions 7:23:4 ( ed. Mel:lger, SC 336, pp. 50-51); Didracalia 21 ( ed. Vööbus., CSCO 407, pp. 214:&-217:19 (text]; CSCO 408, pp. 199:1-201:20 [transl.J). A detailed investigation of Didascalia 21 is included in G.A.M. Rouwhom, Les lrymnes pascalu d'Ephrem de Nisibe. Analyse thio{ogigue et recherche sur l'ivchllion de Ia fore pa.:cale chretienne Nisibe et Ede~se et d1111S quelque:t EgliJes voisine:t au quatf·ii:me siecle (2 vol$; Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 7; Leideu, 1989), vol. l, pp. 157-190. On the connection to Mark 2:20, see F.G. Crcmer, Die Fastenansage Jesu. Mlc 2,20 und Parallelen in der Sicht der Patristischen und Scholastischen Exegese (Bonner Biblische Beiträge 23; Bonn., 1964), pp. 21-40. 364 See abovc; p. 214, note 331, for references in Philo, Josephus and the Palestinian Talmud on pagan Ood-fearen observing Yom Kippur rituaJs. Je<

:lQ2

a

a

Yom Kippur Imagery in the Early Clvistian Imaginaire

223

the continuation of Yom K.ippur observance in Jewish Christian communit· ies who conceived of Jesus' death as vicarious atonement in the same way as Gentile Christians did. Obviously, the argumentations of Paul, Hebrews and Colossians influenced Christian thought and behavior. Yet the clue as to why particulady these texts were successfullies not only in the quality of their argument but also in the soeiological and historical circumstances of the disparate types of early Christian communities. The theologic:al arguments were probably more convincing to a Gentile audience in the Diaspora. especially when the temple no longer exist.

6.3 The History ofTraditions We can now return to the question of what can be leamt from the early Christian texts about the different attitudes toward the ritual and imaginaire of Yom Kippur in the temple and outside it. Three general theological and liteary developments have to be mentioned concemiog Yom K.ippur in Christian Jewish thought in the early decades of the first centw:y, the thirties and forties. First, some Cbristian Jews conceived of Jesus' death as vicarious atonement. 36' Second, prophetic passages and motifs from common legends served some Christian Jews who, in telling tbe story of Jesus' Passion compensated in their own way for the Iack of detailed historical knowledge with prophetic passages, or rendered known historical details theologically meaningful. Third, parts of Second Temple Judaism's ex:pectations of a (high-)priestly Messiah were transferred to Christ. In the proto-typology of Barnabas, the conceplions of Jesus as sin offering, scapegoat and an allusioo to bis high priesthood all cluster under the umbrella of Yom Kippur. It is diffieult to decide ifthe proto-typology was developed by people in a Semitic or a Greek environment who were familiar with the details of the ritual; whetber by their priestly profession. observanc:e or acquaintanc:e with an early form of Seder Awdah. In its earliest fonn, this typologic:al exegesis of Second Temple ritual regarded Hala.khah as a divine source of prophecy. an assumption that was tumed upside down by the heirs of tbe tradition. Probably this did not yet entail an anti-temple attitude as in Barnabas or Hebrews.

Sevcral f&ctors causcd this development, including such cross-cultural Mediterraconcepts as the Noble Death and the Pharmakos, but also more specific Jewish idell$ such as the death of the righteous and sacrificial understandings of mart)TS' deaths. To narrow this concept to an intra-Jcwish devclopment completely detached from ils environmental culture is a rather improbable reduction of the evidente regarding tbe setting of Second Temple Judaitm as a aeative religion llt the crossroads of many enltures. 3"

neall

224 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Clrristianity in the First and Second Centuries If the proto-typology was not originally fonnulated in Greek, it must have entered a Greek context at some point to be received by Barnabas, Justin and Tertullian. Possibly it is at this point also that the anti-temple tendency was added - an influence that could be connected to such groups as those that emerged around Stephen. It is not clear when the concept of the Eucharist as anti-type to the fasting on Yom Kippur entered the prototypology. It must be assumed that any group holding this opinion consequently did not observe the fast of Yom Kippur - a development more probable in the second stage of the tradition since the frrst stage rcgarded post-biblical Halakhah as a cherished source ofprophecy. Greek-speaking Christian Jcws developed the i).aoti!ptov-typology of Romans 3:24125-26*. This must have happened at some point before 56 CE in a community with which Paul had been in contact - i.e. in any city from Antiach to Corinth. If Paul's source already had an anti-temple attitude, the setting of the fonnula could be the same as the Greek proto-typology of Barnabas or Hebrews. In a second stage, Paul adapted Yom Kippur traditions in two letters written araund 55 CE. 366 Considering hisrare use oftemple cult metaphors, this indicates the relatively serious importance attached to Yom Kippur temple ritual among these typologies.367 This appeal of the Yom Kippur temple ritual matches Romans 9:4, where Paul reveals how highly he regards the temple service by subsum.ing it under thc God-given gifts. The cross-cultural phenomenon of Pharma/cos rituals may havc served as a catalyst for Paul's Christological scapegoat typology in Galatians, perhaps also for other New Testament passages such as John 1:29 and IPeter 2:24. lt piobably did so for the reception of the proto-typology of Barnabas in Justin, Tertullian and Hippolytos and of the scapegoat typoc logies in Origen.368 Probably for the same reasons of an easily understandab Je rationale, Matthew reformÜlated his Barabbas episode along the lines ofthe Second Temple scapegoat rituat. 369 In the third stage, Hebrews {60-90 CE) and Barnabas {around 100? CE) certainly polemicize against the temple, as most probably does lJohn {90100 CE). Finally, to the authors all of the discusscd texts - the prototypology of Barnabas {and Barnabas itself), Romans 3:24/25-26*, Hebrews, IJohn, Paul and Matthew - attribute a special importance to cultic Rom 3:24-26* and Gal3:10.13. By way ofcomparison: Passover is mentioned only once in lCor 5:7. 368 See pp. 171-173, above. 369 Matthew is usually considered as writing to a Jewish-Christian audience, one that inc1uded Gentiles, perliaps in Syria around 90 CE. See Schnelle, Einleitung in das Neue Testame11t, pp. 261-264. Others date Matthew slightly earlier, see ibidem. 366

367

Yom Kippur lmagery in the Early Christion lmaginaire

225.

sacrificial atonement achieved by means of a mediator. However, it would be wrong to conclude that Yom Kippur outside the temple had no impact on earliest Christianity. Colossians 1:12-20 may be one such case; the influence of aSeder Avodah on Barnabas may be another. Ultimately, the corpus of Second Temple Yom Kippur prayers is too small for a reasonable degree of certainty to be reached on this point.

Concluding Thoughts Yom Kippur had a decisive influence on the formulation of the early Christian myths of the atoning death of Christ and bis permanent intercession in the heavenly holy of holies. Three major typologies depict Jesus as scapegoat and sin-offering goat (Barnabas), high priest, veil and sacrifice {Hebrews) and kapporet {Romans). All of them belong to the formative period and were probably in use already before Paul.370 This threefold impact of Yom Kipp ur on the formation of the earliest Christian conceptions of Christ's vicarious atoning death has not received sufficient emphasis in previous scholarship. Regarding Barnabas, the age and importance of the proto-typology has not been acknowledged by earlier investigations of Yom Kippur's impact on earliest Christianity - those by Norman H. Young, J.P. Scullion or Wolfgang Kraus, who approached the topic from a canonical viewpoint. Barnabas' importance for understanding earliest Christology is not less than that of Hebrews and Romans, even if its impact was smaller. Any belittling of Barnabas' importance relegates the early Christian use of its Christological scapegoat typology to an unjustifiably marginal status. On the other band, despite the direct influence of Barnabas on the Passion narrative in the Gospel of Peter, an influence of the scapegoat rite on all canonical Passion narratives {Crossan's thesis) is unlikely. Conceming the Epistle to the Hebrews, I have proposed a new theory ofemergence ofthe high-priestly Christology, with Yom Kippur as root rather than as late frame. As for Romans, I have argued for one of the two "classic" interpretations ofRomans 3:25, i.e. the typologization ofthe kapporet. Yet unlike most others, I see no compelling reasons to assume that Paul wanted to advocate a Substitution ofthe temple ritual for Yom Kippur. All three of these texts used earlier Yom Kippur traditions, making Yom Kippur one of the first cultic imageries to be used in the formation of the Christian mythology. 370 l.e., the proto-typology behind Barnabas (including the allusion to Jesus' high. priesthood in Zecb 3) and the sourcc ofPaul, Rom 3:24-2S*.

226 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Ch1'istian.lty in the Fi"tt ond Second Cet~tflriu lJohn compares Jesus to the atonement, using Yom Kippur imagery. This interpretation belongs to a 1ater stage in the development of Christian Judaism, probably the end ofthe first centuzy. Beyond these texts, further passages include less obvious allusions to Yom Kippur. Schwartz' argument for a connection ofGalatians 3:10.13 to the scapegoat ritual is very plausible and may be strengthened by fwther arguments. I propose a new reading associating also Matthew 27:15-23 with the scapegoat ritual. Other allusions to the scapegoat rationale may be seen in the Lamb of God (John 1:29) and the Christological application of the Servant Song in 1Petcr 2:24; but the arguments for this view are much less compelling. Finally. an influence on the Christological songs of Philippians and. in particular, Colossians is possible, but such a claim needs to be strengthened by more evidence. Sources of Jewish influence on the early Christian imt~ginaite encompass a range of types. Some of the earliest Christian texts on Yom Kippur (Barnabos, Hebrews, Matthew) betray intimate knowledge of temple ritual. The justiftcation of Jesus' high priesthood with Zechariah 3 probably reftects Second Temple Judaism's imaginaire ofYom Kippur with its linkage of Zechariah 3 to Yom K.ippur. Hebrews seems tobe close to apocalyptic traditions of the high-priestly ascent to the presence of God in the heavenly holy of holies and the cosmological fight against the Ieaders of the evil powers. No Christian Jewish Wiiting seems to have been influenced by the Bible, alone, detached :from oral or written traditions and from the rites of the contemporary Yom Kippur. The main importance of th.e Yom K.ippur passa.ges in the New Testament lies in their becoming "the canon within the canon." Beginning with Origen, readers approach Paul primarily vja Hebrews, which until modem times would be a.ssO<..iated with bis name. Romans 3 is understood as a summary of the exposc in Hebrews, rendered Paul the theologian of Substitution and sacrifice- to a far greater extent tban he indeed wa.s.371 Most important, the rationale of Cbristian ritual is explained mainly on tbe basis of the conceptions of Hebrews. The celebrant of the Eucharist is a vicar of the heavenly high priest, the church is the temple, and the Eucharist is Christ's sacri:fice.312 Two factors may account for this strong impact ofYom Kipput on early Cbristian myth.ology. First, Yom Kipp ur was of central importance for any Jew. It was bighly mythologized and connected to eschatological expectations of a priestly redeemer. lts atoning function could be easily connected to the rationale of Jesus' death as vicarious atonement. Second, from a m See pp. 265-266, below. m See pp. 269-272, below.

Yom Kippvr /mQgery in the Early Christio" lm"giMire

227

cross-cwtural perspe<:tive, sacri.ficial categories a.re more easily translatable than refmed allusions to local mythologies such as those of the Old Testament. lt is therefore possible that one reason for the spread of the bigh-priestly Christology and the scapegoat typology was that they were useful in the Cbristian mission to the pagans. While the frrst factor applies to the shaping of the mythology, the second explains its aceeptance and elaboration. Most Christian Jewish sources- Hebrews, Barnaba.$, lJohn and probably Matthew- polemicize against the temple ritual of Vom Kippur and presume its substitution by Christ' s self-sacrifice and by Cbristian wor· ship. Yet Acts27:9 demonstrates that some Christian communities continued to observe Vom K.ippur's fast, among them Luke's community, opponents of the author of Colossians and part of the Roman community (Romans 14:5-6}. Of all first-century Christian Jewish writings, only Bornabos betrays opposition to the popular fasL That tbis aversion was probably expressed also in the proto-typology shows tbat different Christian Jewisb g:roups could :from the beginning of the Jesus movement until at least the end ofthe first century hold opposite attitudes to Yom K.ippur's fast. Paul takes an intermediate position, leaving it up to the individual foliower of Jesus to decide which festivals to observe. Other individuals and communitics did not adopt the fast or stopped observing it for any of various reasons: tbeological (conception of Juus' atoning death and hu permanent heavenly interce.$sion), historical (the de.$lruction of the tem~ ple), liturgical ifasting is more individual and not bound to a wor.$hip structure) andlor sociological (increasingly Gentile Church). Nevertheless, as will be seen in the chapter on Christian autumn festivals, a number of Christians continued celebrating Vom Kippur, and other Jewish festivals, '~Aith their Jewish neighbors until at least the fourth century. 313

m See pp. 273-277, below.

Chapter 5

Y om Kippur Imagery in Gnosticism and in Early Christian Mysticism The imagery of the high priest's entrance into the holy of holies Wll!!l widely used as a mytholegumenon in soteriology, in initiation ri:tuals of Valentiman Christianity andin Clement ofAlexandria•s mysticism. These Christian Gnostic and mystic traditions take up the common Jewish image describing divine visions in apocalypticism and in the Hekhalot literature; Clement also adopts Philonic Q.oncepts. Jn this chapter, the :first section cxamines the use ofthe higb priest's entrance in the Valentiman conception of the esehatological entcy of Jesus and his followers into the Pleroma. The second section deals with the application of this mytholegumenon in de~ scriptions of the initiation ritual of the bridal chamber in the Gospel of Philip. The final section analp..es brietly the mystical vision of God in Clement of Alexandria. showing its dependence on the entrance of the high priest in Valentinian soteriology and PhiJonic mysticism. Two fmdings make tbis investigation an important contribution to the guiding qucstion of the intlucnce of Yom Kippur on early Cbristianity. First. the Valentiman Christian authors do not simply adopt the mytho~ legurnenon from their Iewish tradition, rather they return to Leviticus 16 and post-biblical traditions for embellishlng the Yom K.ippur motifs in the tex.ts, i.e. Yom Kippur remains an important source of inspi.ration. Second, the initiation ritual of the bridal chamber is the earliest use of Yom K.ippur imagery in a Christian ritual. Of general interest beyond the impact of Yom Klppur is the position of Valentinian texts in the history of the tradition of the proto~mystical heavenly joumey with regatd to the tbree forms of mysticism: Philo. Hek:halot Iiterature and Clement. The sources investigated include two Nag Hammadi codiccs - tbe Gospel ofPhilip (NHC 2:3), and tbe Valentinian Exposition (NHC 11 :2) - and traditions from three different schools of Valentinian Gnostic Christianity (Theodotus, Marcus and Heracleon) preserved in the polemies of three "mai.nstream." Christian writers (Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Ori-

Yom Kipptn' Imagery in Gno.stlci.lm andin Early Chri1tian Myntcism

229

gen). 1 The chronological relationship of the Nag Hammadi texts to the writings quoted by the Church Fathers is unclear. The three teachersTbeodotus, Marcus aod Heracleon, pupils ofValentinus -lived at the beginning of the second half of the second centuty. The Gospel of Philip is dated to the third century bot is usually understood as being a collection of earlier sources.

1. The High Priest's Entrance in Valentinian Soteriology The ear1iest Valentinian texts with the high priest's entrance are found in two passages in Clement's Excerpts from Theodotus (Excerpta ex Theodoto),2 chapters 27 and 38. They describe an eschatological approach to God in thc picture of the high priest entering tbe holy of holies. Since the Valentinia.n authorship of Excerpts from Theodolus 21 is disputed and it may have originated with either Theodotus or Clement, it will be discussed in the third section, on Clem.eot.3 Here, I will focus on the undoubtedly Valentiman chapter 38:4 A) A river of f~re goes forth Wider the throne' of Topos md ßows illto the void (sU; tö n...Ov) of the creation which is Gehenna, 6 and it is never filled, though tbe fare flows ftom the beginDing ofcreation. And Topos itselfis fiery. 7 Therefon; he

1 I speak ofthree Gnostic teaclms for the sak11 of aimplicit)'. lt is usll&ll)' assumed that iD Excerpts ft'o• Thcodohl3 Clemeut collec:ted the works of sevcral Valentini«
230 The Impact o/Yo111 Kippw on Chri:tianily in the First and Second Centuria says (q)l}Ot), he bas a veil (tc«T«:JlS'fGO!J.«) in order that the (spirits] may not be destroyed by the sight [of him}. And only the arehange I e32ters to him {116wx; lii o ~pxO.yyel.O<; tioiPXnllLx",c; 11vt6v). B) As an image for this, also the high priest entered the holy of holies once every year (oii 11:111:' ehc6v11 ~:ai ocij)Xlt:pet)o; ia~ ~of.l i:Yl«vtW ~~ Tci iiyw Tti'lv G:ywv

ei<JQc1).t C) Thence (ivOsv) Iesus, called for help, also sat down with Topos (auve~~:olliollll 1:(9 T611:4p), that the [spirits] migbt remain and not rlse (xpoovo.otiJ) before him, and that he migbt tarne ( i]J.&1lplila1J) Topos and provide (114pU
The scene, w'hich appears in the context of a description of the netherworld and the destiny of hylics. psychics and pneumatics, can be described as follows: The demiourgos (Topos) sits on the throne in the holy of holies. He is covered by a veil to protect the pneumatics. who would be destroyed by the sight of him. 11 The pneumatics bave to cross this dangcrous zone (the holy of holies) to reach the Pleroma. This transit is possihle only with the aid of Jesu.s the high priest and the angel of the Pleroma, who comes down to placate the demiourgos. The entrance of the high priest to the holy of holies signi:fies the incarnation of Jesus in the psychic Ghrist. 12 The demiourgos is a dangerou.s deity but not an evil one. given that he will not be annihilated; after the entraoce of the seeds to the Pleroma, he will stay in the eighth realm and inherit the place of Sophia. !3 This description has a tripartite structure: an apocalyptic tradition (A), a reference to the biblical typology (B) and an explanation (C) that incorporates A and B in the Valentiman mythos. Tbe juxtaposition of the Gnosti8 Excerpls from Theodotus 38 is the only Valentinian passage to indude lhe chronological refereoce to a~ too evUI.vtoü, i.e. the escbatoJogical Yom Kippur, in the typology. This may be for its dearly eschatological coneept over and. against rnore ambivalent or dearly non-eschatological concepts in the other Valentinian texts. 9 Cf. Heb 9;7a; c~ U ·niv liruripuv [G!Ctlvitvl ti~ 'toiJevtautoup.(}voc; 6äpz~. Yet the similarity betweeo the two pas.sages is verj generat Any allusion to the Epistle to the Hebrews might rather derive from thc epitomizing Clemc:Dt; sce pp. 232, note 17, below. 10 l have made slight changes to Casey's translation, b&sed on Sagnard's edition. 11 Notably, Theodotus does not dtaw upon the ceniral act of the apocalyptic visionary, who joh•s the heavenly liturgy in Iris prayer. 11 As is stated, for example in Excerpts from Theod0111s :S9:2-3: "And wben he came into the region of Topos, Iesus found to clothe hirnself in the foretold Christ, whom lhe Prophetsand tbe Law a1111ounced a.s an image ofthe Savior. But even this psychic Christ that he put on was invisible, md it was necessary for him when he came into the world to be seen here, tobe selzed, tobe a citizen, and. to hold on to a sensible body. A body, therefore, was spun for him out of an invisible psyc:bic substanee and anived in the world of tbe senses empowered by a divine preparation" (my trao.slation, baso:d on Cascy). 13

Cf. F.xcerptsfrom Theodotus 34.

Tom Kipp71r lmagery in Gnosticism andin Ear/y Christitm Mystkism

231

cizing interpretation (C) with the apocalyptic tradition (A) modifies the latter extensively. Its main point bas shifted completely. The scopos is no Ionger the description of a "mystical" experience or a heavenly joumey to leam about cosmological secrets, but an eschatological myth. Furthermore, central features are changed, si:milar to the shift in the biblical creation myth in Gnostic interpretation. Ood has been downgraded to demiourgos. a jealous minor deity who is an obstaele to the true aim ofthe ascent; and the entrance to the throne is perceived as merely a step on the path to salvation in the Pieroma and to the final unification with God. One of the sources of Excerpts from Theodotus 38 was a Jewish mystical text; 14 in Scholem's words: "§§ 37-39 ofthe Excerpta ex Theodoto are all soaked with Merkabah mysticism." 1' lndeed, the chapter appears tobe the oldest source for some tenns and conceptions attested only much later in Jewish literature; E:rcerpts from TheodotJIS 38 therefore manifests an intermediale state between apocalyptic texts and the mysticism of the Hekhalot literature. 16 14 Hofius calls Ezcerpts from Theodotvs 38 a (Jewish) non-Onostic te:xt tbat was in.serted into its ValentiD.ian context; Scholcm and Lueken spealc of Jewish elements or tradition. Hofius, Der Vorhang vor dem Thron G()ltta, pp. tS-16; S<:holem, Jewish Gnosticism. Merfcabah M)l3ticism, and Talmudic Tradition, pp. 34-35; Luelcen, Michael, pp. 96-97. 15 Schalem. Jewllh Gnosticism, Merkabt1h Mysticism, and Ta/mudic Tradition, p. 34, note 10. It was Hem-i Marrou, who in a review of the second edition af Major Trends in Jewish Mystkism drew Scholem's attention to this passage: see ReVlie du Moyen Age Latill S (1949) 166-172, here p. 169. Schalem adds tbat "Jewish elements ••. clearly represent a deterioration ofthe Jewish tradition ... partly misunderstood or reinterpreted." Whüe most of dle coocepts appear in the prophetic visions and apocalyptic beave.nly joumeys (the fiery river, the .fiery God, the throne, the restric&ed aecess), and 1E'ltoch 14 is certainly very c:IO&e to this text, the closest parallel is probably the famous collection of passages on heavenly asceat in bHag l3a-14a. 16 For e:xample, TopO$ recalls the Hobrew term D1p1.1:1 as a desigoat!on of God, employed here as a te.rm for the d•miourgos: see Ezcerpts from TheofkJhls 34; J7; 59;2. See also Scholem, Jewish Gnostici:lm, Merlraboh Mystir:üm. and Talm11dic Tradilio11, pp. 34-35. The expression o OpOvo<; totlTolWV, however, whieh Scholem linked with lKD::J D1i'fl ')w and whicb is quoted by Hofius et al. u proof of fil.rther terminologiul proximity, d.oes not appear in Schlfer's Coneordance, neitber did I fmd it on the Responsa Project CD-Rom of Bar-llan University (Ver5ion 8). lts abseru:e in early Hebrew Iiterature pomt! to a certain terminological distance! By far tbe most eommon teTJ.P is 1'T1D HO''· The emended tenn -cci 1n'E\!jlrna most probably designates those augets who as in JEnoch 14:21, arenot allowed to approach or look upon God. Tbe ÄPXand.o<; mayrefer to the tnuiitioo of Michael as the angelic high priest in later texts: See Lueken, Michael, pp. 96-97; and Scholem. Jewish Gnostlctsm, Merlrabah Mysticism, and Talm!ldic Tradition, p. 49, note 19. Scholem was apparently not aware of Lueken- otherwise he would have quoted bim Wtead ofMarrou on p. 34.

232 Thelmpact of Yom Kipp'llr on Christlanity ln the First and Sec011d Centurie.r The editors argue also for an influence of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Yet this is by no means cJear. The only possible parallel is: •'the high priest entered the holy of holies once every year," which is similar to Hebrews 9:7: "into the second [tent], once a year only the high priest [entered].t' 17 Yet the exp~ion is quite general; Philo employs a similar one. 18 Moreover, even if one wants to argue on linguistic grounds, the sen~ tence may derive not from Theodotus bimself but from bis epitomist, Clement of Alexandria. Other than this vague allusion, &cerpts from Tlu4odotus 38 does not betray any specific infiuence from the Cbristology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the differences and omissions are numerous. No mention is made of Melchizedek, the sacrifice of bis blood, or Christ as a veil. Moreover, the contents of the holy of holies are completely different. Hebrews does not use the term &illOor; to express the passageway to God. lt is therefore pos.sible that the strong priestly connotations in the Jewish apocalyptic traditions of the vision of God 19 triggered Theodotus to connect it with a high-priestly ChristoJogy known to bim independently of Hebrews. In. that case, the Epistle to the Hebrews as weH as chapter 38 are both independent witnesses to the same Jewish apocalyptic ttadition. ._

2. The High Priest's Entrance and the Ritual ofthe Bridal Chamber The image ofthe high priest's entrance into the holy ofholies is connected to the Valentinian ritual of the bridal eha:mber as described in the Gospel of Philip.M The Gospel of Philip's employment of the imagery of the high FinaUy, I do not Jcnow or any earlier attestation for the protective or conooaling function ofthe veil in front of ~ divine throne in a visiooary text prior to Excerp/1 from Theodotus 38. A veil ofthe Dvir appe11n in the Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacriftce 4Q405 15 ii- 16, lines 3 md 5; however, without a concealing function (at teasl in the: preserved text). On the veil in other early Iewish texts, &ee Hofius, Def' Vorhang vor dem Thron

Gottu. 17 Eixcerpt:s from Theodotus 38: 0 apztll~ rixl&l; 'tOfl ivl4ut01l cic_; tri iiTI~ t&v i.yicov ticr(ltt. Heb 9:7: Eie_; öE -cl\v 6wtip«v 4,.~ toü ivuunoü jlOvOt; 6 lipxlepEIY,. ra Legatio ad Gahml 306 tti li8UN ...• dc_; ii cixl&l; ~o1l iv1a.moü o!iSv«~ it:pW:; dainna\

·n.t VIJO'tEi~.

·

For the priestly ccnnocations of the apocalyptlc visioo, see e.g. Himmeltärb, A.scenJ to Heaven in JewiJh and Christian A.poca/ypse:s, pp. 2~25 and 29--46. 20 The Gospel of Philip. f01111d in Nag Hammadi, i.s eommonly placed in a Valentinian Gnostic provenance, probably in Syria. See tbe introductioo to the Gospel of Phlilp by Wesley lsenbeFg in I.M. Robinson, The Nag Rommodi Library in Engli:sh (Leiden, lt

Yom Kippur llllagery in Gnostlcism andin Et1rly Chrisliarr My.sticum

233

priest's entrance to the holy of holies addresses the central qu.estion ofthe impact of Yom Kippur on early Christianity. Students of Onosticism knew the ritual of the bridal chamber already before the Gospel of Philip was unearthed in Nag Hammadi) for example from several passages in Irenaeus• A.dversus Haereses. 21 Yet Irenaeus does not link the temple images to the bridal c.hamber. Such an association appears for the first time in the Gospel ofPhilip in a form closely connected to the traditions of Theodotus. There wcre three buildings spccifically for sacrif.~ee in Jerusalcm. The one fae. ing the west was called "the holy." Another, facing sooth, was called "the holy of the hol:y." Tbe third, facing cast, was called "tbe holy of the holies," the plac~ where only the high priest enters. Baptism is ''the holy" boilding. Redcmption is the "holy of ihe holy." "The holy of the holies" is the bridal cham.ber. Baptism includes the resurrcction [and the] redemption; the :redemption (takes plaee) in the bridal chamber. But the btidal chamber is in tbal whieb is superior to [, ..J you (sg.) will not find [.•.] are those who pray [...] Jerusalem. [ ...] Jerusalem who [...] Jerusalem, [...] those calted the "holy of the holies" [... the) veil was .rent, {•.. ] bridal chamber except the image }170 above. Because of this its vei) was rent from top to bottom. For it was fittiog for some from below to go upward. Tbc powers do not see those who are tlothed io ihe perfect light, and consequently arenot able to detain them. One will clothe hlmselfin this light sacramentllly in the union. n 69

r...

The Gospel of Philip imagines a Jerusalem with three sanctuaries having openings to different directions (west, south, east) and ofincreasing sanctity, and associates them wiCh three rituals (baptism, Redemption/Eucharist and the "bridal cha.mber'''). Most probably, thls triparrite structure imitates the threefold sacred geography of the Jerusalem temple with devir, zevul and ulam. Such a threefold partition appears also in a Heracleon23 - if we •19&8). On the perplexing ritual ofthe bridal ehamber, see De Coninck, "Eotering God's

Presence," cspecially pp. SOS-52l with extensive b!bliograpby. One eould add J.J. Buckley, "A Cult-Myslery io 'The Gospel ofPhilip'," Jour"al of Biblical Literabue 99 (1980) 569-581; and the Valentiniao inscription interpreted by P. Lampe, "Ao Ear1y Cbristian lnscription in the Musei. Capitolini," Shldia T1reologica. Scandi"CIJ~ian JoNrnal of 711eo/ogy49 (1995) 79-92. 21 See Against the Heruies 1:7:1; 1:13:3-4; 1:21:3. Ireoaeus connects tbe ritual especially to the figure oftbe Valentinian teacher Martus. On prcvious illterpretations afthe ritual, see Bucldey, '"A Cult-Mystery in 'Tbe Gospel ofPbilip',~ pp• .575-579. l2 Goapel of Philip 69:14-70:9, lsenberg's translation. Unfortunately, in tb.is passage the man1111cript is tona exaetly at the pas&lge significant for undentanding the ritual oftbe bridal chamber. 23 Heraeleon (ca. 145-180 CE), tbe disclple ofValentinus is koown for having written the first Cbtistian conunentlll')' and the fust c:ommeotary ät all on a book of the New Testament. He is preserved in Origen's commcntary on John, a polemical response on Heracleon. On h!s hermeneutics, sec E.H. 'Pagels, The Johannine Goapel in Gnc.stic Eregu~: Heracleon's Ccnnment1.1ry on John (Society of Blbllcal Literature Monograph

234 The Impact o[Yom Kippur 011 Chrütianity in 1/Je First and St1cond Centurifl.J can rely on Origen. Heracleon compares the three spheres for pneumatics psychics, and hylics to the holy of holies,l-4 the forecourt of the templ~ and the rest of the world.26 The ho1y of holies is the Pleroma, which has been accessed by Jesus the high priest and will be entered by the pneumatics.n What do the holy of hoHes and the high priest's entrance symbolically represent in the Gospel of Philip? The holy of hoHes is the place of pure light, the Pleroma. A veil conceals God's creative activ:ity within. 21 This Series 17; Nashville (Tean.] and New York, 1973), especially chapter 2. See also Y. Jllll$$eos, ..Heracll!on. Commentaire sur l'Evangile selon saint Jean," Le MIISion 12 (1959) 101-151; 277-299; W. Foerster, Von Valentln Zf4 Herakleon. Untersuchungen über die Quellen und die Entwicklung der -valentlnianischen Gnosis (Beihefte zur Zeit~ $chrift f!lr die neuresta.mentlicbe Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 7; Giessen, 1928), pp. 9-12; C. Bammel"Heralc:leon," Theologische Realencyclopildie, vol 15 (1986) 54-57, with an extensive bibliography; C. Gianotto, "Heracleon.," Encyclopedill of the Eorly Chvrch(l992) vol. I, p. 374; on the place oftbis fra:gment inHeracleou's theology, .see also B. Aland, "Erwlblnngsrbeologie und Menscbenk.lassenlehre. Die Tbt:ologie des Heraldeon als Schlf1ssel zum Verständnis der christlichen Gnosis," in: M. Krause (ed.), Gnosi3 and Gnostici3m. Pa~1 read at the Seventh International Cofr{ere"" on Patrl&tic Studie.s (Oxford, September 8th-13th 1975) (Nag Hammadi Studies 8; Leiden, 1977; pp. 148-181), bere pp. 160-164. 24 Or the temple. ~ Or Jerusalem. 26 Origeo states: "(210) But let 11$ also consider Hel'a(:leon's words. He says the ascmt [to} Jerusa.lem indicates Cbe Lord's ascension from [tbe region ofj material things to the psychic region (D.tto -.:Qv il]..n:älv ~o:i~ tov 'f'VXLK:Öv 'tÖnov), which i$ an image of Jerusalem. (211) ADd he thinks the expression, 'He found in the temple (i~),' {Jolm 2:14) and not 'in tbe forecourt of lhe temple (11:poWqi],' is tl.Sed that it might not be thought that lhe mere calliog (..:l.ijOlv), apart from the Spirit, is aided by the Lord. For he considers the temple (ni i.EpOv) to be the holy of holies, whicb. the higb priest alone may enter (tU: piv iyul tcöv D.yi(I)V dvo.l ... ~ a i'OYO!; 0 lipxlepri~ timjllt.). He says, I think, that the pneumalies (•v111!1~Ltt11:oilo;) advance to that place. The forecourt of ~ temple {npoviou), where tbe Levites too are found, he considers to be a symbol of tbe psyt:bics (qruxtltciiv) who attain salvation outside the pleroma... " Orlgen, Commentt~ry 011 John 10:33 (210.. 211), Iransialion by R.E. HeiDe, Origen. CommenJDry on the Gospel Accordlng to .lohn. ßooks 1-10 (The Fathers <>ftbe Ch~b 80; Washington, D.C., 1989); see SC 157 (Q!cile Btanc 1970}, pp. SOS-510 .forthe Greek. 'rl lt ls not clear wbether the pneumatics attain a high-priestly cbancter (as in Excvpu from TheodOIKs 37) or enter the Pieroma with the aid of Jesus, the high priest, as in Excerpt8 from Theodotru. 38. 21 "The mysteries oftruth are revealed, thougb in type and irnage. Tbe bridal chamber, however, remaim bidden. lt i.s the holy in lhe holy. The veil at first con~;ealed how God controlled the c.reation, but wben the veil is rent and the things inside arc revea.led, th.is house will be left desolate, or rather will be [destroyed]. And the whole (inferior) godhead will tlec [fi-om] here. burnot into the holiu [ofthe) bolies, for it will not be ab!e to mix witb Cbe WWiixed [ligllt] and the [tlawless] fullness, but will he under the wi.ngs of

Yom Kippllr Imogery in Gnosticism andin Early Christian MysJicism

235

veil is rent in tbe moment of Cbrist's death.29 The high priest Jesus and sollle Gnostics. who are called priests, enter. 30 Before that, they have to conceive the light and be rebom. ••Jf anyone becomes a son of the bridal cbamber, he will receive the light. lf anyone does not receive it while he is here, he will not be able to receive it in the other pJace."31 Tbis light helps the Gnostic to overcome the watehing powers, since "the powers do not see those who are clothed in the perfect light, and consequently are not ab!e to detain them:m A Wlion witb the light is achleved in a ritual, "saeramentally. •o33 Tbe sacramental aspect of the union refers to tbe ritual of the bridal chamber, which enables tbe Gnostic to enter tbe holy of holies. "Tbe holies of the holies were revealed, and the bridal chamber invited us in.'•34 April De Coninck has suggested that tbe bridal chamher was an initi.ation ritual witb an un-erotic (and tberefore godly) sexual union, which was supposed to restore the divine barmony by overco!lling thc primordial separation of man and woman. Js

the cross [and under] itS arms. Thi.s atk will be [their] salvation when the flood 1ofwater surgcs o\'er them. If some belang to tbe order of the priestbood, they will be able to go witbin the veil with the high priest. Fortbis reason, the veil was notrentat thc top only, sim:e it would have becn open only to tbose above; nor was it rmt at the bottom only, since it would have been revealed only to tbose below. But it was rent from top to bot~· Those above opened to us the things below, in orderthat ._ may go iD to the secret oC the truth. Tbis truly is what is held in high regard (and) what is strong! But we shall go in there by means of lowly types and forms of weakness. They are lowly inder:d when campered with the perfect glory. There is glory which surpasses glory. There is power which surpasse.s power. Therefore, the perfect lhings have opened to us, togetherwitb the hidden things of lroth. The holies of the holies were revealcd. and the bridal chamber iovited us in." Gospel o/Pirilip 84;:Z0-85;21, lsenberg's translation, bere and henceforth. · On the aspect of revelation, see VDlentinian Exposition NHC xi,2; 25:30-39. ''[He is] ... the [truc} High Priest. [tbe one who has) the authority to enter the Holies ofHolies, revealing the glo.ry ofthe Aeons and brlnging forth the abundanee to 'ftagran"'" (transl. I.D. Turner). » GOfpel ofPhi/ip 85:5-10.

"Ir some belong to the order of the priesthood, they will be able to go widli.n the with the bigb priest" (GO$pel of Phi/ip 85: 1-S). 31 Gospel of Phi/ip 86:1-5. · 31 GospelofPhilip 70:5-10. :u "One will clolhe hirnself in tbi.s light sacramentally in tbe unio.o" (GO$pel of .Philip 70: 1-5)• .· · 30 Gospel of Phllip SS: 1-21. · » See De Coninck, "Entering God's Presence," pp. SOS-521. 10

'~eil

236

The Impact of Yom Kipp11r on Christianity iPI the Fir1t and Second CentJtries

But the woman is united to her busband in the bridal chamber. Iadeed. those who have united in the bridal eh8Ulber will no Iongerbe separated. Thus Eve separated lh>m Adam because it was not in the bridal cbamber that shc united with him.36

At once. the ritual of the bridal chamber pre-enacts the fmal union of the Gnostic with his or her light Spirit in the eschaton and imitates the union of the Father and the Mother from which 1esu.s was bom.l"1 Both the ritual and tbe eschatological event are called "bridal chamber... There is an unresolved tension between two traditions referring to the eschatological future and to the present. similar to that between the eschatological approach to God in Excerpts from Theodotus 38 and the present mystical vision in Ercerpts from Theodotus 21. The veil is said to be rent in the future 38 or tobe alread.y .r:ent.39 The renting of the vei! connected to the destruction of"the house," alludes to the Passion and. the destruction of the temple. It signifies the revelation of the previously bidde.n mysteries of the holy of holies.40 The Gospel ofPhilip explicitly states that there is a difference between the eschatological event and the present ritual: Wherea.s in thi.s world the union is one of busband wilh wife - a case of strength eomplemeated by weakness(?) - in tbe Aeon (ete.m.al sphere), tlae form of the union i.s different, althougb we r«ftr to them by the same names. ••

The effects ofthe ritual in the present time is an aspect that helps to elucidate the place of Yom Kippur imagery in the ritual of the bridal chmnber. Gnosticism and mysticism both yearn for the same outcome -union with or vision of God; yet the two are distinct in their conception of this union or vision. Entering the Pleroma in the bridal chamber means achieving a vision of God. This entry is not purely eschatological, as in the Epistle to the Hebrews; it has a ritual pre-ena.cment, wbich means that a mystical vision of God is achieved during the ritual. That this vision is described with Yom Kippur imager:y brings us back to the central question regarding the impact of Yom Kippur on early Christianity: Why did the Gospel ofPhilip employ the imagery of the high priest's entrance to the holy of holies? Even if Valentimans received tbe idea from apocalyptic Jewish traditions, as indicated in the f.ust section of this chapter, an explanation is still needed as to what caused them to accept Gospel of Philip 70:15-25. Gospe/ofPhi/ip11:1-lS. 31 Gospel of Philip 84:25-30. l 9 Gospel ofPhilip 85:5-10. «~ The veil is not a divine embodiment as in the VoleJttilliQ11 &posJtio11, nor does it have a positive prote<:tive furu:tion as in Ezcerpts from Theotfotus 38; it <:Oaceal5 the true revelation until it is rent. This probably reftecte Heb 10:19-22. 41 Go.rpel ofPhilip 76:5-10. 36

31

Yom KJppur Jmagery in Gnosticism tmd in EOT/y Chri1titm Mysricüm

23 7

it. I suggest there are four such reasons. First, the authority of Judaism as the origin of this tradition may have caused reverence for the tradition. A second reason - or a hint of it - may be found in those traditional elements reinforced by the Gospel of Philip: The Valentiman re-ritualization of the' high priest's entry emphasizes the sexual aspects connected to the holy of holies.42 Third, the ritual aspect of the high-priestly imagery matches well a ritual context of practical mysticism with induced ascent to a heavenly temple. Whoever prefe.rs to use Leviticus 16 over other prooftexts for mystical encounters wilh God - Exodus 3, Genesis 15 or Mark 9 - probably does so. since tbe ritual connotations of Leviticus 16 match bis own conceptualization that a vision of God (or the possibility of obtaining esoteric knowledge from ooo•s nearest environment) can be achieved ritually. Fourth, fur the initiated, tbe sec.re<:y of the boly of bolies suitably syznbolizes the esoterici$Ill of the revelation. The first reason can be linked to the Jewish origin of the tradition, revered by the Valentiman Christians; the otber three reasons are intrinsic to the sexual, ritual and esoteric connotations of the tradition itself, which suited the Gnostic conception and its ritualization.

3. Philonic and Valentinian Mysticism as Merged in Clement of Alexandria Salvatore Lilla claimed that the Philonic and the Valentinian usage of Yom Kippur imagery in the descriptions ofthe divine vision strongly influenced Clement of Alexandria's mysticism, especially as formulated in Stromaleis 5:6:39:3-40:4- as did Judith Kovacs more recently andin different tenns.43 This interdependence is relevant for the investigation of Yom Kip· 4l Oe Coninck has assembled the traditional material behind tbis concepti.on (some of w.hicb was discussed in the introductory chapter, above, p. 126). 41 S. Lilla, Clement o/ A.laondria: A Study ln Cmistian Plt~toni&m and Gno1ticiJm (Oxford, 1971 ), pp. 173-181; J.L. Kovaes, "Coneealmcnt a.od GIUI$lic Exegesis: Clement of Alexandria's Interpretation of lhe Tabemacle~" Stt1dia Patristka 31 {1997) 414-437. See also J.E. Davison, "Structural Similarities and Dissimilarities in the Thought of Clement of Alexandria and the Valentinians," SecondCenhlry 3 (1983) 201-217. Other discussions of this passage cao be found in W. Völker, Der wahre Gnostilcer nach Clemens A.lexandrJIJW (Texte nnd Untersuc:hunge.n 57; Berlin, 1952), pp. 403-432; A. Mt!hat, Etude SIIT le.s 'Stromates' de CJement d'Alext~ndrie (Paris, 1966), pp. 456-475; A. Le Boulluec (ed., transl.), C/ement d'Ale.x;andrie. Le.s Stromateis. Stromate V. Tome /I commentaire, bibliographie et inde:x (SC 279; Paris, 1981); A. vao den Hoek, Clement of Alalll'ldrio. and His U.se of Phi/o in the Stromoteis (Supplements to Vigiliae ChriJtianae 3; Leiden, 1988), pp. 116-147.

238 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Christianity in the First and Second Centuries pur's impact on early Christianity, since it is the high priest's entrance tbat connects the ascent visions of all three corpora. I discuss first the Clementine Stromateis 5:6:39:3-40:4, then Excerptsfrom Theod4tus 27, of ambivalent Clementine or Valentinian authorship. 3.1 Stromateis 5:6:39:3-40:4 Stromateis 5:6:39:3-40:4 describes the ascent of the Gnostic to the vision of God in tenns ofthe high priest's entrance to the holy ofholies. ':~:~9:3 So the high priest puts off his coosecrated robe {the univene and the creation in the Wliverse were consecrated by him assenting tbat what was lll4lde, was good), wasbes bimself and puts on the other tunie (a holy-of-holies one, so to speak}, which is to accompany him into the adytum. • It 5eems to me tbat he exhibits the Levite and Gnostic a.s the chief of the orber priests. Those other priests are bathed in water and clothed in faith alone, llnd they expect tbeir own individual abode. [The high priest}, however, distinguishes the objec:ts of the intellect !Tom the sensaal thiogs. He rises abovr: the otber priests and hastens to the eotranee to the intellec:taal world to wash bimself !Tom the things here below, not in water, as for~ metly one was cleansed on being enrolled in the uibe of Levi, but already by the Gnostit Word. , 40:1 {Tb.e high priest] has purified in his whole beaJ1 and thoroughly regulated. He has improved that mode of life, received from tbe priest, to the higbest pitch. Having been sanaified in botb word and life, he puts on the bright array (ya. vw11a) of glory and receives the ineffable inheritance ofthat spiritual and perfect man, "whicb eye hath not seen and ear hath not heard and which bath not entered into the heart of man." Having become son and fricmd, be is now replenisbed with insatiahle contemplation face to face. · For tbere is nothing like hearing the Word llimself. who by meaiiS of the Scripture inspires filller intelligence. 2 For so it is said, "And hr: shall put off the linen robe, whicb. he bad put on when be entered into the holy place, and sballlay it aside tbere and wash his body in wateT in the holy place and put on his robe"

been

{Leviticus 16:<1).

) But in ooe way, as I think. the Lord puts off and puts on by descending into the sensual region; and in anothe.r, be who tbrougb Hirn has believed puts off and puts on, as lbe apostle intimated, the consecrated stole. 4 Thence, aftet thl: image of the Lord, the wortbiest are chosen from the sa.cred tribe to be high priests, and those eleeted to rhe ldngly offiee and to prophecy are anointed.44

The passage stands in the context of an allegorical exegesis of Exodus 2628 (the tabemacle, the vestments and the high priest) and .is heavily influenced by Philo, especially Vita Mosis 2:95-135. 4s In the relevant 44 I slightly amended the translation from A. Cleveland Coxe (ANF) according to the Greek in SC 278. 45 Stromateis S:6:32-40 b&ll been investigated in detail by van den Hoek, Clement of Alexandria, a1rd His U:" ofPhilo ln th11 Stromateis, pp. 116-~147, see especially her table

Yom Kippur Imagery in G11osticism and ifl Early Christion Mysticism

239

passage 5:6:39:3--40:4, Clement sV\oi.tches his focus from Exodus 26-28 to Levitleus 16 and "departs entirely from his Phitonic Vorlage" towa.rd motifs adopted from Valentiman Gnosticism.46 · Clement focuses on the preparations of the high priest, who washes bimself and changes bis clothes explicitly quoting the relevant passage in Levitleus 16:4. The historical high priest represents simultaneously 1esus and the Gnostic Christian. Jesus is mentioned only once, bis entry to the holy of hoHes signifying bis incamation (40:3). The Gnostic clearly dominates the scene. For the Onostic as high priest, tb.e entrance is not the descent into matter but the mystical ascent to the intellectual world, with the vision of God as its final goal ( 4_0: 1.4). Only for the Onostic are the details of the priestly purification rites allegorized. The washing represents a special second baptisru- not witb water (as do the Levites) but with the Logos (39:4}. The donning of a new gannent is explained as puttiug on ''the bright array of glory.. (40:1). The former is reminiscent ofthe Valentinian distinction between pneumatic and psycbic Christians.41 The latter almost certainly refers to the famous garb of light, .which according to the Vale.ntinian form of the Jewish tradition was the pw:pose of the nnification ritual of the bridal chamber. Yet Clement differs from Valentiman soteriology. While Clement adopts the V alentinian distinction between a reward for the psychlcs and an even higher reward for the Gnosticslpneumatics, he changes it from two separate categories to two separate stages. According to him. the psychic can become a Gnostic. which matches Clement's hermeneutics toward Valentinian conceptions in Stromateis 5:6. Adapting many Gnostic conceptions, he tums some of them against tb.eir inventors.48

oo p. 118. See also the apparatus of StihliD's editioA andin SagJWd, Clemenl d'll.laandrie. E:ctrails de Theodote, appendix C; and the commentary ofl.e Boulluec, Clhnrmt d'll.lexandrie. Les Stromatei$. Stromale Tcme II (SC 279; Paris, 1981). 46 Kovacs. ..Ccmcealment aod Gnostic Exegesis," p. 414. • 7 Kovacs, "Coocealment and Onostic Exegesis," pp. 419 and 427-430. 41 Lilct: Hetacleon, Clement proposes a tripartite sacred geography: the holy of holies, the holy shrine and the forecourt are connccted to Gnostic Christians, psychic Christians and pagans, respectively. Yet, while Heracleon associated the holy of holies with tbe Gnostics. the furecourt is the place of tbe psychics. Moreover, Clement calls the Gnostic Christians high priests and Levites, which may be a pejorative pwt on the association of Levites with psychics in Hencleon. See Kovacs, "Concealment and Gnostic Exegesis," pp. 428 and 429.

r.

240 The Impact ofYom. Kippur 011 Christianity in the First and Second Centuries 3.2 Excerpts from Theodotus 27

In a picture closely resembling the one in Stromaleis 5:6:39:3-40:4, Excerpts from Theodotus 27, too, employs the high priest's entrance: The priest (i~t:ix;) on entering within the second veil (Eiauilv tv-rö.; -coii 1Ciltll1tßt.too; -roü liWtipo11) removed the plate (xitu).ov} at the altar of incense, and entered in silence (tv a1y~) with the Name engraved upon his heart, indicating the laying aside of the body ( -roil aol!lcnoo;} which has become pure li.lce the golden plate and nimble (~:oli<pou) througb purification ... the laying aside as it wete ofthe· soul's body (toil o:öcnu;p acilp.11too; 1:~ vvzl'lc;) on which was stamped the Iuster of piety, by which he was recogoized by the Principalities and Powers (-ruic; ÄPXIItc; ~eui tllic; E~oooicno;) as having put araund [him] (11~~:sip.svoo;) the Name. 2 Now he discards this body, the plate which had become weigbtless (~päo;), within the second veil, that is, in the rational sphere (i.v tcp vo1JtcP a:oop.qJ) the second complete veil of the universe. at the altar of incense, that is, with the angels who are the ministets of prayers carried aloft (11apci -co~ ÄEltOuPT~ Tcilv civucpepollivcov Wtcilv ÄyyEÄovc;). 3 Now the soul, stripped by the power of him who has knowledge, as if it had become a body ofthe power passes into the spiritual sphere (eio; -rci nvS"U111lu~eii.) and becomes now truly rational.and higb-priestly ().O'Juci) -cciJ ovu~eui ÜPXltpllmc1\), so that it might now be animated, so to speak, directly by the Logos, just as the archangels became the higb;priests (ÜPX\~Ei<;) of the angels, and the FirstCreated (oi OpcotoKnatol) the high-priests of the archangels. 4 But how is there perfection by Scripture and by learning (Iloii lii in ypacp~ Klli 111191ioemc; 1Ca"lop801j.la) forthat soul which has become pure, and how is it granted to see God "face to face" (t~pOCJIIlliOV ltpO<; 1lpOCJOlltOV ewv op«v)? s Thus, having transcended the angelic teaching and the Name taught in Writing, [the soul] comes to the knowledge and comprehension ofthe facts. lt is no Ionger a bride but has become a Logosand rests with the bridegroom tagether with the First-Calied and First-Created (Ilplll"tonicncov), who are liiends by Iove, sons by instruction and obedience, and brothers by community of origin. 6 So that it belonged to the dispensation (-cf\c; oi~eovoj.lia<;;) to put araund (up,uio8cn) the plate and leam towards knowledge, but it belongs to Powerthat man becomes the bearer ofGod (~o 8eocp6pov), being controlled directly by the Lord and becoming, as it were, his body. 49 27:1

The exact relationship of the passages in the Excerpts and that in the Stromaleis is disputed. The crux is whether Excerpts from Theodotus 2 7 reflects Theodotus or is a gloss by Clement of Alexandria. 50 The "Gnostic" 4 ' I have slightly changed the translation of Casey, The Excerpta ez Theodoto of Clement ofAlexandria. Edited with Translation, Introduction and Notes, according to the Greek in Sagnard, Clement d'Alexandrie. Extraits de Theodote. JO The latter position was expressed nearly a century ago by 0. Dibelius, "Studien zur Geschichte der Valentinianer," Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde tkr älteren Kirche 9 (1908) 230-247, 329-340. The main arguroent is lhe entrance of the soul into the pneumatic sphere. Sagnard, Clement d'Aiexandrie. Extrails de Theodote, p. II, goes sofaras tostatethat "l'Extrait 27 est tout 1\ fait car~ristique

de Ia mani~re de Clement, et peu de fragments pourraient lui etre attribues avec autant de sürete." Neither Dibelius nor Sagnard were able to Iake into consideration the texts from

Yom Kippw Imagery in Gnosticism andin Early Christion Mystici:sm

241

terminology does not provide any clue since the terms appear also elsewhere in Clement and since the chronological relationship between the Stromaleis and the Excerpts from Theodotus is unresolved. 51 Salvatore Lilla understands Excerpts from Theodotus 27 as quoted from Theodotus and uses it as evidence for Valentinian influence on Clement. -Judith Kovacs argues that Clement in this chapter discloses to the reader his most esoteric thoughts, which he still concealed in the Stromaleis - in which case, Excerpts from Theodotus 27 is a further development by Clement himself. 52 Regardless of the authorship of this passage. the ambivalence of its attribution is in itself a good illustration of the proximity of Clement' s thought to Valentiman theologians like Theodotus. In either case, the close relationship is obvious. Again, the picture of the high priest entering the holy of holies is employed to describe the ascent of the Gnostic's soul through the rational sphere and its guarding powers into the pneumatic sphere, where he "is granted to see God face to face." Here again, the author focuses on the changing of clothes, yet he uses an otherwise unknown tradition that the high priest removed the plate with the divine name only at the altar of incense on entering the holy of holies. 53 The removal of the plate with God's nameS4 indicates the soul putting aside the body. 55 The altar of incense refers to the place of the ministering angels who carry the prayers to God. The soul is transformed into a Logos. The terminology for

Nag Hammadi; a revision of their arguments is therefore a desideratvm. The remarks in Procter's dissertation cannot be regarded as adliancing the status quaestionis. See E. Procter, Christion controversy in Alexandria: Clement's polemic against the Basilideans and Valentinians (American University Studies Series VII, Theology and Religion 172;NewYork, 1995). 51 lf Stromatei.r 5 is earlier than Excerpts from Theodotvs, Clement used "Valentinian" terminology independently oflbeodotus. Only if Excerpt.rfrom Theodollls is earlier than Stromaleis 5 may Clement have learned the Valentinian tenninology from lbeodotus. 52 Kovacs, "Concealment and Gnostic Exegesis," p. 433. 53 This motif may reflect acquaintance with priestly traditions: see Bezalel, "Clement of Alexandria on an Unknown Custom in the Temple Service of the Day of Atone.ment," and Wolfson's note in Casey, The Excerpta ex Theodoto of Clement of Alexandria. Edited with Translation, lntroductlon and Notes. 54 The conception that the control over a name is achieved by not pronouncing it is paradoxical and contradicts the solemn proclamation ofthe name in Yom Kippur's ritual. The emphasis is on silence - the name is not uttered but written on the heart. 55 It is unlikely that the material body is intended, since the body is removed in the spiritual sphere. Lilla, Clement ofAlexandria, p. 178, suggests seeing here a reference to the lower part of the soul, as in Excerpts from Theodollls 64. This position is accepted also by Kovacs, "Concealment and Gnostic Exegesis," p. 43S.

242 The Impact o[Yom. Kippvr on Christionlty ln the First and Second Centvries

the metamorphosis of the soul into a Logos evokes the ritual of the bridal chamber. having transcended the angelie teacbing .and tbe Name taught in Writing, [the sou.l] comes to tbe knowledge and comprehension of tlle faets. lt is no Ionger

27:l Tbus,

a bride56 but has become a Logos and rests with the bridegroom together witb the First-Calied. and First-Created, who arc friends by Iove, sons by instruction and obedienc:e, and brothers by community of origin. 57

What were the sources of tbis passage? As with Excerpt$ from Theodo-

tw 38, chapter 27 also may .have been written without the infiuence ofHebrews but in a similar spirit.s11 The author uses some Philonic categories.s9 lt is possible tbat the laying aside of the ttita.Äov at this point of the ritual and the silence reflect the temple ritual. 60 The cluster of motifs comprising a removal of gannents and an angeHe metamorphosis is reminiscent of apocalyptic texts~ wbich employ this cluster in relation to the heavenly traveler.61 The metamorphosis of the entering person into a superhuman being appears also in Philo. 61 Probably, human.s have to recover their primordial status in order to be protected from the guards when seeing God. This Gefahrdungsmotiv is known from apocalyptic ascent visions, Hekhalot literature and Onostic texts. 63

56 This fonnulation does not have to be a polemical pun against the Valentinians, as Kovacs, "Concealment aud Gnostic Exegesis," pp. 436-437, proposes, since every bride changes her status after baving been united with her bridegroom in tbe bridal chamber 57

Excerptsfrom Theodotus21:S.

While the opening fonnulation about the seeond veil calls to mind Hebrews, the sec:ond vcil is known also apan from Hebrews: see Attridge, The Epistle lo the Hehrews. The rest of the passage does not betray any relationship to tbe Epistle. In particular, the central motif of Excerpls from Theodonu 21, the removal of the platc, is c:Ompletely absent from the New Testament writing. 55 The (material) plate, whicb the high priest removed, rep:resents the body, the place before tbe holy of holies the rational sphere; and the altar of incense the angels Iifting prayers aJof\. 60 This rite is attested only here. We cannot be sure if it is based on Christian Gnostic exegetical speculation, on Iewisb ritual speculation or on tbe practice in tbe temple: see note 53, above. · 61 See C.R.A. Morray-Jones, "Transfonnational Mysticism in tbe ApocalypticMerkabah Tradition," Journal of Jewi:sh Studies 43 (1992) 1-31; and cf. M. Mach, F.ntwicklung.s:stDdien des jidi.sclrrm Engelglallhens in vorrabbini•clrer Zeit (Texte und Studien zum antlken Judentum 34; Tübingen, 1992), chapter 3.4.4.1. 6 z See above, pp. 110-112. 111 See e.g. A.rcension of Jsaiah 9-10, and Himmelfarb's observations on similar elements in Hekholot Rabbati and Hekhalot Zutruti in her paper ;'Heavenly Ascent and the Relationship ofthe Apocalypses and the Heklralot Literature," Hebrew Union Olllege Annuol S9 (1988) 73-100, bere pp. 82-86. 511

Yom KipJNr Imagery in Gmntici&m and ln Early Chrutian Mysticism.

243

Given that Clement wanted to describe the Gnostic's vision of God, why did he choose to do so with the imagery ofthe high·priestly entrance? It cannot be a high regard for his Gnostic source. Nor does he hint at a specific mystic ritual. It may have been the image of a hidden holy of holies accessible only to the initiated, an image that matches Clement's concept of different Ievels of Christians.

Conclusions and Implications Valentiman theologians of the second century, among them Theodotus,

HefllCleon and the writer of the Vale.ntinilin Exposition, adopted the motif of the high priest's entraoce into the holy of holies from Jewish apocalyptic ascent visions to describe the eschatological entrance of Christ and the pneumattes into the Pleroma. The ritual of the bridal cbamber portrayed in the Gospel of Philip gives in this world a foretaste of the eschatological entrance. It employs sex:ual connotations of the Jewish imaginaire of the holy of holies to depict union with the light. Together with Philo, these Valentinian conceptions and probably also the ritual ofthe bridal chamber influenced Clement of Alexandria's model of the ascent of the Gnostic' s soul to the vision of God. The imagery of Yom Kippur did not become a fixed tradition in the Onostic Iiterature of the second century. Until Clement, various images and conccptions associated with Yom Klppur continued to inspire think.ers and refonn the tradition. The V alentinians reinforced the apocalyptic motif ofthe change of clothes with the idea ofthe high priest's plate <~•hal.ov). The Gospel of Philip returns to the sexual eonnotations of the Jewisb imaginaire. The adoption of these extra-biblical traditions and the con~ tinuing inspiration by the imaginaire of Yom Kippur implies connections to Jews or Jewish Christians. Clement, who adopted this imagery from Gnostic sow-ces into his mysticism, does not develop it further. Appar· ently, Yom Kippur was less important to him than to Christian Jews and Valentiman Christians.

Chapter6

Yom Kippurin Jewish Christian Legends Two Jewish Christian legends are connected to Yom Kippur. 1 First, James, the brother of Jesus. is described as bebaving every day as if it were a Day of Atonement. I argue that this legend is understood better against the background oftensions conceming Jewish Christianity and the observation of Yom Kippur. Second, Zechariah, the father of lohn the Baptist, is said to have received the annunciation ofhis son's conception wh.en serving as high priest in the holy ofholies on a Yom Kippur. This legend was used for calculating the dates of conception and birth of Christ and John. Furthermore, a holiday celebrating tbis event emerged in the Eastem Church. As I will show in the chapter on Christian autumn festivals, its readings are closely related to the Jewish ihd the Christian imaginaires of Yom Kippur. 2 Jewish Christian traditions from the second century recognize at least four legendary leaders who are described in high~priestly terms, although historically they were detinitely not high priests in the temple and some of them were neither Aaronides nor even Levites. These Ieaders include: (1) Zechariah. the father of John the Baptist.3 (2) Simeon.4 (3) John, the Beloved Disciple,s and (4) James, the brother ofCbrist.6 1 Here, I ha11e cllosen the tenn "le&end" instead of"myth" because we do not know to wbat extent the .fewisb Chrlsti.ao stori(l$ investigated in the eiUTent cbaprer were of foundational .status {QI' Jewish Chrittians. Zec:bariah's and James' promotion to high priesthood became part of .mainstream Christian mythology; but tbis ehapter deab with the Jewish Cbristian provenanee. z See below, pp. 322-328. 3 On apocrypbal legends linked to Zechariah, see still A. Berendts, Studien iiber Zacharias-Apolrl'yphrm ltlld Zac:Junlas-Lflgenden (Leipzig, 189.S). 4 On Simeon (Luke 2:25.34), see S. Porter, "Simeon 3," Anchor Bible Dictionary 6 (1992) 26-28. 5 Oll Jobn in genentl, see Jl.A. Culpepper, John, the Son of Zebedee. The. Life of a Legend (Studies on Personalities ofthe New Testament; Columbia [S.C.], 1994). ' On l&JruiS in general, see J. Painter, Just James. The Brothu ofJesus in History and Tradition (Studies on Personalities of th.e New Testament; Columbia [S.C.], 1997); W. Pratscber, Der Herrenbruder Jakobr.rs und die Jalwhvstradition (Forschqeo zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 139; Göttinge.o., 1983); and idem, "'Ialcoblls (Hemnbruder},.. Reallezikonfiir Antilee undCitristentrml 18 (1998) 1227-1243;

Yam KipprJ.r ln Jewl:th Christian Legends

245

In a Chrlstian context this is a remarkable anomaly, considering that in the first centuries there were no Christian priests. Priests (i.e. presbyters) and high priests (i.e. bishops) served in Cbristian churches only from the third century in the West and probably only from the fowth century in the East.7 Before this., various offices could be compared to that of priest, but these comparisons stayed in the realm of metaphor; there was no separate class of priests. Probably, among the Jewish Christian communities, the bigh-priestly title served to endow their Ieaders with the traditional terminology of Jewish religious leadership, perhaps '\\ith connotations of exceptional powers of intercession and hereditacy authority. The symbol for these aspects of authority and leadership of the high priests is the !tt1:o.A.ov (f"l). one of the high-~estly and royal insignia, wbich is associated with James and with John. Tbe rll was a golden plate with the inscription "Holy to the Lord," which was wom on the miter. 9 Biblical and rabbinie traditions ascribe expiating and apotropaic qualities 10 Epiphanius shows knowledge of a tradition related to Jewish to the post-temple oonceptions of the plate as baving an oracular function - the ability to distinguish between sinners and the righteous. 11 Levitleus 8:9 equates the high-priestly T">X with the 1TJ. The uncut hair of the Nazir is called 1U, too, and this has led some scholars to explain xho.)..ov in this. context as referring to the Nazirite ttadition.ll In my opinion, the fact that the 1rl was also one of the royal insignia links it to ruling power and leadership. 13 If Jewish Christian tradition continued to use the Jewish terminology. designating their Ieaders as high priests, how did they relate to Yom Kippur, the ritual of the high priest? These traditions can provide us with a

r•x.

M. Hengel, "Jakobus dec Herrenbrudec- der erste Papst?" in: idem, Pllfl/113 und JaJcobw.a. Kleine Schriften lll (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen tum Neuen Testament 141; Tllbingen, 2002; pp. 549-S82). ' B. Kötting, "Die Aufuabme des Begriffs •Hiereus' in den cbrist(ichen Sprachgebrauch," in: idem, Ecclesia peregrinans. Dos Gouuvolk unterwegs. Gesammelte A:uflliitze (Miblstemche Beilläge zur Theologie 54:1; Mnllster i. W., 1988; pp. 356-364), pp. 352-353, see also note S2,11tere. 1 Epipbanius, PantuiQif 29:4; Polyerates apad Eusebius, History of Jhe Clnuch 3:31:3; History ofthe Chlll'ch .5:24:3. Exod 28:36ff. Exod 28:38; mPe:sah 7:7; bPesah 77a; mZebah 8: 12; mMenah 3:3; bZebah &8b. 11 Epiphanius, De ,:if gemrnis 2:1; the tradition appears in Protevangeli11m of James S: 1; bYebQJII 60b; Ttugam Pseado-Jom~than Nmn 31:17-18. 11 Num 6; Jer 7:29. 11 See 0. Maycr "10" in Tlteologlschu WiNterbuch zum Alten Testament .5 (1986) 329-334. ln IQSb Rule of Bles1ings iv:28 the priest wears a 1Tl (cooseaation) for the holy ofholies. In 4QI61 Pesher baialt 8-10 iii 20 tbe mes.sianic kin,g wears a 1rl. 9

10

246 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrit~tümity in lhe First and Second Cennuiß glimpse into Jewish Christian ritual. about which evidence is so scant, especially conceming Yom Kippur. Of the four figures mentioned, only Zechariah and Jam.es are described in passages relating to Yom Kippur. Tbey will be the topics of the two sections that follow. Two other early Jewish Christian high priests, Sirneon and the apostle John, are briefly described in an excursus.

l. James. the Permanently Interceding High Priest Hegesippus' Hypomnemara is the eatliest sourc:;e to describe James, the brother of Jesus, with strong high-priestly motifs. 14 I suggest it was Hegesippus who portrayed James behaving every day as if it were Yom Kippur: he intercedes regularly in the holy of holies, and he observes permanently the prohibitions ofYom Kippur. With this, Hegesippus proposes an alternative to the singularity of Yom Kippur' s afilictions and its highpriestly service. For James, the Christian high priest, the holy of holies is always accessible and it is always possible for rum to offer up prayers in that location, where God is closest. Consequentty, a special Day of Atonement is unnecessary. Unfortunately, the original text of Begesippus has been preserved only indirectly; the relevant passages appear only in Eusebius' Historia Eccle· siastica and Epiphanius' Panarion. 15 Yet the question of the textual rela~ tionship between Hegesippus, Eusebius and Epiphanius has not been resolved. Did Epiphanius know of Hegesippus only indirectly, via Eusebius, or did he read him directly? Most scholars tend to hold the first opinion and discard Epiphanius. 1' However. decisive a.rguments have not 14 Moch of this section has been previously published in Stökl Ben Ezra, '"Christlans' Celebrating 'Jewish' Festivals of Aotumn." On introductory questione to Hegesippus, see T. Halton. "Hegesipp," Theologj8che &alerrzyklopätlie 14 (l98S) 56D-562. Hegesippus' Hypomnemtzta are Ullually dated to aro\Dld 180. Eusebius claims he is of Jewish origin, although stholars have called tbis into question. He may have been a Geotile Christian: see W. Telfer, "Was Hegesippus a Jew?" Ha,..,ord Theological Rniew 53 (1960) -143153; N. Hyldahl, "Hegesippus Hypomnemata,'' Stt.tdid Theologica 14 (1960) 70-113. Odcd Irshai has demonstratcd that at least the traditions Hegesippus used betray a Jewish background: 0. Irshai. "Historical Aspects of tbe Christian-Jewjsh Polemic Conceming the Church of Jeri!Salem in tbe Fourth Century (ln the Light of Patristic and Rabbinie Literature)" [in Hebrew with English summary} (2 vols; Ph.D. dissertation; The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1993), vol. I, p. 12. 15 Eusebius, History ofthe Church 2:23:4-7; Epiphanius, Panarion 29:4; 78:13-14. 16 Adminedly, Epiphilllius' greater precision and his use of explicü titles are no arguments for a direct acqoaintance with Hegesippus and may be explained by an attempt

to systematize EllSebius' version.

Yom Kippu.r in Jewish Christian Legends

247

been put forward. Some motifs in Epiphanius• paraphrases are conspicuously close to Jewish traditions and might refer to a direct relationship to Hegesippus. 17 The descriptions of James• behavior can be divided into two parts. the high~priestly aspects and the ascetic aspects. The high-priestly aspeets· consist of the following motifs: J ames • gannents, his intercession, his presence in the holy of holies and bis charismatic rairunaking. Epiphanius explicitly refers to James as a high priest. May that not have been part of Hegesippus' acoount? That it was not unthinkable in the second century to address a Christian hero as ••high priest" is proven by the Protevangelium 8, whicb explicitly caßs Zechariah a high priest. First, Eusebius' statement lhat James wears only linen and never woolen garments recalls the instructions for priests in Ezekiel44:17-18. Linen garments are used by ordinary priests in the daily service and by the high priest on hisentering the holy ofholies. Second, Eusebius relates that James prayed in the sanctuary ('tel ciyux. 6 vooc;) and that he was tbe only one allowed to enter it. The latter fact makes it certain that Eusebius bad in mind the most restricted area, the holy of holies. 18 In fact, Rufinus and Jerome, Eusebius' translators into Latin and Syriac translated the tenn as "holy of holies.•• Zahn has suggested that Eusebius' text might in the fourth century have read ...~ci ciy1.«t 1:rov Q.yi.o:lv." even if no e.xtant manuscript actually preserved this reading. 1 ~ Third, according to Eusebius, James prayed without cessation on behalf of his people. The discrepancies of Epiphanius' portrayal from Eusebius' can be explained as ..improvements'' by Epiphanius so that his source would match better the biblical precepts of Yom Kippur. Epiphanius em' 7 T. Zahn, "Brüder tmd Vettern Jesu, .. in: idem, Fo,..,chtmgen 1ntr Geschichte des nl!t4te.stamentlichen Kanol'll u.'tfd der altkirchlichen Literatur (Leipzig. 1900; vol. 6:2, pp. 225-372), p. 262; IU. Lawlor, "The Hypo.mnemata of Hegesippus," ia: idem, Evsebiana - Es11ays on the Ecclesiastical History afEu.sebius (Oxford, 1912, pp. l···97). Tbat Epiphanius WBS eiependent on Eusebius is defendcd by E. Schwaru:, "Zu Eusebius Kirchengeschichte," Zeitllchrifl ftir die neutestamentliche W'usel'llchaft und die Kunde der alteren Kirche 4 (1903) 48-66, here p. SO; J. Munck, "Presbyters and ])isc;iples ofthe Lord in Papias. Exegetic Comments on Eusebiu.s, Eccles:iastical History, UI, 39," Hanard Theological Review 52 (1959) 223-243, here pp. 241-242; Pratseher, Der Herren.bntderJalwbWJ und die Jakobustradition, pp. 103-104; F.S. Jones, "The Martyrdom of James in Hegesippus, Clcment of Alexandria, and Christi~~n Apocryp:ba, Including Nag Hammadi: A Study ofTextual Relations;" in: D.J. Lull (ed.), Society of Biblicol Literatrue 1990 Seminar Papers 29 (Atlanta [Ga.], 1990; pp. 322-33.5). 11 Wbile tti &rtll and o w~ usually refer to the temple, they can also have the specific meaning of holy ofbolies: seeHeb 9:2 or 9:3, depending on which manuscript is chosen; losephus, Bell'umjudalcvm 1:152. " Zahn, "Brüder und Vettern Jesu," p. 230.

248 The Impact uf Yom Kippw on Chl'islianity in the First arui Second CentflTieJ ploys explicitlythe titles "high priest" and "holy ofholies," and he quotes Leviticus 16 in relating that James entered the holy of holies only once a year. Eusebius' unbiblical "unceasing Yom Kippur"' is clearly the lectio difficiliol'. But if Hegesippus described James as permanent intercessor in the holy of holies, James behaved every day, as if it were Yom Kippur. This is the first indication that Hegesippus polemicized against a special Day of Atonement. Fourth, the historiola of James as rainmaker in Epiphanius' accouo.t may point to Jewish traditions about the high priest on Yom Kippur. "And once, when there was a drought, he raised bis hands to the heaven and prayed. and immediately the heaven gave water."20 This feature is usually explained as an exposition on Blijah's prayer for rain in IKings 18:42-45 or James 5:16-18, wbich certainly may have intluenced the choice of words in Bpiphanius. Yet the context of Yom Kippur is reminiscent of a Babylonian tradition according to which it was one of the high~priestly tasks on Yom Kippur to pray for the beneficial amount of rain in the com.ing year. 21 The high priest's skills as institutionalized rainmaker were challenged by charismatic raimnakers. In tbe discussion of the highpriestly prayer in the Babylonitm Talmud, Rabbi Yosef compares the power of praycr of a charismatic rainmaker such as Han.ina ben Dosa to that of a high priest' s prayer and reaches the conclusion tbat thc prayer of this cbarismatic personage is more effective than that of the high priest. I suggest understanding Epiphanius• historiola of James, the rainmaker, as alluding to James' higb-priestly role and simultaneously to his charismatic function, which implies polemies against the slcills of the historical high priest on Yom K.ippur. Epiphanius• account starts with a drought. which Jasted exactly until the moment when James lifted bis hands to heaven. If the Babylonian coneept was held also in Palestine in Hegesippus' time (the second century), then the bigh priest was responsible for the drought and James, the charismatic rainmaker, demonstrated bis superiority. Not only the high-priestly aspects but also the ascetie practices of James recall Yom Kippur, and may perhaps point to a conscious association witb the Day of Atonement, rather than the customary explanations: Naziritell

21

Epipbanill$, Panario" 78: 14. bYomo S3b; bTa 'an 24b.

21

On James as a Nazirite see E. Zucksehwerdt, "Das Naziräat des Herrenbruders

lO

Jakobus uch Hegesipp (Euseb, h.s. Il 23,5~),,. Ze.it1chrf/t for die nefltestomelrlliche Wis$enschaft wnd die Kwnde der älteren Kirche 68 (1977} 276-87. Of the three Nazirite abstineaces (alrohol, haircuttiJJg and belng in the presenee of co.pse&, see Num 6:1·-7), James obseTYed two. Moreover, the. formulation ll:K a:oo.iac; l''ltpöc; uütoil, whkh is employed regarding S8.lllsOD, clearly tries to turn J8.llles into a Nazirite. Epiphanius reduces tbe similuity to rhe Nazirite tradition by ski.pping the abstention ftom wine.

Yom KJppur in JITII'ish Ch,.istian Legends

249

or Rechabite23 traditions. According to Eusebius. James avoided alcohol from birth. nor did he eat meat; he did not cut bis hair, embalm himself, or frequent a bathhouse. Epiphanius does not mention the abstention ftom wine and from anointing, but he adds abstention from sexual interoourse, from wearing sandals and from wearing a second coat. 24 lf we assume that Busebius and Epiphanius used Hegesippus independently and adopted different but complemcntary details, we can reconstruct a Iist of seven prohlbitions: drinkins wine. eating meat, haircutting, bathhouse, anointing, wesring sandals or a seoond ooat, and sexual inter~ oourse.2s I find especially telling that Eusebius, Epiphanius and Mishna.h Ta'anit agree on the mention of keeping away from public bathhouses, a prohibition that does not fit tbe Nazirite or the Rechabite txaditions.26 The last four prohibitions agree with Jewish custom on public mourning days as described in the Misbnah Ta'anit.21 To abstain from wine and meat is a rule for the eve of Tish'a be'Av. 28 However, the closest parallel to the whole list is the six prescriptions for Yom Kippur: eating, drinking, washing. anointing, wearing sandals and sexual intercourse.29 Ifthe assumption is oorreet that Epiphanius and Eusebius independently copied directly from Hegesippus. Hegesippus portrayed not Qnly the high-priestly but also the aseetic aspects of James' bebavior as a permanent Yom Kippur. Now we have to take into consideration the religious situation after the destruction of the temple. The entrance of the most sacred person into the most sacred place to intercede in God's presence for hwnanity's sins bad been restricted to the m.ost sacred day, Yom Kippur. Fasting and praying were of major importance, but they happened also on other days. In this context, Hegesippus portrays James, the leader of the Jewish Christian faction, as fasting and interceding unceasingly in the most sacred piace as if every day were Yom Kippur. This portrayal spreads the unique sanctity ofthat ts O.a ehe Rechabite background see lhe discussion in lrshai, "Historical Aspects ofthe Christian-Jewish Polemic Conceming ehe Chllrch of Jerusalem in tltc Fourth Century," vol. 1, pp. 8·-12 and vol. 2, pp. 13-16, notes 67, 68, 71, 83-86). ~ The latter two may also depend on Matt 10:10; however, many of the motifs of Matt 10 are missing. t~ The following abstinem:es arc mentioned by both: meat, b.athhouse, haircutting. Only Eusebius mentions wine and anointiog, while Epiphanius is the only oue to reter to sandals, second eoat and sex. 211 mTa'an 1:6. 17 mTa'an 1:6;4:7. ~• mTa'an 4:7. 29 mYoma 8:1, no eating. drinking, wubing. anointiog, sandals or sexual intercourse. The first two are modified, because total abstinence from food and drinlc. is impossible ev1111 for permanent asc:etics. There is no prohibilion against using a public bathhouse, since washing is forbidden altogetlter.

250 Thalrnpoct of Yom Kipflll7 on Christionity in the Firfi and Second Centwiu

day to all days ofthe year. If James, the Jewish Cbristian leader par ex.cellence, could, according to Hegesippus, approach God directly every day, a special Day of Atonement bad become superfluous for the followers of James, i.e. Hegesippus' Jewish Christian contemporaries. By the same token we can conclude (if our thesis is correct) that some Jewish Christian groups, those against whom Hegesippus drew his portrayal, did observe YomK.ippur.

2. Zechariah's Revelation on Yom Kippur Luke l teils the story about Zechariah, the priest, who on offering incense in the temple is approached by Gabriel. who announces to him the future birth of Jobn. lf we consider Luke's account as historical, Zechariah's act was part of the duty of every member of the priestly watches who participated in the temple service; in this case, Zechariah was most probably offering the daily incense offering in the sanctuary, the ..holy area.. oul~ide the holy of holies. Suddenly, in the fourth century, simultaneously in man.y places and in many languages, •a tradition appears about Zechariah, the high priest, receiving the revelation on entering the holy of holies on Yom Kippur or Sukkot:30 in Latin in the anonymaus de solstitiis (third or fourth century?) and Ambrose (d. 397); in Syriac in Ephrem (d. 373); in Greek in Chrysostom's Christmas Homi/y from 386Y The simultaneaus attestation is so widely dispersed that the ttadition must be older than the end of the fourth century.

10 See above, p. 68, notes 239 and 290 for oU.er authors who considered the two festi· vals as one, or who eonfused SUkkot and Yom Kippur. On the sarne confusion of Silkkot and Yom Kippurinrelation to Job.o's annunciation or conception, cf. e.g. Cillysostom, Christma.s Homily 5 (PG 49:3~7 C); Pseudo--Cillysostom, In lfJlJdem co11ceptionis sancti loannis Baptfstae (PG 50:739 A). ~ 1 /Je solstltiit et aeC{Ilinocliis (ed. Botte, pp. 96-98); Ambrose, Commentary on Luke 1:22 (CCSL 14:17, lines 339-346); Ephrem, Commentary on E'ICodru 12:2-3 (CSCO 152:141); ComiMIItary on the Diate.uaron 1:29 (SC 121:61--62); Homily on the NatMty 5:14, 26:12; 27:3.13 (conceptlon of Jesus on 10 April, six months aft.er lohn); Joho Chrysostom, Christmas Homily, PG 49:351-62. The traditionalso appears in many other writings, among them those of the mid-sixth-century traveling businessmau who is known by the name of Cosmas lndic:opleuStes: Christion Topography 5:9 and 5:37 (SC 1S9:20-23 and 66-69); and an anonymous commentary on Luke from Jerusalem, which the editor dates to 400-450, fragment 10, publisb.ed in J. Reuss (ed.), Lukas-Kommentare

ou.s der griechischen Kirche. Aus Katenenhand$chriften ge.sDmmelt und herau.sgegeben (Texte und Untersucbungen 130; Berlin, 191!4), pp. 23-24.

Yom Kipplll' in Jewi$h Christian Legends

251

Already in the Protevangelium of James, a Jewish Cbristian legend of the mid-second century,n Zechariah bad been promoted to high priest. Yet the actual scene of the annunciation is only indirectly alluded to: "About that time [when Mazy was working on the temple curtain] Zechariah became mute, and Samuel replaced him, unti1 Zechariah spoke" (10:2). Neither time nor place nor details of the encounter with Gabriet are specified.33 Elsewhere in the Protevangelium, the holy of holies is a place of revelation {8); nevertheless, the annunciation does not have to have happened on Yom Kippur, since in the Protevangelium, tbe holy of holies can be entered every day (as in Hegesippus). 34 Yet from promoting Zecha32 On the Protevangelium, see H. Smid, Protevangeli11m Jacobi. A Commentary (Apocrypha Novi Testamenti 1: 1; Assen, 1965); E. de Strycker, La forme Ia plus anclenne d11 ProtivU1fgile de JaC
252 The Impact of Yom Kippw on Christionity in the First and Second Cenhlries riah to high pricsthood it is only a small conceptual step to placing the annunciation scene in the context of a special ritual of the high priest, i.e. Yom Kippur. l$ The fourth-century embellishment may well have circulared alteady in second-oentwy Jewish Christian circles, whose members regarded Zechariah as a high priest. A hint on this may be manuscript S of the Old Syriac~ whicb :improves Luke's laconic statement "to offer the incense in the temple of the LOid"' (1:9) to "to bring in the incense"- presuming a movement into a building, which could be the holy of holies or the sanctuary.36 · How is it possible to ex.plain the legendary metamorphosis of Luke' s simple ae<;ount - a priest offering incense in the sanctuary at an unspecified time - to the detailed, sophisticated version - a high priest offering incense in the holy of holies on Yom Kippur? I propose two explanations: First, a story about a high priest who receives a revelation in the most sacred place on the most sacred day is more interesting than a story about some priest who enters some place on some date. 37 If legend promotes to high priesthood the priest who enters the sanctuary and receives a revelation during bis incense sacrifice, the likelihood increases that the place and the ritual will also be promotedt Second, the Jewish imaginaire of Yom Kippur closely associates the high priest's entrance to the boly of holies and the incense sacrifi.ce with encounters with angels and with the divine.38 For people accustomed to thinking in the tradition of the Epistle to the Hebrews. which places the incense altar in· the holy of hoHes, this shi:ft

the holy of holies and; naturally, the holy of holies protccts her purity. Second, tbe presenee of Ood passcs from the holy ofholies to Mary. The tradition influeneed early lsl&IU and may therefore be Jewish Christiau: see Qur'an, Sura 3:37 (the family of 'Imran). The tradition of the virgins sew.ing the temple veil .also points to a Jewish Christian provenance, since it appears in 2Barat:h 10:19; m$eqal8:S; Puiqta Robbati26:6: see Lieberman, "The Temple: Its Lay-Out and Procedure," pp. 167-169. 3' On the various texts dllting ehe revelation of Zeebariab to Yom Kippur, sec J.F. Coalcley, ''Typology and the Birthday of Christ on 6 January," Orientolia Chrutiana Analeeta 236 (1988) 247-256; and A. de Halleux, "Le comput 6phr6mien du cycle de Ia nativite," in: F. Van Segbroeek, et al. (ed$.), The Fo11r Gf.JSpels 1992. Festschrift Frai'IS N11irynck (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologican~m Lovaniensium 3; Leuven, 1992: pp. 2369-2382). 36 Two Western writers, Irenaeus of Lyon (d. aft.er 178) and Victorinus of Poetovio {d. 304), statc that Ze<:hariah brougbt a ~ifice: see Iren.eus, Against the Her~t .des 3:10:1, cf3:11:8; and Victorinus, Co1111t1entury on the Apoca/ypse 4:4 (SC423:68; cf. CSEL 49:50-Sl). n Daniel Sehwartz, in an oral communkation. " See pp. 79-85, 110-112 and 124-127, above.

Yom Kipplll' ill Jewish Christitm Lege1rtls

253

becomes even slighter.39 Even ifthe full-fledged tradition appears only in fourth-century mainstream sources, the Protevangelium strongly suggests tbat an early fonn existed already in Jewish Christianity. The simllltaneous surfacing of the tradition at the end of the fourtb cen.twy in many languages and areas can be explained in light of the pronlotion of the celebration of Cbristmas at that time. For computing Christ' s birthday, the references in the account of John the Baptist's birth are indispensable, first and foremost being the annunciation to Zechariah. th.e only event that could be assigned to a specific day - the tenth of Tishri. 40 I will give my translation of the most interesting and probably earliest passage on Zechariah and Yom Kippur from the anonymous tract de solslitii:s et aequinoctiis conceptionis et nativitatis Domini nostri Iesu Christi et Johannis Baptistae, since thc text is not easily available and has not been

trans1ated: In the times when Zecllariah, the father of Jobll, served in the priesthood of the Iews according to the dec:ree of the law and the ptophccy of Ionab, whieh proclaimed to the Ninevites the destruction of their city after tbru days, the Nincvites had gained mercy from God's action through penitence.'1 ln memory oftbi.q, now, the Jews observe every year a last in the morxth of September, whidt they .solemnly call Booths41 or Tabernacles.40 Tberefore the priest! at that time offered Rerific:es to God for the sins of the peopl.e in tlt.ose days in the mollth of September according to the law's c:ommandmem; therefore, when Zechariah saerific:ed at the altar, he immediately professed that he was not a priest nor worthy [to intercede] with prayers for tbe sins ofso wicked a people. But (ZecbariahJ remernbered that Christ hlmself was going to be tlte only lnle priest, about whom the fllthcr bad said: You at'e priest in eternity accordi11g to the Ol'der ofMelchizedd; [Ps 110:4], who alone offers an appeasiog sacrifice for the sins of all to God. Aod Zecharia.b prayed for His com.ing...."

39 On possible reason.s for Hebrews plac:ing the in~;cose altar in tbe holy of holies, see Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews, pp. 234-236; and cf. lKgs 6:22; 1B111'Uch 6:7. o10 for example, Epbrem writes "From the tenth day of lhe seventh month, wben

Zec:bariah J"Ceei"ed the announcement oftbe birth of John, until tbe tenth day ofthe first month, wben Mary rcceiwd the annollllctment of the angel, six months passed... Com.mentary on &odru 12:2, transl. by J.P. Amar, E.G. Mathews and K. McVey, St..Ephrem the Syrian. Selected Prose Work.t. Commentary on Gmesis. Commentary on E:roriJJs. Homily on """ Lm-d.. Letter to P11.bli11S (Fatbt:rs of the Cburch 91; Washington, D.C., 1994), pp. 246-247; cf. CSCO 152:141. 41 Tbis is one of the earllest attestations for an association of Jonab with Yom Kippur; see above, note219, pp. SS-56 and pp. 51-59. 42 Metellitum is a llan.scriptioo of the Aralnaic term ltn'?'ltl1l/ am7oa. 43 Scaen.(Jphegiam is a transcription of the Greek term OICIIVOlUJYi.a. 44 Here follow refereoces 10 the fulfillment ofprayers &om Matt 7:9-11; llobn S: I S.

254 Tlre Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in IIre First and Second Centuries Thus, when Zechariah had prayed for this, the IlDgel Gabriel answered him:

Zechariah, your prayers have been heard Behold, Elizabeth, your wife will bear you a son, and you willname him John. You will halle juy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, and he will be great in tlre sight of the Lord. He will not drink wine or strong drink; soon, even before his birth he will be jilled with the Holy Spirit. He will turn many of the people of Israel toward the Lord their God and he will go before him [Luke 1:13-17]. The story happened before the f"Irst year of Tiberius Caesar [14 CE], in the month of September, on the eighth Calends of October [24 September], on the eleventh [day of the] waxing moon [II Tishri], when the Jews have to celebrate the fast ofTabemacles. Then, indeed, after the ninth year, Tiberius Caesar [23 CE] computed time and course ofthe moon, and this day, the eighth ofthe Calends ofevery October, happened to be the equinox, when the night begins to be Ionger than the daylight. For he must increase, he said, but I must decrease (Jobn 3:30). For the light had become less than the darkness when the Jews, according to the law and the prophecy, offer God the sacrifices in which John was conceived, in which they were also accused by the Lord, as the prophet Isaiah says: What to me is the

multitude ofyour sacrijica? Says the Lord; I halle had enough ofyour burnt afferings oframs and the fat of calves and goats. [lsaiah 1:11]. For these [offerings] were affered previously for the sins of the people, which already had to cease when John the Baptist was conceived. And therefore Zechariah, his father, the priest ofthe Jews, became mute, since their sacrifices already then had to cease and "become mute," which were affered for the sins ofthe people. The one and only priest came, who affered a sacrifice to God for the sins with bis own single spotless lamb. And John showed him to the Jews: Hel"e is the Lamb ofGodwho bears the sin ofthe warld[John 1:29).45

The "eleventh (day of the) waxing moon," 11 Tishri, could be understood as the day after Zechariah finished performing the Yom Kippur service, returned home, bad intercourse with Elizabeth and John was conceived. 46 The high priesthood of Zechariah is explicitly declared to be inferior to the "only true" high priesthood of Jesus. The confusion and identification of S ukkot and Yom Kippur occur very frequently, 47 probably because the two festivals are so close on the calendar and because the construction of booths is more perceptible to the outside observer than prayer assemblies taking place inside synagogues. Here the date (10 Tishri) and the ritual (intercession and sacrifice for atonement, Jonah, repentance) refer to Yom Kippur. This is not the place to engage in a discussion ofthe convoluted provenance of de solstitiis, but its acquaintance with Jewish ritual and the use of a transcription metellitum for the De solstitiis et aequinoctiis (ed. Botte, pp. 96-98). I will retum to the computation and the speculations about the astronomical constellations in the section on the commemoration day ofthe annunciation to Zechariah; 4'

46

see below, pp. 322-328. 47 See above, p. 68, notes 289 and 290, and p. 2SO, note 30.

Yom Kippur in Jewi:sh Christion Legends

255

Aramaie Kn':l107.l/Kn':l':lo7.l for booths bespeak an author residing in an area with Aramaie and Jewish influences but with Latin as the language. The frequency with which Ephrem refers to the computation, his acquaintance with traditions of the Pro/evangelium, and the reading of the Old Syriac point to a generic connection between the Jewish Christian legend and the Syriac mainstream authors. The writings of such mainstream authors as Ambrose, Ephrem, Chrysostom, Beda and Ishodad, and the institution of a festival, prove that Zechariah's high priesthood and the annunciation in the holy ofholies on Yom Kippur-Sukkot became "faits hSgendaires." I will retum to this tradition in the chapter on Christian autumn festivals, where I analyze the festival that commemorates the annunciation to Zechariah in the Eastem Church and is closely related to the Jewish and the Christian imaginaires of Yom Kippur.48 Does the Protevangelium betray any attitude toward Yom Kippur? It seems not. Unlike in Hegesippus, the aspect of permanent intercession in the holy ofholies is missing, as is the self-affiiction. But as in Hegesippus, the holy ofholies is always accessible to the Christian Jewish high priest, who in the end will be murdered in the sanctuary. Remarkably, the annunciation scene, which the later Christian mainstream tradition depicts as happening on Yom K.ippur, is completely marginalized. If we take into account the possibility that the Yom Kippur tradition was already circulating in second-century Jewish Christianity, was there a reason to suppress it? Suppression would fit the general tendency of the Pro/evangelium to minimize the position of John the Baptist and replace him with Mary. Excursus: Sirneon and John as High Priests Simeon, another figure ftom Luke's nativity narrative, is the beneficiary of two promotions. Luke's accouot provides no evidence that Simeon was a priest or even a Levite. Y et a few Christian texts call Simeon a priest,49 most probably because of the close association with the temple in Luke's account (2:25-35). The Pro/evangelium promotes See below, pp. 322-328. A search in the TLG 8.0 resulted in, among other sources, Pseudo-Epiphanius, De prophetarum vita et obitu (recensio prior) {ed. Schell!lan p. 24 line 11); Pseudo-AthanasiU5, Testimonia e scriptura (PG 28:64C); Johannes Damascenus, Sermo in annuntiotionem beatae Mariae uirginis (PG 96:652C). The authenticily of the last has been rejected by I.M. Hoeck, "Stand und Aufgaben der Damaskenos-Forschung," Orientafia Christiana Periodica 17 (1951) 5-60, here p. 40, note 96. On Sirneon in the Vitae Prophetal"llm, see A. Schwemer, Studien zu den frühjüdischen Propheten/egenden. Vitae Prophetarum (2 vols; Textsand Studies in Aocieot Judaism 49 and 50; Ttlbingen, 1995, 1996), vol. 2, pp. 326-327. On the Vitae Prophetal"llm as Christian composition, see D. Satran, Biblical Prophet11 in Byzontine Pa/estine. Reassessing the Lives of the Prophets (Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 11; Leiden, 1995). 41

49

256 The Impact ofYom KipptU' on Christianity in the First und Secemd Cenwrie$ Simeoo further, to high priesthood (24). He becomes the suc:cessor ofthe murdered Zeehariab. This did not become part of' generat Christian Iore; the only otb.eT text kDown to m.e tbat calls Simeon a high priest is the Latin version A of tbe Descent to Hell. A setoAd Simeon, the son ofClopas is traditionally seen as the suc:cessor of James as bishop of Je-. rusalem. While I could not find 811Y explitit mention ofSimeon Clopas as (lrigb} priest, i1 is possible that he was not always sharply distinguished from tbe Simeon who held Jesus as a baby in bis hands. 50 Tradition closely links three Cbristian (high) priestly figures: Zechariab, Sirneon end James.' 1 This bccomes mostevident through the discovery of their c:ommon tomb on 1he Mount of Olives in the year 3S 1 by a hermit. Epiphanius.n In any esse, in tbe plot ofthe ProtBllangelium, having 1wo suc:cessivc Christian Jews in the high priestbood reinforces tbe Christian claim to tbe temple as 1 place ofOod's presenc:e. The last of tbe figures to be examined is Joho, the Beloved Disciple. He is differmt, in that hishigh priesthood did not become a "mit ll!gendaire" as did the high priesthood of Zecbariab or James or even Simeon. Very few sourees refer to biro in high-priestly terms." The earliest such SOUJCe is a Ietter by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus arul femm.t Ieader ofthe Quartadeciman faction, to Vietor ofRome wrir:ten around 190 CE, preserved in Eusebius: ..... John, who rec:lined upon the bosom of the Lord, and wbo was a priest wesring th.e sacerdotal plate (xnalov), was both a wilness and e. teacher..."-"~ While Polycrates uses the term if1PE'ix.; (priest) and not üp;tL~ (high priest), the xi'talov clearly designates John as a high priest. Coosequently, Rufious traoslate$ the first passage with sacerdo.s (priest) and the second with summus sacerdo:s (high priest).ss Tbc only other attestation I have he.-d of, and this only indireetly, is the colophon of a Paris manusaipt of Hippolytos "Odes on All the Scriptures." mentioned by Robm

Eisler." How could Joho have become a hi~ priest? There are at least two possibilities: famHy relations with the "high priests" Jesos and James,51 or bis exceptional rank by virtue ofbeing the last surviving aposUe. As noted earlier, the xi:talo.ov may weil have been perc:eived as a symbol of power ofthe bigbest rank. There tan be no doubt that Polycratea' reason for including tbis tradition in his Ietter to Victor was to enhance bis own posirion regarding the celebration ofEaster on 14 Nisan. One eould paraphrasebis argument thu9: ..I observe the same liturgical tustom as Polytarp and as John, who was the bearer of the !Ct~ul.ov.'' And one eould add: "And be, the chiefpriest, should know wheo to celebrate

50 Possibly. Hegesippus coosidm Simeoo Clopas to bc a high priest. Eusebius writes that the attempt to san James was undertakcn by a Rechabite priest. lnstead of lhese conupt Jines, Epiphanius writes Simeon Clopas. $1 E.g. all ofthem are called "just.'' 51 See F.-M. Abel, "'La s6pulture de saiut Jac.ques lc Mineur,'' Rt!liB~ Bibliq11e 16 (1919) 480.-499. But see also S. Vcrhcl.st, "L'apoca1yp$e de Zacharie, Simeoo et Ja~ ques," R~llt Biblique 105 (1998) 81-104. " See Zahn, "B~~r und Vettern Jesu,,. pp. 209-213. 54 Polycrates aPild Bu.sebius. History oftIu? Church 3:31:3; 5:24:3. " Jerome quotes Polycratcs usingpontifex (priest): De viris inlustribus 45 (Texte und Untersuchungen 14:29 [Emest Cushing Richardson, 1896]). 56 "Odes o.n All the Scriptures" in Pari.s Codex Coislin. 195, according to Robert Eisler, The Enigma ofthe Folll'th Go.spel (London. 1938), p. SS. 57 Actording to one tradition Salome, Jobn's motber, was Mary's sister, and lohn and Jesus were in fatt cousins: see Zahn, "BrQder und Vettern Jesu,,. pp. 340-341.

Yom Kippur inJflll'i&h Chrinifllf Legend$

251

festivala.." Tbe in!ormation ahout Jcihn is, after all, mueh more sk:etchy lhan OID' sources about ZechariJh and James. aud all eo~N:Ius.ions about bi:s bigb priesthood are su~ect to tbis sketchiness.

Conclusion Hegesippus• portrayal that the holy of hoHes was always accessible and that James practiced aseetie behavior as if every day were Yom Kippur makes a Day of Atonement obsolete, especially if the temple ritual is no Ionger performeiL Instead, Hegesippus promotes the practice offasting and praying every day. Per:baps we have to understand even the mishnaic assertion tbat it is the Day of Yom Kippur that atones as a readion to similar argutnents. 51 The Mishnah would have countered Hegesippus by maintaining that Yom Kippor is not obsolete, since it was never the priestly ritual that achieved the atonement but the special day. At some point between the second and fourth centuries, ~bariah becomes a high priest entering the holy ofholies on Yom Kippur for all these reasons: the story•s appeal, the ttaditional association of the entrance into the holy of holies on Yom Kippur with revelation, and the suitability of Yom Kippur as the date for the

computation of Christmas.

Part Three

The Impact of Y om Kipp ur on Early Christianity from the Third to the Fifth Centories

Chapter7

Chr~stian

Exegesis ofLeviticus and the Polemies against

the Contemporary Yom Kippur Over the centuries the biblical Yom Kippur imagery from Leviticus acquired increasing importance for Christian sages. In fmt-century Christian Judaism, it was only for tbe community ofHebrews and some other Christian Jews that Jesus was a high priest entering the holy of hoHes - by the tbird century, Jesus is the heavenly high priest for almost every Christian. Not only Jesus but even a bishop who celebrated the Eucharist could be described as a high priest upon entering the holy of hoHes of bis cburch. Moreover, while the New Testamentealls Jesus a scapegoat in allusive tenns. in fifth-century Christianity the scapegoat has become a common image explieitly used to explain the atoning function of Christ' s death. Tbis impactwas mainly "bookish,. or "biblicaln via tbe inclusion ofLeviticus, Hebrews and Romans into the Christian canon. Yet even if tbe main impact of Yom Kippur derived from its biblical vetsion, we still bave to ask why it was this imagery that became so attractive. I claim that Yom Kippur as observed by Jewish contemporaries of the Church Fathers contributed to the increasing use of the Yom Kippur imagery by Christians. To address this point, the chapter opens with abrief presentation of some aspects of Christian exegeses of Leviticus 16, focusing on the writings of the fust and most int~resting co1nmentator, Origen. It also reflects on the increase in the use of terms relating to institutions centralto Yom Kippu.r (holy of holies, high priest, kapporet) in Christi.an Jiturgical tenninology- what Steven Fine calls "templization" (section 1). 1 The three sections that follow analyze the challenge posed to Christianity and its cl.aim regarding the exclusivity of Cbrist•s once-and-for-all Day of Atonement sacrifice by the continuing observance of Yom Kippur. I begin with a description of the e-ridence for Christian participation in the Jewish fast, whicb caused considerable tension in Caesarea and Antiocb. I maintain that Origen wrote hls exege.!lis ofLeviticus 16 and 23 as an attempt to keep these Christians from fasting on Yom K.ippur (section 2). I then ana1

For the term and its ramitications in Jato antique Judaism, soe Fine, This Holy

PJace,-pp. 41-59, 79-94, 132-1S6.

262 The Impact ofYom KippllT on Christia11ity in the Third to the F;fth Centurie:s

lyze the evidcnce provided by those authors who polemically describe contempotary Yom Kippur rites, some even as firstband witnesses, whlch testifies against an exclusively ..booldsh" relationship to Yom K.ippur. 'fhat many of tbese descriptions appear in Cbristian tracts on fasting may be seen as further evidence for Christian auempts to keep fellow Christians from joining the ''fast of the Jews" (section 3). Finally, I address the other side of the coin, discussing Jewish polemies in Yom K.ippur-related tcxts in opposition to the Cbristian concept of atonement (section 4).

1. Christian Exegesis of Leviticus and the Templization ofthe Liturgy Quite surprisingly, Greek and Latin as well as Syriac and Annenian material on Leviticus, and specifically on Yom Kippur, abounds. Leviticus, par~ ticularly those chapters dealing with sacrifices, is commonly rcgarded as the book least known among Christians at all times. Symptomatic oftbis neglect is the "Biblica" index oftbe (otherwise extremely helpful) C/(lllis Patrum Graecorum, which lists not a single exegetical tract for Leviticus2 - though there are as many exegetical tr:acts dealing with Leviticus as with Hebrews, namely seven (originally wriUen in Greek and dating back tobe* forc 500 CE).3 When counted together with Latin, Syriac and Armenian works there are many more. The following is to my knowledge the most complete Iist of early Cbristian exegetes dealing with Leviticus as a whole book (i.e. without homilies covering single cbapters): a) Around 240 CI> Origen4 wrote a set ofhornilies preserved in Rufinus• Latin translation. Homilies 9 and 10 deal with Yom Kippur. 5 2

M. Geerard and F. Glorie (eds.), Clat~is PatTtim Graecorum.

Yolum~ll

V. Indices, ln-

itüz, Concodantiae (Co.-pus Christianorum Tumhout. 1987), p. 118. This. fact doe$ not

detract ftom the praisewonhiness of this erudite work of seholarship; it merely demoostrares tbe Iack of Cbristian interest in Levitieus. 3 Geerard and Glorie, Clavis Potrum Graecorum, vol 5, pp. 146-147, Jists seven (Origen, Theodore_ofMopsuestia, Severus of Gabala, lohn Cbrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Gennadius and Theororet of Cyru.s). Almost all of them extap.t only in fragments. • Lived ca. 18!1-254 in Alexandria and Caesarea, writing his homilies from Caesarea. ' W.A. Baehrens, Origenes Werke, :sechster Band: Homilien zum Hexatnch ln Rufins Uber:setzrmg. Erster Teil: Die Homilien zu Gmesi9, Exodus und Levitlew (GCS 29 {Origenes 6}; Leipzig, 1920); on Yom Kippur, see pp. 417-445. The Freneh translation and the notes by Mareel Boa-ret in SC 286 and 287 (Paris, 1981) are very helpful. I quote from the English translation by G.W. Bark.ley, Orlgen. HontiiJI on Le~~iticiiS 1-16 (Tbe Fathen of the Cburcb 83; Washington D.C., 1990). On Origen and the Jews in gen.eral. see tbe

are

Christion Exegesic ofLe~~itiCVI ond tlte PolemiQ Q[l(Jirut Yom Kipp11r

263

b) Eusebius of Emesa (d. ca. 359) wrote a selective comm.entary in Grc:c:k preserved in an Annenian translation}5 He is the only exegete ofLeviticus who did not comment on chapters 16 or 23. 7 c) Augustine (354--430) wrote two works on the Heptateuch. Quaestiones and Locutiones. wbich explain difficult passages. Within this framework he also dealt with Leviticus. 8 d) Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444) wrote the G/aphyra, a selective commentary on the Pentateuch (before 423). Anotber spiritual commentary on Yom Kippur is extant in sections ofhis On the Adoration and Worship ofGod in Spiritandin Truth (around 415).9 e) A presbyter, Hesychius of Jerusalem, wrote an extensive verse-byverse commentary (430-450) translated into Latin by an anonymous translator (probably of the sixth century). 10 This is the only exegetical traet covering exclusively Leviticus, and the only extant early Cbristian commentary on Leviticus verse by verse. f) Theodoret of Cyrus 11 wrote Questions on the Octateuch (after 453). elasstc: by N. de Lange, Origen and the Jews (Cambridge [UK], 1975). Nevertheless, de Lange does not refer to the exegesis of Lev 16. 6 Vahan Hovhannesian, EUJebe d'Emese, 1. Commenlalre de I'Octateuque (Venice, 1980); yet the commentary on Leviticus fills only ten pages, 125-134. 7 B. ter Haar Romeny suggests that Eusebius' opposition to allegory might explain his Iack of interest in the sac:rificial passages: sec his "Early Antiochene Commentaries on Exodus," in: E.A. Livingstone (ed.), Sludia .Patristica 30 (Leuven, 1997; pp. 114119), hcrep. 117. · • Augustine, Quaestionum in Heptateuchum liber tertius (CCSL 33:175-233}, here pp. 211-214; Loe11ticmum in lleptateuchvm liber tertius (CCSL 33:424-431}. here p. 428. ' Cyril of Alexandria, G/aphyrorum in Levilic11m liber (PG 69:S39-.S90); On the Adoration and Wonhip ofGod in Spiritandin Tnuh (PG 68:133-ll25), here pp. llOS1108. On Cyril, bis exegesis and Judaism, see R. Wilken, Judaism and the Early Christion Mind A Stttdy ofCyril of.Aiuandri(J's F.;zegesis and Theology (New Have:n [Conn.] and London, 1971). especially pages 39-68. On the Glaphyra and On the Adoration rmd Worllhip ofGod in Spiritandin Tnlth, sec ibidem, pp. 69-92. IO Ht$)'Chius, Commentary on Le~~iticus (PO 93:787-1180). SeeS. Tampellini, "Introduzione allo srudio del Commentarius in Levitk:um di Esi~hio di Oerusalemmc," (Ph.D. dissertation; Bologna, 1998); 811d his preliminary swvey, "L'csegesi del Levitico di Esichio di Oerusalemme. Osservazioni introduttive c sondaggi preliminari,'' Annali di storia dell'esegesi 13/1 (1996) 201-209. l would like to express my deep gratirude to Stcfano Tampellini for providing me with a copy ofhis dissertation. 11 Lived ca. 393-466, mainly in Cyrus, a small town close to Antioch. See C.T. McCollough, "Theodoret of Cyrus as Biblical Interpreu;r and ihc Prcsence of Judaism .in the Later Roman Empire," Swdia .Patristica 18 (J 983) 327-334. On Theodoret's exegesis, see J.-N. Guinot, L'atigese de Theodoret de Cyr (Th6ologie historique, 100; Paris: Beauchesne 1995), especially pp. 771-75. Greck edition by Fm~ändez Marcos and Saenz-Badillos, Theodoreti Cyremis Quaestiones in Octatt.uchum.

264 The lmp4ct of Yom KipJIIlT on Christianity in the Third t(J the Flfth Cenhlriu g) Cyprian, "the Poet" of Gaul (early fift:h century) wrote some lines on Leviticus 16 in his poetic retelling of tbe Heptateuch. 12 h) A selective commentary in Syriac exists under the name of EpJ.trem.l3 i) Questions on the Old Testament are asc:ribed to Isidore of Seville (ca. 560-()36). 14 j) Paterius excerpted writings of Gregory the Oreat in his De Exposi-

tio7U! Veteris ac No11i Testamenti. 1s k) lshodad ofMerv (niuth century) compiled a commentary from previous exegeses of Leviticus. 16 In his chapter on Leviticus 16 be quotes Narsai (d. ca. 503), lohn ofBeth Rahban (d. 567). Abraham ofBetb Rahban (d. after 567), Michael (sixth to seventh centuries) and Daniel bar Tubanita (seventh century). 17 Of these, John wrote a commentaty, Michael Questions, and the others most probably

Memre.

~

C)oprianus Gallus, Heptateuchos (CSEL 23:1 p. 104-ll.S [R. Peiper 18911)•. u P. Beued.ictus (ed.), SancJi Patris Nosl1'i Epltraem Syri Opera Omnia quae astant Graece, Syrtace, LoJine, in S4/S tomo:s di8tributa ad MSS. Codices Vatican03, aliosque castigata, muftis aucta, interpl'etatiolte, praefationibliS, notis, Yarilllflibus lectiqnibus illwtrala Nunc primum sub Awpiciis Clemetrlis XII. Pontfficu Maximl e Bibllatheca Vaticana P7odeunt. Tomut PrimltS Syriace et Lotine (Rome, 1737); on Lev 16, see vol. 1, pp. 244-245. A further commenlaty, extant i.a Armeniaa, is also attributed to Epbmn: see E.G. Mathcws (ed., transl.), T1r11 Armenian Commentariu on Exodus·Deutuonomy Attributed to Ephrem the Syrian (CSCO 587:83-123, 588:67-93; Scriptores Anneniaci 2S-26; Louvain, 1998). The editor dates the translation to around 1100 CE: see idem, The Armenion Commentary on Gene:t.is Al11'ibuted to Ephrem the Syrian (CSCO 572; Scriptores Armen.iaci 23; Louvain, 1998), pp. 1-11. 14 P!(?}-Isidore, Qvauiionu de 11eteri el IWUO Testamento. On Levidcus, see PL 83, pp. 321-340. On Yom Kippur, see Pl, 83:333-334. lts autbentidty has been questioaed by B. Altancr, ..Der Stand der Jsidorforsc:hung," in: Miscellanea .lsidorlana (Rome, 1936) (non vidl), cf. E. Dekkers and A. Oaar, Clmis Patrum Lotinorum {CCSL; Steenbrug, 3 1995), pp. 398 and 402, nwnber 1194. 15 On Leviticus, see PL 79:753-762. 16 lshodad of Merv's commentacy on Leviticus bas been edited and tnmslated by Ceslas Van den Eynde as Commentain d'JJodad de Merv Sfl1' I'Ancien Testamerrt. /1. E%ode- Deuteronome (Text: CSCO 176 = Scriptores Syri 80; Translation; CSCO 179 Seriptores Syri 81; Louvam: Peeters 1958). I would like to express my gratitude to Clemeus Leonbard for drawi.og my attcation to this important collation of earlier commeutaries. 12

17

On tbe identity of the authors and theiJ period, see thB introduc:tion of van den

Eynde, Commentaire d'l1o'dad de Mf1r'l' sur I'Ancien Testament. 11. &ode-Deuteronome [translaticm] (CSCO 179, Scriptores Syri 81; Louvain, 1958), pp. vü-xi.

·Christlan Exege:sis ofLevitiCIIS and the Pole111ics agalrMI Yom Kipp11r

265

k) Tbeodore bar Koni (end of eightb century) compiled older intezpretations of Leviticus, too; yet bis Yom Kippur traditions are anony~ mous. 18 Other ancient writings on Leviticus are lost. We know of the following commentators: 19 J) Victorinus of Pettau (d. ca. 304). m)Diodorus ofTan:us (d. before 394). n) Apollinaris ofLaodicea (d. ca. 390). o) Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) possibly wrote a commentary on Leviticus. p) Some fragments oflost Greek commentaries survived in the Catenae, first assembled by Prooope of Ga7.a (d. 538). The earliest and most iroportant tracts on Leviticus by Origen and Hesychius were written in Pale.stine and m.any others in Syriac-speaking areas with large Jewish populations. Many commentaries emerged in the first half of the fiftb century, the golden era of exegetes among them those by Cyril of Alexandria, Hesychius, Rufinus (translation of Origen), perhaps Theodore of Mopsuestia, and shortly afterward also Theodoret. The interpretations of Leviticus 16 and 23 proceed generally along Hebrews' high-priestly typology,20 andin general, the status ofhigh priest became one ofthe Standardattributes ofChrist. 21 Origen, the first Christian exegete of Leviticus explicitly justifies his exegesis in terms of the ll Tbeodore bar Koai, Scholia Mimra 3:43. See Hespel and Draguel (CSCO 431, 432; Scriptores Syri 187, 188), pp 169-173. 19 Campare R. Pevreesse, l.e1 ancümr commentateur.s grec:s de l'Octateuque et des Roi.~ (Studie Testi 201; Vatic:m City, 1959), passim; aod idem, "Anciens commentatears grecs dc l'Octateuque," Revue biblique 44-4S (1935-1936) 166-191.201-220,364-384. ~ M.A. Signer, "Fleisch und Geist. Opfer und Versöhnung in den exegetischen Traditionen von Judeotwn und Christentum,'' in: H. Heinz (ed.), Yersöhmmg in der jfidi.sclten und clvi.stlichen Liturgie (Freiburg i.Br., Basel and Vienna, 1990; pp. 197-219). On Christian exegesis of LeviticllS, see also the studies in Ännali di storia dell'uegesi 13/1; G. Rouwhorst, ..Leviticus 12-IS in Early Christianity," in: M. Poorthuis and J. Scbwartz (eds.), P11rity alld H()/inus (Sewisb and Christian Penpectives Series 2; Leiden, 2000; pp. 181-193); Tampellini.. "Jntroduzione allo studio del Commentarius in Leviticum di Esi<:hw di Oerusalermne"; R. Wilken, "Origen's Ho~ru1y on Leviticvs and Yayikra Rabbah," io: G. Doriwl and A. le Boulluec (eds.), Ori~niana Sextll, Origine et Ia Bible I Origen and the Bible. Actes du Colloquivm Origenianum Se1:tum Chontilly, 30 aoül - J lleptembre 1993 (Bibliotheca Ephemeridom Theologicanun Lovaniensium 118; Leuven, 1995; pp. 81-91); R.J. Daly, "Sacrificial Soteriology in Origen's Homilies on Leviticus,'' in: E.A. Livingstoue (ed.), Studia Pt:uristica11:2 (Oxford, 1982; pp. 872-878). 21 A monograpb on the high priest in Cbristianity is a deside.ratum. A good overview of tbt high priest in late antique Christology can be Cound in G, Schöllgen and F.-L. Hossfeld, ..Hoherpriester," R(I(J/lexi/u)n fiir Antilee und G'hristenlum 16 (1994) 4-SS, c:olumns 2S-37 (by Sc:böllgen).

266

~

lmpor:t ofYom Kippur

011

ChriJtianity in the Third lo ihe Fifth Centuries

"Pauline" Epistle to the Hebrews as his henneneutical key to Yom Kippur.22 Origen also uses other New Testamenttexts -·such as Romans 3:25 and Uohn 2:1-2 - as interpreting key texts.:n Among the passages dis~ cussed in cbapter 4 (on th.e Cbristian imaginaire), these two are quite explicit about their conn.ection to Lc\Jiticus 16. Where no explicit New Testament typology exists, Origen works analogically to Hebrews, with Christ as key for interpreting texts typologically. Thus almost all features of Lcviticus 16 are typologized: not only the high priest, but also the calf, the ram, both goats, the k4pporet and the "prepared .man" are interpreted Christologically .24 Origen gives many interpretations of the scapegoat. He connects a Christological scapegoat typology to the Barabbas episode;2s a second typology is associated with the two crucified criminals;26 a third, .an allegoxy ba.qed on Philo, explains the goats as evil versus good thoughts;27 and a fourth and fifth see in the goats symbols of evildoers versus good people and sinners versus repentants. 23 All of Origen's interpretations have in common that they are "bipolar'' - the scapegoat represents something bad. the sacrificial goat something good. Similar models are found in Augustine and Pseudo('?)-Isidor. 29 Emperor Julian goes a :step further and explains that tbe scapegoat is a cbthonic sacrifice betonging to the chthonic deities.30 Yet the Oreek exegetes of the fifth centmy and the extant Syriac exegetes strongly oppose this line of exegesis as polytheistic and promote 21 Yet in tbe time ofOrigen, Hebrews still bad a highly c:ontroversial status. Might it have been the suihlbility of Hebrews in ChristianiziDg the sac:rificial prescriptioM of Levrucus that rostered Origen's use of it? It may be no mere coincidente tbat Origen is the first to extensively int.eipret Leviticus and use tbe sacrificial statement$ of Hebrcws. A glance into the Biblia Patrutica reveals that Origen used 1he ninlh cbapter ofHebrews in works older than the Homi/y on Lniticus, e.g. the Commentary on John, On Prayer and Exhortati~ to M(ll'tyrdom. The use ot' Heb 9, however, abounds in the ninth and tenth Homiliu on Leviticu~; and Origen, via his exegesis of Leviticus, may have poomoted acceptnce oftbe only New Testament writing, with an explieitly sacrificial thcology: see l. Allenbach et al~ Biblia Potristica. JndeJt du citations et allraions bibliques dam Ia littiralllre patristique (7 vols; Paris, 1975-). 2S Rom 3:25 and IJobn 2:1-2 appear e.g. in Homlly on Leviticus 9:S:8 (SC :287:94). 24 See e.g. Hesychius, Commentary on L~iticu (PG 93:1001A). 25 Homily on Lniticu~ 10:2:2 (SC 287:134). 201 Homtly on Levitleus 9:5:2 (SC 287:88), ·n Homily 011 Leviticra 9:6:1 (SC 28'1:96). • Homily on LevltlctAS 9:4:3 (SC 287:84) and 9:3:3 (SC 287:82). u Augustine, Quaestiomim in Heptateuchum liber lertius 55 {CCSL 33:213, lines 1359-1372); Pseudo(?)·lsidore, Quaestiones inLeviticttm 15 (PL 83:333-334). 30 Julian, AgaiMt the Galileons 299A-305B tiaDs.l. by W.C. Wright. The Work$ of tlre Emperor Julian. JJ'ith 011 Engli.sh Translation (LCL Julian 3; London and Cambridge [Mass.], 1961; pp. 319-427), here pp. 404-405.

Christian Exeguu of Leviticvs and the Polemies against Yom Kippur

267

a Christological interpretation, with each goat representing one of Christ's Ililtures.ll

The scapegoat became very appealing to Christian theologians. It appears in almost all works that interpret only selected parts of Leviticus, such as the Quaestiones on Leviticus. 32 Also, in tracts that do not specifically deal with Leviticus the seapegoat typology appears frequently, a.s in such authors as Ambrose, Jerome, the anonymaus commentator on Mark, Cyril of Alexandria and Theodoret.33 Additionally, distinct tracts a:re dedicated to the scapegoat. among them Jacob of Samg's Homily on the Scapegoat (d. 521).34 What is the reason for this appeal, considering that the scapegoat is only irnplicitly typologized in the New Testament? One might have thought that the exegetes built on the implicit New Testament allusions (Galatians 3:13; Matthew27:15-23) or on the proto-typology behind Barnabas 7. 35 Origen•s Christological typology is in fact based on the Barabbas episode., bat Matthew 27 cannot be his source, since he uses aJl four Gospels and bis reading is rather an eisegesis than an exegesis. The proto-typology of Barnahas might have served as a model, especially since Barnabas bad quasi-canonical status in some circles. Yet despite its use by Justin, Tertollian and Hippolytus, the proto-typology does not appear in later exegeses.36 A possible explanation may be the halakhic traditions upon which 31 Cyril of Alexandria, Glaphyr(/'F'fU11 in Leviticum liber (PO 69:580A-589B); Ep. 41 tJd A.cacium Scythopoli (ed. Schwmz, vol. 1:1:4, p. 4o-48; cf. PG 77:20JC-221A); Contra l•lianum IX (PG 76:960A-970A); Homiliu on Luke .53 (cd. Chabot, p. 191; transl. Touneau [CSCO 140), p. 129). Theodorei:, Eranistes, (ed. G. Ettlillger, 208:2~211:32; cf. PG 83:2490-2568); Qataestionu in Lniticum 21 (ed. Fernltnde"JZ Man:oa and Säe.n:ZBadillos. 172:23-175: 18 [ cf. PG 80:328A-329DJ)~ Hesychius, Commentary on Leviticus Y {PG 93:989-1 002); and Jacob of Sarug, Homily on the Scapegoat, (ed. Bedjan, vol. 3, pp. 264-266). 32 B.g. Augustine, Quautionum in Heptmeuchum liber tertius SS (CCSL33, p. 213, lines llS9-l372), Locu.tionum in Heptateuchum llber terttus 41 (CCSL 33, p. 42&, lines 191-194); Cyril of Alexandria, Glaphporum in Levlticus liber (PG 69:5&0A-589.8); Theodoret, Quaestiones in Lwiticum 22, ed. Fernände.z Marcos-Säenz·Badillos, 172:23175: 18; Pseudo-Ephrem, Commentary on Lwitlcus, ed. Benedictus, vol. 1, p. 244-245. 33 Ambrose, Letter 3;13-14 (CSEL 82:1:25-26); Ierome. Dialogus A.dversus Pelagianas 1:35:78-91 (CSEL 80:43-45); Ps-Jeroroe, Commentary on Mark 15:1 1 (CCSL 82:71); Cyril of Alexandria, Homiliu on Luke 53 (ed. Cbabot, p. 191; tran.sl. Tonneau [CSCO 140], p. 129); and Theodoret, Eranistes, ed. Ettlinger, 208:26-211:32. Amon.g many other places, see also the .index to tbe letters by Se-veJUS of Gabala in PO.

Ed. Bedjan, vol. 3, pp. 259-282. For an analysis oftbese passages, see pp. 147-179, above. 36 Some traces ofthe proto-typology rnay have survived in Cyril of Alexandria, who de.scribes: "Two goats, bea\ltiful (~~:lll.oi) and equal in height (iooptyt&eu;) and strength (im;Autet;) and of tbe same color (op3zpooi)" {roy tnmslation of Glaplryrorum in Le!litiJ4

:s!l

268 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity inthe Tlrird to tht Fifth Centwies the rypology is based. TYPologizing the red ribbon implicitly ascribes validity to the Jewish Halakhah. Perhaps this is the reason for Jshodad's polemies against e~egetes who tell of the red ribbon. 37 Jewish exegesis may be involved in tbe rejection ofthe proto-typology, since Ishodad links the red ribbon to Isaiah 1: 18, an a.c;sociation that appears in rabbinie sources but not in Barnabas.3' In sum, the easiest explanation for tbe emergence and popularity of the scapegoat typology is the necessity to Christianize Leviticus 16, togetber with the rest of the Old Testament. This is one reason, but it cannot be the only reason, since the scapegoat rypology appears also in tex:ts unconnected to Leviticus 16. I have argued elsewherc, that the scapegoat was particularly well suited to promote to pagans the idea of Christ's vicarious atonement, since for them, the rationale of the scapegoat was similar to that of their local pharmalws.39 Nevertheless, the mythologization ofthe Yom Kippur ritual in the story of Christ's atoning self~sacrifice was insufficient to kcep the new religion going. People who a.c;cribed an atoning cffect to tbis death by undergoing baptism continued to sin after Christ's death and thcrefore needed further frequent means of atone.ment. The need to addn:ss this problern is seen in passages ofthe Christian exegeses ofLeviticus 16 that speak about the individual Chrlstian. The individual sinner requ.ires some fonn of connection from thc saving event of the past to his life in the present, a link providing the possibility to expiatc bis sins, to propitiate the divine wrath or to avoid punishment for transgressions. 'fhis can take different forms. Origen suggests atonement via a psychological cleansing, confession of sins, a radical change toward an ascetic Iifestyle, good deeds, martyrdom and attendance at Christian rituals. 40 Tbe individual could imitate the high priest by expelling his/her bad 1hougb.ts; he/she oould imitate Chr.ist's se1f-sacrifice in .martyrdom, wbich for Origen has a vicarious atoning e.ffect for the community; he/she could give alms 9r fast. In any case, presence was necessary in the worship. 41 Origen equates atteodance at Cbristian commuoaJ cum liber, PG 69:S88A). Altematively, this mi,ght hint at Cyril's direct eonbu:t with a Jewisb cxegetieal ~ition. The tradition about the red ribbon appears in lshodad, Co~rr mentary on Levitic11s 16 {CSCO 176:104, Hnes 11-JS); andin Pseudo-Ephn:m, Com.mentary onLevitiClls 3 (CSCO 587:118-119; 588:89-90). Both texts refer to Mic 7:19, a passage read in the synagogue on Yom Kippur: see above p. 56. 37 Ishodad, CommenlaJ')' on Levitleus 16 (CSCO 176:104, lines I l-15). 38 See above, pp. 130.--131. Pseudo-Bplrrem mentions also Isa 1:18-19. 39 On the pharmakos, see above pp. 171-173; and more fully St6kl, "The Christian

Exegesis of the Scapegoat between Iews and Pagans." • Homily on Levitleus 9:8:5 (SC 287:108-t 12); 9:9:4 (SC 287:114-118). 41 For the vicarious atoning efti:ct of martyrd.om, see Origen, ExhoTtation to Martyrdom 30:16; for attendance at worsh.ip, see Homily on Levitictls 9:5:9 (SC 287:94-96).

Christian Exeggsia ofLevitiCIIs and the Polemies agairut Yom Xippur

269

prayer with partioipation in the high priest's interoessionary prayer by the people who wait for bis exit from the holy of holies. 42 While this is not yet a full-:fledged sacrificial view of the Eucharist, Origen p.rovides the fitSt hint that Christian worship is beginning to take over tbe atoning function of Yom K.ippur. In the words of Robert Daly: "lt is true that numerous texts can be marle good sense of only on tbe supposition that Origen conceived of the Christian liturgy as sacriticial. Be that as it may, the important point to remember is that when Origen thought of Cbristian sacrifice, foremost in bis consciousness was apparently not a litnrgical rite of the Church, but rather that interior liturgy of the Christian heart and spirit by whicb a man offered bimself and all bis prayers, works and thought~ through Jesus Christ to God thc Father.H43 Phenomenologically, the frequent partaking of the Eucharist is the exact opposite of a fast observed

once a year. The substitutive relation of the Eocharist to Yom Kippur can be seen even more clearly in the long-tenn process of templization. 44 By templization I mean ~ use of temple terminology for other institutions, in this case, for the Christian mass: calling the bishop "(high) priest," the table for tbe Eucharist '"altar.'' the church «temple," and the special sanctuary in it "holy of holies." Full-fledged impositions of the temple terminology of Yom Kippur on the Christian mass can be found in medieval Latin authors such as Amalar of Metz (d. ca. 850) or Hildebert (d. 1133) and Ivo of Chartres (d. 1116).4~ Sometimes tbese interpretations even include the Homily on Lwiticr~s 9:5:9 (SC 287:94-96}. R.J. Daly, "Sacrific:e in Origen," Studio Patristica 11 (1972) 12s-129, here 129. See also tht table on p. xxxv in Theo Hermans, O,igime. Theologie .sacriflcielle rh .sacerdt:>ce ries chl'ititrzs (Tb6oJogie historlque 102; Paris 1996). 44 See Fine, This Holy Place, pp. 41-S9, 79-94, and 132-156. ot5 An edited ve~~~ion of Amalar's works appeared in J.M. Hanssens (ed.), Amalarii epi.scopi operallturgica omnia (Srudi e Testi 133-140; Vatican City, 1948--J 950). The other worbarestill only in Migoe: Hildebert, vewa de srry.sterio missae, PL i71:l177-1194 (esp. 1183-1190 on Yom Kippur} and ltbgr fk sacra eucharistia, PL l71:119S-1212 (here esp. 1212); lvo, S~rmo V slve opuscul•m fk convententia veteris er novi sacrijicii, PL 162, 535-562 (esp. 553-561 on Yom Kippur). On the autbors and tbeir Y om K.ippur interpretatiom, see l.A. 1UDgmanD, Mwarvm sollemnia. Eine gmetische Erklarung der römischen Messe (2 vols; Vie.tUUi, FreibiU"g i. Br., Basel, 51962) vol. l, p. 146; vol. 2, pp. 289-90; R. SUDtrup, Die BetlllUt&!lftl der liturgischen Gebärden und Be~~regunge~~ in lateinischen und deut!lchen Awlegvngen des 9. bis B. JQhrhundllrl.s (Milllsterische Mittelalter-Schriften 37; MUDich, 1978), p. 459; and A. Pranz, Die Messe im Deutschen Mittelalter (Dannstadt, 1963, repr. Freiburg. 1902), pp. 429-431. On Amalar, seealso E. Volgger, Die Feier des Karfreitap bei Amalar von Metz (77j/78f)...JJj0) (Ph.D. dissertation, Vienna, 1993); C. SclmvseJlberg, Das Jlerhalrnis von Kirche und Theater. Dargestellt an aiJigi!Wtihlten Schriften tkT Kir42

43

270 The Impact ofYom Kippur 011 Christianity ln the Third to rhe Fifth Centuries scapegoat rite.46 While the date ofthese texts clearly lies beyond the soope of this work, these intlllential commentarie.s illustrate the continuous inspiration ofYom K.ippur's temple rite.s. Yet the templization ofChristian liturgy began much earlier, becoming visible to a growing extent already in the fourth century. Not finding a Christian pendant to Fine's study, I turned to Lampe•s Patristic Greek Lexicon and checked for liturgical use of tenns belonging to the temple vocabulary, to gain a preliminary impression on templization. 47 Three tenns of the temple tenninology are pertinent to. Yom Kippur: "high priest," "holy of hoHes" and "kapporef' repre.senting the performer, the place and an instrument ofthe rituaL First, "high priest" and "high priesthood" are compared to Christian offices, including bishops, from the beginning of tbe second centmy (lClement); but this is not yet templization in the strict sense. 48 For the direct use of "high priest-(hood)" for bishops, priests and celebrants of the Eucbarist. Lampe cites texts froru the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries, respectively. 49 Georg Schöllgen. cites also cxamples from the third century. so In Latin, Tertullian, as early a.s the third centuiy, calls the bishop "high priest,''s 1 and Cyprian calls a celebrant of the Eucharist "priest,'' with an explicit sacrificial interpretation fashioned on an imitation of the high priest Christ. For, if Christ Jesus, our lord and God, is bimself the high priest of God the father and tirst offered himself as a sacritice to the falber and commanded tbis to be done in commemoration of himself" certainly the priest who imitates that which Cbrist did aDd then offers the true and full sacrifice in the Cburch ofGod the f.tther, ifhe

chenviiler und liturgischen Texten bis auf Amalariw von Metz (Bem, 1981); lind E.T. Francis, The Euchoristic Theology ofAmalorius oflthtz (Paris, 1977) (non vidr). On thc Greelc predecessors ofthe Latln "exegetes," see R. Bornen, Lfls commentaires b)l%antins de Ia divlnt Uturgie du VlbJ au Xfle siec/e (Archives de l'orient chr6t.ien 6; Paris. 1966). I would like to express my deopest gratitude to Ewald Volgger, who graciously made available to me a copy of his fas;;inating dissertation on tbe little studied field of medievalliturgy exegesis. 411 On tbe scapegoal rite in Ivo's allego.ry of the mass, see PL 162:557C, SS9B. 41 This impression needs to be reinforced. by investigating espeeially the archaeological data ftom ioscriptioos. The passages tbat follow reflect mostly Lampe. For further passages from all periods, see H. Nibley, "Cbristian Envy ofthe Temple.'" Jewish Qucu-u.rly Rwiew SO (1959/60) 97-123, 227-2Ml. While there is a distinction be~en meta· phoric usage (tbe bisbop .is like a high priest) and direct usage (the high priest offers the Eucharist), and both are of interest in our quest. the latt.er bespeaks a more advanced

Stage. 411 On the use of ''high priest" in Christian administration, see SchGI!gen, "Hoherpriester," espe-;:ially c:olumns 37-49. 49 G. W.H. Lampe (ed.), A Parrutte Greek LexiCOII (Oxford, 1978), p. 239. so SchOilgen, "Hoherpriester," colu!IJ.QS 39-44. -' 1 Tertullian, On boptüm 17:1.

Christion Exegesis ofLeviticru and the Polemies against rom Kippru

271

thus begin$ to offer according to what he sees Christ hiinsclf offcred, perfurms truly in tbe place of Christ. 51

Second. while several fourth-centu.ry authors use "temple" (va()(;) for churcb, » the use of "boly of holies" for a Special area in the church emerged in Jerusalem. Lampe ascribes to Eusebius the frrst use of ''holy of holies" (Td iiyta. Trov ciyi(I)V) for the tombin the Holy Sepulcher.54 1be revered and most holy witness (pop~ilptov) ofthe resnrrection oftlle Savior has n:appeared against all bope, ao.d the holy-of-holies grotto ('r:o y( ciytov ~•lv ciyirov iivtpov) has received a [similar] image of the Savior's revival. ss

Tbis concept appears rou.ghly SO years l.ater in the desaiption of the Holy Land pilgrimage of Paula and Eustochium in their Ietter to Marcella. preserved as Ietter 46 among those of Jerome: [f J'erusalem. was destroyed, it was that its people migbt he punished; ifthe temple was overtbrown, it was that its figurative sacrifices might be abolished. As regards ita stte, Japse of time has but invested it with ~b grandeur. The J'ews of old revereoced the Holy of Halles, because of the things coutained in it - tlle cberubim, the mm:y-seat, tbe ark of the covenant, the manna. Aaron's rod, and rbe golden altar. Dof!$ the Lord's sepulchril seem Jess wOI'thy u{vi1ner4iion? As often as we entcr it we see the Saviour in His gravc clothes, and if we linger we see again the angel sitting at His feet, and the napkin folded at His head. Long befure this sepulchre was hewn out by Joseph, its glory was foretold in lsaiah's prediction, "his rest shtdl be glorious," meaning that the place ofthe Lord's burial should be held in universal honor.•

Paula and Eustochium revere Jesus• grave as a substitute for the original holy of holies: The tomb is no less wortby of veneration. A beautiful application of the high priest and bis entry into the holy of hoHes to a Christian ritual can be found in the report by Gregory of Nazianz about bis own ordination by Basil in the year 372 modeled on the Aaronic investiturein Exodus 29. For you aooint a high priest and put on him the [hlgh-priestly] robe, and crown him with the turban, arul Iead him to the altar of the spiritual bwnt offering. and sacrifioe the calf of perfection, and fill bis hands witb the Spirit (•ordinate him], and Iead him ioto the holy ofholies in order to initiate him, and make him inlo "'a minister of the true teot that the Lord, and not DJID, has set up" [Heb 8:2]." ~ My translation ofCypriao. Leiter 63:14:4 (CS:EL Jc:410-411). " Lampe, A PatristicGr11ek.Lexioon, p. 897.

Lampe, A Patristic Greelr. Lcicon, p. 19. My translation ofEusebius, Yila Constantini 3:28 (GCS 7:96). " Jerome, Leuer 46:5; transl. W. Freemantle, NPNF 2:6:62; my emphasis. 57 My translation ofGregory ofNaziaru:., Homily 10:4 (PG 3S:82&D-832A). A Frencb translation is available in SC 405 (M.·A. Calvet·Sebasti; Gregoire de Ntniaf~Ze. DiscourJ 6-12; Paris 199.5}, here p. 325. 14 55

272 Thelmpaa ofYom Ktppur on Chrllliallily ln the Tlzi,.d to the Fijih Centuries In this implicit typology, Gregory imports the temple tenninology into Cbristian worship, leaving it open to question whether he is implying a mystical allegory (Gregory entering into the heavenly sanctuary) or a typology on the historical church building in which the ordination took place. By equating the ministers ofthe biblical temple, the heavenly sanctuary and the church building, Oregory most likeJy has both of these inter~ pretative levels in mind Such a triad appears in the catecheses of Theodore · of Mopsuestia. 58 The high priest's entry into the holy of holies. Christianized in Hebrews, has been re-ritualized in the Christian liturgy. Finally. ii..ae~t11ptov may describe a special place in a church, as in the Typicon of Sabas.59 Other instances are from the end of the fust millennimn. 60 The impetus necessary for the metaphorical use of Uaatl]ptov in Christian ritual is much smaller. The celebl'lllli ofthe Eucbarist- the Christian high priest, so to speak- brings the blood into the holy ofholies. Yet he does not sprink.le it. neither does his 5ource of inspiration, Hebrews, speak of sprinkling or employ kapporet in Christ's entry to the heavenly holy ofholies. lt is, therefore, the Yom Kippur typology ofHebrews rather than Lcviticus 16 itself that influenced tempii;r.ation. In sum, in the context of €hristian ritual atonement, Yom Kippur'_s imagery: "high priest(hood}," "entry to the holy of holies" and "scapegoat" had clearly achieved an important place among some Christians, but without the motif of blood sprinkling on the lcapporet. 61 Did this rise of Yom Kippw:'s imagery happen only because of the ''bookish" or "biblical" influence of Leviticus, Hebrews and Romans? The followi:Jig sections argue 1hat while the biblical versions of Yom Kippur must be credited with the main impact, we cannot fully camprehend the rise of the Yom Kippur imagery without assuming an impact on some Christian authors ofthe fast as celebrated by contemporary Jews.

ss See the short analysis in Bomert, te.' commentaires byzantins de Ia divine lil11,.gie dfl Ylle au XJ"e siecle, pp. 80-82. st Kraus, De,. Tod Jesu ah Heiligtumsweihe, pp. 30-32, refening to C. du Cange, Gl081arfum ad Scriptores Mediae etlnji,.mae Graecitatis (Gnu, 1958; repr. of 1688) {cotumn .513]. The Typicon is from the fifth century, but lw becn ftcquently reworked. 60 L&mpe. A PalTistic Greek Lexicon, s. v. ". Interesting also is the addition of the Armonian word "lllonement" ~lf'ldi) to · some Annenian anaphoras, and tb.e imagery of the high-priestly ritual in the St. James Anaphora meutioued in Ligier, Peche d'Adam el piche d11 monde. Bibl~t, Kippur, E11charistie (2 vols; Theologie 411; Paris 1~60, 11161), 2:304-306. See also tb.c appendlx.

Christum Eregais of Lwiticus alfd the Polemies flgainst Yom Kippur

273

2. Christian Participation in the Jewish Fast A considerable nwnbet of Christians in third-century Caesarea and latefourth-century Antioch observed the Y om Kippur fast together with their Jewisb neighbors. Above, I argued that Luke's community, the opponents of the author of Colossians, and some among Rome's Christian Jews observed the fast around 100 CE.62 These Christians did not conceive oftheir participation in the fast as Contradietory to Christian atonement theology. Origen and Cbrysostom, however, did, and reacted by attacking the Jewish fast, pointing out its discrepancies in :relation to the biblical Yom Kippur a:nd proposing Christian alternatives. Two passages illustrate Origen's wrath aga.inst members of his own parishin Caesarea Maritima. who participated in the Jewish fast. Hedeclares in bis twelftb Homily on Jeremiah: You, who observe the Jewish ~t (,:flv VlliJ'tl!iav ·n)v lo'UiiaiJCqv) as ifunaware ofthe Day of Aronemeut that exists since lesus Chrisl, you bave not heard of the hidde:n

ato.t1e.ment, but ouly of lhe apparent. Because, hearing of the hlddest atonemeot is bearing how God put JesiU forward as atonement (i140'jlov}for our dns,63 and that lr4! lrirrue{fis an atone~~rerlljor OIIT sins, not only for oun, but also for those oftlre

wlrole world[1Johll2:2}.64

The passage cannot be seen as an attack on Jews, because in that case the 10'00a.1rijv wo1lld be superfluous. Part of Origen's audience apparently followed the atoning fast of Yom Kippur, and it is them that he is addressing. It seems that these people were attracted to Judaism even beyond Yom Kippur, since Origen complains also about Christian observance of circumcision and Passover. He is upset about tbese ''dangerous ones in between." In bis eyes, Cbristianity and Judaism are exclusive alternatives. Whoever fasts with the Jews has neither understood nor accepted the atonement inherent in Jesus• death. The second passage appears in Origen's tenth Homily on Leviticus: Whence also we must say somelhing now to those who think: 1hat in vinue of tlle eoiiUIIIIII.dmeut of the Law they :must also practice the fast of the IeW$ (•os. qui putanl pro fllandato legfs sibi quoque lttdaeorum ieiunium iei11nandum).65

Again, the people fasting ..the fast of the Jews" cannot be Jews, but they may be either Judaizing Christians o:r Jewish Christians. In third-century See above, l'P· 212-218. Cf. Rom 3:25. 44 My lrllll$lation of Origen, H01t1ily on Jeremlalr 12:13 to Jer 13: 17; Greek in GCS 6:100 (Klostemlann). 65 Origen, Homily on Lwiticus 10:2: 1 (SC 287: 132), lransl. Barldey, p. 204. Latl.n also in GCS 442:10-ll. 12

°

274 The l111pact ojYo111 X.ippur on Christianity in the Third to lhe Fifth Cenlllries Palestine the distinction between these two groups might not always have been very clear.66 It is more Jikely though that Origen was disturbed by dissenters ofhis primary community, Judaizing Christians, rather than by Cbristianizing Jews. The latter were more likely to upset Jews over their adherence to the Christian Messiah. While 1 found no references to Christian participation in the Jewisb fast in subsequent Palestinian authors (such as Eusebius and Cyril of Jerusalem), two Antiochene sources from the end of the fourth century, Chcysostom (ca. 347-407) and the Canons of the A.postles, prove that Christian participation in the fast of Yom Kippur was a continuing phenomenon in Syria-Palestine, at least in cities with a dense Jewish population.67 Chl:ysostom states at the beginning of bis first Homily against the Jews (386), 68 that a buming issue keeps him from continuing his homilies against the Christological heresy of the "Anomoeans." This buming issue was the participation of Christians in the Jewish festivals. (I :4) Another very serious illness calls for any eure my words ean bring, an illness whicb has become implanted in the body of the Church. We must Iust root lhis ailment out IIJid then take thougbt for matten outside; we must rmt eure our own and then be eoncemed for others~who are strangers. (.S) Whal i.s this disease? The " Some Gentiles wbo became Christian may have earlier been. attracted to Judaism (before convertiog to Christianity) - wouJd they be Judaiziug Christians or Jewish Oui&tians? 41 On Chrysostom and the Jews, see in particular R.L. Wilken, John Chrysostom and the Jews. Rhethoric and Retlllt)' in the Late Formh Century (Tbe TraDJformation oftbe Classical Heritage 4; Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1983), who builds on the work of M. Sin1on, "La pol6mique antijuive de Saint lean Chrysostome et le moavement judaisant d'Antioche," in: idem, Recherehes d'hlst()ire JudW-Chrltienne (Etudes Juives 6; Paris, 1962; pp. l40-iS3). See also R. Briindle, "Christen und Juden in Antiochien in den Jahren 386/387. Ein Beitrag &U.r Geschichte altkirchlicher Judenfeindschaft," Judo.i<;p 43 (1987) 142-168; A.M. Ritter, HErwägungen zum Antisemitismus in der Alten Kirche: Acht Reden ilber die Juden," in: B. Moeller and G. Ruhbach (eds.), Bleibmdes 1111 Wandel der Kirchengeschichte (Tilbingen, 1973; pp. 71-91). On Chrysostom's biograpby, see J.N.D. Kelty, Golden .Vouth. The Story of John Chrysosto111. .Ascetic, Pr'eacher, Bisbop (Grand Rapids [Mich.}, i 995); ou. the c011text ofthese sennon, see pp. 62-66. l.bave used mainly the ttanslations ofP.W. Harkins, Sainr John Chryaostom. Discourses again8t Judaizing Christian:s (The Fathers ofthe Church 68; Washingtoa, D.C., 1979); and Brlndle and Jegher-Bucher (eds.), Acht Re.den gegen Juden, which includes an excellent commentary. Brändle is also wodting on a new edition in the series SC. The gap in the text of the second sennon c:an now be tilled by the reeent manuscript found IIJid published by W. Pradels, R. Bräntlle and M. Heimgartner. "Das bisher vermisste TextstOck in Jobamtes Chrysoslomus, A.dversu:J JJldaeos, Oratio 2," Zeitschrift fti.r Antike und Christen/tim (2001) pp. 23-49. ._ Some have suggested calling the sermons ..Against tbe Judaizers," since there is as much polemies against Judaizers as there is against Jews.

Christialt Exegesis ofLtNitie~~s anti the Polemies against Yom Kippur

215

festivals of the pitiful and misll!able lews are soon to march upon us one after the other andin quick suecession: the feast ofTrompets, the feast ofTabemac:les, the fasts. 119 There are many in our ranks who say they think aa we do. Yet some of lhese are going to wateh tbe t'estivals and others will joln the Jews in keeping their feastll and observlng their fasts. I wish to drive this perverse c:uscom from the Chureh rigbt now. My discourses aga:inst the Anomoeans can be put off to aoother time, and the postponement would eause no hann. Bur now that the Jewish festivals are close by and at the very door, if l should .fail to c~ those who are siek with the Judaizing disease, I am afraid that, because of their ill-suited association and deep ignotanee, some Cbristians may partake in the Jews' ttan$gre11Sioos; once they have done so, I fear my homilies on these traasgressions will be in vaia. For if they hear no word tiom me today, they will then join the 3ews in tbeir faats; once they have conunitted this sin it will be useless forme to appl:y tbe remedy.10

Among the Jewish autumn festivals. it is particularly the fast that arouses the wrath ofthe venom-spewing "Golden Mouth." It is its atoning purpose, which is highly inco.mpatible with Cbristian tbeology aod tbrows doubt on the exclusivity and finality of Christ's atonement- even though, from a historical point of view, New Year and Sukkot may have been as attractive to the Christians as the Day of Atonement. Chrysostom's words show that there were different Ievels of participation. There were people Wb.o only fasted, and there were those who also participated in the custom of walking barefoot. Do you fast with the Jews? Then Iake off your shoes with tbe Jews, and walle barefoot in the marketplace, and s.bare with them in their indecency and laupter. But you would not choose to do this beeause you are ashamed Md apt to l>lush. Are you ashamed to share wich them in outward appearance but unashamed to share in their impiefy? What excuse will you have, you who are ouly half a Christian'171

But the last of Cbrysostom's homilies reveals that Golden Mouth bad not not been very successful with his wamings (8:4). The third witness to Ch.ristian participation in Yom Kippur's fast is Canon 70 ofthe Canon.s ofthe Apostles, probably from late-fourth-century Antioch. 12

1 commented earlier on the strange order of the festivals: above, pp. 68-69. AgaiMt the Jews 1: I :4; transl. Harkins, Saint Jo/m Clrrysos.t()m. DisctJIII'ses agDinat Judahing Christia11J, pp. 3-4. 71 Aga111Jt the Jews 1:4:7; transl. Harkins, Saint Jo/m Cllrysostom. Discourses against Jvt/(jfzing Christians, p. 16. 12 The Canons ofthe Apostles are the fmal part oftbe Apos.tolic Constituti()71J (8:47: 18!1), assembled in Syria about die end of the fourth <:enrury. Same scholal$ presume An· liocb to be the place oftbis eompilation. For text and introductory questions, see Mettger. Lu Comtilutions apostoliqvu, SC 320, pp. 13-94; SC 336 pp. 9-12 and 274-309. 69

70

276 The Impact of Yom Kippr~r on CltriJtionity in the Third to the Fifth Centuries lf a bishop or Allother cleric should fast with the Jews or c:elebrate holiday1 witb them or accept their festive gifts, such as unleavened bread and anyth.ing similar ta this, he shall be deposed; ifa layman, excomm1111icated.73

This is the earliest legal text referring to Yom .K.ippur. The explicit prohibition of fasting is among the redactional additions of the Canons of the Apostles to formulae adopted from its source,74 which did not mention fasting. 75 lt was the situation in the community or communities authoring the Canons of the .A.postles that caused the inclusion of this prohibition. Fasting now appears at the top of the list, demonstrating that it was the problem of greatest concem. The punishment imposed is draconian; it resembles that for entering synagogues with the intention to pray, or contributing to synagogues or temples. Is it possible to understand the distinction in the law between laity and clergy as evidence for participation of clergy in Yom Kippur? If any priest or bishop defended bis participation in the Jewish fast, such a defense did not survive in writiog.16 But neither do I know of any statemen1 referring to biShops deposed or exconununicated for participating in Yom Kippur. Therefore, no final conclusion can be drawn about possible clerical participation in the Jewish fast. Th4 Canons ofthe Apostles remained ahighly authoritative source in Byzantine legislation.77 Various commentaries remark upon Caoon 70; other texts include a prohibition on participation in the Iewish fast. 78 Nevertheless, it is difficult to decide if such repetitions of 73 Ei 1\c; iRioltOli:O<; il äAl.o~ ~~;):qpuco<; V110'{6'6!il jitita 'IovSIJ:üov " iloptOil;ct Jlf>T. uml'iiv ii 6€~~~ ti\<; iopTij~ l;iVUl, O{Ov Ö./;tJ)I.Q; ij tt 1:0\0ihOV. Jta8Cl1pito8fD• &i 5i latK~, ~l r;eallm. CQif(»>s ofthe Apo!ltles 10, In Linder, The JewJ in the Legal Sources ofthe Early lttiddle Ages, I# l/3, p. 27. The passage is commented on or included in the foiio\\ing later collections: Johannes Scholastieus (around !14o-360}, Collection ofConons ln jO Tilles {Linder. #6/104, soe also #61102); Photius' and Theodoros Balsamon's recensions ofthe Nomocanon in 14 Titlu (Linder. #7/121, seealso #7/118, #71177, #7/187). 74 Canon 70 is gcnerally regarded as a combination of canons 37 and 38 from the Co~mc:il of Laodicea, held in Syria aroUnd 380. However, netther passage includes the tisst. 75 Was it thal Christian participation in the Jewish fast was not considen:d as threatening their identity? ~ Leo defi:nds the Christi8ft Fast of the Sevenlh Month and distinguishes it from the Jewish fast. 17 Despite the condemgation of the Apostolic Constitutions in the Trullallum, see Linder, Tlte Jew.r in tlte legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages, p. 26. 71 lohn Cb.rysostom's sermons against Christian participation in the Jewish testivals of autumn we referred to explicitly by Johannes Zonaras (twelfth ceotury) in his part ofthe Tripartite Comme~~tary to the Cot~ci/iQJ" Legislolion: sec Linder. The Jews in the Legal So11rces of the Early Middle Ages, #28/3S3. He and bis contemporaries Theodoros Balsamon and Alexios Aristenos comment also on the prohibition contained in the Canonr of the. .4.postles: see Linder #l8/3S6, 3S7, 360, 370, 371). X.tlQ;\ am&v

Christiar~

Exegetit ofL~il.fau and the Polemies agatn&t Yom Kippur

211

a prohibition reflect the acuteoess of the problern or are merely the carrying forward ofa traditioo. In the West, the authority ofthe Canons ofthe .A.postles (k:nown th.rough a sixth-century translation) was much weaker. 79 Origen, Chrysostom and the Canom of the Apostles provide evidence for the participation of Christians in the Yom Kippur fast in third-century Caesarea and fourth-century Antioch. All three texts react sharply against this Judaiziog anempt, which they consider incompatible with Christianity.80 Shlomo Pines has suggested that the strong presence of Jewish Christians in Antioch might stand behind this phenomenon. 81 In the following section. I will deal with some more general aspects of the Chrlstian Yom Kippur polemics. Yet polemies can exist witbout a histodcal ra.isori d'!tre. Tbe importance ofthe passages on Christian participation in Yom Kippur lies in their providing prooftbat the Jewish fast was not an imaginary "opponent," attrac:ted Christians in a very concrete way a.nd influenced the Christianization of Leviticus in exegesis, thereby contributing to the inclusion of Yom Kippur imagery in the thought of some authors and in the liturgy.

3. Christian Polemies against the Contemporary Yom Kippur The contemporary Yom Kippur influenced Origen's attempts to persuade Christians not to participate in Yom Kippur, resulting in a reinterpretation of Leviticus 16. How "productive" was the tension that Yom Kippur caused between Christians and Jews in the work of other aulhors? To what extent are other Christiao interpretations of Leviticus 16 merely "booki.sh" Christiaoizations of the Old Testament and to what extent cao they be Wl· derstood as reactions to a contemporaxy Jewish filst perceived as threat? In this section, I want to investigate more closely the interconnection between polemies aod reinterpretation.

Linder, TJre Jews in the Legal Sources ofthe Early ltliddle Ages, fl\IOS/949 • .., fioally, is it possible tbat Basil,.too, fought Christians observing Yom Kippur? In his f1rst Homily on Fasting he ooUDI:ers the claim that Yom Kippur is to be venerated for being the fust fast eommanded by God with the argwnent that Adam was ordered to fast long before the Torah was given (Basil, Homily on Fasttng 1:2 (PO 31:165BC). IC bis argument reflects a simllar one existing in his community, it is possible thal in Basil's comm.uoity, too, some Christians observed the Jewish fast.. 11 S. Pines, ·ne Jewish Christiaas of the Early Centuries of Christianity According to a New Source," in: G.G. Stroumsa (ed.), The Collectsd Worb ofShlomo Pinu. J'ol. 4. St.dies in the History ofReligion (Jemsalem, 1996; pp. 211-284), bere pp. 244-245. I would lite to than1: John Gager for drawing my attention to this point 'l!l

278 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chrl.s/iQnity in the Third to the Fifth Centuriu C.brlstian texts :railing against Yom Kippurmay be polemicizing against a literal equation of tbe hiblical Yom Kippur with the earthly temple and I or they may be polemicizing against what they understand as the Jewish concept of fast and other contemponu:y Yom Kippur rites. Are polemies against Yom Kippur mostly "paper tiger" reactions against an imaginary Jewish Institution with no real impact in the com.munity of the writer? Before classizying the various texts, I want to present the basic lines of the Christian po1emical IU'gument. Since most of the texts have already been quoted in the two preceding sections (or in the section on Christian descriptions of Yom Kippur in part 1), I v.1ll not repeat the list here. 82 First, the polemies against literal inte:rpretations of Leviticus 16 are based mainly on the historical argument that the temple and its institutions had been destroyed according to the divine plan foretold by Jesus, sho'Wing clearly tbat they were merely manifestations of heavenly ttuths. This argument is based on the concept that there are only two ways to inte:rpret the Bible, either literally or allegoricaliy, 83 which for the polemicists means Jewish or Christian. Tertium non datur. There is no room for a non-Chris~ tian non-Iiteral reading. Eilher God referred to atonement in the earthly temple-which is no Ionger stal\ding- or he must have meant another temple, which can ooly be the Christian one. Origen writes for example: Therefore, Iet whoever observes these fasts go up "tbree times a year" to Jeru.salem "to appear before the Temple of the Lord," to offer bimself to the prieat. Let him seek l:be altar whiclt was twned into dost; Iet him ofl:er sacrifices, with no high priest standing by. For it is written that, fasting, tbe people will offer "two hc-goats" in a sac:rifice. Upon tbese they ought to c:ast lots that one of them be· come "the Iot of the Lord" and be oft'ered as a sacrifice to tbe Lord; but tbe other' .s lot is tbat it be sent "living into tbe wildeme$s," and to have in bimself t:be sins of the people. Consequently, all the.se Jhings must be completed by you who want to observe fasting acc:ording to the precept ofthe Law.114

Cbrysostom objects explicitly to Jewish (and Christian) claims that some features in the synagogue have taken over temple functions. He observes that Christians are attracted to synagogues because they deem that the Torah scrolls bestow a temple·like sanctity on the place; they call the Torah shrine an "ark," associating it with the ark ofthe covenant.'S Yet an ark doth not a temple make, and Chrysostom counters the Jewish templization by pointing to its partiality. '2

See ahove, pp. 70-77 and 262-277.

There are, of c:outse, several Christian interpretatiooalle~ls, but for the sake of the argument, I c:onsider them all as "allegorical." 84 Homily on Leviticus 10:2:1 (SC 287:132·~134),1ransl. Barldey, Origc11. Homily on Leviticus 1-16, p. 204. 0

*1

A.gairr.stth4Jews4;1:6;6:1;l-1.

Christfan Exegesis ofLevilicus and the Polemies against Yom Kippur

279

W~t.at sort of ark is it that the Jews now lla:ve, where we find no propitiatory, no tables of the law, no boiy of holies, no veil, no high priest, no incense, no holo<:aust, no sacrifice, none of the otber thlngs that made ehe arlc of old solemn and august?110

It might be nG coincidence that Chrysostom lists those items needed especially for Yom Kippur's temple rite. The propitiatory, the holy of holies, the veil and high priest and the sacrifices - all are missing in the synagogue - how then can they provide atonement? Chrysostom acknowledges that there are priests in the synagogues, but they are not true priests, lacking proper ordination: We fmd none of these [rites) today: no sacrifice, no bolocau.s.t, no sprinlding <>f blood, no anointing with oil, no ten1 of meeting where they must sit for a defmite number of days. This makes it obvious tbat the priest among thc Jews today is unordained, imclean, under il c~. and profane; he only provokes God's wralb. If a priest oould not be ordained in any other wa.y than by these rites, and these rites no Ionger exist. then there is no possible wa.y that their prie.sthood could hav e C(lntinued to exist.W

Chrysostom mocks Jewish templization, which ignores the elements crucial to Yom Kippur. lf we read this passage in the context of the parallel templization of church buildings, administration and liturgy, which focused on just tb.ese items ··- the holy of holies, the veil, the high priest and sacrifices and later also the propitiatory- Chrysostom's polemic becomes even more mockiog. "We," the Cbristians, have the true temple in heaven and in the Church; "you" do not. Analyzing the Christian exegesis of Leviticus 16, I found very little evidence for a familiarity with Jewish exegesis. Almostall paraUels can be explained with the common biblical source.88 An exception may be a reference to the deification of the high priest on bis entering the holy of bolies, which is foWld in Leviticus Rabbah, in Origen andin Philo,89 Cyril's reference to the twinning of the goats may be dependent on a J ewi:sh tradition; 90 likewise Ishodad•s polemies against the red ribbon. 91 While this does not preclude explaining some Christian interpretations of Leviticus 16 as reactions to tbe attraction ofthe contemporary Yom Kippur, their authors' acquaintaru;e with the oontempora:ry Yom Kippur has firsttobe shown. 16 Against the Jrnv:r 6:7:2; transl. Harkins, SaintJohlt Chrysostam. Discourses against J"doizing Cluistians, p. l 72. 111 Against the Jrnvs 6:5:9; transl. Harkins, Sailll John Chrysostom. Discornse.s Qgainst Judaizing Christi
280 The lmpacr ofYom Kippur on Christlanity in the Third to the Fifth Ce/1111ries

Second, those who polemicize against the fast are in a difficult position, given that fasting is honored among Christians, too. Galatians 4:9-10 is frequently cited as stating that though Christians may fast evcry day and should fast frequently, they should not observe any special holy day. Basil, in his first Homily on Fasting, counters the claim that Yom Kippur is to be venerated for being the first fast commanded by God with the argument that Adam was ordered to fast long before the Torah was given. 92 Ifhis argument reflects a similar one existing in his community, it is possible that in Basil's community, too, some Christians observed the Jewish fast. Many Church Fathers denounce the Jews as hypocrites, quoting the words of Isaiah 58 and Jonah: people fasting demonstratively in sackeioth and ashes, as opposed to tbe inward fashion of Christians, who anoint the head and wash the face, as Matthew6:17 enjoins.93 The use of Isaiah 58 andlor Jonah may be a polemical response to their function as Haftarot on Yom Kippur; yet both religions may have chosen the texlS merely for their suitability and their place in the common canon. Similarly, the use of Matthew 6:17 could be based on an awareness of Jewish fasting rites, but could equally be traditional use of the main New Testament prooftext. These depictions do not provido. any clue as to whethec the Christian polemics are attacking a real fast or an imaginary one, as long as they do not specifY other rites confirmed by Jewish sources- as in the case ofTertullian (praying in open places, festal gannents, waiting for evening star), Ephrem (praying. purification), Chryso~;tom (dancing barefoot on the mar· ketplace), Leo (walking barefoot) and Theodoret of Cyru.s (laugbing, playing and dancing):94 He [God} ordered fasting on tbe tcnlh ofthe month. Therefore, be called Ibis day lhe Day of Atonement. He sald "Humble your souls from tbe evening ofthe niath ofthe montb"" and ..evcry soul, which wi!l not be humbled on that day, that soul will be destroyed from your people.''" Yel the Jew~~, who Wldisguisedly light against tbe law, do not Iook sad o.o. this day, but laugh and play ad daa~ aad praetiee uodlaste words and decds (r~&Kn x:ot r:o:i.l;oucn lli:oi xopeilooo' ~~;o\ o~~:o>.«v totc; PllPIICJL ltO~ 1rPiill!«lll EiXPJJvt~n).97

Theodoret juxtaposes the biblical comm.andment with Jewish practices, implying that the joyous character of the Jewish fast completely Buil. Homily 011 F~J&ting 1:2 (PG 31: 165BC). E.g. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 40:4; Origcn, Homily 011 LevitiCflS 10:2:4 (SC 287:136); Epbrem, Homilies on Fosting 2; I; Basil, On Fasling 1-2; Leo, Sen~ton92:2. M For these texts, sec above, pp. 73-76. 95 Lev 23:27.32. 96 Lev 23:29. 'Y1 My translation of Quaunones in Ocrat~llclrum, In Le~>ilicum 32 (ed. Fcmhdez Marcos and Sienz·Badillos, p. 183:12-19). 92

!ll

Christian Eregesis ofLeviticta and the Pole~nics agaimt Yom Ktpp11r

281

contradicts the precepts of Leviticus, · which speaks of "humbling the soul.• Dancingmatches Misbnah Ta'anit4:8 and proves that Theodoret was an "eyewitness." lt is not clear to mc what stands bebind "unchaste words and deeds." It is probably just unfounded polemics. If Theodoret's words reflect actual Jewish behavior, thls might be in reference to the grooming ofthe dancing maidens, as mentioned in Mishnah Ta'anit4:8. The Christian texts on Yom Ki.ppur can be classified according to the two categories mentioned above ·-· polemies against a literal reading of Leviticus 16 or polemies against a hypocritical fasting practice. The ma.tUler in which an inte.rpretation of Leviticus 16 relates to the contemporary Jewish fast can be classified by whieh of these two areas the authors cover - i.e. whether their authors are "'eyewitnesses" of a contemporary Yom Kippur or not. Eyewitnesses are those who describe contemporazy Yom Kippur rites that they could not have derived from biblicaJ exegesis. Fasting, for example, is too common to scrve as a basis; but daneing and other joyful aetivities, walking barefoot. praying, and the like point to personal acquaintance (e.g. Barnabas, Tertullian, Theodoret, Chiysostom, Leo, Ephrem). Authors who betray firstband acquaintance with Judaism regarding topics other tban Yom Kippur also belong to this group (e.g.Justin, Origen, Cyril of Alexandria, Jacob ofSarug). ••Eyewitnesses" who polemicize against the contemporary Jewish fa." ExceptionaUy, Theadoret refers to the contemporary Yom Kippur not with ..fast." but wilh "Day of Atonement," mo5t probably because of bis biblical temma. 119 I.e. tex.ts that juxtapose ao attaek on the Jewish fast with a Christian reading ofthe high priest or the goats. ulll In On Fruting, Tertullian refers positively to Iudllism, but only .in th.i& speeific contexr, beeause be wants to portray the Jews as more devout tban tbe non-Montanist Christiaos. This bias becomes apparent from bis Jess syntpathetic refuences in Aguilut Mareion andAgainst the Jews. where he denounces those obsenoing the Jewish fast as "fasting ftom salvation." 101 On Leo, s~ pp. 74-76 above and 312-317, below. 282 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Cenlllries promotion of Hanukkah is linked to his reactions to the perceived threat of Christmas. 102 "Eyewitnesses" who polemicize against the contemporary Jewish fast without giving a Christian reinterpretation of Leviticus 16 or 23 provide evidence of the ongoing challenge of Yom K.ippur for Christians. Tothis group belong Ephrem, Chrysostom and perhaps also Eusebius and Basil. Those authors who give a Christian reinterpretation of Leviticus 16 or 23 without referring to the contemporary Jewish fast - such as Augustine and Cyprianus Gallus - may be instances of a solely ''bookish" influence of Yom K.ippur, but this is merely an argumentum e silentio. The example of Origen, who does not detail contemporary rites though he is clearly an eyewitness to Christian participation in them, shows that we should not jurnp to conclusions. Two exegetes ofLeviticus 16, Hesychius and Cyril of Alexandria, refer to the "fast." 103 Their exegesis does not provide evidence as to whether the polemies were directed against the Yom K.ippur of their contemporary Jewish neighbors or against an imagined institution. Stefano Tampellini has found no conclusive evidence that Hesychius was familiar with Jewish exegesis. 104 Further investigation might reveal some contact. His being in Jerusalem suggests that Hesychius was acquainted with living Jews. Robert Wilken's examination of Cyril's relationship to Judaism makes it quite reasonable to believe that Cyril knew the Jewish fast directly.105 Cyril's exegesis of Leviticus 16 in the Glaphyra should therefore be read together with the references to the true spiritual fast in On the Adoration and Worship of God in Spirit and in Truth as an anti-Jewish polemic. Cyril, then, probably belongs to the eyewitnesses. Finally, those authors who mention Yom Kippur but most probably were not eyewitnesses and have not provided a Christianized version of Leviticus 16 or 23 merely constitute evidence for Christian awareness of the existence of Yom K.ippur, biblical or post-biblical. 106 In sum, many texts from all times and geographical zones attest to the tension Christian theologians feit toward the contemporary Yom Kippur 102 On sorne aspects ofthe impact of Christmas on Arnerican and Gennan Judaism, see I. Weissman Joselit, '"Merry Chanuka': The Changing Holiday Practices of Arnerican Jews, 1880-1950," in: J. Werthcimer (ed.), The Uses ofTradition. Jewish Continuity in the Modern Era (New York and Jerusalern, 1993; pp. 303-325). 103 Hesychius, Commentary on Leviticus 23:27-32, PG 93:10928; Cyril of Alexandria, On the Adoration and Worship ofGod in Spirit andin Truth (PG 68: II 05BC). 104 Tampellini, "Introduzione allo studio del Cornmentarius in Leviticurn di Esichio di Gcrusalemme," pp. 229-231. 105 Wilken, Judaism and the Early Christian Mind; cf. pp. 267-268 note 36 above. 106 E.g. the polemical references in Aristides, Apology 14:4 (Syriac); and Diognet 3:14:1. See above, pp. 219..:.220. Christiart Eregesi3 of Leviticu3 and the Polemies against Yom Kippur 283 (Barnabas, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, Theodoret, Leo, Ephrem, Chrysostom and perbaps also Eusebius, Basil and Cyril of Alexandria). Some of them provide us with quite conclusive evidence for an impact of contemporary Yom Kippur upon some exegetes ofLeviticus 16 (Barnabas, Justin, Tertullian, Origen and Theodoret) and, as weshall see in the next cbapter, on the Christian Fast ofthe Seventh Month (Leo). On the otherhand, some exegetes seem to be influenced merely by the biblical Yom Kippur (Augustine, Hesychius? and Cyprianus Gallus). 4. Anti-Christian Polemies in Yom KippurTexts If Yom Kippur was a cballenge for Christian theologians, the Christian claim of Cbrist's once-and-for-all fulfillment of the Day of Atonement ritual might by the same token have been a challenge for Jewish theologians. The ideal liturgical Sitz im Leben to express answers to these Cbristian claims would be the Yom Kippur service. In turn, inclusion of polemies against the Christian atonement concept in the Yom Kippur liturgy explains at least some of the Christian concems against participation in Yom Kippur. To_ show this "other side" of the tension around atonement and Yom Kippur, I collected some Statements from the Talmud and from Sidrei Avodah tbat may be understood as polemical reactions against Christian claims to have inherited the biblical high priesthood, against high-priestly Christology and against the atoning power of the cross. All of these concepts became more manifest to non-Christians during the Christianization ofthe Roman Empire (especially ofthe Holy Land), through the development of a more public liturgy and through the finding of the True Cross and the development of its cult. Two famous passages in the Talmudim divide the Second Temple period into three declining epocbs: the 40-year golden age of Sirnon the Just, the 40-year dark age before the destruction of the temple, and the age in between. 107 In the golden age, the Iot of God always came up in the right band, the red ribbon always became white and the western lantem always bumed. In the intermediate age, this was not always the case. And in the dark age, the 40 years preceding the destruction of the temple, $s was never the case. As the text appears now, there is clearly a relation between the golden age and the dark age, both 40 years long, with the first verging on ideal conditions, the latter leading to catastrophe. However, the first passage, wbich deals with the golden age and the intermediate age, and the 107 yYoma 6:3, 43c; bYoma 39ab. 284 The lmpoct o[Yom Kippur on Chrutionity in the Third to the Fifth Centuriel second passage are separated by an anecdote on Simon the Just. The tradition about the red ribbon, which no Ionger becam.e white in the 40 years before the destruction of the temple, appears also on its own. 108 The two traditions may therefore bave been transmitted independently. joined only at a later stage, reflected in the Talmudim. 10!1 There may be a second intention in the passage on the dark age, beyond portraying the high-priestly Verfallsgeschichte from an anti-Christian stance. About 40 years befo.re the destructionJ i.e. araund 30 CE, Jesus was crw::i:fied, and according to the Cbristians, this death effected atonement. The rahbis claimed the opposite: that ex:actly ftom that time, the red ribbon no Ionger became white, i.e. atonement was no Ionger effected. 110 Another Baraita from the Tosefta explicitly mentions t:l'l'l:l, heretics. ..They asked Rabbi Aqiva: "What (sball the high priest do)? (Shall he) switch (tbe Iot) from the left (band) to the right (band)?" He said them: "Do not give thc heretics an opportunity to oppress you."lll The commentators of tbe Talmud read into Aqiva's warning that tbe sages should not create tbe impression that they decide halalchic questions arbitrarily. \Vhile Rashi understands the IJ"l't'l as disciples of Jesus, it is difficult to define the exact opposition gJOup. , I suggested above that the reappraisaJ of the Levitical Pfiesthood, especially in the piyyutim - in.spired by priestly circles - might have been directed against the rising high-priestly Christology and the Chri.stian use of the term ..priest" in tbe administration, e.specially after the imperialization of Christianity bad marle these concepts concrete in the context of the ernpire and its cities. According to tbe Christian claim, Christ replaced the Levitical priesthood with his Melchizedekian priesthood, tbe former being coaupt and its rituals without power. In tbe fust part of the Sidrei Avodah on the world's history up to Levi, however, Melchizedek plays no role. The Sidrei Avodah glorify tbe works of the Levitical high priests, their power and effectiveness. It is noteworthy that these Sidrei A.vodah evolve in Palestine during approximately the same period as the high-priestly 1111 bRH31b. in Hebrew may perhaps point to an earlier time, still in the Tlli!Ilaitic era. However, one ciiUlot be Sllre about this. 110 I would like to thaak Bpbraim Shoham S!einer tor this reading. Haos Kosmala suggcsted that the passage reflects a Jewish disbelief in the atoning effect of lhe saerifices of Yom Kipp11r: H. Kosmala, "Jorn Kippur," Judilica 6 (1950) 1-19, here pp. ll-l9. 111 tYoma 2:10: mn7 D':r7.l'? Olp!lllnn ;~~: o:t? 'aK 7'.11.,., '?M7.!117D mu111'11:m K::l'i'S' ., nll ,.,MW tt:~•,nK. T:his Baraita appears also in bYomo 40b, sligbtly adapted. Due to the eensure the modern prints read "Sadducees," but all good manuscripu read l'l'tl. See bbbinovic2:, Diqd11qey Soferim, vol. 4, p. 111. Iot Of coune, the dating of the Baraita is difticult. but its being writtcn Christtan. Ezegesis ofLevitiCf/.8 and the Polemia againsl Yom Kippur 285 Cbristology becomes more visible in the liturgy, especially in the newly constructed churches in Pa1estine. In bis receot Pt>etry and Society in Jewish Galilee ofLate Antiquity, Joseph Yahalom dedicated two sections to anti-Cbristian polemies in the piyyutim for Rosh Hashanah by Yose ben Yose and Yannai. m If 1hese paytanim did not hesitate to express their Jewish identity over and against the Christian environment in liturgica1 compositions for the New Year, it would be strange not to fmd at least some similar expressions in piyyutim for Yom Kippur. Most scholars admit to the presence of quit~ strong antiChristianpolemics in the Yom K.ippurpi)ryut Ha'Omrim leKhilayShoa•,m which I, however, leave aside, since the polemics·are not directed specifica1ly against high-priestly Christology. Yahalom refers to a possibly antiChristian passagein a stanza dealing with the Sabbathin what is probably the earJiest extant poetic &der Avodah- ~ be 'Ein Ko/: 114 Those smearing whitewash on {the Sabbath) do not have rest [on itJ since the wic:ked (are) withheld ftam its light. D'liVI"Illl.lZ)l 1")1Rr.l ') Wlp!ll"' tt7 1:l '7!11! 'ntl These lines are a play on words in Ezekiel 13:11: "Say to those who smear whitewash on it (that it shall fall)," and Job 38:15: "Light is withheld from the wicked (and their uplifted arm is broken)," where the same expressions ?!ln 'nl:! and l:lilK C'llll11tllll7.)'l appear. Here, it may be understood as an antiChristian polemic comparing to wicked sorcerers those who irnpose SWlday over the Sabbath, a hot issue in tbe late fourth centucy. uz Yahalom, Poetry and Sociel)l in Jewish G11lilee uf Late Antiquity, [in Hebrew} (Tel Aviv, l999). pp. 64-·71 and 72-80. m Vl171 ry•)7 n•·v.mm (ed. Zulai, p. 339); S. Lieberman, "Haz.onot Yannai" {in Hebrew] Sinai 4 (1939) 219-2:50, here pp. 224ff. JohaM Maier tried lo refule this view, suggesting that the po!emical reading is ODly a medieval interpretation: see 1. Maier, "The Piyyut 'HD'omrim le-.kldlay shoa' and Anti-CIIristian Polemics" [in Hebrew] in: E. Fleischer an.d J. Peruchowslcy (eds.), St~~.diu in Aggadfl, Tarpms rmd PraytFs of Israd in Memory of Jmef Beinemann (1erosalem, 1981; pp. 100-110); but Zvi Rabinovitz, the recent cditor of Yanuai, rigbdy statcs that Maier's argumcnts are bardly convinci.n.g: see Z.M. R.abinovitz (ed.), The Lihlrgical PoeiiU of Rabbi Yan11ol occordfng to the 17iennial Cycle of the Pentateuch and the Holiduys. Oitical Edition with lntrodllction and Commeltlary (m Hebrew) (2 vols; Jerusalem, l98S, 1987) vol. 2, pp. 207-227, esp. pp. 221-222. See also Yahalom, Poetry ond Socidy in Jewish Golilee ojIAte Antiquity, pp. 73-74. On Yannai, see also N.M. Bronznick, The Litllrgical Poetry ofYannai. Ex· planotion:r and lllterpretation:r with Srtggutioi'IS for Teztual Eme~~dations and CompletiO"IU of Lacunae (Jei'Wialem, 2000). 114 ~ be'Ein Kol ("Then, when there was .oothing") (ed. Yabalom, p. 88, Iines 214215, with .ootes). 286 The lrnpact of Yom Kippur 011 Christionity in tlre Thud to the Fi/th Cmturiu Other Verses that I collected from the Sidrei Avodah before Yannai match such a context of Cbristian-Jewish polemics. I have focused on Statements against the high-priestly Cbristology. Christian claims on the priesthood and the salvific effect of the wood of the cross. Naturally, the polemical tendency changes from Seder to Seder and some Sdarim show more specific anti-Cbristian polemies than others. m TheSeder Avodah 'Az be 'Ein Kol, includes another two double stanzas that may refer to Cbrist's atoning death on the cross: An opening of righteausness, for a criminal (Pvtl!)) cannot he [the high priest) shall open for bimself lltODC for criminals.116 According to the Christian concept, Christ di~ on the cross, a punishment for criminals, but is hirnself considered sinless - unlike the Levitical high priests, who "bad to offer a sin offering before being able to atone for others." This coneept is tumed on its head by ':Az be 'Ein Kol. lt claims that the Levitical high priest did a good thing in bringing a sin offering for bis transgressions and confessing his sins. while that criminal who died on the cross cannot supposedly atone for others. 117 The famous paytan Yose pen Yose composed many, very different Sidrei A:vodah and other religious poems. One poem for Yom Kippw: is the lamenting confession 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol. 118 The polemical intent becomes clear from the third line~ Thc scrvice has ceascd from the House of Service and bow sball we serve the Pure when the foreignBr (1r) opresses us. 119 The current (Christian) govemment keeps the community from rebuilding the temple and reinstalling the liturgy .110 The poet :reacts to the Christi an substitution theology thus: m E.g. 'A..sapper Gedolot (ed. Mir.~ky, pp. 203-210). 'Az he 'Ein Kol (ed. Yahalom, p. 146, line:s 762-763). Regretfully, the extant liagment of ~z bli'Ein Kol ends abruptly in the middle of the bull being slaughtered. Another early Seder At~odah, which seems to be closely COPDected to 'Az be'Ei11 Kol, also tontains th~ line "for a criminal (llvn!l) CBilDOt atone for criminals" (line 382). Yah.alom added the extant futgm.ent in his edition of 'A:r: b~t'Ein KDI. We cannot be 'ure about the Sttder's title, since the fust lines are missing. Yabalom suggests seeing bere the lost 'AI'omem Je 'BI t"K7 ozmK) by Yose ben Yose. 118 'f:in Lanu Koben Gadol (We do not bave a high priest) (ed. Mir.lky, pp. 210-216). 119 Ed. Mirsky, p. 210, line 3. 120 The feeling of persecution and oppression is expressed also in tbe following: "The blood of the sprinkling oft'er has Ieft the House of Offering I and how shall we sprinlde blood. when our blood is poured out?" (ed. Mirsky, p. 21l,line 8). 116 117 Chrtsl/(111 &eg&is ofLwitictU and the p"/f!mit:4 againat Yom Kippur 287 The contemptible {lsrael], 121 the foreigne111 (i:!'1t) treated her witb contempt and how will we come to our heritage (i!?nl;), when our hernage belongs to the foreigners (n'"ll;). 1n Clearly, ,r refers to the ruling Cbristia.ns, who claimtobe heirs to the heritage betonging to the Jews, wbich may include the ''Old" Testament. the land oflsrael and the (high) priesthood. Finally comes the line The woods oftbe order (1,lt '!3') stopped on the altar ofwood (Tl7) 1Zl and how shall we become pure by the wood (T1r.l), when we failed at the wood (TD)?I:U Repeating the key word "fll"' four times is almost certainly a pun on the TY, i.e. the cross and its (im)potence in achieving purity. This type ofpolemic against the "wood" of the cross is comprehensible over and against the rising cult of the cross and the distribution of cross relics after the discovery of the True Cross around 335. Yose's most famous Seder Avodah is 'Allah Konanta 'Olam beRov Hesed, still in use in the custom of tbree northem ltalian cities to this day. 12s This Seder Avodah contains an ambiguous Une on the Levitical priesthood: And the piUagel'$ of lheir [the pries!$'} honor will be swallowed and infected.12' At first glance, tbis line refers to the past. i.e. Korach and Hezekiah. Yet the future tense might weil be understood as directing curses against those who will claim the hooor of the biblical priesthood. i.e. the Christian priests and their heavenly high priest. This interpretation becomes clearer in light of two sentences in Yose's Iongest Seder Avodah. 'Atkir Gevurot 'Eloah, 127 which can be understood against Christian conceptions of priesthood. 128 To the foreigner ("lt) he will not give the heritage oftheir (the priests') honor/ no human being will iuherit the gift oftheir part. 11t Cf. Mirsky's commentary to this Une. Ed. Mirsky, p. 212, line 14. ~ZI.- Mirsky refe111 to the altar of wood in Ezek 41:22. 1z1 1n Ed. Mirslcy, p. 2JS,line 32. us 'A.Uah Konanta 'Oiam beRov Hued (lDn :ll1l D'IW ölnlllJ 01mc.) (You establtshed a I:M world most graciously) (ed; Mirsky, pp. 178-203). 126 Ed. Mirsky, p. 187, line 71: ll1lll'l w?1J.' D11J.J •n::11. 'AJ:kil' Gevlll'at 'Eloah. Here (ed. Mirsky, pp. 127-172). Tbe very heginning of 'Azkil' Gevurot 'Eloah emphasizes e.bsolute monotheism in an almost patripa!Sianisl.ic way and defines Jewish identity over and against e.ll others (ed. Mirsky, p. 127, lines 1-4). · 119 Ed. Mirsky, p. 148,li.ne 119. 127 128 2S8 The Impact of Yom KipJIIlr on Chri&tiOifily in the Third to the Fifth Centuries This line is quite similar to the lines of 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol, quoted above. but here the priestly honor is endangered explicitly by the foreign~ ers. the ruling Christians, as in 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol. Another balf-line n1~1l •nu C'vln ,,!f1J can be interpreted in two different ways. either as "the keepers ofthe laws, thc swift in commandments" or "the Christians ofthe· 'laws' are pillagers of the commandments." The first praises the priests, the second is an indictment of those who deprived Israel of its commandments and yet claim to fulfill them. The passages cited above may be understood as a rejection of Christian claims to have inherited the priesthood, to have a sinless high priest and tQ have an all-atoning cross. The rabbinie texts and the piyyutim counter these claims by maintaining that strangers cannot inherit the priestbood. The Christian Pseudo-Messiah died as a cr.iminal on tbe cross and camwt even atone for himself. That bis death bad no atoning effect is shown by the cessation of the miracle of the red ribbon in the year he died. While these are polemies on general Christian ideas, they are embedded in liturgical and halakhlc Yom Kippur texts, showing the JewiSh aspect of the tension between two religions conceming 1he question of atonement and priesthood, particularly on tbis special day: Conclusion Yom Kippur's temple imagery bad an enormaus impact on early Christian saorificial theology and the intexpretation of the liturgy. That this impact was not only the "bookish'• legacy of the adoption of Leviticus, Hebrews and Romans into the Christian canon and the necessity to explain them, but also the outcome of Jewish-Christian tensions on the issue of atonement and the Day of Atonement has been argued on th.e following basis. Tb.e earliest Christian exegete of LeV:iticus, Origen, who par excellence sets the stak.es for successive generations. states explicitly tbat he is battling th.e "problem" of Christians partidpating in the Jewisb fast. He views their participation as denying the exclusivity of Christ's once-and-for-all atoning death. Statements by Chrysostom and in the Canons of the Apostles prove that Yom Kippur continued to attract Christians and to disturb theologians. Altbough I found no further explicit examples of Church Fathers fighting this phenomenon, the numerous Christian authors polemicizing against Yom Kippur and betraying firstband knowledge of Jewish rites constitute evidence of the threat these authors felt from Yom K.ippur•s alternative atonement. The Jewish side of this tension is expressed in the polemical passages inserted in the Yom Kippur liturgy and in halakhic Chrutian Exegesis ofLtvitkull and the Polemies against Yom Klppur 289 texts pertaining to the fast. The Jewisb Yom Kippur prayers, then, also developed partly in rcsponse to Christian atonement theology. The impact of the contcmporary Yom Kippur on early Cbristianity en~ compasses a ..positive adoption," 130 in the sense that it attracted some Christians to observe the fast, and a "negative reaction," in the sense that it pro\loked polemies against and dissociation from the contemporary Yom Kippur. Yet Cbristianity did not react by rejecting the Yom K.ippur imagery altogether. On the cootrary, anotber "positive,. effect regarding Yom Kippor was the continuing development of a detailed Christian interpretation of the biblical Yom K.ippur and its intensified use in Christian theology. It is conspicuous that Origen, the flfSt great Church Father to interpret Christ's deatb as an atoning sacrifice. is also so deeply engaged in an exegesis of Leviticus 16 in the sociohistorical context of the challenge of Christian's participating in Yom Kippur. In the next chapter I will argue that this tensionalso affected the Christian festival calendar by attempts to counter. through concurrent feasts, tbe appeal of the Jewish fast. 130 On these tenns, see the inttoduct.ion, on t)-pes of influence. above, pp. 4-6. Chapter 8 Y om Kipp ur and the Christian Autumn Festivals In the late third century, the central Christian festal seasons were spring and early summer with Easter and Pentecost. During the fourth century, Christma5 entered most liturgical caleridars and gave the Christian year a second, winter focal point. Yet the autumn still had no major Christian festival, in contrast to the intense Jewish festival cycle ofTishri. While Judaism was generally attractive to Christians, the autumn festivals seem to have been particularly appealing. I suggest seeing two later Christian festivals in autumn as related to the Jewish fall feasts, especially Yom Kippur. The Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross ernerged from bookish imagination but plausibly also to provide a Christian alternative to the Jewish autumn festivals (section 1). The liturgital traditions of the Roman Fast of the Seventh Month include customs adopted from the Jewish autumn festivals as well as polemies against Yom Kippur. Perhaps it is even a Christianized Yom Kippur (section 2). In addition, the commemoration of the annunciation to Zechariah developing in the East, possibly in fourth-century Jerusalem, reenacts Jewish-Christian legends around Zechariah and Yom Kippur (section 3). 1 1. The Encaenia, the Exaltation of the Cross and Y om Kippur The Encaenia are the yearly commemorations of the dedication of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher- first the Martyrion in 335, later also the Anastasis. The Exaltation of the Cross celebrates the (alleged) invention of the True Cross by Helena Augusta. It began as part of the Encaenia and gradually developed into a separate (estival. A distinct name for it is attested for the first time in the sixth century. Both festivals spread widely from their Jerusalem origin, sometimes with a slight change in the date. The Encaenia reached most Eastem Orthodox churches; the Exaltation is celebrated in the Eastem traditions as well as in the Roman Church. 1 Fora possible additional influence of Yom Kippur on early Cbristian liturgy, sec above, p. 3, note 10, and the appendix. Yom Kippur and the Christion Autumn Festivals 291 These festivals have been frequently investigated, most recently by Louis van Tongeren in his dissertation on the Exaltation of the Cross. 2 Sources on the early development of these festivals are scarce. Eusebius, Socrates and Sozomenos describe the actual dedication in 335. 3 Details of the Iiturgy of the yearly festival can be found in Egeria, 4 in the Armenian 2 L. van Tongeren, &altatio CT'Ilcis. Het feest van KT'Ilisverhejjing en de zingeving van het lcruis in het Westen tijdens de vroege middeleeuwen: Een liturgie-historische studie (TFT Silldies 25; Tilburg, 1995); English translation, Exaltation of the CrO!iS. Towards the Origins of the Fealit of the Cross and the Meaning of the Cross in Early Medieval Liturgy (Liturgia condenda II; Leuven, 2001). Van Tongeren hus summarized the fJISt two chapters in a concise article, "Vom Kreuzritus zur Kreuzestheologic. Die Entstehungsgeschichte des Festes der Kreuzerhöhung und seine erste Ausbreitung im Westen," Ephemerides Liturgicae 112 (1998) 216-245, on the development until the seveoth century; see pp. 216-226. Sec also J. Hallit, "La Croix dans le rite byzantin," Parole de /'Orient 3 (1972) 262-311, here pp. 288-293; and R.P.F. Mercenier and F. Paris, La priere des eglilies de rite byzantin. 11. Les fotes. 1. Grandes fotes faeli (Amaysur-Mcuse Belgique, 1939), pp. 32-58, on aspects ofthe modern cult (I was not able to consult the more recent 1953 edition); for the dcscription of the Armenian rite, see; S. Der Ncrsessian, "La ," Annuaire de l'institut de philologie et d'histoire orientaleli et slaves. DtrtKapDua. Meltlnges Henri Grigoire 10 (1950) 193-198. Usefullexicon articles are R.F. Taft and A. Kazhdan, "Cross, Cult of the," The Oiford Dictionary of Byzantium 1 {1991) 551-553; and A. Bugnini, "Croce. VII. La C[roce) nella liturgia," Enciclopedia Cattolica 4 (1950) 96G-963. The classic book by A. Frolow, La relique de Ia vraie Croix (Paris, 1961), is nothelpful on theritua1 history of the Exaltation. 3 Eusebius, Vita Constantini 4:40-46. Cf. Socrates, History ofthe Church 1:33; Sozomenos, History ofthe Church 2:26; A.-J. Fcstugiere, B. Grillet and G. Sabbah (Irans!.), Sozomene: Histoire Ecc/esiastique. Livreli 1-ll. Texte grec de /'edition J. Bidez (SC 306; Paris, 1983), pp. 346-349; cf. the Chronikon Paschale §334, ed. L. Dindorf, Chronikon Paschale (Corpus Scriptorum Historiac Byzantinac; Bonn, 1832), PG 92:67-1028); English translation by Michael and Mary Whitby. Chronicon Paschale 284-618 AD (Translatcd Texts for Historians 7; Liverpool, 1989), p. 19-20; and the pilgrim Theodosius (ed. P. Geyer, CSEL 39:135-150), here pp. 140-142. 4 "(I) Also, Fcast ofthe Dedication {dies enceniarum) is the name they use for the day when the Martyrium, the ho1y church on Golgatha, was consecrated to God. (2l Moreover, thc holy church which is at the Anastasis, at the p1ace, that is, where the Lord rosc after His Passion, was also consccratcd .to God on the same day. (3) The dedication of these churches is observed with the most solemn liturgy, since the cross ofthe Lord was foWld on that day also. (4) This is why it was decreed that whcn the above-mcntioned holy churches were first consecrated the consecrations wou1d be on the same day as that on which the cross of the Lord was found, so that these events might be celebrated at the same time, on the same day and with full liturgy. (S) It was also discovercd from the ScripEures that this Feast of Dedications would be on the day when the holy ruler Solomon stood and praycd before the altar of God in thc newly completed house of God which he had built, as it is written in the books ofParalipomenon (2Chr S-1, esp. 7:9-10; cf. 1Kgs 8]. {6) When this Feast of the Dedications is at band, it is observcd for a period 292 The Impact of Yom KippJU on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Centurie.s and Georgian translations of the Jerusalem lectionary (the Old Armenian Lectionary and the Old Georgian Lectionary)/' and in few other places, 6 of eight days. {7) Maoy days beforehand a crowd of monks and aplltactitae begin gathering together from various provinces, not only from Mesopotamia and Syria, from Egypt and the Tbebaid, where the monks are numerous, but also from all other plices and provinces. (II) In ftl.ct, there is no one who would not go to Jerusalem on this day for such a solemn liturgy and for such a splendid feast. {9) Lay people, both men and women, als() gather togelber in Jerusalem on these days from aU provinces in tbe spirit of faith and on account of the feast day. (lO) Though fewer in munber, there axe still more thall forty or fifty bishops in Jerusalem during these days, and with thern come mtlny of their clergy. (II} What -can I add? Everyone considen that be has faUen into great sin if he is not present on days of such solemnity, unless there be conflicting obügati.ons, such as would keep a man from fulfillillg a good inte.ntion. tm Ollring th~ Feast of tbe Dedications, tbe decoration of alt the c:burches is similar to that at Euter and at Epiphl1DY. and 011. each day tbey asscmble for lhe liturgy in various holy places, Just liS at Easter aad at Eplpb.~ any. (ll} On the first and sec.:,n Rome, 1962~1963). • Sozomenos, History of the Church 2:26. Sozomenos wrote between 439 and 450. "The temple, called the 'Great Martyrium,' which WIIS built in the place ofthe skull at Jecusa!em, was completed ab out the tbirtieth year oflhe reign of Constantine; ... the temple was tberefore consecr:ated .... Since that period the anniversary of the consecration has been celebrated with great pomp by the chureh of 1erusalem; the festi:val continue$ eight Y 293 According to Egeria. who p.robably visited Jerusalem sametime between 381 and 384 CE, the Encaenia last · eight days and commemorate simultaneously tbree event.s: the invention ofthe cross (3),7 the dedication ofthe Martyrion (1) and the dedication ofthe Anastasis (2). She leaves no doubt that it was the invention of the cross that set the date for the two dedications (4), and that the cross is the reason for an exceptionally splendid liturgy. Egeria does not yet distinguish between a week for the churches and a day for the cross, or a first day in the Anastasis and a second in the Martyrion, as is done in the Old Armenion Lectionary. 8 Apparently, for the pilgrim of the late fourth century, the feast of the dedication is the invention of the cross, and the Exaltation is the Encaenia. Egeria (and later Sozomenos) assign a quasi-obligato:ry character to pilgrimage to the festival (11). The Eneaenia equal in solemnity only two other festivals, Easter and Epiphany, the two other Christian octaves (12). Unfortunately, Egeria does not give a date for the festival.' The earllest source for this is the Old A.rmenian Lectionary, giving 13 to 20 September. U) However, Egeria explicitly compares the dedication of the Holy Sepulcher with that of the First Temple. According to her, the Encaenia are celebrated on the same days as the dedication of the first "house of God" as shown by a passage in "Chronicles." 11 days., initiation by baptism is administercd, and people from every region under the so.n resort to Jerusalem duri.Dg tbis fustival, 8Jid visit tbc sacred pl~es" (transl. NPNF). Sec also the homilies under tbe name of Epbrem, pu.blished by S. Hcid, "Zwei an den Enkainim der Ierusalem.er Grabeskirche gehaltene Predigten des griechischen Epbr!m... (Hiens Christiamtl 84 (2000) l-22. Heid acccpts tbei.r authenticity and dates lhem to 35{)-375 CE (p. 2). Tbere are also homilies by Alexander the Monk, Sopbron.iliS (d. 638) and Andreas ofCrete (d. ca 740), but tbey go beyond lhe chronologicalscope oflhis investigation. See SophronillS, Homl/y on rhe Ezaltatio11 ofthe Yenerahle Cross and on the Holy Antt:rtasis (PG 87/3:3301-3310); Alexaodcr tbe Mook, Onthe Finding ofthe Yenuable a11d Lifogiving Cross (PG 87:3:4021--$4); 8Dd Andreas ofCrete, In ualtationem S. Crucis ora-tiones 1-2 (PG 97:1017-1036, 1035-1046). 7 The numbers in pan:ntheses refi:r to my earlier enumeratioo of the :sentences in Egeria, Dlary, sec above, note 4. * For Egeria, tbe stotio for the tlrst rwo days is the same, the Martyrion. This has been analyzed by Verbelst, "La liturgie de Jetusalern a 1'6poque byzantine," pp. 159-160 and 163. 9 Since in her diary, Egeria destribcs the Eocaenia after lhe Holy Weck and Pentc· cost, it becomes clear that lhe Encaenia were later in tbe year. 10 On the question oftbe date, see below, p. 296, note 28. 11 I.e. 2Chr 7:8-10. According to this passage, Solomon c:onsecrated tbe temple just hefore Succot., 8-14 Tishri. This date matches t:bc Encaenia only impreciscly. Why does Egeria refer to Chronicles and not to Kings- which leaves open tbe exact day ofthe seventb mooth aod lherefare fits !Ietter - wbich in general was better known than Cbroni- 294 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity ;" the Third to rhe Flfth Centuries Tbe structural similarities between the Encaenia and the two Jewish temple dedication festivals, Sukkot and Hanukkah, bave led some scholars to suggest a genetic connection. 1" Tbey point out tbat Egeria calls the festival dies encenarium, the Latin name for Hanukkah. Tbe Encaenia and Sukkot take place in the seventh month (the same season), last for eight days (including Shmini Azeret), commemorate tbe dedication of a place of worship and are an occasion for pitgrimage to Jerusalem. Several readings of the Old Armenion Lectionary and the Old Georgian Lectionary, witnesses to the Jerusalem lectionary, evoke the temple and refer to Jerusalem and to the cross. 13 Moreover, readings from other old manuscripts of the Armenian Lectionary, probably from the fifth to cles? The parallel passage in 1Kgs 8 speak.s of an eight-day dedication (verses 65-«i) in tbe $cventh month (2) leaving the exact dates open, probably presupposing that the dedication ofthe temple was celebrated during the festival ofSuccot. !n any case, 8-14 Tishrl would indude Yom Kippur on 10 Tishri. Interestingly the author of Chronicles, in whose time the Day of Atonement was defuqtely part of the Jewish ritual calendar, does not comment on this. See the reference to Jewish traditiOD5 regarding this issue above, page !23. 12 In affrrmation, see H. Vincent and F.-M. Abcl, Jerusalem: recherches de topographie, d'archeologie et d'histoire (2 vols; Paris, 1912-26), here vol. t, p. 203; J. Wilkinson, "Jewish !nfluenees on the Early Cbristian Rite," Le Museon 92 (1979) 347-3S9; See also idem, Egeria's Travels to the Holy La:nd(Ierusalem, '-1981), pp. 298-310 (="Jewish Influenc~ on the Jerusalem Li:turgy''); M.F. Fraser, "Constantine and the E.aeaenia," Stildia Patristico 29 (1997) 15-2S; J. Schwartz, "The Encaenia ofthe Cburch ofthe Holy Sepulchre, the Temple of Solomon and the Jews," Theolog4clre Zeitschrift 43 (1987) 265-284; J. van Goudoever, Biblical Ca/endars (Leiden, 1959). Skeptical are A. Baumstark, Comparotive Liturgy (revised by Bernard Botte; English edition by F.L. Cr~;~ss; London, 1958), here p. 203; E.D. Hunt, "Constantine and Jerusalem," Journal of Ecclesiaslical History 48 (1997) 405-424; 0. Irshai, "Consta.ntine and the Jews: The Prohibition agalost Entering Jerusalem- History and Hagiography," [in Hebrew with English srunmary] Tarbi% 60 (1995) 129-178; Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de Urusalem ä l'~poque byzantine," pp. 1.59-164. A book-length srudy devoted to the festival is a tksiderahl.m. M. Black, "The Festival ofEncaenia Ecclesiaein the Ancient Churcb with Special Reference to Palesline and Syria," Journal of EcclesiasJical History 5 (l9S4) 78-85; favor Hanukkah as background, as does S. Verhebt. I would ]ike to express roy great apprec,iation to Stephane Verhels.t for mak.ing available to me material~ by now probably in print - before its publicatioo. 13 Jolm 10:22-42 (Jesus onHanukkah in Jerusalem) on the fust day and !Cor 1:13--24 (the foolishness of the cross) on the second day in all witn~s ofthe aocient JerusaJem lectionary; Mark Il:l5-18 (the "Cleansing" of the temple) in the Laihai manu:script of the Old Georglan Lectionary on the fourth day: ~ee Tarclwischvili, Le grand tecti Yom Kippur and the Christian Autvmn Festival.r 295 seventh centurics, 14 proscribe verses like "blessed are those who dwell in your house for ever and ever singing your praise," 1j or "wc ponder your mercy, 0 God, in the midst of your temple." 16 Considering that the recita.l took place in .J:erusalem' s new central sanctuary, most people certain1y understood the Martyrlon to be Solomon's temple, just as did Egeria.. Fifty years after Egeria, Sozomenos makes the equation explicit: "The temple ( vo.~). called the "Great Martyrium," whlch was built in the place of the skull at Jerusalem. was completed about the thirtieth year of the reign of Constantine. " 17 While this terminology was used also for other church buildings, it is particularly true for the Martytion. 11 Egeria's explicit reference to tbe dedication of Solomon's temple and the various temple readings of the Old Armenian Lectionary demonstrate that the participants and the malrers of the liturgy were conscious of this relationship at least in the last quarter ofthe fourth century. In addition, two other verses ofthe readings may weil bave been chosen as polewical puns against the contemporary Sukkot, mocking "those Jews" in their tents: "I would rather choose to be thrown aside in the house of God than live in the tents of the sinners"; 19 and "I divide Sichern, and the valley of the tents I distribute.''20 As we know from Chrysostom, such metaphors were used in Christian anti-Jewish sermons polemicizing against Sukkot.11 Yet Sukkot is not the only Jewish festival with possible connections to the Encaenia. The first to soggest an influence of Yom K.ippur on the Encaenia was Jan van Goudoever. 22 After him., Michel van Esbroeck proposed to see Yom Kippur as background to a homily, which he suggests to be by John ll of Jerusalem. on the dedication of the church of Zion on the third day of the Encaenia.23 More recently, Michael Frasec bas made an exten14 On tbe Encaenia, the Exaltation. of the Cross and the manuscripts Vienna 285 (V) and Vjeruta 3 (W), see Renoux, Le Lectionnaire de Jhvsalem en Arminie, PO 48:2:127135. '' Ps 83:5 LXX, read on Wednesdays: sce Renoux, Le Leeliannaire de Jllrvsalem en A.rminie, PO 48:2:240. 16 Ps 47:10 LXX., read on Tbursda}'$: see Renoux, Le Lectionnaire lk Jervsalem en Armenie, PO 48:2:241. 17 History ofthe Clrurch 2:26; transl. NPNF. For the Greek text ofBidez witb. Frcnch ttanslation, see Festugi~re, Grillet and Sahbah, pp. 346-349. tc See above, pp. 271-272. 1• Ps 83:llb LXX, read on Wednesday. 20 Ps S9:8b LXX. read on Sunday. 21 Chrysostom, A.gaiiiSt the JW~s 7:1 (PG 48:915). l'l See van Goudoever, /Jiblicol Calendars, p. 211. ZJ See M. van Esbroec:k, "Jean II de J6rusalem et les cultes de S. Etienne, de la Sainte· Sion et de la Croix," A.nalectt~.Bollandia1!fl 102 (1984) 99--134; aad idem, uune homelie sur l'Eglise attribuee a Jean de Jerusalem." Le Mwion 86 (1973) 283-304. 296 The impoct of.Yom Kippur ofl Clrri1tianily in tlre Third to tlre Fiflh Centllrie.s sive claim for the influence of Yom K.ippur on the date of the dedication festival.24 Discerning the latent influences of either Sukkot or Yom Kippur is vezy difficult. Both festivals take place at the same time of year. In the Second Temple period. both focused on the temple, and it is the temple dedieation, not the practice of constructing booths or dancing with lulavim, that influenced the Encaenia:zs Yet six observations - regarding sacred time. sacred place, the pw:pose and content ofthe Encaenia/Exaltation rites and some Jewish reactions - refer specificaJly_ to Yom K.ippur. First, in the templization of church buildings, the most sacred space in the church of the Martyrion is the first to be called holy of holies.26 Doing so evokes the sacred geography of Yom Kippur's ritual. In addition, in Jeromes's comparison ofthe cave to the holy ofholies, he underscores tbat like the adytum of the fonner Jewish temple, it is a special place for sup~ plicatory prayers butthat unlike the latter the eave can be freely entered.27 However, the holy ofholies is not used on days other than Yom Kippur. Second, while any date cJose to Sukkot is also close to Yom Kippur, in fact, as M. Fraser has ealeulated, the actwd dedication of the Martyrion on 13 September 33528 most probahly coincided with that year's Yom Kippur.l!l Was this a coincidence or deliberate'1! 0 Many scholars prefer to See Fraser, "Constantine and the Encae.nia." 25 Is the rite of raising the cross in !hree {later fo 11r) di.rections taking up a theme ofthe luiav ritual? Palm Sunday, per:haps also Epiphany, is reminiscent of Sukkot: see Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de J~rusalem a I' l!poque byzantine," pp. 79 and 225-226. 215 See abovc. p. 271. 27 See Jeromc, Letter46:l3;Letter 108:9. 38 A number of scholars doubt that the dedication took place on 13, 14, 1.5 or 17 September. The last date found in the Chronicon Paschale is most probably a scribal error (Verbelst, pp. 160-162, however, argues .iD favor ofaecepting it). 15 September is transmittcd by the pilgrim Theodosius. This may be a return to the bibli<:al model of Sukkot. 13 and 14 September are equally well attested • .A detailed discussion ean be found in e.g. van Tongeren., "Vom Kreuzritus zur Kre112:estbeologie," pp. 222-226. 29 Fraser, "Constantine and the Em:aeoia." 30 Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de Ierusalem ä l'epoque byzantine,"" p. 161, note 17, wbo is very careful in t"Omputing dates and tends to favor Jewish or Jewish-Chdstian influ.ences, discards Fraser's calculation as "all!atoire." However, we are on quite reliable ground. Yom Kippur always falls in a cenain :moon phase between .new moon md full mooa. This astronomical coostellation fits only 13 September. plus/minus one or two days for manual observation mistakes. For this date, following close upon Rosb Hashaoah, it is hardly conceivable that the Jewlsh astronomcrs would so seriowlly have miscalculated lhe leap year that Rosh Hashanah would bave fallen a whole lunar month either earlier (15 August) or later (13 October), since this would have seriously confilsed the ritual an.d agricuitural llfe. For a Yom Kipp11r on 13 October, Rosh Hashanah would have bad to occur on 3 October. Dershowitz aod Reingold's calendar program gives 27 Septembec as 24 Yom Kippur and the. Chris.tian Avtumn Festivals 297 follow lldefons Herwegen's suggestion (publicized by Anton Baumstark) that Constantine chose the date of the Encaenia over and agamst the ldes of September and the Iudi Romani, which commemorate the dedication of the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitol, in order to manifest the Christianization of Aelia Capitolina, the city of the gods of the Capitol.31 An anti-pagan detennination of the date of the Encaenia is indeed probable. But does this exclude an anti-Jewish one? Even if one adopts the view that Constantine did not betray anti-Jewish attitudes, Jerusalem,s Church offleials certainly did. 32 Furthennore, the structme of the Encaenia is molded on the biblical model, not the pagan. It is celebrated during eight days, not fourteen as in the earlier version of the Iudi or four as in the later one. 33 Oded Irshai and E.D. Hunt have independently suggested the interesting hypothesis that the anti-Jewish stance is a later local, ecclesiastical development veering away from Constantine's originally anti-pagan directinn. 34 Yet even ifthe typology to Solomon's temple dedication, preserved in Egeria's report, was introduced only in the time of C}'l'il of Jerusalem. the length ofthe festival, given as eight days, is original and points to a conscious typology of the biblical chro:oology at the outset Furthennore, as noted in the previous paragraph, Eusebius already called Jesus• tomb "holy of holies,'' a clear allusion to the substito.tion for the temple. Therefore, also geograpbically, the temple typology was part of Christian consciousness from the beginning. These Observations do not contradict the chronological sequence of attitudes the latest possible date for Rosh Hashanah in the Jullan calendar ofthe third/fourth century CE (and 28 August as the earliest possible one). We can th.erefore be quite cefblin tbat in 335 Yom Kippur fell on 13 September (':1: two days for an observational error), i.e. it coincided wltb the dedicalion day of the new Christian "temple." Yet thi!l is only a small poillt in the argumentation, and the observation is valid mainly for the year of inception of the ritual (though, J181urally, Yom Kippur and Sukk:ot are always celebrated quite close to the Encae.nia a.od the Exaltation of the Cross). JJ Baumstark, Comparative Liturg;y, p. 203. 32 Irshai, «constmtine and the Jews," p. 172, opts for a primarily anti-pagan orienta· tion. u See H.H. Scnllard, Festivals and Cert11flonies of the Roman Republic (Lorulon, 19111), pp. 183-186, 011 the Ludl Romani 5-19 September, and pp. 186-1&7 on the dedication of the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. See also tbe calendar at the end of K. Latte, Romiachi! Religionsgeschichte (Handbuch der Altertwnswissenscha.ft S/4; Mun:ich. 1960). 34 lrshai, ''Constantine and lhe Jews," p. 172. Hunt, "Constantine and Jerusal.em," p. 422, does not refer to Irshai's paper in Hebrew, published only shortly before Hunt's. 298 The Impact ofYom Kipp11r on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Centuries proposed by Irshai and Hunt, but they make the chronological aspect of their hypothesis less likely.35 Third, a reading of the Old Georgian Lectionary for the third day recalls a theme related to Yom Kippur, the high-priestly service of Jesus in Hebrews 8:7-9:10. 36 An Armenian Lectionary for the fifth day ofthe Encaenia - preserved by one old manuscript, which, according to the editor, Charles Renoux, reflects Jerusalem's liturgy before the eighth century and perhaps as early as the fourth37 - picks up the same theme, reading Hebrews 3:1--6 on the fourth day and Hebrews 9:11-16 on the fifth. 38 This juxtaposition of the Christian interpretation of the Day of Atonement with the date of Yom Kippur may point to a consciousness on the part of Christians about the proximity ofthe Jewish fast. Fourth, the cross, the central object ofthe festival, ist~ Christian symbol for atonement. This fact finds expression in the liturgy in the adoration and elevation ofthe cross. The earliest explicit source for the ritual adoration of the cross on the second day of the Encaenia is the Old Armenion Lectionary. Egeria may have known of such a rite. 39 The earliest description of the rite of elevation of the cross in the Old Georgian Lectionary prescribes an extremely long sequence of 50 Kyrie Eleison by the congregation upon each of the elevations of the cross by the celebrant. 40 Such a mantra for mercy is conceivable, particularly in view of the special atoning force ascribed to the True Cross. While it is not certain that the crosswas part of the Iiturgy in the actual dedication of the Church in 335, it had a 35 In an oral communication, Oded Irshai stated that today he regards an influence of Sukkot as more feasible than he did in 1995. 36 Tarcbnischvili, Legrand Jectionnaire de l'eglise de Jerusalem, No 1249. 37 See above, p. 295, note14. 38 Renoux, Le Lectionnaire de Jerusalem en Armenie PO 48:2:240. The 0/d Georgian Lectionary reads Heb 8:7-9:10 on the third day: see Tarcbnischvili, Legrand /ectionnaire de l'iglise de Jirusalem, N° 1247-1250. 39 Egeria describes an adoration of this kind only on Good Friday. Given the pivotal place Egeria ascribes to the cross in the Encaenia, either she omitted an already existing adoration rite from her description, or the rite may have been performed on one of the later days of the Encaenia, which are not part of the extant text of the fragment. In any case, we cannot be sure that she was unaware of such a rite during the Encaenia. 40 Lathal manuscript: see Tarcbnischvili, Legrand lectionnaire de l'iglise de Jeru:salem, N° 1240 in the notes. Verhelst, "La Iiturgie de J~rusalem ä 1'6poque by:zantine," p. 163, examining the data of the Georgian lectionaries speaks of an earlier layer of three elevations of the cross and four in the later tradition. According to ms Oxford 30322 (Codex Auct. E. 5.10) from the fourteenth century, the cross is lifted three times in all four directions. According to ms Oxford 30322, the Kyrie is repeated 100 times, then 80 times and finally 60 times: see Mateos, Le typicon de Ia grande egli:se, vol. 1. p. 41, note 2. Yom Kippur and the Christion Autumn Festivals 299 crucial function as a relic ofatonement from Cyril's time on. 41 Moreover, there is an ambivalent tension between the cross and Jews in Cbristian and Jewish texts. In some of the legends of the cross's discovery a Jew plays the ambivalent role of keeper of the secret tradition of the location of Christ' s tomb and concealer of it. 42 According to van Esbroeck, the first staurophylax, Porphyry, appointed in the time of John II of Jerusalem, was a Jewish Christian.43 In Christian conciousness, the cross became a visible token of Christianity's Supersession of and superiority to Judaism.44 Polemies against the cross (fl1}, in rabbinie Iiterature and in piyyutim, show the Jews' awareness of the importance of this artefact and its theological significance. 45 Fifth, the focus on the concept of atonement and the adoption oftemple geography are connected in a homily, published by van Esbroeck. 46 41 See Cyril of Jerusalem, Epistula ad Constantium 3 (ed. Bihain p. 287); Catecheses 4:10; 10:19; 13:4. Some scho1ars doubt that the crosswas already there before the dedication, since Eusebius does not mention it: see Hunt, ''Constantine and Jerusalem," pp. 415-416. Hunt bases bis view on the silence of Eusebius and the testimony of the pilgrim of Bordeaux. However, the discovery may have been made after the pilgrim's visit in 333 but before 335. Moreover, Ze'ev Rubin has convincingly argued that Eusebius had his reasons for passing over Jerusalem's artifact of dtual power. The discovery was closely connected to Makarius, the competitor for the hegemony of Eusebius' Caesarea: see Z. Rubin, "The Church ofthe Holy Sepulchre and the Conflict between the Sees ofCaesarea and Jerusalem," in: L.I. Levine (ed.), The Jerusa/em Cathedra 2 (Jerusalem, Detroit, 1982; pp. 79-105). The argument is continued in Z. Rubin, "The Cult of the Holy Places and Christian Politics in Byzantine Jerusalem," in: L.I. Levine (ed.), Jerusalem- Its Sanctity and Centrality to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (New York, 1999; pp. 151-162); seealso J.W. Drijvers, He/ena Augusta. The Mother ofConstantine the Great and the Legend of Her Finding the True Cross (Brill's Studies in Intellectual History 27; Leiden, 1992), pp. 81-93; and H.A. Drake, "Eusebius on the True Cross," Journal of Ecclesiastical History 36 (1985) 1-22. The wide and early distribution of parts of the relic of the True Cross and the mention already by Cyril of Jerusalem of the finding of the cross under Constantine make an !nventio Cn~cls after the construction of the cburches rather unlikely - not to mention the technical difficulties of such excavations at such late a point. 42 Cf. van Tongeren, "Vom Kreuzritus zur Kreuzestheologie," pp. 219-222; Drijvers, Helena Augusta, part 11, particularly chapter 6. 43 Cf. van Esbroeck, "Jean II de Jerusalem et !es cultes de S. Etienne, de Ia SainteSion et de Ia Croix," pp. 112-113. 44 Cf. Drijvers, Helena Augusta, p. 187. 45 See e.g. the passage quoted above, p. 285; and Schwartz, "The Encaenia of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Temple of Solomon and the Jews." 46 He published the Armenian text and a Latin translation in: van Esbroeck, "Une homelie sur I'Eglise attribuee a Jean de Jerusalem." His more recent article includes a French trans1ation: see van Esbroeck, "Jean li de Jerusalem et !es cultes de S. Etienne, de Ia Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix," pp. 115-125. 300 The /mpael of Yom Kippur on Chrirliallily in IIre ThirJ lo tlre Fifth Centuries According to him this homily is connected to the dcdication of the new church on MoUilt Zioo and was delivered by John ß of Jerusalem (386-· 417) on the thiro day of the Encaenia, one day after the Exaltation of the Cross (15 September 394).47 If van Esbroeck's dating of the dedication is conect,48 the last day of the week of Encaenia (20 September), coincided with the eve ofYom Kippur.49 Moreover, the homily focuses on the propitiatory (n1l!l::J), the central object of the Yom Kippllt' sprinkling rite in Leviticus, Hebrews, Romans and the Mishnah. Indeed. John states his intention as being ..to nanate worthily with holy woros that mystery oftbis holy propitiatory (punmpmb.) and that divine dwelling betrothed through the prayers of all saints...~ Therefore, the homily is best Ullderstood against the background ofthe Day of Atonemcnt.51 Finally. an Armenian text from about the seventh centUl'}' mention.s a fast for the festival ofthe cross claiming its origin is Jerusalemite praxis.52 ~7 The Clavis Patrum Graecorum eontinues to Iist the hotnily nnder dubia. ,.. For his argumeuts, see van Esbroeck, "Jean ll de Jerusale.m et le$ culte:s deS. Etienne, de Ja Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix.," pp. 109-112. ..., Aceording to the calendar-cumpu.tation program by Nachwn Dershowitz and Edward Reingold (http://emr.cs.uiuc.edulhome/reingold/calendar-book/index.shtml). 50 My translation of section 23. For the Armenian text, see van Esbroeck, "Une ltom6lie sur l'Eglise altrib~e ä Jean de J&usalem," p. 292. John describes eight spberes (1) the divine etb.er, (2) heavenly Je.rusalem, (3) the Gardeo of Eden, (4) the arch of Shem and Noah, (S) Mount Moriab, (6) Mount Sinai, (7) the temple and (8) the Cbun:b. Most of the sec:tions on eacb sphere end with a statement on the mediating power of tbe holy propitiatoty (barekhawsout'eamb SDilrb k'avarmtis) (1,2,1,4,7 and 8). The passage on Mount Moriah (S} ends witb a blessing on the foundation stone ofthe churcb. Tbe pas· sage on Mount Sinai ends witb the warning nottobring alien fire near, piclcing up the story ofNadab and Avihu (Lev 10; 16:1): see van Esbroeck, "Jean 11 de J6rosalem et les cu.ltes deS. Etienne, de Ia Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix," pp. 121-123. Sl Van Esbroeck, "Jean Il de J6rusalem et les cu.ltcs de S. Etienne, de Ia Sainte-Sion et de Ia Croix," pp. lll-112. Van Esbroect also explains two reanarks on. fasting (secnon 71) aud penitence (section Sl)as allusious to Yom Kippur; see van Esbroeek, p. 120, note 88 an.d p. 122, note 96. While tbese remarks conlribute to the atm.o:sphere of atone~ ment, they remain very genend and do not 1.1$e my ofthe biblical Yom Kippur passages. 52 See the texts by Step•aoos Siwnec'i (sixth or seventh century) published by E. Petrosyan in Ejmiaril'l 41 (1984) 44-50 (non vidi), mentioned by R.enoux, Le Lectiannaire de Jenaait~m en Jtrmtlnle, PO 44:4, p. 434, note 11. However, Renoux rcminds us thllt lhis pf Yom Kip~r and the Christion A.t#vmn Futillais 301 What ki:n.d of Sukkot/Yom Kippur influenced lhe emergence of the Encae· nia/Bxaltation of the Cross? The parallel elements in the Christian and Jewish festivals point to the biblical background with the temple, not to the contemporaneous way of celebrating Suk:k:ot by building boolhs and parading with lulavim. The only contemporaneous ritual influence could be the fast of the Exaltation, blit I do not know wben lhe Christians introduced this fast. We have here, then, a special form of "bookish" in:fluence. However. the dedication of a church, even as central as the Holy Sepulcher, does not in itself explain the establisbment of a yearly festival that attracted the attention of so many people. How can tbe sudden rise of the En<:aenia in fourth-century Jerusalem be explained? I suggest two factors that sparked the emergenu ofthe Encaenia at this pla<:e and time: the Ortsgeist of the Holy Land and the challenge of con~ tempo:rary Judai.sm's festivals. I consider the main factor to be the Ortsgeist of the Holy Land, the infiuence exerted by the symbolic language of the Holy Land on its rulers. Accordingly, in the fourth century, the consecration of the new centT:al sanctuary of the rulers of the land of the Bible followed the mythological consecration ceremo.ny of the land's temple, Jinked to Solomon, Bezalel and the date of Sukkot. Tbe cballenge of the festivals of eontemporary Judaism is a possible second factor. The llomilies on Leviticus by Origen and the polemical passages in the Sidrei AYodah show the tension over Yom Kippur and atonement between Christians and Jews in the third and fourth centuries, especially in Palestine. Chrysostom's orations Agaimt the Jew& :from Antioch. delivered only fifty years after the dedication of the Holy Scpulcher, attest to the same friction. He assembles bis flock for an exceptional prayer service on Yom Kippur to keep Christians from attending thc lewish service.s3 Furtherm.ore, there are some hints of a Jewish reaetion to the proximity of the Encaenia to Sukkot. Joshua Schwartz h.as suggested that the Christian festival caused a transformation of Jewish exegetical traditions regarding the construction of the Third Temple, the time of which was postponed from Tishri (the month of the Encaenia) to Heshvan. 54 Therefore. even if the Jewish community of fourth-century Jerusalem a.nd its environs was very small and probably rather clandestine, ss and most 53 W. Pradels, R. Brllndle and M. Heimgartner, "The Sequence and Dating of John Chryso.stom's Eigbt Discourses .A.dversusludaetJs," Zeitschriftftir Antike 1md Christen~ tvm 6 (2002) 90-116, bere p. 95. 34 Schwartz, "The Encaenia ofthe Church ofthe Holy Sepulchre, the Temple of Solomon and the Jews." 5S Cf. G. Stemberger, Jews and Clvistians ilf the Hol:y Land. Palestine in the Fourth Centwy (Edinburgh, 2000), pp. 17---21 and 40-43. 302 The Impact of Yom Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Centuries inhabitants of the city were pagan, Judaism and its rituals remained an ideological challenge. The same is true of the Jewish Christian community.56 Cyril of Jerusalem's wamings not to follow Jewish practices attest that Jerusalem Christians fett continuously threatened by the attractiveness of Jewish ritual (even in its traditional baptism catechesis). Moreover, Galilee, with its dense Jewish population, cannot have failed to have an impact on Cbristian pilgrims to and inhabitants of Jerusalem. Yet the tension over the rituals of contemporary Judaism explains only the location, not the time of the appearance of the Encaenia. The biblical character of the Encaenia, which focuses on the temple with its holy of holies and its atoning function, could be a Christian challenge to the temple-less Jewish interpretation of the Sukkot commandments emphasizing booths and lulavim instead ofthe sanctuary. In sum, the parallels between the Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross and Sukkot are impressive. The Encaenia, one ofthree centrat pilgrimage festivals, is celebrated for eight days in the seventh month and commemorates the dedication of the sanctuary. The sanctuary is called "the temple" and appropriates various legends originally associated with the Jewish temple. Six further observations may bespeak an additional influence of Yom K.ippur: The cave of the Holy Sepulcher was revered as the holy of holies; 13 September 335 probably coincided with 10 Tishri; Hebrews 9, with its description of Jesus' high-priestly ritual, is read during the Encaenia; the cross liturgy focuses on atonement; John's dedication homily focuses on the kapporet; and Christians fast on the festival of the cross, a practice probably originating from Jerusalem in early times. 57 The main factor underlying the introduction of this dedication festival, ruodeled on the biblical type, was most probably the new status of the Bible as an ideological model for reforming the political reality and its expression in religious symbols by the (now) Christian authorities of fourthcentury Palestine. The Christianizers of Palestine had to follow their myth, which encompassed both the New Testament and the Old. The symbolical expression of political power over the earthly Jerusalem could be expressed only in terms of the Old Testament, with its temple, King Solomon, Sukkot and Yom Kippur. 56 G. Stroumsa, "'Vetus Israel': Les juifs dans Ia litttüature hierosolymitaine d'epoque byzantine," Revue de /'hi:stoire des religions 205 (1988) 115-131, includes a nwnber of very suggestive passages on th.e existence of a Jewish. Christian community. Stemberger, Jews undChristians in the Holy Land, pp. 71-81 and 111-114, on the other hand, is much more hesitant. 57 Fraser mentions the second, fourth and fifth points; van Esbroeck the fifth. Yom Kippur and tlre Christian Aulllmn Festivals 303 A second, more marginal factor was the concurrent situation of Palestinian Cbristianity in tbe land of tbe Jews and the appeal of the Jewish rites to outsiders, pagans, Christians and potential converts. 2. The Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September) and Yom Kippur The Fast of the Seventh Month (Ember Day of September), one of the major Cbristian liturgical events of fifth-century Rome, has been much researched. 58 While some scholars have pointed to Yom Kippur as background,59 the opinio communis regards its influence as biblical at the most. I will argue that the links between Yom Kippur and the Roman Fast ofthe Seventh Month are more numerons and closer than was previously thought. Our understanding of the promotion of the festival by Leo in the fifth century can be significantly enhanced by taking into consideration not only the biblical but also the contemporary Yom Kippur. 60 n See G. Morin, "L'origine des Quatre-Temps," Revue Benedictine 14 (1897) 337346; L. Fischer, Die kirchlichen Quatember. Ihre Entstehung, Entwicklung und Bedeutung in liturgischer, rechtlicher und kulturhistorischer Hinsicht (Veröffentlichungen aus dem kirchenhistorischen Seminar MOnehen IV. Reihe Nr. 3; Munich, 1914); K. Holl, "Die Entstehung der vier Fastenzeiten in der griechischen Kirche," in: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Yol. 2. Der Osten (Tilbingen, 1928; pp. JSS-203); 1. Schümmer, Die altchristliche Fastenpraxis, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Schriften Tertu/lians (MOnster, 1933); J. Danit!lou, "Les Quatre-Temps de septembre et Ia ~te des Tabemacles," La Maison-Dieu46 (1956) I 14-136; J. Janini, S. Siricio y los cuatro temporas. una investigacion sobre los fuentes de Ia espiritualidad seglar y del Sacramentorio Leoniano. Leeclon inaugural del curso 1958-59 (Valencia, 1958); G.G. Willis, "Ember Days," in: idem, Essays in Early Roman Liturgy (Aicuin Club Collections 46; London, 1964; pp. 49-97); A. Chavasse, "Le sermon III de saint Leon et Ia date de Ia ct!lt!bration des Quatre-Temps de septembre," Revue des sciences religieuses 44 (1970) 71-84; T.J. Talley, "The Origin of the Ember Days. An lnconclusive Postscript," in: Rituels (Melanges P.-M. Gy) (Paris, 1990; pp. 465-472); J.-L. Verstrepen, "Origines et instauration des Quatre-Temps A Rome," Revue Benedictine 103 (1993) 339-365. For handbook se<:tions, see A. Chavasse, "Les Quatre-Temps," in: A.G. Martimort (ed.), L 'Eglise en Priere.lntroduction Ia Liturgie (Paris, Tournai, Rome, New York, 1965; pp. 758-767); H. Auf der Maur,.Feiern im Rhythmus der Zeit. Herrenfeste in Woche und Jahr (Gottesdienst der Kirche. Handbuch der Liturgiewissenschaft 5/l; Regensburg, 1983); A. Nocent, "Le quattro tempora," in: M. Augt! et al. (eds.), A.namnesis. Vo/6: L 'anno liturgica: storia teologia e celebrazione (Genoa, 1988; pp. 263-266). 59 In the past century, this thesis has been most prominently defended by Fischer, Die kirchlichen Quatember, p. 7, and Schommer, Die altchristliche Fastenpraxis. 60 St!!kl Ben Ezra, "Whose Fast Is lt?" was based on a previous version of this chapter. a 304 The Impact ofYom K.lppur on Christianity in the Third to the Flfth Centuriu Th.ree kinds of sources are available for the early understanding of the fast: The main source is the nine Sermons by Leo the Great (440-461) on the fast of September.41 They are supplemented by short notes in various sources. 62 The Codex Verona Bibi. Capit. LXXXV (80), traditionally known as the Sacramentarium Leonianum or Sacramentarium Veronense preserves prayers predating the seventh century;63 and the Epistolary of Wurzburg (seventh to eighth centuries) and the Comes of .A./cuin (eighth century) give evidence for liturgical readings on the Ember Days in th.e Roman Church going back: at least that far. 64 2.1 The Origin ofthe Solemn Fasts Today, the termErnher Days (Latin qvattuor temporum, French QuatreTemps, Gennan Quatember) refers to a series of fasts observed after four holidays: the frrst Sunday in Lent, Pentecost. Holy Cross Day (in September) and St..Lucia (13 December). They include fasts on the Wednesday and Friday and a night vigil from Saturday to Sunday. 65 However, the late antique version of the fast is quite different from the modern one. 66 First, • 1 Tbere are also nine sermons on the fast of Decemher aw:l four on the Pentecostal fa.\t. I used the edition by A. Chavasse, Sancti Leonis M«gni Romani Pontificu Tractatus Septeiltet Nonaginta (2 vols; CCSL 138-l38A; Twnhout, 1973); English translation by Conway and Freeland, St. L#lo the Great: Sermons; French translation by R. Dolle, Leon le Grand. Sermons (4 vols; SC 22, 49, 74, 200; Paris, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1973). 112 E.g. Tertulüan, On Fasting 14:2-3; PhUaster, Dil>entli'Um He,.ueon Ub#lr 149; as. weil as tbe anolzylllous Liber Pontificalis and !Je .folstitiis. These soun:es will be discussed below. 61 Tbe Sacramentarium Yerone111e wa& edited in the seventb century, but lbe p.-ayers are older. I used L. Eizenhöfcr, P. Siffrili and L.C. Mohlberg (eds.), Sacrammtari11m Veront~nse (Cod[ex] Bibl[loteca] Capit[olare} Yeron{eruis] LXXXY [80]) (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, series maior Fomes [Sacramentarium Leonianum} I; Rome, '1978), pp. 108-114. 64 Tbe data bave been convenieR!ly assembled by A. ChaYli.Sse, Lu l~ctionnairu. romairu de Ia Mus~ 011 Ylle et Yllle siecles (2 vols; Spieilegii Friburgensis Subsidia 22; Fribourg. 1993), vol. 2, pp. 11-21 for the Epistle readings and pp. 25-38 for the Gospel readinp. Cf. the tables in G. Godu, "Bpitres," !Jictlormaire de l'arclriologie chretienne et Iiturgie Sll (1922) 245-344; and H. Leclerq, "Lectionnaire," Dicti<mnaire de l'arch~ologie chritienne etliturgie 8:2 (1929) 227G-2306. ~s Aotoioe Cbavasse argues that the Sunday, being the beginning of tbC weck., should also be understood as being part of the Sole.mn Fasts: sec bis ..Le sermon Jn de saint Leon et Ia date de la c616bntion des Quatre-Temps de septembre,•· p. 79. 66 On the modem Ember Days, see R.E. McNally, "Ember Days," New Catholic Encyclopet/ia S ( 1967) 296-298. Yom Kippur and the Christian Aurumn Festivals 305 the name changed. 67 I employ the names used by Leo I and Gelasius I to avoid anachronistic terminology: ieiunium sollemne (Solem.n Fast) for the series of fasts; or ieiuniUm quatrilseplimildecimi mensis (Fast of the Fourth/Seventh/Tenth Month) for a single fast." Second. the exact dates of the fasts were assigned only in the eleventh century. by Pope Gregory VII; until then. their dates varied greatly. 69 Third, most scholm agree that the Ember Day of Lent did not belong to the original serie.s of fasts; some would even exclude the Ember Day after Pentecost. Consequently, scholars- especially those writing in French- often speak of Trois-Temps or Deu:x-Temps instead of Quatre-Temps. Fourth. the ancient festivalwas far more important than the modern rite suggests.7 Finally, it was practiced in the beginning solely in the city ofRome and was only gradually adopted in other countries. ° The ex:act time of origin of the Solemn Fasts has been the suhject of numerous books and articles. 71 The universally accepted termillUs ante quo is the fmt major extant source, the sermons of Leo, in whose time the festivalwas already weil established. Three periods are proposed for its origin: 67 The Engllsb name Ember Days is an abbreviation of the German Quaumrber, itself an abbreviation of the Latin {ieiunia) quattuor tempcrum, which appeared for the fust time in the cighth century. Y Fora similar decision. see Verstrepen, ''Origines et instaurationdes Quatre-Temps ä RQme."In fact, Leo uses tbe termFast ofPentec:osL From Gelasi\1$ on, the termi.nology becomes unified a.nd the fast after Pentecosl is caUed the Fasl of ihe Fourtlt M<1nth. The lectionaries use another terrn to refer to the vigil: :~abba/um in duodecim lectione:s, whlch remained in use until the twelfth century. This name derives from the custom of n:ading the six Iutions first in Greelc then again in Latin. uw:ler the Greelc domination of Rome (S50-750). See A. Cbavasse (ed.), Le SacFamentaire gelasien (Yaticun.a Reginensis 316), :sacramentaire pre:~bytiral ~tn usage daru les titra romaim aa Ylle siecle (Bibliotheque de Theologie, serie 4/1; Tournai, 1958), 107-110. 6t Antoine Chavasse bas shown that tbe date of the "Deux.-Tomps" of September and December was mucb more variable than previously thought; e.g. the Fast of December could be celebrated after Christrnas. See Chavasse, "Le sennon IJl de saint Uon e:t Ia date de Ia ul~bration des Quatre--Temps de septembr-e." -", In the earliest Sacramentary, the Veronense, the prayers for tbe Fast ofthe Seventh Month extend over as many pagcs as Cbristmas, and roore pages than Peotecost Its importance increased even further wheo .it was gradually inlroduced an over Europe. 11 On this question, see Chavasse, ''Le sennon III de saint Uon et Ia date de la celebration des Quarre-Temps de scptembre"; Danielou, "Les Quatre-Temps de septerobre et Ia retc des Tabemacles"; Fischer. Die kirchUchen Quatember; Janini, S. Slricic y las: cuatro temporas; Morin. "L'origine des Quatre-Temps"; and most rect:ndy Talley, "The Origin ofthe Ember Days"; a.nd Verstrepen, "Origines et insllluration des Quatre- Tcmps ARome." 306 The ImpfJet ofYom Kippur on Clrri:stianity in the Third to the Fijth Centuries the time of the apostles (fu:st/second century), the late second or early thlrd century and the late fourth century. Some scholars, especially from the early modern period, regard the Solemn Fasts as an apostolic continuation of an Old Testament practice, taking literally some Statements in Leo's sennons. 72 However, Leo's fonnulations may have meant "traditional" in a wide sense rather than "apostolic" in a n~ow sense. 73 Furthermore, his statements clearly served a rhetorical function. With the attribution to the apostles, Leo wanted to foster the authority and observa.nce oftlle fasts, which are considered a ]udaizing practice. The time of Pope Siricius (384-399) was suggested by Jose Janini whose theory is favored by some major liturgists, among them Hansjörg Auf der Maur. 74 Janini based his thesis mainly on Jerome and on Philaster of Brixen (d. ca. 397). who supposedly polemicized against the Roman Solemn Fasts. 73 Yet, as Jean-Louis Verstrepen has shown, Janini's reading of Jerome is quite speculative, and the most relevant polemical passage is aimed at Jews observing Yom Kippur and against Christians participating in it in Syria-Palestine {where Jerome lived) rather than being a polemic against the Roman fasts far from Bethlehem.76 Philaster. who describes a group that keeps four fasts according to Zeehariah 8:19 and employs the term quatuor tempora (the first occurrence ofthis tenn), 17 does not support Janini's thesis. Pb.i.laster;s dates do not match those ofthe Roman Solemn Fasts, and his term quatuortempora does not refer to the Solemn Fasts.78 Thomas Talley and Jean~Louis Verstrepen revived the traditional theory of an origin of the Solemn Fasts in the late second or early third century 12 Sqmons 78:1; 79:1-2; 81:1 (Pentecost); 89:1.4; 90:1; 92:1.4; 93:3 (Septeotber); 15:2; 17:1; 20:1 (becembcr). » See Janini in Verstrepen, "Origines et insta.uration de~J Quatfe-Temps l Rome,,. pp. 347-349. 74 Janini, S. Siricio y las Cllatro temporas; Au! der Maur, Feiern im RhythmrtJ der Zeit. ~ Jerome, Commentary 011 Galatlan.s 4:10 (PL 26:377-378); Letter 52:10 (CSEL 54:432-·433); Commerrtary on Zecharioh 8:18-19 (CCSL 76A:820); Philaster, Diversar11m Hereseon Liber 149 (CSEL 38:120-121). 18 Cf. Verstrepen, "Origines et instaurationdes Quatre-Temps ä Rome," PP- 353-357 and the passages discussed tbere, esp. Commentary on Galatian.s 4:10. 71 Diversarum Hereseon Liber 149: absolute praedlcauit. ut mysteria Christianitotis in ipsis quattuor ieiuniu nunJiata cognosceremus. Nam per annum quattuor ieirmia in ecclesia celebrantur, in natale primum deinde in pascha, tertio in ascensione. quarto in pentecosten (CSEL 38:120:24-121:4 [friedrich Marx 1888]). This textwas written. 385391. " Verstrepen, "Origines et Instauration des Quatre-Temps aRome," pp. 341-343. --------------------- Yom Kippur and th.e Christfan A.utumll Fj1Stivu/s 307 following a statement in the Liber Pontificalis ahout Callistus I, bishop of Ro:rne in 217-222: tim;s a Year there should be a fast from com, He decreed that on ~aturdays three wine and oil accordmg to tbe prophecy. While agreeing that the part of the ~iber Pontificali.s dealing with the bistory before Anastasius II (496-498) t~ generaUy legendary,ao Talley tries to corroborate the Liber with a passage tn Tertullian.'s On Fasting. Wby do we devote to Stations the fourth ~ sixth days of tbe week, and to fasts the 'preparation-day'? Anyhow, Y Tertullian polemicizes against "Psychics" (ltlost probably to be understood as Roman non-Montanists), who extend the Wecl:Jy station fasting from Wednesday and Friday to Saturday. T~ley etnphasizes Tertullian's use of "sometimes (si quando)." These Psychics do not fast every Saturday, but on1y during certain weeks -- perhaps the Solellln Fasts? Fasts on Saturdays are extremely rare. Tertullian refers to the Pfe-pascha} fast as the only exception acceptable to him. From this passage one ca.n ga.ther that Tertullian was polemicizing against an early fonn ofthe Roman Solemn Fasts. 79 Translation by R. Oavis, The Book of Pontlfls (Libe,. pontificalis): The Ancient Biographfes of the First Ninety Roman 81'hops to AD 71 S (Translated Texts for Histori IlDs. Latin Series 5; liverpool, 1989), P· 1 · TIIe Latw reads "Hic constituit ieittnium die sabbati ter in anno fieri, frumenti, vini .et o/ei, secundll1R prophetfam." - L Ducbesne, Le libel" prmtificalis. Texte, intrcductton et.commemail"e (reprint of original edi- tion (1886-92] withaddition ofa third volume; ~· 19S5-19S7), here vol. 1, p. 141. In the eyes of a 1.ater copyist the Latin Phrase was too llllprecise and be consequently added ~in the fourth, seventb and tenth mollths." . The "prophel" is usually understood as _refcrnng :0 leeh 8:19. However, Zechariah explicitly mentions {o11,. tasts. I mggcst seell)g 4 'Peelal tradition of Exod 23: 14-17 a.s the "'prophet" behilld thi.s ~ge, resemb~mg the_ ~tlttn~ent in de solstitiis: Initittm mensisfrumentariae et vindem1ae et ole~e er:! domraluc/Q inlaetitilmt et g(llldivm et dies festos multos: sce De solstitiis. et aequm~tJu (ed Bo~e, pp. 95:34-%:105). Note that the ttipartite divisio.n of tbe frui~ and th~u harves~ IU't ld:ntical i.n the two texts. ao In any ease, tbe statement m the L1ber P~ntificalfs IS wilD.ess ta the understanding of the origin of tbe Ember Days being in the tune of the COillpilation of the ea:rliest part of the Liber, the sixth century. As in Leo, tbe Solerun F~t has an ancient and honorable aura. . • 1 SI On Fasting 14:2-3; translatton by S. The Wallm ANP 4:112. The Latin reads: Cur stationib~<S quartam et sextam sabbati dicQmus et ieiuntis pal"asceuen? Quamquam uos etiam sabbatum, si quando, continuatis, numquam ni$i in Pascha leiunandum secundum rationem alibi redditam CCSI- 1 (Gerlo) p. 1273:3-7. 308 The Impact cf Yom Kippur cn Chrutianity in the Third to the Fifth Centuriu Another possible reference to the SoleDUl Fasts is the enigmatic tractate de solstitiis.12 which refers to tbree fusts in the fourth, seventh and tenth months. 83 Following Lietzmann, Verstrepen places the text in fourthcentury Rome and states that de solstitiis is "un temoignage de J'existence de trois jeiUles Saisonniers dans l'Eglise Jatine vers Ia moitie du we siecle." 34 There are several ways to connect the chronological equations in the tex.t with the Solemn Fasts.as However, a Roman provenance of ck solstitiis is less than certain, which mak.es a conelusive interpretation of the passage difficult. In sum: While we can be sure that the introduction ofthe three filsts occurred well before Leo, we do not .know the exact period. Talley has given new support to the chronological aspect ofthe legend in the Liber Pontiftcalis and the passages in Tertullian~ less ptobably, de solstitiis m.ay refur to the Solemn Fasts. That the Fast of the Seventh Month was not mentioned earlier, more often or more explicitly can be quite easily ex.plained. The fast may have existed in the time ofCallistus and Tertullian without being important c:nough to be noted more widely and not achieved its signifi~ cance until Leo thc Great. Against those who want to date the fast Iate, we have to keep in mind that an arJWmentum e silentio, which is usuaiJy weak, is even weak.er in a field with such sporadic evidence as early Christian liturgy. Yet a decisive argument for the early dating has still not been brought forward. n For further background infonnation on this tractale, see the different views in tbe introduction to Bottc's edition; and H • .Engbcrding, "Der 2.S. Deumber als Tag der Feier der Geburt des Henn," ArchiY für LiturgiewiJsemchqft 2 (1952) 25-43. _. "leiuni11m quartr.lm et ~tepllmum e1 decimum e:ril dom11i iuda in laetitiam et gaudi11111 et solemnitates bonas eJ diemjestOJ m11lto.~": see De sobtitiis et aequinoctiis, ed. Botte p. 9.S:63-6.S. 14 Verstrepen, "Origines e! instauration des Quatre-Temps ! Rome," pp. 346-347, ~~~ . as The first, suggestcd by Verstrepen. understauds the passage as refeuing to the Solemn Fasts a&r Pentecost andin September and December. Two other interpretations consider a second chronological equation, which speaks of lhe three temple pilgrimages (a•?l,) in Nisan, Sivan (!) and Tishri,- "Quod si ergo ipse ut tnltlum anni, iam lltique ab ip.fo quartr.lm mensem jvnium numeraremu.r tr.t septimum nptembrtm et decimurn dß- cembrem, de quibw dominU$ ad Moysen dlcit: 'Tribvs temporihiiS diem fesmm agetis milli· (Exod 23:14)": see IN solstltii.s et af!lq1ltnoctiis, cd. Botte, p. 95:81-IS - perhaps referring to. the pre-paschal fast and to the Solemn Fasts after Pentecost cmd in September. However, the author places the three Jewisb festivals in June, September and December; he was themore probably referring to the three week:-l011g festivals of Passover, Sukkot and Hanukkah, in Nisan, Tishri and Kisle11. In this case he would refer to the pre-paschal fast and to the Solemn Fasts of September and December, wh.i()h would match weil tbe theory of an early ...Deux-Temps." Yom Kippur and the Christion AutUIIJtl Festival.t 309 Apart from the date of origin of tbe Solemn Fa.sts, the question of their religious background and context is of central importance for estimating thc impact ofYorn Kippur on early Christiaoity, since, according to one ofthe theories, the Solemn Fasts are transformations of Jewisb fasts, including Yom K.ippur. Until recently, most scholars and handbooks tended to accept Morio's theory (1897) of a pagan origin for the Ember days." Morin refers to tbe three pagan Romanfestivals ofjeriae sementivae,jeriae messis andferioe vindemiales tbat were Christianized. Belonging to the class of feriae conceprivae, tbe da.te of the Christian fasts was not fixed but determined each year anew. According to Morin the dates fell in the following periods: the jeriae sementillae - 11 November to 25 December; the feriae measis June-August; thejeriae vindemiales ·-19 July to 25 September.87 Morin has suggested that the Ember days were established in competition with or as a substitu.te for and sublimation of these tbree feriae, part of "le desir de faire concurrence a l'une ou l'autre solennite du ferial palen en vigueur a Rome durant les premiers siecles de l'ere chretienne."118 Morin's hypothesis was the opinio communis for a hundred years. until recently refuted by Talley, who showed that Morin, tbe great master ofliturgy, bad based bis theory on faulty research (by others) of the cla.ssical sources.89 Talley pointed out that tbe jeriae sementivae took place not in December but rather at the end of Januaty. Their date, therefore, does not matcb the Fast oftbe Tentb Month.90 While this suffices to overthrow Morln's hypothesis, 116 See e.g. Chavasse, "Les Quatre-Temps"; and Auf der Maur, Feiern im Rhythmus derZeit. 11 Morin gives a quite impressive Iist of simila.rities between these pegan RoiD8n foriae and the Ember Days: Both were originaily restricted to the eity of Rome. These feriae are tbree in number, es were the original Ember Days. They are "lebrated at the same times of the year. Tbey a.re not tixed in the calendar but determined by the priests. They combine an agricultu.ral basis with purific:at.ion, expiation and apotrOpaic aspects. Among tbe three festivals, the ferioe sementivcu are tbe rnost important. Sirnilarly. the Saturday of the December Ember Days was more important than the others and with Simplicius beeame the only ordination day. " Morin. "L'origlne des Quatre-Ternps," here p. 341. " Talley, "The Origin of the Ember Days." The long prevalence of Morin's hypotbesis may be an outcome of the increasing specialization ot: .scbola.rs, the l:wk of communicatioa among different fields of research and tb.e seminal authority of .Dom Morin in the field of litu.rgy. 90 The Fast of the Tentb Montb c:ould be observed at the beginning of January or as latc as the ftrioe sementivae. 310 The Impact of Yom Kippur rm Christianity i'n the Third to the Fiftlt Centuries there are further serious questions regarding the content of bis argument and the metbod he used.9 1 Given that the debate about the background of thc festivals has once again been revived, any new hypothesis should, ideally, propose an answer to all of the following questions: Is it possible that there were once only one or two fasts, or is three the original number? When and why were tbey instituted? Why are they observed only in Rome? Why are they observed in this season? Why was the exact time of their observation not fixed? Why are they observed on Wednesday, Friday and Saturday? Why do they include a vigil? Why an: most readings from the Old Testament? Wbat is the special character of each fast? How has this character changed? What is the relationship of the fasts to pagan and to Jewish festivals? Unfortu~ natcly, so bro~ an investigation into the background and development of the three fasts cannot be undertaken for the present. Here, I will offer only some reflection on the Fast ofthe Seventh Montb. Could the Solemn Fasts be an independent Roman Cbristian invention?92 In this case, the emergence ofthe Fast oftbe Seventh Month and all its "Jewish" elements have to be explained as "throwbacks" to the Old Testament by a Iiturgical im:J.ovator intimately familiar with the Bible. Also, the development of a special fast after Pentecost is comprehensible in light of the prohibition on fasting during the 50 days after Easter. The Solemu Fastafter Pellteeost undersoores the beginning of regular station fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays. The emergence of the Fast of the Tenth Month, however, is more difficult to explain. Does it pick up elements of Hanukkah? The central difficulty is to give a reason for tbe structural similarities of the three fast:s as a group and to rationalize the need to found seasonal festivals with such strong agricultural elements in a vast metropolis like tbe city of Rome, and exclusively there. Talley's early dating opens the door to a "positive,. influence through Jewish converts in early times (''apostolic influence" or "adoption"). If we consider the Solemn Fasts as a series. tbe only Jewish series of fasts that 91 See Talley, "The Origin of the Bmber Da.ys." OnLy theferiae semenlivae beloog to the chronologically undetermioedferiae conceptiPae. There seems tobe no other special connection between the three foriae. The Bmber days of Pentecost are rarely in June never in July or August parallel to the feriae mes$iS. Cltava5se, "Le seJ'Jilon lll de saint Uon et Ia date de ta celebntion des Quatre-Temps de ~eptembre,.. showed that the Ember days of September may take plac:e also after the equinox. The conn~tion of expiation, prote1:tiou and apotropaic aspects with barvest festivals is quite co~nmon; we also find it in the co.oncc:tion ofYom Kippur and Sukkot andin Pbllo's understanding ofYom Kippur. n Schalars of comparative religion sometimes forget the option of indigenous religious treativity and exaggerate tbe dependeuc:e on various other traditions. Yom Kippur and the Christfan .4.tttumrr Futillais 311 cor:nes into consideration as a source of influence is the one hased on an interpretation ofZecbariah 8:19: "The fast ofthe fourth montb, and tbe fast of the fifth, and tbe fast of the seventh, and tbe fast of the tenth. ••93 The Misbnah and Talmudim interpret tbis verse as referring to the Jewish fa.sts in the accompanying list:94 A Date in the Jewish Julia11 Date Calendar 9"' or 17m Tammuz beginning .June - mid .July B gcb Av c 31d Tishti D 10•Tevet Event -· beginning July mid AU&U$t mostly September beginning of Decemberbeginning of Jauuaey Fall of the wall of Jerusalem Destruction of the temDle Death of Gedaliah BegiMing ofthe siege of JerusaJcm ··The dates of the Jewish fasts A. C and D come quite close to the Christian Solemn Fasts.95 Can the origin of the Solemn Fasts be an interpretatio ChrisliaNa of the months given in Zechariah 8:19? The first to connect Zechariah 8:19 to the Solemn Fasts is Gelasius I in the late fifth century.96 In Roman Cbristian minds ofthe seventh century, Zechariah 8:19 is de:tinitely connected to the Solemn Fasts since it is read during the Saturday vigil of the Fast of the Seventh Month.97 All references to Zechariah 8:19 prior to Gelasius are unconnected to the Solemn Fasts.98 It therefore seem.s moreplausible that the references to Zechariah 8:19 ftom Gelasius onward are an attempt to endorse an already existing practice with biblical authority rather than the adoption of a Jewish practice - testifying to biblical 9:1 The Vulgata 1eads: ieiu11i11m q•arti et ieirmium qvinti et ieiunillfll 11eptimi et ieiunium decimi. But of course the Vulgata was not yet the accepted Bible version in the fift;h century. " mTa'an 4;yTa'u" 4:5, 20b; bRR 18b. 9S Tbe Iack of a Cbristian equivalent to B can be explained theologi<:ally. A Cb.ristian filst on the day ofthe deslruction ofthe temple would be a contradiction. in terms. This is not quite so with Gedallan•s death and the siege of lerusalem and fall ofits -ns. 91 See below, p. 313, Qote 110, for the quotation . .,., See helow, p. 318, for Iist of the readings. " Phüastcr uses Zech 8:19 refen-ing to a diffioJrent series of fasts (see above). Wbile lerome knows the Jewisb fasts, he does not connect the Cbristian Solemn Fasts to Zech 3:19: sec Commmtary on Zechariah 8:18-19 (CCSL 76A:820), referring to the 17 Tamm.uz, 9Av, 3 Tisbri and lOTevet. He compares the Iewish md Julian calelldars, starting witb. April as the tirst rnonth and consequent[y reaching July, August, Ocrober and January as months of the tast. This differenee most lilc:ely reflects the Syriac calendar, wb.iclJ sets NisaQ iB April. Leo does not refer to Zec:b 8:19, nor does his terminology bettay jofluenc:e of this verse. He uses not ieiunium quorti (mensi:r), the term ll!led in ZeclJ 8: 19, but Fast ofPentecost. 312 Thelmpact of Yom Kippur on CJ~rutianity in the Third to the Flfth Centuries influence rather than apostolic influence or the adoption of oontemporary Jewish ritcs. Ludwig Fischer and Jean Danielou argued for "apostolic" influenoe ooly in the case ofthe Jlast of the Seventh Month. Fischer argaed at the beginning ofthe last century that Vom Kippur is lhe background to the Fast of the Seventh Month.99 In contrast, Danielou promoted a Qwnnmic version ofSukkot as the origin forthe Fast ofthe Seventh Month. 100 However, both theories have difficulties in explaining the exclusively Roman origin of the fast and the similarities among the tbree Solemn Fasts, e.g. the fact that all ofthem were movable. iOI In sum, the extant sources are too sca.nt to reach a decisive conclusion on the question of origin.. 102 In the sections that follow 1 will compare the Fast ofthe Seventh Month with Vom Kippur and argue for later inßuence of Vom Kippur- by the adoption of some of its rites and concepts, by the inspiration from biblical passages and by a polemical reaction against the contemporary Jewish fast. 2.2 Leo 's Sermons on the Fast ofthe Sevcnth Month and Yom Kippur The ambivalent attitude of Lee the Great toward the Jewish Day of Atonement in his Sermons on the Fast ofthe Sevcnth Month demonstrates that the contemporary Iewish Day of Atonement was an important factor in the dcvelopment ofthe Christian fast. Leo's description of the concepts and rites of the Fast of the Seventh Month is very detailed, and many of them parallel tlte concepts and rites of Yom Kippur. At the end of each sennon, Leo admonishes his hearers to observc a fast on Wednesday and Friday and a Saturday to Sunday night vigil. Christians, he admonishes, should abstain from ..worldly occupations:• and food coasumption should be reduced; but whoever does not feel strong enough may eat. 103 The purpose of the Fast of the Seventh 99 Fischer, Die kirchlicherr QrAatember, pp. 10--11. AD.toine Chavasse suggested seeing in tne cbange of the name of tbe Fast of Pentecost CO Fast of the Fourth Month (in analogy to tbc Fast of the Seventb I Tenth Month) evidenee for the unification of the Solemn Fasts and the dis.sociation of oacb of them from their individual origins (personal eommun.ication referrcd to by Verstrepen, "Origines et instauration des Quatrr:·Temps a Rome,"p. 343, note21). Danielou, "Les Quatre-1 emps de septembre el Ja fete des Tabemacles." On Fiscber, see also G. Morin, "Review ou Fiselter 1914," Rev11e Benldictine 31 (1914-1919) 349-Sl. Joz See Noceut, "Le quattro tempora." who states: "None perciö possibile, alme.oo a tun'ogi, conoscere con certezza Je origini deUe Quanro Tempon" (p. 264). 103 E.&. Sermon 87:2; 89:1. Similar rulinp for sick:, pregnant, very :young or very old people exist. of course, in nsbbinie Judaism: see mYoma 8. 100 191 .Yom Kippur anti the Chriatjon .Autumn Feslhlaf.s 313 Month is purification and protection ofthe community. propitiation ofGod and forgiveness of sins. 104 The placatory function of fasting is expressed e.g. in Sermon 88:1: "The arousal of divine justice ... could not be placated except by fasting." and Sennon 94:4: "By the devotion of our fast we may please the merciful God. " 105 The discipline of the body is strenglhened by the abstention from food, the soul by the abstention from sin. 106 Here and there Leo adds sacrificial connotations, mostly speaking of alms as the "sacrifice of mercy."107 In one passage Leo explicitly juxtaposes fast and sacrifice with a placatory function: "The God of mercies, pleased by the sacrifice of the fast, will hear us, through Christ our Lord." 108 Almsgiving is obJigatory for all, regardless of fasting, and a fast without ahnsgiving is considered a mere expression of avarice. I® From the time of Oelasius I (492-496),no the fasts gain yet another dimension by being occasions for the Ordination of priests and deacons. This practice might even have been the custom as eatly as the days of Leo. 111 The communal charactcr of the 104 This comesout strongly also in the 'fler~nense, e.g.. 373: ".Adesto, domilte,fideiibus tJJis, et quos caelutibu.v instituu sacramentis, a terrenls: coNterua periculis. ~ (ed. Eiz.en- bOfer, Siffrin and Mohlberg, p. 110); and 876: "Omnipotena sempiterne tleus, misericordlam tuam supplice.f exoramus, 111 hoc lllllm, domille, sacramentum non sit nobis reatlt:S ad poenam, sed jiat inJercessio salu.tarla ad 11t:niam: sit abolitio peccatorwn, stt fortitudo fragiliam, ait oontra muiUii pericvla firmamentvm." (ed. EizenhOfer, Siffrin and Mohlberg, pp. 110-111). IIEI Cf. also Sermon 93:3 "When our three devotions come togetber into one design, that is 'praye.r, alms, and fasting,' the grace of God fumishes us wirb a restraint in desires, the granting of our prayen:, and forgiveness of sins.'' On the propitiation by prayer and almsgiving, seealso Sermon 12:4; 15:1; 20:3 ~a certain power of baptism is set in almsgiving... 106 E.g. Sermon 86:1--2; 87:1; 88:1-2; 89:3; 92:2; 93:3~ :94:1-2. 107 E.g. Sermon 13;2; 20:2; 8S:S. 118 Deus misericordiarum ieiunil sacrificio placatlls exaudiat per Chrishutl Domillum nosrrum (Sermon 89:6). Cf. J'eroneme N° 89S, .Accepta libi &int, domi11e, quaesumu.r, nostri dona leiunii; quae et ~piando nos tua gratia dtgnos efftcierrt, et ad .vempitema promlssa perdttcant {ed. EizenhGfer, Siffrin aud Mohlberg, p. 112). 109 E.g. Sermon 15 :2; 87:3. The traditional triad- Cast, prayer and almsgiving- reflec:ts the ~enttal chaptet of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 6). On Leo and almsgivlng, sec R. Bolle, "Un docleurde l'aum6ne, S. Uonle Grand," J'ieSplrituelle (19.57)26~287. 110 Gelasius, /Alter 14 (PL S9;138A): ()rdinf)tionlll vero presbyterÖI"URR se11 dioconorum 110.11 nisi quarti, septimi, t!l decimi men&iWII jejuniis: sed et ingrwu quadragelimali atque medio, vespere sabbali nowrrit celebrandas. ln rhe eranense, the prayers for ordioation and for the memorial of ordinations of bishops follow the prayers for the fast of the Sevenrh Month. 111 In fac:t, Leo 1 celcbrau:d bis ordinadon day on the Fast of tb~ Seventh Month in the yelll' 443: see Chavaue, "Le se.rmon III de saint L6on et la date de Ia Ct!;~bration des Quatre-Temps de septemhre."ll is possible that his ordioation day, Sunday, 29 September 440 CE, coincided with the e.o.d of the vigil of the September Fast. Uowever, tbi• may r 314 The lmpacl ofYom .Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fiflh Cenluries fast is of central importance. For Leo, the communal fast and almsgiving constitutes an apotropaic protection rite for the whole community, since they purify the Church as a whole and unify it against the attacks of the devil. u2 Although ehe watchfultury of the cruel enemy nges and spread.s out hidden anarc~ everywhere, he can take no one, he can wound no one, ifhe tinds everyone armedt everyone active, everyonc sharil11 in the wor.ks ofmercy.m Tbis concept recalls the importance of the communal fast on Yom Kippur and reflects a relatively recent shift in Ecclesiology- Augustine's view of the Church as a ..school ofsinners. " 114 The fast of the individual does not need appointed days and belongs to the "voluntary observances . . . dependent on private initiative" (Ser~ mon 88:2); the combination of communal fast and praycr js a more efficacious means of puri.fication and remission of all sins than is the individual fast: We are all deaased by the daily gift of God from various contaminations. In unwary souls, bowever, many gross spots adhere tbat ou!:ht to be wasbed oui with greater care and clean~ with mo:re effort. Tbe fUIIest remission of sin is obtained when there is one prayerand on\: confession oftbe whole Church. 115 The Sermons on the fasts of the fourth and tenth months show that tbese characteristics ate common to all three fasts. 116 Propitiating and purifying are the general aims of most fasts. Among the characteristics of the Fast of the Seventh Month that recall Yom Kippur are: the date. the general idea.s of puritication and of propitiahave been a coiDcideoce. A similar juxtaposition of atonement with ordination can be found in tbe rabbinical undentanding ofthe b.igh-priestly preparation week before Yom Kippur; see Knohl and Naeb, "Müu'im veKippurim." 112 See e.g. Sermon 18:2; 88;2-4; 89:2. m St!Tmon 88:2. 114 Perbaps, the emergence of another eollective repentance ritual in the fifth ceniUry, the rogations in Gaul, may retlect this shift in Ecclesiology. The rogations, however, probably developed out of local pagan rituals: see G. Natban, "'The Rogation Ceremonies of Late Antique Gaul. Creation, Transmission and the Role of the Bishop,.. Classica et Media1111olia. Revue danoise de phllology et d'histoire 49 (1998) 27S-304; and W. Klingshim, Caesarit4 of tlrles. The Making of a Christion Commtmity in Late Antique. Gaul (Cambridge Srudies in Medieval Life and Thought, Fourth Series 22; Cambrigde 1994), pp. 177 aud 240. I would like to thank Peter Brown for kindly drawing my attention to tbese conaec;tions. m Sermon 18:3. 116 Cf. Sermon 12:4; 78:4 oo purification; 12:4; 15:1; 20:3; 78:4; 81:4 on propitiation and forgjveness; 19:2; 78:2 ou protection; 13:2; 20;2 on tbe sacrifkial character; 18:2 on the communal character. Yom Kippur and the Chri.rtionAutumn Fe.stivals 315 tion of God through fasting, alms, supplicatory prayers and abstention from work, the unizying communal cbaracter, the sacrificial connotation and the association with onlination. Taken singly, none is su:fficiently distinctive, as cumulative evidence, however, they are noteworthy for pointing to a relation between Yom K.ippur and the Fast of the Seventh Month. But as noted earlier, Leo is careful to emphasize the distinctions from the paralleJ Jewish fast. While Christians should abstain from "worldly occupations," they may perform "necessary,. works; and food consumption is reduced, not completely forbidden, and wboever does not feel strong enough, may eat. 117 1be close and ambivalent relationship between the Christian Fast of the Seventh Montb and the Jewish Day of Atonement is most clearly expressed in Leo's 89th Sermon: When, therefore, dearly beloved, we eucourage you on to certain matters set out eveu in tbe Old Testament, we are not suojecting you to the yoke of Jewisb observance, nor are we suggesting to you the custom of a worldly (carntzlis) peoplo. Cbristian self-denial surpasses their fasts, and, !f there is aoything in ccmmon between us and them in chronological drcumstances (temporibus), the customs (morihus) are different. 1" Let them have their barefoot processions (nudipldallo), and let tbeir pointless fasts (iei:rlnia) show in the sadness of their faces (in tristitla uul· tuum). We, however, sbow no cbauge in the respectability of our clotb.es. We do not reftain from any right and necessary work:. lnstead, we eoutrol our freedom iD eating by simple frugality, limiting the quantity of our food, but not condellUling what God has ereated. 119 Unlike Christians, Jews have barefoot processions nudipedalia (l)t their fast is expressed by sadness (2) and less respectable clothes (3), and they abstain completely from work (4) and food (5). As noted earlier, Leo's mention of the barefoot processions makes it almost certain that he is describing contemporary Yom Kippur rites as an eyewitness and not from a "bookish" familiarity with the Jewish fast. His Statements are not imaginary polemies against the biblieal Day of Atonement but reflect a real contlict between three parties: bis contemporary Jewish neighbors who observe their fast, those Christians who observe the Fast of the Seventh Month and those Christians who apparently attack the Christian fast as a Jewish observance. Leo admits to similarities. but strongly emphasizes the distincti()n so as to defend the fast against accusations of Judaiz.iog practice. Unlike Chrysostom, Leo does not complain about Christians actually Sermon 88:3; and see the sources given aoove in note 103, p. 312. The t.ranslation of Freeland and Conway ("if there is anytbing in eommon between us and them in circumstaru:es, there are great differences in our character") mines some aspects of the eomparisoo. Dolle's French translation goes in the same direction as my Suggestion. Mores is the head1ine for the five customs that follow. llt Sermon 89:1 (CCSL 138A: 551). Cf. the discussion on PP- 74-76 a.bove. ll't 11' 316 The Impact ofYom Kippur on Chri.ttianity in the Third to the Fifth Cenlllries participating in the Jewish festivals and the fast, but he defends bimself against accusations of Judaizing by explaining thc similaritics as betonging to the apostolic Jewish herltage. Like the Ten Commandments, the Solemn Fasts are the valuable part ofthe Old Testament precepts, which bave been adopted into the new covenant. Judaizing is orthodox - if it is apostolic: The Apostles distinguished the Old Testament dec:rees, dearly beloved, in such a way tbat tlley might extract some of them, just as they bad been composed, to beaefit the teaching of the Gospel. What had for a long time been Jcwish custoJU could become Christian observance (obser11antiae), for the Apostles understood !hat the Lord Jesus Christ bad come into the world, •not to destroy the law but to fulfill it. •1'211 The Chrlstianiud fasts, then, are converted Old Testament precepts. When,ftom dle teaching of ancient docttine, de~rly beloved, we undertake the fast of September to purify our souls and bodies, we are not subjecting ourselves lo legal burdens. We are embracing thc good use of self-rtstraint that serves the Gospel of Christ. In 1his too, Christian virtue can 'exceed that of the sa-ibes and Pharisees,' not by making void the law, but by rejecting wodd!y wisdoiiL Our fasts ought not to be su<:h as were those about which Isaiah the prophet, witb lhe Holy Spirit spealting in him, said.111 t What makes the Jewish practice into a Christian one are mainly its perfor- mers. Confidcntly encouraging you with fatherly counsels, dearly beloved, we preach the fast dedicated in September to the exercises of common devotion, sure that what was fust the Jewish fast wiU become Christiao by your observaoce. 122 In sum, Leo •s descriptions of the Christian Fast of the Seventh Month display a great similarity to the rites and concepts connected to Yom Kippur. Feeling under attack by Christians who are annoyed at the simiJarity betv.-een the Cbristian and Jewish fasts, Leo emphasizes the distinctions and defends the Christian practice as apostolic legacy. His referenees to the oontemporaneous Yom Kippur make clear that the tension between th.e Cbristian and Jewish fasts is not based on an imaginary biblical model but reflects a. historic proximity. Leo's promotion of the Fast of the Seventh Montb and his emphasis on its Christian characte.r bave to be understood as a reaction - on the one band agaiost the attaclcs by fellow Christians and on the other against the competing presence of the simultaneaus Jewish 120 Sermon 92:1 (CCSL 138A 568:1-6); lransl. by Conway and Fr~~elaud, St. IA.o the Great: Sermoll$, p. 38:S. m Sermon 92:2 (CCSL 138A :569:31-39); tJBDsl. by Conway and Freeland, St. Leo the Great: Sermons, p. 386. 122 Sermon 90:1 {CCSL l38A SS6:l-4); trausl. by Conway and Freehmd, St. Leo the Great: SermoM, p. 37!1. Yom Kipp'ID' and the Chrwian Avtumn Fe1tivals 317 fast. Regarding the remarkable correspondence between the Fast of the Seventh Month and Yom Kippur, it is likely that some rites were indeed directly adopted- e.g. via converts or Judaizantes - though it is difficolt to point to specific instances. Tbis impression is reinforced by analyzing the parallel.s between the readings of the Fast of the Seventh Month and Yom K.ippur. 2.3 Tht Readings ofthe Fast ofthe Sevtnth Month and Yom Kippur Our earliest sources for the biblical readings of the Roman order, the Comes of Würzburg and the Comes of Alcuin, mention highly interesting readings for Wednesdays. Fridays and the Saturday vigils. 123 The sheer number of Lectiones (six) demonstrates the solemnity of the vigil. In the Roman lectiouary, only the Easter and Pentecost vigils bave six lessons. In a sense, the vigils ofthe Solemn Fasts are therefore seasonal repetitions of the paschal fast and vigil. 124 The choice ofthese readings clearly reveals a close relation to the Jewish festivals of autumn, especially to Yom Kippur and tb.e themes related to it (see accompanying table). There are two possible explanations for the correspondence between the two reading cycles: (a) through adoption from the Jewish lectionary direct "positive" influence; or (b) through the content of the biblical texts themselves and the liturgical context they suggest- "bookish" influence. The former was suggested by Ludwig Venetianer and again by Erle Werner.125 Antoine Chavasse argues for the latter, spealdng of "la perspective d'un Romain du IV~ siecle qui telirait 1' Ancien Testament pour s'en inspirer dans la reglementation d'Wle celebration desti~ee a prendre place au cours du 'septieme mois• ! 1126 lll On thc read!ngs, see Chavasse, Le~ lectionnaires ramai1&1 de. Ia MeJse au Ylle et YI/Ie slecles, vol. 2, p. 19 and p. 42; and the belpful table in Cbavasse, Le Sacramentaire gllasien (Yaticanus Reginensis J16), .~acromentaire presbytiral en tl.fage dans les titres romain.f au V/Je ;decle, pp. 110-111; or sec G. Godu, "Evangiles," Dictionnaire de l'archiologie chretienne etliturgie S/1 (1922) 852-923, espeeially columns 896-923, and Godu, "Epitres." · 1 ~ TaJiey, "Tbe Origin of tbe .Ember Days," p. 470. !2! L. Venetianer, "Ussprung und Bedeutung der Propheten-Lektionen." Zeitschrift der Deur1cJren Morgenlandischen Geaell.rchaft 63 (1969) 103-170, here pp. 140-141; E. Wemer, 11te Sacred Bridge. Liturgical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Chwch (New York, 1959). p. 80. • J:lili Chavasse, "Le setmou 111 de saint 1..6011 et Ia date de la c616bration des QtmreTemps de septembre," p. 8L The fourth century is probably too early a datiog for the readiog.s. Of all the Lectiones and Gospel readings.. Leo quotes only Mark 9:29 (Ssrmon 87:2). But the &eneral idea is val•d also for the installation and promotion of the testival in Leo's time and evea before him. 318 The lmp Wednesday _ß\fdl) Lectiones Amos 9:13-15 (Wd2l (WdG) Gos-pel Friday Nebemia 8:1-10 Mark 9:17-29 Hosea 14:2-10 (Frl} (FrG) Gospel Luke 5:17-26 Satuzday vigil Levitleus 23:27-32 Contenls Restoralion oflsrael; agricultura! motifs; end of the Book of Amos Readillg ofthe law on New Year Exorcism Call for Israel to repent; -agric;ulturaJ motifs· end oflhe Book ofHosea Debate over forgiveness of sins and healing of the lame YomKippur (Se.l} (Sala) 127 _(_Sa2) {Sal) Jeremiah 30:8-11 Leviticus 23:34-43 Micab 7:14--20 (Sa4) Zechariah 8:14-19 (SaS) (Sa6) - (SaO} Gospel Exodus 32:11-14 Hebrews 9:2-12 Luke 13:10-1"7 Eschatolotrlcal urom ise of salvation Suk.kot Prayer for protection and forgiveM ness1 end of the Book of Micah Eschatological conditions and fourfold fast God is propitiated bv Moses Tbe tabemacle and Christ the bigb Pli,est perfurming atonement Releasing (on the Sabbatb) the woman bound by Satan 12ll Four texts refer directly to the tbree Jewish festivals of autumn. Most clearly, (Wd2) Nehemia 8:1-10 relates to New Year, (Sal) Leviticus 23:27-32 to Yom K.ippur. (Sa2) Leviticus 23:34-43 to Sukkot and (Sa4) Zecbariah 8:19 could be understood as referring also to the fa.rrt of Gedaliah. The order of texts follows the chronological order of the festivals. The only New Testament Epistle reading am.ong tbe Lectiones, (Sa6) Hebrews 9:2-12, describes the new Day of Atonement of Jesus Christ. Tbe langnage of two of the lectures, (Wdl) Amos 9:13-15 and (Frl) Hosea 14:2-10, is replete with agricultural allusions, fitting the atmospbere ofSukkot. Tbe main theologicalline of the readings encompasses sin, repentance, propitiation, forgiveness and restoration. (Wdl) Amos 9:13-15 and (Frl) Hosea 14:2-10 speak about the restoration of Israel or about its being called to repc:ntance, topics reminiscent of Yom Kippur, (Sa4) Zecbariah 8:14-19 and (Sa5) Exodus 32:11-14 address God. forgiver of sins, being placated by fast and interoession. (Salb) Jeremiah 30:8-11 and (Sa3) 127 This text appears ouly in the Come.s of 'Wilrzburg (N° 146), not in the Comes of.4.1- cuin. 121 Thls exorcism evolc:os a discussion on tbe meaning of tbe Sabbath and is r~:ad on Se.turday. :Yom Kippur and the Christiaw A:uhlmn Futivals 319 Micah 7:14-20il!} speak: of salvation and forgiveness and protection of Israel agai.nst its enemies. The three Gospel readings talk about healing exorcisms connected to the forgiveness of sins. At first glanoe, the cboice of pericopes seems to conflllD. Cbavasse's tbeory that tbe rites of the Fast of the Seventh Month were shaped by a Christiall who combed the Old and the New Testament for texts pertaining to September. There are, however. several problems with this approach. The ..bookish"' explanation does not account for the unusually large number of lections for this Cbristian fast. Nor does it explain the preeminence of Old Testament pericopes among the readings. Indeed, a Cbristian mining the Christian Bible for passages about repentance, propitiation, forgiven.ess and restoration could find more than enough in the New Testament. Moreover. Chavasse addressed only the content of the passages, without considering their Jewish liturgical use. lnvestigation of the latter shows tbat a nurober of lections of the Christian fast betray connections with Yom Kippur, tbus making it probable that some Christians were acquainted with Jewish liturgical habits. 13° Five of the Old Testament passages of the Fast of the Seventh Month are read in some synagogues at about the same time - three on Yom Kippur itself; the other two very close to Yom Kippur. On Yom Kippur itself: (Sal) Leviticus 23:27-32 and part of {Sa3), Micah 7:18-20, and, in some Palestiman communities, (Sa5) Exodus 32:11~-14. 131 On Sabbath Shuva between New Year and Yom Kippur: (Frl) Hosea 14:2-10 (as weil as Micah 7~ 18-20). 132 On Suk:kot: (Sa2) Leviticus 23:34-43. Particularly tbe choice oftwo ceadings. (Frl) Hosea 14:2-10 and (Sa3) Micah 7:14-20, is not easily explained without reference to the Jewisb reading cycle. Readings from the minor prophets are extremely rare in the Roman lectionary; Micah is read only here, while Hosea is read on only ll!l Tbree of tbe lectures are actually the very end of the boolcs of Amos, Hosea aod Mi· eab (Wdl, Frl, Sa3). 130 Wben comparing the readings of the Fast of the Seventh Momh and Yom KippW', we have tobe aware that nothing is known about tbe readings in Rome's synagogues in the fif\b &o sixth centuries. All of the following remarks are valid only if at lea$t part of tbe readings agreed with the mishnaic, talmudic and post-talmudic readings: sec above, pp. 54--59. We have to be aware too tbat of alt Epistle and Gospel n:adings, Lco refers only to Mark 9:29 (Sermon 87;2). 111 See abovc, p. SS. This observation cscaped my attention in Stökl Ben Ezra, "Wbose :fiast Is lt?,. In some rabbinie ttaditioii.S, Exod 32-34 is linked to Yom Kippur: see y:Yoma 7;3, 44b; Levilicus Rabbah 21:10 (ed. Margulies, pp. 489-490). See also yYoma &:9, 4Sc, discussing the episode of the golden calf as one of the prooftexts on which to base tbe confe.ssions. 133 Hos 14 is also the scriptural focns of bYoma 86a-b: see p. 56, ai:Jove. 320 The Impact o[Yom Kipp11r on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Cenlllries one other occasion. Second, these specific pericopes - Micah 7 and Hosea 14 - do not seem to have been weil known among Latin authors. 133 In short, if a Christian reader were to have connected these texts to the fast, he would have been making an extremely atypical choice. A more plausible explanation is that the choice of Micah 7 and Hosea 14 as readings in the Christian services was connected to their use in some Synagogues in September. Furthermore, the final epistolary reading of the Saturday vigil, (Sa6) Hebrews 9:2-12, depicts Jesus Christ performing the high priest's ritual from the Day of Atonement, but includes no reference to September. Therefore, whoever chose this reading was likely aware of its typological and polemical connection to Leviticus 16, the main lesson of the Jewish festival (or theSeder Avodah). By virtue of its position after the Old Testament readings, Hebrews 9:2-12 is presented as the apex of the whole reading circle, communicating to the hearer that Christ bimself undertakes the atoning work of the true Yom Kippur. In light of the competitive Situation attested by Leo, it is quite plausible that Hebrews 9:2-12 was chosen as a polemical, supercessionist substitute for Leviticus 16. 134 Direct contact, however, cannot explain all ofthe readings. Some readings of the Fast of the Seventh Month are not connected to the Jewish liturgy for the month ofTishri (e.g. Amos 9:13-15; Nehemia 8:1-10; Zechariah 8:14-19). Moreover~ a number oftexts central to Yom Kippur are notread on the Fast ofthe Seventh Month: Leviticus 16 and 18; Numbers 29:7-11; Jonah and Isaiah 57:15ff.m Leviticus 18 and Jonah might not have been read in the majority of synagogues. 136 While Hebrews 9:2-12 can explain the disregard of Leviticus 16 an.d Numbers 29:7-11, it is difficult to give 113 See Biblia patristica; the index to the trarulated (and therefore incomplete) works of Augustine by J.W. Siles, A Scripillre IndG to the Works ofSt. A11gustine in English Translation (Lanham, New York and London, 1995) gives an equally meager use ofthe minor prophets by Augustine. A single verse, Hos 14:10, is used widely without any connection to repentance. The crucial verses about repentance, Hos 14:2-3 a)most never appear in early Cbristian Latin literature. Again the exception proving the rule is the pseudo-cyprianic Ezhortation to Penitence probably from Spain from about the same time as Leo, cf. C. Wtmderer, Br11chstücke einer afrikanischen Bibeliibe,.semmg in der pse~~docyprianischen Sch1"ift Exhortatio de paenitentia (Programm der kgl. Bayer. Studienanstalt zu Erlangen; Erlangen, 1889), here p. 34 for the ciating. 134 Venetianer, "Ursprung und Bedeutung der Propheten-Lektionen," pp. 140--141, argues that tbe mishnaic reading Lev 23:27-32 was abandoned as a reaction against its adoption in the Christian fast. This is overextending the Roman evidence to the rest of the Jewish world. 13' Neither does Leo quote them or allude to them. For the readings in the early synagogue service, see above, pp. 54-59. 136 See above, pp. 56-57, especially note 219. Yom Kippur and the Christion Autumn Festivals 321 reasons for the neglect of Isaiah 57:15ff (especially Isaiah 58:5ff). But neither can the "bookish" model explain the absence oflsaiah 57:15ffand Jonah, since both texts would have matched the themes of the Cbristian vigil of the Fast of the Seventh Month perfectly. Christians combing the Old Testament for suitable texts surely encountered these passages, which are very commonly used in Christian literature, especially as prooftexts for Gentile groups who claim to fast more piously than Jews do. 137 Different reasons, then, may have influenced the choice of readings. Some may have been adopted directly via Jewish Christians or Judaizantes,138 some may have been chosen by attentive readers Qf.the Old Testament, 139 some may have been selected as polemical responses against the contemporary Jewish fast, 140 and some may have been read without direct relation to the Jewish fast. 141 Thus we can speak of three kinds of influence: influence through the adoption of Jewish ritual customs, influence through polemical reaction to Jewish ritual customs and "bookish" (biblical) influence. 142 Conclusion The Fast of the Seventh Month and Yom Kippur are closely related, though the origin of the Christian fast remains obscure. The biblical Yom Kippur served as the model for the Christian fast, as did the concepts and lections connected to it. This is shown by the reading of Leviticus 23:2732 and by Leo's explicit reference to the Christian fast as a Christianized Day of Atonement adopted by the Apostles. Beyond that, the contemporary Jewish fast also played a role in the promotion of the Christian fast and influenced some of the rites and concepts connected to it. Christian awareness of the contemporary Yom Kippur becomes clear through Leo's de137 Parts oflsa 57:15-58:14 are read during Lent according to the lectionaries in most churches. Parts of Jonah are usually read during the Easter vigil, again according to most lectionaries. Tobe sure, reading the whole Book of Jonah or Lev 16 would have made for an exceptiona11y long reading; but this does not exclude the possibility of selecting some verses, parspro toto. 138 Notably, those passages that appear in the Jewish reading cycle but show no intrinsic connection to a fast in autumn, e.g. (Frl) Hos 14:2-10 and (Sa3) Mic 7:14-20. Of' course, other texts ftom the Jewish reading cycle may have been adopted, too, such as (Sa1) Lev 23:27-32 and (SaS) Exod 32:11-14. 13' E.g. (Wd2) Neh 8:1-10; (Sa2) Lev 23:34-43; (Sa4) Zech 8:14-19 and perhaps also (Sa1) Lev 23:27-32. 140 E.g. (Sa6) Heb 9:2-12 and perhaps also (Sal) Lev 23:27-32 and (SaS) Exod 32:1114. 141 E.g. {Wd1) Amos 9:13-15 and the special reading in the Comes of Wiirtburg, Jer 30:8-11 and the Gospel readings. 14l Even "apostolic,. influence cannot be ruled out. 322 The lmptu;t o[Yom Kippur on Chrlstitmlty in the 11tird to the Fifth CePttttria scriptions of contemporary Jewish practice (nudipedalia). previously misunde.rstood as references to a pagan practice. Some lections (e.g. Frl. Hosea 14:2-10 and Sa3. Micah 7:14-20) were probably direct adoptions from Jewish readings of Tishri. Others {e.g. Sa6. Hebrews 9:2-12) were chosen as a polemical reaction against the contemporaneous Day of Atonement in order to make manifest the supersession by the Christian fast - just as Leo tried to express the superiority of the Christian fast compared to its Jewish prototype. While he may have perc:eived the fast of bis Jewish contemporaries a5 threatening the Christian identity. his main tbrust is to propagate the Christian Fast of the Seventh Month and justify it against possible accusations of Judaization by fellow Christians. Unlike Chrysostom, Leo does not complain about Christians taking part in Jewish festivals. Plausibly, the Roman fast prevented Christians from participating in Jewish Yom K.ippur services. It would be interesting to kn.ow whether the institution of the Fast of the Seventb Mon1h was a reaction to a situation similar to that in Antioch of a mass movement of Judaizing Christians. Unfortunately, our limited knowledge of the Jewish and Jewisb Christian communities in Rome in the third to fifth centuries precludes being more ~ precise. Notwithstanding the dangers inherent in making statements about psycho-religious constellations 1,500 years ago, it does seem that the Fast of the Seventh Month answered the same collective psycho-religious needs as did the Day of Atonement. It is a day of communal purification, propitiation and expulsion of evil Spirits at the time of the harvest, marking the end of the agricultural cycle of sowing, tending and harvesting. It is a fast in the midst of an abundance of food. a moment of communal contemplation of the self in relation to God, in the days of reckoning the human Iabor of a year dependent on factors beyond human control. 3. Bastern Commemoration ofGabriel's Annunciation to Zechariah Early Cbristian tradition elevated Zechariah, the father of Joh."l the Baptist. to high priesthood, 143 and according to legend, Zechariah received the annuncialion ofthe conception ofhis son in the holy ofholies on Yom K.ipput. Two factors gave impetus to the development of this tradition. First. the myste:ry surrounding the place of the ac:mmciation, the ritual per.fonned by Zecbariah and his hierarchical position in Luke 1 all provided fertile 143 See above, pp. :25G-2S.S. Yom Kippvr Dnd the Chriflian Allhlmn Futwa/3 323 ground for creative speculation. The more famous the hero of a tradition, tbe more interesting bis story. Second~ some people attempted to give the birth of Christ - an important event of redemption history - a place in the liturgical calendar and looked for hints on which to base their calculations. The scant chronological references in Luke I about tbe visit of Mary to Elizabeth were tbe only data they could use. And tbese references could give only relative dates. Christ was born half a year later than John, and in each case the annunciation and conception had happened nine months earlier. But when exactly? Explaining tbe ritual perfonned by Zechariah as being patt of the Yom K.ippur temple service provided a fixed point for the calculations. In the Greek and S)'riac East this chronological fixation of tbe legendary event found liturgical expression in the establishment of a commemoration day for the annunciation to the high priest Zechariah of the birth of bis son, John the Baptist. Establishing a liturgical event such as the CQmmemoration day might well be coooected to the finding of Zechariah's relics, together with tbose of Simeon and James the Just, 144 in Jerusalem. on the Mount of Olives on 1 December .351. 14s In other words, the location of Zeebariah in sacred geogl'aphy might well have been the impetus for adding Zechatiahts annunciation into the liturgical calendar, which probably spread from Jerusatem to other places. The tradition of the discovery of th.e tomb ofthe three Christian (high) priests - Zeehariah, James and Sirneonoriginally points to a Jewish-Christian provenance, as the Protevangelium ofJames mentions Zechariah and Sirneon and claims to have been written by James the Just. Yet in the fourth century, the Profevangelium was already widely known and independent of Jewish-Christian circles. Three main traditions mandate for dates for the commemoration day in the respective liturgical calendar. First, in the Oreek Synaxarion, the annunciation is commemorated on 23 September. The same is true for two West Syriac calendats,146 which are relatively late and, according to Baumstark ~ On the connectioo between the three figures, see above, pp. 2.SS-2S7. Some Synaxaria commcmorate thc lhtee figures together, on 23 October. w The source for this event is a tenth-century Latin text. whicb is a translation of a lost, most probably Greek, text rmt tramlated by Abel, "La sepulture de saint Jacques le Miue11r." The legend is conrumed by some lectionaries, which record this event as bcing on 1 December, and by Theodo$iUS, who lmew of the existcnce of such a tomb in 530, see CSEL 39:140..142 (cd. P. Geyer). IoM Ms Paris 146 (seventeenth eentury), Va.tican 69 (sixtcenth century) and Briti~ Museum Add. 17232 (1210), all published by f". Nau i11 Martyrologe~ et Mertologu orien- ltna (PO 10; Paris, Freiburg i.Br., 191 S). 324 The Impact of Yom Kipp ur on Chri31icmity il'! the Third 10 the Fifth Centwies and Engberding, are influenced by the Byzantine calendar. 147 The Coptic Synaxarion, too. co.m.ro.emorates the annunciation on 26 Thoth. which is 23 September in the Julian calendar. 141 Second, the Old Georgian Lectionary, witness for the Jerusalem tradition, commemorates the visio Zachariae et mutitatis (eius) on 27 September; 149 and a similar date, 26 September, is confinned by an early Syriac calendar. 1so Baumstark suggests Palestine as the point of origin for the commemora:tion days of some biblical figures and events in the Old Georgian Lectionary, among them the anmmciation to Zechariah. 1 ~ 1 Following Baumstark's suggestion. I will speak of the Jerusalem date (26 I 21 September) as distinct from the Byzantine date (23 September). The Arab po!ymath Al Biruni gives yet a third date. In a treatise on calendars ca. 1000 CE he writes that on the tenth day of Tishri A (10 October)m the Melkites celebrate the "commemoration of the prophet Zacha141 A. Baumstark, Festbrevier und Kirchenjahr der syrischen Jalwhiten. Eine lihlrgiege.schichtliche Yorarbeit auf Gr~md Handschriftlicher Studien in Jerw~alem und Damasku.f, der Syri$Cht!n Handschriftenkmaloge von Berlin, Cambridge, London, Qxjord, Paris vnd Rom und des unierten Mossuler Festbrevierdruckes (Paderbom, 19'10), p. 274; H. Bngberding, "Kann Petrus der Iberer mit Dionysius Areopagita identifiziert werden?" Orien3 Chl-i.rJionw; 38 (1954) 68-95, here pp. 75-76. 1 ~ F. Nau (ed.}, Martyrologi!$ et Menologe.s orientma.. Les Menologe3 de.s ivangelioires copte~-arabes (PO l0/2; Paris, Freiburg i.Br., 1915; pp. 165-244), p. 189. The manuscripts consulted were written in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. 149 Oaritte, Le. ca/endri.er palestino-gi:orgien du Sinaiticus 34, p. 341; cf. "Visio Zachariae aphonian in Paris Codex Oeorg. 3 and the Latbal manuscript of tbe Old Georgian Lectionary: see M. Tarchni.schvili, Legrand lectloMaire de I'Jglise de Jerusalem, N° 1257. Garitte also refers to Bototov, wbo claims to have seen a text by Maximus Confessor mentioning 27 September as the day of the annunciation to Zecluuiah. Garitte, Le calendrier palestino-glorgien du Sinaiticus 34, p. 341. A search for Zaxa in TI..O S.O did not yield a text speak:ing of Zechariatl, the father of John the Baptist, in the uigitalized texts of Maximus. uo British Musewn Add. 14519 (eleventh to twelfth ce.nturies), published by F. Nau in Martyrologes et Menologes orientaux (PO 10; Paris, Freibmg i.Br., 1915). 1" "Ihre Heimat in Pallistina suchen .möchte man sieb ferner &~Kh bei einigen Gedächtnistagen biblischer Gestalten versucht tuhlen (sie!]. die dem huari.zmischen Heiligenkalender [the souree of Al Birunil gegenOber dem gemeinby:z.antinischeo Brauche wie gegenüber der ge<.lrgischen Ueberlieferung eigentOmlieh sind" cf. A Baumstark, "Ausstrahlungen des vorbyzantinischen Heiligenkalenders von Jerusalem,"' Orientalia Chl-istiana Periodica 2 (1936) 129-144, bere p. 137. Baumstark refers to Zechariah (10.10); Joseph of Arimathiab (29.12); Elijah (7.8.); Elisha (8.8.); Jeremiah, Zecbariah and Ezekiel (16.8.); and an prophets (30.8.). 132 The Arabic .reads ..Tishrtn.'' [n Syriac Tishri A is used fur October and Tishri B for November (Payne Smith, s.v.). That "Tishrtn" is in sny case the same as October can be leamed front the beginning ofthe preparation fast before Chrislmas, which begins on the six.teenth day ofTishrin Ir (16 November), 40 days before 2S December. Yom Kippr~r and the Christfan A11hlmn F«Stivals 325 rias.""J.S3 "On this day the angels announccd to hlm the birth of bis son John, as it is mentioned in the Koran, and in greater detail in the Gospel."154 The explicit notation of the date 10 Tishri demonstrates the direct link to Yom Kippur. This date is adopted also by Bphrem (d. 373) wbo, bowe""Ver. does not :refer to a festival. us Christian liturgical sources dcscribing 10 October as the date for the commemoration of Zech.ariah are unknown to me. 1S6 For the Byzantine and Jerusalem dates, too, there exist explanations based on 10 Tishri and connecting Zecharlah's revelation to Yom Kippur. The earliest text known to me (third or fourth century?) giving a raison d'etre for the Byzantinc date is the Latin tractate de $Olstitiis e t aequinocriis conceptionis et nativitatis Domini nostri Jesu Christi et Iohannis Baptistae. 1s1 This text is also the earliest to give a Julian date for the annWlciation to Zecb.ariah. alheit without mentioning a liturgical commemoration. It is the main theological idea of de solstitiis to prove the co~ incidence ofbiblieal revelation and divinely ordered nature. John and Jesus were conceived on tb.e equinox and bom on tbe solstice, the most important asttonomical dates of the year. us The "eleventh [day of the] waxins ~» hlamic tradition apprreotly also identifies the prophet Zechariah as tbe tather of John the Baptist. 1"' Al Biruni, 11ut Chronology of Anciurt NotioM (Sachau, p. 286 [291 ]). The part of AI Biruni's book relevant for Christian lfturgy was also publisbed by R. Griveau (ed.), Martyro/oges et Minologu orientDra XYJ-XYJJ/. Lu fltes des Melchites, par A.l-Birouni (PO 10:4; Parisand Freiburg i.Br., 191S; pp. 289-312). Highty interesting is AI·Biruni's explanation of the Muslim 'Ashura. (Sachau, pp. 326-327 [329-330]). Aroong the diffsrent idea& related to 'Ashura in Mustim traditioo are the following: ..People say that on this day God toolc compassion on Adam, that tbc ark ofNoah stood still ou tbe mountain AljQdi, that Jesus was bom, that Moses was saved (from Pharao), and Abraham (from the fire ofNebukadnezar), that the fire around him (which was to bum bim) bccame cold. Flll'thor, on this day Jacob regaiued his eyesight, Joseph was drawn out of the ditch, Solomon was invened with the royal power, the pW!isbment was taken away from the people of Iona. Hiob was free.d ftom his plague, ehe prayer of Zechariab was granted and John was gjven to him." (Sachau, p. 326 (329)). On the 'Asbura, cf. above p. 34, note 100. 155 Ephrelll, Commentary on Exodus 12:2-J; (CSCO 1S2:141); Cummental")' on the Dfatemrron l :29 (SC 121 :61-'2); HqmJly on the Nalivity 27: 18; see Coak.ley, "Typology and the Birthday of Cbrist on 6 January"; and de Halleux, "Le comput ~ptuemien du cycle de Ia nativitl!." 1511 Of course, 23, 26 and 27 September sornetimes eoincide wich 10 Tishri in the Iewish c:alendar. Al Biruu.i, however, was referring to a Christian S)'Jiac: calendar. 1" De solstitiis et aequinoctlis (ed. Botte, pp. 96-98). Fo:r the t.xt, see above, pp. 2532S4. ua The fJTSt to conncct the equillox to the femvals of Tishri (not Yorn Kippur) was Pbilo, Dtl specialibr.ts legibu1 1: 186. 326 The Impact ofYom Kipput- on Christianity in the Third to ihe Fifth Centuries moon" {i.e. 11 Tishri) in de solstitiis sbould probably be understood as tbe day after Zechariah concluded the Yom Kippur service. retumed home and bad intercourse with Elisabetb- and John was conceived. Accordingly, the conception took place at the equinox, 24 September, one day after the annunciation on Yom Kippux, which happened tobe 23 September. De solstitiis does not speak of a commemoration day, but the chronology matches the Byzantine Synaxarion. Among other early authors explicitly connecting Yom Kippur to the annunciaton to Zechariah on 23 Septemberare commentaries on Luke by Pseudo-Epiphanius and an anonymous Jerusale- mite (400--450). 159 The earliest explanation for the Jerusalem date known to me is the commentary to tbe liturgy that is anonymous but recorded under the name of George, bishop of the Arabs. edited by R.H. Connolly, usually dated to the tenth century. 160 In the chronographical introduction to bis explanation of the liturgy. the autbor includes the following passage: And Iohn was annun.::iated on the tentb. [day] of the seventh lunar month, i.e. Tisllri (flrst Tithrin), wbich was on the 26"' day of the sevendt solar month, September (Eiuf), on a Thursday. 1~ 1 Because .in that year the fast of tbe tenth day feil on a Friday and the Jews do not $,)bserve (a fast o.n) a Friday because of the fear tbat in the event that one w<Juld die, he would stay unburied and decay, tbey changed it to the Thnrsday. Afterwards Zechariah stayed until tbe 2~ day of the lunar [month), 162 an.d then the days ofhis ministry were full. Iohn was conceived at the beginning of tbe lunar month Marheshvan (later Tlshrin), or on the 17th day of the solar montb October (jirst Tishrin), on a Friday. And he s:tayed in the womb during the lunar months. of Mameshvan (later TisJtrin), Kislev (Kenon), Tevet (Kenon). 3ad Shvat an.d Adar. In the sixtb month, bowever, the beginning oftbe lunar month of April (Nisan), on the 29m on ." For Pseudo-Epiphanius, see F.C. Conybeare "The Gospel Commentazy of Epiphanius" 'Uitschrifl fiir die neidestammtliehe Wissenseht1ft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 7 (1906) 318-332; 8 {1907) 221-223, h.ere (1906) p. 325 (folio 73-74). For tbe ;monymous Jerusalemite commentacy on Luke see, fragment 10 in Reuss, Lukas-Kommentare aus der griechischen Kirche, pp. 23-24. Cf. also the spurious correspondence between Cyril ofJerusalem and Jullus of Rome in PG 96:1436-1449. Uio R.H. Connolly (ed.), Mo'll)lmi Auctoris Expasitio Ojficiorum Ecclesiae Georgic Arbelensi Vulgo Adscripta. Tomus I-IV (4 vols; CSCO 64; 72; 76; 71 [ Scriptores Syri 25; 29; 32; 28]; Paris I Leipzig, 1911-1954). 161 Tbis very specific constellation of a Day of Atonement (I 0 Tishri) belng a Tbursday that falls on 26 September is very rare. 1151 26 Tishri here equals 12 Oc:tober. Sukkot (with Simhat Torah) ends on 22 Tisbri or, outside the land of Israel, on 23 Tishri. Yom K.ippur dnd the Christidn Äut11mn Fesltval8 327 the l81h day of tb.e solar rnonth July (Tammuz), which is the fifdt of tbe lunar month Av, 011 a_ Wednesd.ay.~<~' Wbile the proposed chronology is impossible, 164 the theological idea behind it is interesting, since the author apparently tries to establish a mathematical tbundation for the date 26 September as Yom Kippur in the year of the conception of John the Baptist. Coincidence with the equinox plays no role. The definitive inspiration for the Syriac author is the Jewish date of Yom Kippur. Here, the period between annunciation (26 September) and conception (17 October) is much Ionger than in the Byzantine calendar. However, tbe author does not use the explicit term "Yom Kippur." nor does h.e describe Zechariah as a high priest; yet he clearly knows these details .from the tradition. Both texts link the annunciation to Zechariah with the Jewish fast. But whereas for the Byzantine text the coincidence with the astronomical constellation of the equinox is clearly central, the Syriac tex.t concentrates much more on Yom Kippur and seems tobe fairly weU acquainted with Jewish calendar regulations. lt is commonly assurned that the 0/d Georgian Lectionary reflects the liturgy in Jerusalem in the fifth to seventh centuries. 16s The Lathal manu~ script (L) and tbe Paris manuscript (P) of the Old Georgian Lectionary give the following readings for the visio Zachariae: Psalm 141 (140):1.3; Proverbs 12:25--13:3; Zechariah 2:13-3:4; Hebrews 8:7-9:10; 166 Psalm 119 (ll8):131; Luke 1:1-20. 167 This is an impressive assembly ofmany of the texts connected to the Jewish andlor Christian imaginaire. of Yom Kippur. The most significant readings are those of Luke 1:1-20 (the story of the annunciation to Zechariah), Hebrews 8:7-9:10 (Christ's fulfillment of 163 My translatio11 of tbe Syriac in ed. Connolly, (CSCO 64:40, lines 14-29). I refer to the lunar months by their Jewish names and bave put the literal translation of the Syriac month name in ilalicized pareatheses. Connolly's Latin traoslation (CSCO 71:34-35) makes it ditlicult to distinguish between the Jewish l1111ar months and the Roman solar months. löol If the preceding I 0 Tishri fell on 26 September, 29 March callllOt fall on 1 Nisan. Also, i{ 26 September was a Thursday, 18 July of the following year cannot c:oincide with 5 Av and has tobe either a Friday or, in the event the following year is a leapyear, a Thursday. w Compare Verbelst, "La Iiturgie de J6rusalem i11'6poque byzantine," pp. 12·~16; and the introduction in Garltte, Le calendrier palestino-georgien du Sinaiticl6 34. 11111 The rnanuscripts refer to 8 September, the birth of Mary, see Ta.rchnischvili, Le grand leclionnaire de l'eglise de Jerusalem, No 1225. Cf. also the reading of tb.e samc passage of Hebrews for the dcdicatiOIJ of the (new) Kathisma churcb (p. 27, N° 1145). On this festival. sec Verhelst, "Le 15 Aoüt,le 9 Av et le K.athisme." 161 See Tarchnischvili, Le grtJnd /ectioi'IJtaire de l'eglise deJi111sale",, No 12S7. 328 The Impact ofYcm Kippur on Christianity in the Third to the Fifth Clmturies Yom Kippur) and Zechariah 2:13-3:4 (the encounter of the high priest Jesus, son of Jeho:zadak, with the angel, God and Satan), which were apparently understood as typologically related to Zecbariah's encounter with Gabriel. The other readings are related to Zechariah's tevelation: Psalm 141 (140):1.3 refers to prayer and the request tosend a guardian to watch the mouth, i.e. to prayer and to silence; Proverbs 12:25-13:3 speak:s of the just and wise son and the virtue of silence; and even Psalm 119 (118): 131 may be understood against this background. "With open mouth I pant, because I long for your conunandments." The readings chosen for this day are clearly a dramatization of the annunciation story set against the background ofYom Kippur. In sum, if we speak of a Jewish intluence on the ritual commemorating the annunciation to Zechariah, jt is mainly of a bookish influence we speak. The Jewish calendar offe.red a welcome solution to a tecbnical question of importance for Christian calculators of the Messiah's birth. The festival, then, is a side result of this solution - in itself of .rather minor importance. Nevertheless, it is a striking case of the re-ritualization of a Christian legend that is basedOll an episo,p.e from the New Testa,ment, placed in the setting of the Jewish festival cycle. It is not the re-ritualization of Yom Kippur itself; but it commemorates an event that, according to Christian mythology, took place on Yom Kippur. Unlike tlle Roman Fast of the Seventh Month, this festival adopts the temple imagery, not the fast. The inclusion of Hebrews 8:7-9:10 and Zechariah 2:13-3:4 in the readings of the Old Georgian Lectionary reflects the Christian imaginaire of Yom Kippur's temple ritual beyond the story of Zechariah in Luke 1:1-20. The calculations by Ephrem, de solstitiis and Pseudo-George reveal that some Christian tb.eologians were well aware of the contemporary Yom Kippur and might have chosen the readings accordingly. Consequently, the annunciation to Zechariah, too, provides evidence for Yom Kippur beiog a continuous inspiration for Cltristianity. 168 · 168 The Byzantine Synaxarion and the cal.endar of John Zosimus (ed. Garitte, p. 336) commemorate thc prophet Jonah on 21 September. The proximity of its d.ate to Vom Kippur and its significant liturgical place in Y om Kippur servkes from very early on are conspicuous. However, since neither the Old Armenion LectioMry nor the 0/d Georgian Lectionary mention Jonah at thls time, it would •ppear to be a rather We adoption. General Conclusions I would like briefly to summarize the m.ain results of my investigations before launehing into some of their implications as well as suggestions for further research. 1:-'irst, the temple ritual was widely intexpreted and eonnected to several myths in the Jewish imaginaires of Yom Kippur, to the reservoirs of motifs, myths, concepts and sensual impressions regarding Yom Kippurin the various Jewish groups. Three main interpretations emerge. The entry of the high priest into the holy ofholies was perceived as an encounter between a human being and God, and it was seen to mirror the heavenly joumey of the apocalyptic (JEnoch 14), and the ascent of the mystic's soul to God in Philo and in Hekhalot mysticism. In eschatologically oriented groups, a high-priestly redeemer was expected to conquer the Iord of Evil and to liberate bis good prisoners on the eschatological Day of Atonement (11QMelchizedek, JEnoch 10). Accordingly, the scapegoat was usually conceived of as the symbol or embodiment of evil - evil thoughts of men in Pbilo, even demonized as the Ieader of the evil forces in 1Enoch 10, in 4Q180 and 4Q181, in the A.pocalypse of Abraham, andin some rabbinie Statements. Second, the Jewish imaginai.Tes of the Yom Kippur temple ritual extensively influenced the formulation of the Christian Jewish myths and conceptions about the atoning effect of Jesus• death and his ascent to God. I believe this impact to be greater than proposed in the earlier stU 330 Geneal Canclvsions Fifth; the imagery of the high priest's entry into the holy of holies employed in Jewish apocalyptic and mystic texts influenced Valentinian Cbristian soteriology and eschatology and the ritual ofthe bridal chamber, a fonn of induced mysticism. And the Valentinian concepts in turn, influenced the early Christian mysticism of Clement of Alexandria. The great importance of Yom Kippur for the early Christian Jews left its traces in Christian Jewish texts throughout frrst century, in the traditions that were later used by Barnabas, Hebrews and Romans {3Q-6S CE), in Paul's letters (50-60 CB) and Hebrews (ca. 50-60 cn?), in Matthew (7080 CE), and in lJohn and Barnabas (ca. 95 CE?). Hebrews combined the apocalyptic conception of a hlgh-priestly redeemer appearing on an eschatological Yom Kippur with the idea of the atoning self-sacrifice. The two were present but distinct in otber Second Temple texts such as 11 QMelchir:edek and 2Maccabees. The depiction of Jesus as high priest was most likely already current before Hebrews, and the high priesthood of the non-Levite Jesus could be justified tbrough the biblical precedent of a high priest named Jesus in Zechariah 3. This passage was already connected to Yom Kippurin Jewisil apoc.alyptic thought (Apocalypse ofAbraham). Conceming the scapegoat, tbe Christian Jewish imaginaire of Yom Kippur differed to some extent from the "mainstream" Jewish imaginaire and developed rather marginal conceptions. The majority of Jewish texts associated the scapegoat with demonie powers and evil - e.g. Philo linked it to evil thoughts and evil people- or even saw it as a sort of Ieader of the evil angels as in lEnoch. 4Ql80 and the Apocalyp.se of Abraham. Thls mainstream conception seems to stand behind Matthew's redaction of Mark's Barabbas episode. For the Christian Jewish conception of the scapegoat as a positive type (Barnabas, Galatians, lPeter?, John?), there are only a few parallels - among them Josephus' narrative of Allanus and the rabbinie statement on Ravya bar Qisi. An influence of Jewish Yom Kippur prayers on Cbristian Jewish texts (Colossians, Philippians, Barnabas as Seder Avodah) is possible, yet the sources are too meager to make a definite determination possible. In a later period, a Jewish sermon that may have been part of the Yom Kippur service, Pseudo-Philo On Jonah. found its way into Christian collections. 1 I assume that most Christian Jews continued to observe the fast ofYom Klppur. Only gradually did they cease to do what they were accustomed to observing. Unlike previous investigators, who often deduced from the use of temple typology in a Christian author bis rejection of the temple service, 1 See the appendix for the possibility tbat some Jewisb. Yom Kippur prayers found their way into the Christian liturgy. General ConcJ~~~tions 331 1 assume such a oonclusion to be only partially valid (definitely so in Barnabas and Hebrews; perhaps also in Matthew and lJohn). Moreover, Christian Jews who rejected the temple service might still keep the fast. We can only be sure a group did not keep the fast ifthey explicitly polemicized against it (Barnabas, Diognet, Aristides). lt is unlikely that Paul's statements in Romans 3:25-26 and Galatians 3-4, which do not differ greatly from Pbito•s spiritualization. imply a cessation of observance of Yom Kippur, sioce Paul praises the temple service and accepts that parts of the Roman community continue their observation of (Jewish) festivals. Even more, Luke and bis community can be shown to have observed the fast, as did the opponents of the writer ofthe Epistle to the Colossian.s and parts of the Roman community. Several factors led to the Christian abandonment of Yom Kippur and the temple ritual as weil as the fast. Historically and liturgically, the destruction of the temple, wbich. ended the temple ritual, weakened the oompulsion for a communal fast with prayers on a single special day. Hegesippus portrays James as permanently observing Yom K.ippur. which may imply transition from 10 Tisbri to any day. Theologically, typological interpretations of Yom Kippur played some role in tbe abolition of Yom Kippur by causing some Christians to perceive the Christian myth and the Jewish ritual as alternatives. Sociologically, Yom Kippur was for Gentile Christians not so much a custom to be continued as a festival to be newly adopted - a process possible only where the new custom could be supported by a Cbristian rationale. Since Christ died in Nisan and not in Tishri, the main meaningful events of earliest Christianity were connected to a different month. It speaks strongly in favor ofthe importance ofYom Kippur in Christian Jewish Ufe that a festival not connected chronologically to the events around Christ's death- events that forged tlle colleetive Cbristian identity- conceptually bad so deep an impact on tbeir most profoundmyth. Yom Kippur continued to influence early Christianity even after the destruction ofthe temple. The imagery of Yom Kippur's temple ritual be· came increasingly attractive. Jesus' high priesthood and his identification with the ko.pporet became topoi in Christian atonement tbeology and in rationales for the Eucbarist. The Christological scapegoat typology, too, was widel.y used to illustrate Cbrist's atonement. While ..bookish" influence of the biblical YOUI.. Kippur may partially explain this increase - Romans 3 and Hebrews Iiad become the "canon within the canon," and many exegetes wrote interpretations of Leviticus - I consider tbe Jewish fast ofthat period tobe also an important factor. Christianity and Judaism oompeted for the "true,. way of atonement - the Cbristian myth versus the Jewish ritual, in much simplified tenns. Origen, Chrysostom and the Canons of 332 General ConclllSions the Apostles provide evidence for the participation of a considerable nurober of Christians in tbe Jewish fast in Syria-Palestine until at least the late fourth c:entury. These Christian theologians perc:eived this attraction a.s threatening tbe distinction ofthe Christian identity from "fleshly" Judaism by challenging the Christian conc:eption of Christ's atoning death 8lld its ritua.Is. Christian intellectual leaders reacted manifoldly to this challenge. Origen's Homilies on Leviticus are the clearest proof of direct interdependence between the polemies against Christian participation in tbe Jewish fast and the development of a Christian alternative. The Homilies expand the Cbristianization of Leviticus 16, starting with the New Testament passages on Yom Kippur but adding further passages. In tbis, Origen is the first to strongly promulgate Hebrews' sacrificial atonement theology. Several other Christian writers polemicize against the fast: Barnabas, Justin, Tertullian, Theodoret ofCyrus, Leo ofRome, Ephrem, Chrysostom and perhaps also Eusebius and Basil. Most of tbese authors seein to be acquainted with the Yom Kippur oftheir period, a fact tbat suggests Christian sages in other regions feit similady threatened by the contemporary Jewish fast and not simply by th& image of the biblical Day of Aionement. The competition between Judaism and Christianity regardillg the "true" means of atonement, is apparent in Jewish texts, too. Jewish theologians responded to the challenge posed by Christian atonement theology by inserting polemies against the Christian priesthood and the cross into Yom K.ippur liturgical poems. Still, these factors cannot explain the inccease in the use of the scapegoat imagery to explain the ra1ionale behind Christ• s death. lt is not a development of canonic traditions, sinc:e references in the New Testamentare strictly implicit and seldom used as prooftexts. Barna· bas proto--typology ceases to be used after Tertullian and Hippolytus probably because of its support for halakbic traditions. And it is not part of the general Christianization of the Old Testament, since it also appears apart from exegeses ofLeviticus (e.g. in Origen, Ambrose, Jerome). In my opinion, the proximity of the rationale of the scapegoat to the rationale of the widely .known pharmakos rituals endowed an increased use of the scapegoat imagery with practical value in a pagan enviromnent perhaps less farniliar with Old Testament stories. Beyond the impact on the theology, at least three Christian festivals celebrated closely to 10 Tishri, emerged in response to the impaet ofYom Kippur on early Christianity: the important Enc:aenia/Exaltation of the Cross in Jerusalem, the equally important Fast of the Seventh Month in Rome and the marginal commemoration day of the annunciation to Zechariah in the East. The emergenc:e of the first two festivals can be explained in part against the background of Christians and Jews c:ompeting for ad- Gtmeral Conclwions 333 herents to their concept of atonement. The Encaenia/Exaltation of the Cross probably emerged as part of the growing impact of Old Testament imagexy following the Christian assumption ·of political and religious authority in the land ofthe Bible- an effect I have called the "Ortsge1:rt of the Holy Land." Conceming the Roman Fast ofthe Seventh Month, direct «positive" influence, perhaps by converted Jews, plausibly explains the extraordinary paratleis between the Christian readings and the reading attested for Yom Kippur. Leo the Oreat and other readings reveal a "negative" reactive impact ofthe contemporary Jewish fast. Finally, the annunciation to 7...echariah is a re-ritualization of a Jewish-Christian legend using texts pertaining to Yom Kippur in its Christian imaginaire (such as Hebrews 9 and Zechariah 3). Its explicit connection to 10 Tisbri in Christian and Muslim calendrical computations demonstrates once again the awareness ofnon-Iews oftbis date in the Jewish calendar. The results of this investigation support the assumption that early Christianity and early Iudaism stood in a competition with each other that caused a mutual influence. ln the center of this competition stood the "dangerous ones in between," Christians who eontinued to observe Yom Kippur and Jews who feit a special affmity to Jesus. They aroused the sc::om of theologians attempting to define the boundaries of the mainstream identity of each side. Histories of Christian liturgy have yet to incorporate these ..dangerous ones in between" into their approach to the Christian festal calendar ofthe first, second, third and even fourth centuries. Ritual and social reality seem to differ considerably from the theological ideals drawn up by the Church Fathers and the rabbis, whose aim was to develop distinct identities. The two religions competed for centuries for the aUegiance of these "dangerous ones in between," proposing mutually ex.clusive inte.rpretations and re-ritualizations of Yom Kippur's temple rituaJ, which in reality was no Ionger performed. Yet the two religions shared not only the common (if different) canon ofthe Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, they also shared the emphasis on sin and atonement and on the psychological need to regularly expiate one's sins andlor propitiate God; and both formulated the ritual and theological answer to this need in terms of Yom Kippur. In this study, I have tried to scrutinize the Christian sources ofthe first centuxy as Jewish documents and to read them with "Jewish glasses." Taking up Marcel Simon's thesis regarding Cbrysostom's reaction to Christia.n participation in Yom K.ippur, I have attempted to draw a broader picture of the influence of Yom Kippur on ear1y Cbristianity after the destruction of the temple. I have also tried to apply Israel Yuval's approach in understanding Christianity and Judaism as two religions emerging under a mutual competitive intluence. Much remains to be donet and many of the 334 General Conclusions conclusions have to be seen as tentative given the wide net cast by this study. I bave tried to draw the main lines of the impact of Yom Kippur on early Cbristianity as a whole; a more differentiating investigation of the patristic sources might perhaps reveal regional differences (amo.ng, for example, Syria-Palestine, Egypt, North Africa and tbe rest of the Latin West), and especially some sort of correlation between the competition posed by and the important influeru:e of tbe local Jewish community. At the start of my investigations, the Syriac sources were the corpus in which I expected to fmd tbe most interesting texts and the strongest signs of competition between Christians and Jews and of Cbrlstian participation in the fast. Yet lacking for the most part a comprehensive index for biblical citations and allusions or the assistance of a digitalized thesawus, I am not sure if the tex:ts I found or others pointed out to me are representative. The corpus of Syriac texts undoubtedly wmants further investigation. A desideratum is an in-depth analysis of the post-biblical history of Yom Kippur, ideally up to the present. A more meaningful comparison of the patristic exegesis of Leviticus 16 and 23 with the rabbinie can he achieved only after a critic~ investigation of all relevant rabbinical sources, which I was unable to pursue comprehensively given the Jimited scope of this project. The Christian impact on the Yom IGppur liturgy revealed in this study is very limited. I assume that tbere are many more statements, omissions (such as the ignoring of Melchizedek in the early Sidrei Avodah) and ritual developments that can be marshaled as reactions to Christian atonement theology and ritual. Furthermore, it would be fascinating to examine the interpretations of the Mass by Amalar, Hildebert and Ivo, who explain the Eucharist wholly in tenns of Yom Kippur, including the scapegoat. lt would be interesting to know if their intensification of the biblical terminology was in some way linked to Jewish traditions. or if it was purely an intra-Christian development. Finally, an investigation of non-Jewish descriptions of Jewish festivals might be another promising project, to reveal not only the level of knowledge but also the anthropological perceptions of the other and, via the other, also ofthe self. Appendix: Yom Kippur and Bastern Anaphoras 1. In a series of studies, Louis Ligier argues that Sidrei A vodah influenced the so-called Clementine liturgy in the Apostolic Constitutions, 1 and tbat the confession prayers 'Attah Yodea • Razel 'Olam and 'AI Het affected Bastern Christian anaphoras.2 Before Ligier, Erwin Goodenough and Wilhelm Bousset also argued for a Jewish origin of the· praefatio of the Clementine liturgy. 3 They, however. saw the root in the Jewish Yoner prayer- an unlikely thesis, as David Fiensy has demonstrated.4 Ligier has the distinction ofbeing the first Christian liturgist to have seriously studied Sidrei Avodah, such as 'Azkir Gevurot 'Eloah and 'Attah Konanta 'Olam beRov Hesed. Ligier's main arguments for the influence of the Sidrei Avodah on the praefalio of the Clementine liturgy are their parallel liturgical locations 1 Apollolic Cimstitlllions 8:12:1-15:11 (SC 336:176-217) are called the Clementine liturgy. 2 1.. Ligier, "Autour du sacrifice eucharistique. Arulphores oricntales et uarnnese juive de Kippur," Nouvslle Revue Thiologique 82 (1960) 40-SS; idem, ..AlUlphores orientales et pri~res juives," Proehe Orient Chritien 13 (1963) 3-20; idem, "C~I~b,.tion divine et anamn~se dans Ia premi~re partle de l'Anaphore ou Cuon de Ia Messe Orientale," Grtgorionum 48 (1967) 22.5-252; idem, Peche d'Adam et piche da monde, vol. 2, pp. 289-307. 1 The praefatio covers 8:12:6-26 (SC 336:180-191). E. Goodeoough, By Light Light (New Haven, 1935), pp. 320-326; W. Bousset, "Eine jlldische Gebetssauuulwtg im siebenten Bw:b der Apostolischen Koostitutionen," Nachrichten von der Guelill,haft der Wissenschaften zu Göttlngen, Philosophilch*ht.norlsche KJusse 1915, pp. 435-489 (here, pp. 449--464) = Religiomwissenscltaftliche Shldien. Auf:rätze zur ReligiOI'Ugeschichte des Hellenistischen Zeitalters (ed. by A:F. Verbeule; SupplementstoNovum Testamentunt SO; Leiden, 1979; pp. 231-285), here, pp. 244-259. Bausset argues for a Jewish baclc:ground only of A.postolic Constilutions 8:12:9-20. See also K. Kohler, "The Ori&{n and Composition of the Highteen Benedictions with a Translation of the COrresponding Esse1.e Prayers ill the Aposto1ic Coostitutions,,. Hebrew Union CQ/lege A.~m~~all (1924) 387-42S•. who, unlik:e Bousset and Goodenongh, reprd$ the p.-ayers in book 8 a.s thoroughly Christianized. "so lhat their ffKIIIer relation to the Benedlerions of the Syuagogue was entirely lost sight of" (p. 4 I 8), and discusses only prayers in book 7 of the Apostolic Canstitutions. 4 D. Fieo.sy. Prayen Alleged to Be Jewi:rh. An baminoiitm of th(l Constitutiones Apostolorum(BrownJudaic Studies 65; Chico [Calif.], 1985), pp. 137-141 and 172-176. 336 Appendix and similarity ofcontent.s Like the Jewishpiyyut, thepraefatio introduces the ritual anamnesis of the sacrifice (the A vodah of the high priest I the Eucharist). And like 1he Jewish piyyut, the praefatio recounts the creation of the world and man, and continues with the history of sinful humani.ty and a saving and punishing God- from Adam's sin, curse and restitution to Joshua, via instances in which God sides with the just (Abel, Seth, Enosh, Enoch, Noah, Lot, Abraham, Melchizedek, Job, Isaac, Jacob, Josef, the exodus, Moses, Aaron) but chastises sinners (Adam, Cain, the deluge, Sodom and the Red Sea). The long and dewlcd account distinguishes this anapbora from all otbers.6 Ficnsy's arguments against Bousset and Goodenougb are compelling with regard to Ligier as well. He points out that many tbeological ideas in the praefatio - providence, creation, man as a rational and cosmopolitan being, knowledge of God - match ideas of special importance to the compiler ofthe Apostolic Constitutions and are therefore unlikely to derive from his Jewish sourcc.7 The spe<:ial emphasis on creation and some ofthe expressions ofthe praefatio correspond to phrases in Justin Ma:rt)T, Theophilus of Antioch and Cyril of Jerusalem conceming Christian worship. as weil as to later anaphoras. 8 Moreove.r, Ligier himselfhowever remarks on a number of dissonances. A number of Old Testament figures - Seth, Enosh, Enoch, Melchizedek., Job, Josef and Joshua ~ do not appear in the Sidrei Avodah.9 Since various lists of Old Testament figures appear in other redactional passages of the Apostolic Constitutions and in early Christian literatute the distant parallel is easier explained ~ incidental. 10 FinaUy, the position of the prayers in the Jewish and Christian liturgies in fact differs - the Seder Avodah follows the Qedushoh (Sanctus), wbereas the praefatio precedes the Sanctus .11 In swn: the parallel to the SttJrej Avodah is imprecise, and the single motifs appear elsewhere in Christian liturgical context. New arguments are needed to shore up tbis thesis. 5 Ligier, "Autollf du sacrifice euc:haristique," p. 41-4S; ide.m. ..CelChration divine et anamn~se dans la premiere pertie de I' Anaphore ou Canon de la Messe Orientale," pp. 245~247; ide.m, Peche d'Adam er peche du monde, 2:289-307. 6 Ligier, "AirtOur du sacrifii:e eucbaristique," p. 48; ide.m, Pechi d'A.tkrm etp~chl du monde, 2:29S-297and 301-302. ; Fieosy, Prayer11 Alleged toBe Jewish, pp. 141 and 174-175 1 Fiensy, Prayers A.Jleged toBe Jewish, pp. 138-140. ' Ligier, Piche d'A.tkrm et peche du monde, 2:291, notes 184 and 18!1 and p. 302.. Ligier regards Melchizedek, Job, Josef and Joshu.a as Christian additions. Seth, Enoch and Henoch appear in Sir 49:14-16. 10 E.g. Aposto/ic Constihltif»>S 2:SS: 1, 5:7:12, 6:12:13, 7:5:5; Hehrews 11; James 5:11 and 5:17; lCiement 1-12: sce Fien.s.y, Prayus A.lleged toBe Jewish, p. 136. 11 Ligier, Nchd d'A.dam et pechL dumo11de, 2:295. Appendix 337 2. According to Ligier's second thesis, some Eastem Cbristian anaphoras were influenced by the confession prayers 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam and 'Al Het, i n that they show the following parallels. 12 First, the specific enumeration of sins according to their gravity (voluntary or involuntary sins; sins com.mitted consciously or out of ignorance, in secret or in public, deliberately or unintentionatly; sins in thought, word or deed;. known or unknown sins); second, lhe invocation of God as knowing hidden and secret matters and thoughts (based on Deuteronomy 29:28); third, a corw respondence in the formula of three verbs for atonement/forgiveness (in Grcek: av~, älpec;, avyx;mpT)GOv; in Syriac: ~• ......._____.., - ) . and tbree substantives for kinds of sins to the Hebrew verbs n?o, 'mZl and ,!l.:l with the nouns xon, l'lV and Yll'!!l; fourth, the position of tbe Christiart prayer following the sacrifice and connected to the remembrance of God. 13 In a book presently in press. Stephane Verbeist greatly ref'mes and transforms Ligier• s proposal.14 That I engage simultaneously wiih Ugier and Verbeist does not imply that their theses are identicaJ. Ligier dates the adoption of the Jewish prayer to the frrst or second centucy. while V erbeist prcfers the third. Also, both Ligier and Verhelst argue that thc Christian and Jewish confession prayers fultill a similar liturgical function at a similar Iiturgical place. They disagree, however, a.'l to which. For Ligier, tbe sacrificial interpretation ofthe Eucharist is foremost. whereas Verbeist emphasizes the Mementos. As I do not have all the necessary material to check these complicated argumentations, l will await the appearance in print of Verhelst's interesting deliberations before engaging with this point. I have chosen to translate here tbe relevant passages of the two most interesting of the many anaphoras they discuss, the Syriac St. James Anaphora and the Syriac Cyril Anaphora. The former reads: 1 The p•ople: Pardon. forgive. 2 The pleat: Pardon(....__....), forgive (,..\..._,a,..), remit ( - ) . God, our lapses (..._:~o...~a.--..o.} 3 those {eommitted] willingly (111' ..._.....) 4 and tbose unwillingly, 5 those c:ommitted knowingly ( ..-~ • •) 12 L. Ligier, "Penitenee et Eucharistie en Orient Th~ologie sur une interfuenee de prieres et de rites," Orientalia Christiana Periodica 29 (1963) 5-78, esp. pp. 41Hi2. 13 Ligier, "Ptnitenee et Eucharistie en Orient,... pp. S0-56. 14 S. Verbelst. "Une fonnule dU Y6m K.ippour." In: idem, LeJ traditions judeo-chrltiemtu daM Ia Liturgie de saint Jacqu.ea. (forthcomi.Dg). I would lite to express my deepest gratitude to St6phaoe Verhelst for scnding me this part of his book prior to its publication and for discu.ssing it. with me via e-mail. Appendix 338 6 and those IUiknowingl.y, 7 those committed in word, in deed and in thoug.bt, 8 those coucealed (, ... •) 9 and those revealed (.....----J.o.,..), 10 lhose foreknown to lhe erriD,g, 11 those your holy oame knows. 15 The Syriac Cyril Anaphora reads: 1 The people: Pardon, forgive, 2 The priest: Knower ofthe hidden [things],judge ofthe thoughts. 3 Let pass and erase all our sins, 4 [lhose] known S and those not known, 6 [those] committed willi.ogly 7 and those unwillingly, 8 [those) hidden 9 and revealed 10 (!hose] ofnow and [thDse] ofprevious time and [those] ofthe future .•. 16 Unfortunately, Ligier was not yet able to use Daniel Goldschmidt•s introduction to and edition of Seder Rav 'Amram Ga 'on. Some of Ligier's keen philological perceptions are thcrefore based on inoonect textual assump~ tions. Moreover, even if one uses Goldscbmidt a.s Verhelst does, thc text of the prayers in Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on is too coiTUpt tobe useful for reconstructions. The oldest extant reliable version of 'Allah Yodea' RMei 'Olam I 'Al Het is therefore to bc found in Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga'on: 1 You know die secrct.s ofthe uoiverse ('Allah Yod11a' RO%ei '0/am), 2 and the biddenmost mysteries of all the living. 3 You probe oll imrermo.st chombers1' 4 and see kidneys and heart1 S Absolutely nothing is hidden from you and nothing i:; con~aled from your eyes. 6 May it be your will, GOD, our Qod 7 that you pardon 1I.S (7mbn) for all our iniquities (u•mmll) 8 aod you atone ("l!l:ln) for us for all our willtül sins (1l'llll19)." 9 For sins (' A.l Het) that we sloned before you carelessly (n:uvn) * " My translation of the Syriac lext in 0. Heiming, "Anaphora Sancti lacobi, fratris Domini." in lf.naphorae Syl'iacae W3 (Rotne, 1953; pp. 107-177), p. 168. Cf. A. Rllckt'.l", Die syrischen Jalcobosanaphora nach der Rezension du Ja 'qob(li} von Edessa. Mit dem griechischen PMalleltut heratugflgebtm (Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen 4; Münster in Westfalen, 1923), p. 44. 16 My translation of thc Syriac text in A. Raes, "Anaphora Cyrilli Hierosolym.itmi vel Alexandtini," in A.naphorae Syriacae V3 (Rome, 1944; pp. 323-363), p. 356. 11 Prov 20:27. 11 Jer 11 :20. 19 See y Yoma 8:9, 4Sc, for the text see above. p. 52, note 197. 339 10 and for sins that we sinoed before you willfillly (Jnrl), 11 for sins that we sinned before you secretly (,no:t) 12 and fur sins that we sinoed before you openly (..,;l:l), 13 and for sins fur which we are obligated tobring an" 'Aseh-saerifice,.. 14 and for sins for whkh we are obligat.cd tobring a ..Lo To 'aseh sheNataq le'A.feh-sacrifiee," 1:S and for sins for which we incur death at the hauds ofthe Heaven, 16 and for sins for wblch we incur excision, 17 and for sins for which we incur forty lashes by tbe court, 18 and for s.ins for wbich we incur beheading, sl'rlulglillg. buruing and 4!toning, 19 for those that are kDO\W to us 20 and for tbose that are not known to us, 21 those that are revealed to us and tb.ose that arenot lcnown to us are already knowntoyou 22 as il is said. the com:IIQlttd [things] orefor GOD ond the reveale.d [thirtgsj are m~rs and ow childrm's forever, thot we may folfdl oll the wordr ofth,., Torah.m 23 Sin.ee you are the forgiver of Israel and the pardoner ofthe tribes of Yeshiii'Uil in every generation, and apart from you we have no king who pardons and forgives.21 Ligier and Verhelst point out tbat the Christian confession prayers use three different verbs expressing the idea of forgiveness corresponding to three kinds of sins, and they see 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam as in Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on as model for this expression.22 Verhelst pointsalso to the confession prayer at the end of Yoma in the Palestiman Talmud and to · tbe uvelchen additions to the Amidah. In Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on, the oielest and best text of 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam, however, only two verbs (7mt~l1, 1!l::m) and two substantjves (u•num1, 1l'l7W!l) appear in a single sentence (lines 7-8). In addition, the oldest witness to the confession in the Palestinian Talmud, the Leiden manuscript, also reports only two verbs and two substantives. A later scribe added a third verb and substantive to the Talmudic passage as well as to the 'Attah Yodea' /Wzei 'Olam in Seder lW~ 'Amram Ga'on and the modem versions.13 The threefold confession prayer is app&Ientlya later adaption of Leviticus 16. Equally, the uvekhen additions to the Amidah, which mention alfthree verbs, are absent from Deut 29:28. My translation ofthe text given in ed. Davidsoo, Asafand Yoel, pp. 2S9-260, wed on the translation of the modem Asbkenazy rite by Scherman, The Complete ArtSerail Mochzor Yom Kippur Nusach Ashunaz, pp. 19-25. ll While the tM:e verb.'l in the Christian texts do not include an exact eqnivalent for ,!I:J, Verbeist refers to a Georgian Version of the pn.yer that u:ses a plausible equivalent of :Jjj 21 1~>:1. :n mYoma 3:8; yYoma 8:9, 4:Sc, cf. the discussion in bYoma 36b and Leviticus Rabbah 3:3. These passages have been discussc:d by Verhclst. 340 Sede.r Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on and fcom almost all Palestiman witnesses to tbe Yom Kippur liturgy. 24 It seems more conceivable to methat the Christian authors, too, developed the tbree-partite formula inspired by the biblical textrather than by Jewish liturgy. A much stronger argument is that th.e Jewish and Cbristian confcssion prayers lil>t particular kinds of sins: voluntary or involuntary sins, sins committed secretly or openly. and hidden or revealed sins. Wbile Ligier and Verbeist use Seder Rall 'Amram Ga'on, I will list the parallels aceording to Sede.r Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on, whose prayer -texts are more trustworthy: Syriac St. 'A.ttoh Yodeo' Razei '0/um ('Al Het) in Seder Cyrii-Anaphora Syriac James-Anaphara Rav Sa 'adkl Ga 'on parallel types ofs!ns varying types ofsins 3 williDgly (... 4 unwülingly s knowingly (<'t'~< 6 8 9 7a .,....,..) ......) unkn;)wing.ly concealed (, _.1_, s} revealed f! in word, 7b indeed 1c and in thought, 10 foreknown to the erriDg. II your holy narne lol.ows -·> l 0 willi\dly (lno) 9 carclessJy (llllvr.l) 19 known to us 20 not known to us II secretly ("Ulo:l) 12 opeoly('l'Jl:l.) 13 for which we are obJigated to bring an "' '.A.seh-sacrifice" 14 for which we IR obligared to bring a ...Lo Ta 'a~eh 6 willingly 7 unwilliDgly 4 known S notknown 8 hldden 9 revealed 10 ofnow 11 andof previou.s time 12andofthe future 1hdlataq le '.4seh· saaif~ee" lS for whleh we incur death at the hands of the Heaven 16 for whleh we incur excision 17 for whlch we inc:ur forty lashes by the Court 18 for which we incur beheading, slrallgling. burning and stoninlt As the table shows, the sins of types 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 in the Syriac James· Anaphora match the sins 10, 9, 19, 20, 1l, 12 in 'Attah Yodea • Raze; '0/am aceording toSeder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on. Although the sins do no1 appear in the same exact order and each prayer lists a number of sins not 24 See above, p. SO, note 187. .tf.pptmdix 341 given in the other prayers, this can be easily explained. Conceming the variation in content, Christians would neitb.er feel a need for the two kinds of sins connected to sacrifices nor to the types of sins related to death penalties, given in Seder Rav Sa 'adia Ga 'on. The more generat categories of sins in the two Cbristian anaphoras could therefore be explained as substitutes for the specific h.alakhlc Jewish types. Regarding the variation in sequence, one may raise the argument that thc Cbristian anaphoras vary among themsclves and may have attached little signiticance to the order. Giving a Iist of possible sins in a confession prayer is not an uncommon phenomenon. Those wishing to confess want to be sure ~o cover all eventu~ alities. However, the parallels are rather close and 1he differences can be justified. Finally, the Cyril Anaphora and 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olam invoke God as knowing secret matters and thoughts. Tbis idea is based on Deuteronomy 29:28, a verse quoted at tbe end of 'Attah Yodea' Razei 'Oklm (line 22) and could, therefore, again speak for a parallel adaption of biblical traditions.25 God's omniscience, bis knowledge of coneealed matten, is mentioned in many prayers. 26 Ligier emphasizes, however, tbat the combination of this idea with a confession prayer appears only in 'A«ah Yodea' Razei 'Olam and the Cbristian prayers. The present investigation has shown that we find it also in Qumran, Pseudo-Philo and inscriptions on steles in Delos, in texts very likely connected with Yom Kippur.27 While the biblical model may have influenced the Cbristian and Jewish prayers independently, the cwnulative evidence supports a direct link. In sum, the similarity between the Jewish and Christi.an prayers is more likely rooted in a genealogical than in a phenomenological_ relation. A close reading ofthe pbilological arguments ofLigier and Verbeist reveals that the parallels may point beyond the common use ofbiblicallanguage to direct liturgical connections- i.e. adoptionrather than biblical influence. 28 Whether or oot Ligier's and Verhelst's theses are correct, they are among the best examples of the profound impact of Yom Kippur on eady Christianity. Ifwe remain skeptical, some Christian liturgies ofthe Eucharist were formulated according to the biblical model of Yom Kippur. Not only did the celebrant of the Eucharist become the high priest and the v See above, p. 39, note 130. 26 See for example the rabbinie prayers 7, 1.5, 16, 27, 31,34 and 35 in the Iist given in HeinemaruJ, Prayer l'n the Period afthe Tanna'im and the Ämora'im, pp. !31-137; and the prayer in Arall'laicLevi (4Q2l3a J i 10-11) I additions to the Testament ofLevi2:3 in manuscript Mount Athos. rt See above, p. 39 and p. 48, note 172. 21 On the types Gfinßuenee, see above, pp. 4-6. 342 Appendix church building the temple, but Christian confession prayer also became the confession prayer in thetemple on Yom Kippur.29 Ifwe accept Ligier•s and Verhelst's observation that the paratleis are too close to derive solely from biblical influence, some liturgies ofthe Eucharist used contemporary Jewish liturgies of Yom Kippw-3° as source - via Jewish converts to Christianity,:H Jewish Cbristians32 or God-fearers.33 K.eeping in mind the late Jewish influence on the readin.gs ofthe Fast ofthe Seventh Month, the prayer may have crossed the lines even after tbe thlrd century. Last but not least. I would like to remind that we shou.ld not deny a priori the possibility that the influence may have been mutual. The parallel Iist of six sins is not attested in Second Temple sources and may equally have its origin in Christian congregations, which in turn influenced '.Attah Yodea' Razei 'Olom. Verhelses reappraisal and reviewoftbis part of Ligier's theses demonstrates amply that further discoveries may be made in the study of the relation of early Christian Anaphoras to Jewish liturgy. 3. Along similar lines, one could argue tbat another prayer from the eighth book ofthe Apostolic Constiturions, included among those defined as Jewish by Bousset and Goodenough".34 may have bee:n part of a Yom KJppur prayer (the phrases in italic:s have been explained by Goodenough as Cbristian interpolations): 0 almighty eternal Ood, Iord ofthe universe creator and chlef of everything, who showed forth man as a an omarnent of tbe cosmos (~toOJIOV ltÖOJIOV) through Christ, a.nd gave an implanted and written law to him, so tbat be migbt live lawfully as a rational being. and gave to the sinner your own goodness, as a pledge to Iead him to repentance; look upon those who bave bent the neck of their soul and body to you, hecause He does not desire the death ofthe sinoer, but his repentanc:e, so that he might t\lm back from his way of evil, and live! 35 He accepted the repentance of the Ninevita; he desires all men to_be saved, an.d to eome to a knowledge oftruth; On this phenomenon oftemplizati.on, see above, pp. 273-277. Or, as Verbeist suggests, tbe confession on Mondays and Thundays. ~~ Ligi.er "P6nitence et Eutbaristie en Orieat." p. 57. 32 Verhelst. 33 A possibility tbat bas alway.s to be taken into coll.Sideration. M Bousset, "Eine jlldisclle OebeiSSammlung im siebenten Buch der Apostolisc:heo Konstitutionen." p. 278; Goodenougb, By Light Light, pp. 331-332. 35 Ezek. 33:11. 2!1 JO Appenaa 343 he Several elements are reminiscent ofYom Kipput: God's kingsbip, creation and compassion, the giving of the law, tbe power of repentanee, the Ninevites and l~cs~&:;. The quotation from Ezekiel33:11 appe81S also in tbe confession prayer of the Ne'ilah in Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on.38 Yet nothing points specifically to Jewish authorsbip. and tbe prayer may be a Christian plea for divine mercy. 39 o 4. Finally, almost a eentury ago, Hemi Leclerq argued for an influence of Yom Kippur piyyutim on the ordo commendationis animae. He compared the list of Old Testament .figures in the ordo commendationis animae whose appeals in dangerous situations were heeded by God witb similar lists in Mishnah Ta'anit and various medievalpiyyutim for public fasts. 40 The lists, however, vary greatly; many of the characters in the ordo do not appear in the piyyu.tim,41 and vice versa.41 I would rather argue that a common psychological urge causes the supplicant to call upon previous instances of divine intervention.43 3' Cf. Luke 15:11-32. Apostolle Con•titutions 8:9:3-9 (SC 336:164-··165). I bave adapted the traDslation of D.R. Damell and D.A. Fiensy, "Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers," in: J. Cbvlesworth (ed.), The. Old Testament Pse11depigrapha 2 (New Yorlc:, 1985; pp. 671-698}, here p. 689 37 (number 11). l:t See Seder RavSa'odia Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Yoeland Asaf, p. 262). 39 See Fiensy, Prayers Alleged to be Jewish, pp. 14~147; Damell and Fiensy, "Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers," p. 689, :~~.ote llb. 40 mTa'a" 2: l. H. Lecler-q, ..Defunts;'' Dictionnaire d'lUcheologie chretie1111e et de liNrgie 4 (1921) 427-456, he~ p. 438. I would lik.e to thank Margot Stroumsa-Uzan for · drawing my attention to this thesis. ' 1 Enocb, Iob, tot, Susanna and, of course, the Cbristian figures Peter, Paul and Thscla. 42 Aaron, Pinhas. Joshua, Elisha, He:zekiah and Mordecbai. 43 Interesting also is the addition of tbe equivalent for atonement (J!IILD1Jilll9 to some Annenian anaphoras (Sahak, Gregory of Naziaoz, Cyril of Alexandria. Athl!DIIsius). I would lik.e to thank Daniel Findikyan for com:sponding on thi1 point, which awairs further elaboration. Bibliography 1. Primary Sources 1.1 Bible Bib/ia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Editic frmditu.r renm>ata. (Edited by K. Eiliger and W. Rudolpb; Stuttgart, 1967n7). Biblia Sacra ir.atavulgatam versionem. (Ed. by R. Weber; 2 vols; Stuttgart, '1983). The Holy Bible containing the Old and New T~taments wilh the Apacryphal I DeuterOC4nonical Books. New Revised Standard Version. (New Yor.k, 1989). [NRSV]. Le Levitique. Traduction du te')lte grec de la Septante, introduelion eJ not.es (Edif.ed by D. Pralon, and P. Harl6; La Bible d' Alexandrie 3; Paris, 1938). Novum Testamentum Graece. (Edited by E. Nestl~ Er. Nestle, K. and B. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C.M. Martini and B.M. Metzger; Stuttgart, 27 1993). The Old Testament in Syriac. .According to the Peshirta Yer.tion. (Ed. by the Peshitta rmtitute Leiden; 4 vol:s; Leiden, 1972-1998). Samaritan Pentateucll: See below under "Targumim."' Septuaginta. Id est Yetus TestameJJtum graece ir.ata LXX interpres. (Edited by A. bhlfs; 2 vols; Stuttgart, 'I 96.5). Septuaginta Yetus Te:;tamtmtum GraeC'IIm Auetoritale Societatu Litterarum Gotringensis {(}(jftinger Sept11agintaj. Vol. 13: J. Ziegler. Duodecim prcphetae. (GOttingen, 1943). Vol.l:2; 1. W. Wevers. and U. Quast. Leviticus. (Gottinge.n, 1986). Synopsis Qwattuor Evangeliorum. Locis parallelis evange/iorum apocryphorum et patrum adhibitis. (Edited by K. and B. Aland; Stuttgart, 1' 1985). 1.2 Jewish Literattue 1.2.1 General Collections Discoveries in the Judean Desen. (Oxford, 1955ft). Garda-Martlllez, F. The Dead Sea Scrolis Translated. The Qr.tmran Tuts ln English. (Leiden, 1995). Garcia-Martinez, F. and E.l.C. Tigcbelaar. The Dead Se<J Scrolls Study Edition. (2 vols; Leiden and Grand Rapids {Mich.], 1997, 1998). Chade.s. R.H. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the 0/d Testament in English. (2 vols; Oxford, 19 13). · Charlesworth, J.H. The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha. (2 vols; Garden City (N.Y.], 1983-198:5). IOdische Schriften aus hellenistischer und römischer Zeit. (Edited by W.G. Kümmel and H. Lichtenberger; Gnterslob, I 973ft). Rupon.aa Project, version 8.0. ofBar-nan University, 2000. 346 Bfbllograph}' 1.2.2 According to Titles JEnocll Black, M. TluJ Book of Enoch or I EltOCh. A New Englisll Edition wilh Commentary and Texlllal Notes. (Studia in vetcris testamenti pseudepigtapha 7; Leiden, 1985). [English translati.on). Clwles, R.H. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch. Translatedfrom the Editor 's Ethiopic Tert. (Jerusalem, 1973=1912). [&glisb translation]. Knibb, M. The Ethioplc Boot of Enoch. A New Edition in the Light of the Am.r.~~tic I>ead Sea Fragments. Vol. 1: Text and Apparatus. Vol. 2: Jntroduction. Translation and Connnentary {in consultation with Edwanl Ullendorff}. (2 vois; Oxford, 1978). [F.nglish traoslation ofthe Eddopic]. lQM: seeWar Sero//. lQPesher Habflkkuk Buri:ows, M. (with the assistaoce of J.C. Trever and W.H. Brownlee). The Dead Sea Scrolls of SI. Mark'l Mona!Rtery. YolumtS 1. The Jsaioh Manuser/pt alfd th<J. Habolclcuk Commentory. (New Haven, 1950). lQS Rule of the Comnunflty Licht, I. The Rute Scroll. A Scrollftom the Wilderness of.ludaea-JQS, JQ,Sa, JQSb. Text, Introdltction und Commen/41ry. (Jerusalem. 1957). 1Qs• .Bale of JJiasi11p Milik, J.T. In: idem and D. Barthelemy. Qumran Ca!le J. (Discoveries in the Judaeq Desert I; Oxfonl, 1955; pp. llt-130). lQ Wort& of Mosu (Itp2) Milik, J.T. ln: idem and D. Barthelemy. Q10111'an Cave I. (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 1; Oxford, 1955; pp. 91-97). 2JJor11ch Dedering, S. Apocalypse of Baruch. (The Old Testament in Syriac acconling to the Peshitta Version 4:3; Leiden, 1973). [Syriac]. Klijn, A.F. 2 (Syrlac llpocalypse of) BtJJ"Uch. In: J.H. Ch&rle$worth {ed.). The Old TeslamenJ Pseudepigrapha. VoL 1. {Ganten City [N.Y.], 1983; pp. 615-652). (English translation]. 2/!lltN!If Andersen, F.l. "2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch." ln: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testament Pseutkpigrapha. (New York, 1983; vol. 1, pp. 91-213). [English translationJ. 4MIICCt11Jees Anderson, H. "4 Mat(;abees." In: I.H. Charle$worth (ed.), The Old Testamem Pseu.dfi{Jigrapha. (New York, 1985; vol. 2, pp. 531-564}. [Englisb. translalion]. 4Ql80/J81 Allegro,J.M. Qumran Cawt 4.1. (4Q158-4Q/86). (Discoveries in. tbe Judaean Desert of Jordan 5; Ox.ford, 1969; pp. 77-79). 4Qb-ch....., (4Q10l,l0l, 104) Milik, J.T. The Boolu of Enoch. Aramaie Fragments of Qumr4n Cave 4 {with th~ collaboratton ofMatthew Black). (Oxford, 1976), pp. 139-217, 340-353. 4QEnoch Gl1mt!l' (4Q103) Milik, J.T. The Bookl of Enoch. Aramaie Fragm•nts af Qumrdn Cave 4 {widr the collabaTatio11 o[Matthew Black}. (Oxford, 1976), pp. 310-317. Bibliagraphy 4QPuherl~•iah 347 (4fll61) Allegro. I.M. Qwnran Cavei/.L (4Ql58-4QJ86). (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan S; Oxford, 1969; pp. 11-lS). 4QP~slter on Psalms (4fl171) Allegro, J.M. Qu•r-r.m Cave 4.L (4QJ58-4Ql86). (Discoveriel! jn tbe Judaean Desert of JordanS; Oxford, 1969; pp. 42-51}. 4QTGI'glllll oflnitiCIIS (4QJ56) Mililc, J.T. In! ide&n and R.. de Vaux. Qamtran grotle 1/.IL (4QJ18-157). (Dlseoveries in the Judaean Desert of IordUI 6; Oxford, 1977; pp. S6-89). 4QV!sionsof Amra11l (4QS44) Mililc, J.T...Mil.ki-sedeq et Milki~rda' dans les anciens ~crits jllif:s el cbr~ens ... Journal for the Srvdy ofJ11dai:sm in the Persion, Helleni:stic and Roman Period 23 (1972) 9~-144. 5Q13 Kister, M. "5Ql3 and tbe 'Avodah: A Historical Survey and lts Significance." Dead Sea Dtscoveriu 8 (2001) 136--148. J.T. Milik. Iu: ldem, M. Baillet and R. de Vaux. Le.s ,Petites Grotles' de Qumrärr. Exploration de lafolaise. Les grouu 1Q. 3Q, .SQ, 6Q, 7Q a JOQ. Le rtn~le011 de cuillre. (Discoveries in the Judacan Desert of Jordau3; Oxford, 1962; pp. 181-183). llQMelcllludek (tlQ13) Gan:ia-Martinez, F., E.1.C. Tigc:helaar and A.S. Van Der Woude. "ll QMelchizedek."ln: idtuu (eds.), QJtmran Cave 11. Yol. 11: 11Q2-J8, 11Q20-3J. (Discoveriel! in the Judaean Deaut 23; Oxford, 1998; pp. 221-241). llQTemple Scroll {11 Ql !J-10) Yadin, Y. The Temple Scroll. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1983). Asc~U~Sib11 Dflsalilh Knibb, M. Ma,.tyrdom and Ascension of lsaiah. In: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.). The 0/d Testament Pse11depigrapha. Vol. 2. (Garden City [N.Y.], 1985; A>· 14~176). [E.uglish translation]. Apoalypu ofA.lmllr11m Philonenko-Sayar, B. and M. Philonenko. "L'Apocalypse d'Abralwn.lntroduction, texte slave, tradu<:tion et notes." SemiJica 31 {1981} 7-ll7. [Siavonic wilh l''rench translation]. --.Die A.poca/yp:le A.brahoma. (JUdisehe Schriften aus hellenistiscber Ulld ~misch~r Zeit 5:5; Giltersloh, 1982).[German translation). Rubinkiewicz, R. L'Apocalypse d'Abraham en viewc slaw~. lntroduction, terttJ critique, tradrtclion el commerrtaire. (Zrodla i mooografie 129; Lublin, 1987). [Siavonic wilh Fnnch trau.slation). ----. ''The Apocalypso of Abraham." In: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.). The Old Testament PafiUdepigrapha. Yol. 1. (New Yorlc, 1983; pp. 6Sl-705). [English trlliSlation). Apat.fllypse of Eli}« 348 Bibliograph)' Att~mait: Levl (4Ql13, 4Q214) Stone, M.E. aad J.C. Greenfield. In: idem arul G. Brooke, .J. Collins, T. Elgvin. P. Flint, E. Larsou, C. Newsom, E. Puech, L. Schiffman, J. Trebolle Barrera (in c:onsultation with J. VanderiCam). Qumtan Cave 4. XV/1: Pal'abiblical Tats, Part 3. (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 22; Oxford, 1996; pp. 1-72). 'Aromem le'EI Yahalom, J. Priestly Polestinian Poctry. A ND17ative Litwrgy for the Day 4 Atonemel'lt. {Jerusalem, 1996). {Hebrew]. Atb'kenazy Mabzor Gokbchmidt. D. M(lhzar fol' the Days of Awe. According to the .r4s1Jcenmy Rite of All Cwtoms ["cJ"ding thc Westem Asllkenary Rite, the Poli1h Rite, and the Anaent French Rite. Volvme 2: Yom Kippur. (Jerusalem, 1970). [Hebrew/Aramaic]. Schenuan, N.N. The Comp/Bte ArtScl'oll Machzar Yom Kipptlr Nusach ..Uhkenaz. A new Irans/ation and anthologi%ed commentary. (ArtScroll Mesorah Series New York, )986). [Eoglish translation ofthe modern rite}. 'AIIlpper Gedolot: see Yosse ben Yosse. 'Attalr Ko11otrta •o1anr beRov Hesed: see Yosse ben Yosse. 'Aittlh Yuett' Raw.p'Olanr: see Seder RtN Sa'adia Ga 'on. 'ANl/'Anahnuj Hattmu: see Sedu Rav Sa'adia Ga 'on. 'Az be'Ehr Kol Yahalom, J. Priestly Palestinian Poetry. A Narrative Llturgy for the Day ofAton4!ment. (Jerusalem, 1996}. [Hebrew]. ~ · 'tkklt Gev11.rot 'Elo11h: see Yosse ben Yosse. Ba.bylonlan TaltDild: see Talmud, Babylonian. Contieies Rdbb•lr Midrash Rabba haMev11'ar. Shil' haShirim Rabbah. (Edited by the ''Makhon haMidRsh baMevu'ar"; 2 vols; Jerusalem, 1994, 1995). Simon, Mauric:e. Midra~h Rabbolr. Song ofSongs. (London, 1939). [English translation). DullfflCIIS ~11ment Qimron, E. In: M. Broshi (ed.). The Damascus Document Reconsidered. (Jelll$alem, 1992). . Dellteronomy R11bbd Liebermaun, S. Midra~h Debarim Rabbah. Edited for IIre First Time from the Oxford ms. No. U7 with an lntroduction and Notu. (Jerusalem, ,1974). Mirkin, A. Midrash Rabbah. Mephurash Pirvrh Mada 'i Hadash beTsiruf '"Ayln Had08hoh"- Mor'eh MeqOinotlefcJrol Ma'amorei haMidrash. Devarim Rabbah. (Tel Avi.v, 1967). Rabbinowitz, I. Midrash RahbalL Deuteronomy. (London, 1939). [English traoslatiO!l]. 'Ein Lt1n11 XolJa Gadol: see Yosse ben Yosse. F.xod11s .Rt1bba1l Lehrmann, S.M. Midrash Robboh. Lodre;. (London, 1939). (English translat!onJ. Middn, A. Mtdrasclr Rabbah. Mephurash P/111$/r Mado 'i Hadash beTsiruf "'Ayin Hadasht:zh"- Mar'8h Meqomot lekhol Ma'omarei haMidl'ah. Shemot Robbah. (Tel Aviv, 1967). · Festival Pr11prs (IQ34, 4Q588, 519 a11d 507) Baillet, M. Qllmr4n Grotte 4.111. (4Q482-4Q520). (Discoveries in tbe: Judaean Desen i; Oxford, 1982; pp. 168-170 and. 175-215). Milik. J.T. "(Q]34. ReclMiil de pri~ IiturgiC)ues." In: idem and D. Barth6lemy (eds.), Qumran Cave 1. (Discoveries in 1he Iudaeau Desert l; Ox.ford, 19SS; p. 136). Bibliograplry 349 - - - . "[Q] 34bis. Recueil de pri~rea liturgiques." in, idem and D. Barthi!lemy (eds.), Qu111ran Ca11e J. (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 1; Oxford, 1955; pp. 152155). GeiU!Str llabbtlh Freedman, H. Mi41'Mh Rabboh. Genu/s. (2 vols; Londoa, 1939). [Bnglish lrwlslation]. Theodor, J. and C. Albeclc. &reschi1 Rr.lbbo mit kritischem AppQI'tlt 11nd Kommentar. (Reprint of Jerosalem 196S, wbich is a oorre(;ted reprint of Berlio 1912-1936; 3 vols; JeniSalem, 2 1996). Ho 'Omrim IIK.Irlloy Shot~•: see Yannai. Heldialot Literature Schäfer, P., M. Schlllter-, and H.G. von Mutius. Synopse zur Rekhalot-Lite.rar'Mr. (Ttt'bingen, 1981). [Hebrew). Helknlftk SjlllllfOftll Prt~.;pen For the Greek, see Ap(molic CoJUJitutioru under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Damell, D.R. aod D.A. Fiensy. "Hr:llenistic Synagogal Prayers.'' In: J.H. Charlellworth (ed.), The Old Te#Difli!l'll Pseudeplgropha, Yol. 2. (New York, 1985; pp. 671698). (Bnglish translation]. Joaephu Michel, 0. and 0. Baucmfeind. Jostphws, Flm>ius, De be/loJudaico. Der jtid&che Krieg. Griechisch rmd d1111~ch. Rrsg. und mit einer Einleirllng sowie mit Anmerkungen. (3 vols; Muaich and Darmstadt, 1962-19611). [Greek teltt and German translalion]. Niese, B. Fla11ii Iosephi Opera. (7 vols; Berlin, 1887-1895 [repr. 19SS]). [Greek]. Thackaray, H., R. Marcus, A. Wikgrea, and L. Feldman (tzaasl.). Josephws (in Nine YoJ11111es) with an Engll:h Translation. (LCL; Cambridge [Mass.], 1926ff). [Greek text ao.d English translation}. Jsbile~ Vanderl Le•itiCU$ JlJJbblllr Israelstam, J. aad J.J. Slotki. Midrarh Rr.lbbah. Leviticlls. (London, 1939). [English lralllilation]. Margulies, M. Midr~h Wayyikra Rabbah. ..4 Critical Edition Basedon MallliiJcriptl and Gennah Fragments with Yarirm# and Notes. (2 vols; Jerusalem and New York, '1993).{Hebrew). Liber Antiqlliltl.tllm Biblk•ntm Harrington, D.l., J. Cazeaux, C. Perrot and P.·M. Bogaert. Psersdo-Philon. Les Antiq11ites Bib/iques. (2 vols; SC 229, 230; Paris, 1976). Harrington, 0.1. ·~Pseudo-Philo." ln: I. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament Pse~~depigrapha. Yo/.1. (New York, 1985; pp. 297-377). {English too~slation]. Mabzor: see Asllinazy Mahzor, Seder RaY 'Jimram Ga'on and Sedu Rat> Sa'odia Ga'on. Mekillll de Rllbbi Yülrmt~.el Lauterbach, J. Mi!lcilta de-Rabbi lshmael. A Critica/ Edllion on tlle Basis fJ[ the Manwscripts and Early EdttiQm with an English Trtms/ation, lnrroduclion and Notes. (3 vols; Philadelpbia 1933, 1933, 1935; repr. 1976). Horovitz, H.S. and 1. hbin M11chilto d'Rabbi Jsmael cum variis lecticmibus et adnolatit»tibws. (Jerusalmn "1997). {Hebrew]. Blbliography 350 Mi5bnaiJ Albeck, Ch. Shisha Sidrei Mishnah. (6 wls; Jerusalem 1952-SS). [Hebrew]. Danby, H. The MisJrnah Tran:rloted from tlre Hebrew with lrttrod11ction and Brief Lpla~U~tory Notes. (Oxford 1933, repr. 1964). Meinhold, J. Joma (Der Yer:rolmvngstog). Tat, Obersetzrmg und Erlt:liirung. (Giessen, 1913). [Hebrew text and Gennan translation]. Rosenberg, Y. "Mishna 'Kipurim' (Yorna) - A Critical Edition with Introduction. Volume 1: Iotroduction. Volume 2: Edition." (ln Hebrew wiQI. English summary) {2 vols; Ph.D. disserution, The Heblew Univcrsity of Jerusalem, 1995). Strack, ll. Jomo. Der Mi1chnairaklat 'Versi;hnungstog'. (Schriften des ln$titutum Jndaicum inBedin 3; Leipzig, 3 1904). [Hebrewtext and Gennan transl.Uon]. Palestioiao Talmud: see Talmud, Palestiniao. Puiqta Rllt~Kllhllnll Mandelbaum, B. Pesilao de Rav KIJhanD Accordtng to an Oxford Man'!lscrip. With Vorfants From Ail Knmm1111tary anti Introduclion. (2 vols; New York, 2 1987). [Hebrew] Braude, W.G. and I. Kapstein. Puikta de-Rab Kalla-na. (Pbiladelphia, l97S). (English translatioo}. Pe:sitta IUbbatl Friedmaan, M. Pailcta Rabbati, Midrasch filr Ihn Fest-Cyc/us rmd die avsgezeichMten Sabbathe. Kritisch bearbeitet, c~mentirt, dUTch neue handschriftliche 1/aggadas vermehrt. mit Bibel-11nd Persomm-lndicea v~seherr. {Vienna, 1880). (Hebrew]. U!mer, R. Pui<]ta Rabbati. .4 Sy11optic Editiofl ofPaiqta Robbati Based 11pon All Lrant Manuscripts and the Editio Princeps. Vo/ume I {eh. 1-24). (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 155; Atlanta [Ga.] 1997). [Hebrew). Philo Cohn, L. and P. We.ndlaud. l'hiiMis Alo:andrllai opera quae supei'Simt. (J vols; .Berlin, 1986-1930). (GIW.k]. Cohn, L., I. Heinemann, M. Adler, and W. Theiler. Die Werks Philos von A/u:ondria in thutscher Vber~etzung. (7 vols; Breslau and Berlin, 1909-1964). [German translation). · Colson, F.H., G.H. Whitaker, and R. Marcus. Philo. With an English Translation. (12 vols; Cambridge [Mass.], 1929ff). [Greek text and English tran.slatio~]. Daniel, S. De specialibus legib11S I et U. (Les Qluvres de Phiion d'Aiexandrie ·24; Paris, 1975). Pitqe Rt~bbl EIW.er Friedla.nder, G. Pirke. de Rabbi ElitUer. (London 1916, repr. New York 1981). [English translation]. Higger, M. "Pirqe Rabbi Elie:zer." Horev 8 (1944) 82-119; 9 (1946-1947) 94-166; 10 (1948) 185~94. (Hebrew]. Pl,1,111ti• aad Prayers: see Ashkenazy Mahzor, Seder Rav 'A.mram Ga 'on, Seder Rav Sa 'adia Go'on, Samaritttn Lilurgy, Yaunai and Yosse beo Yosse. Psalms of So/~IIN)n Wright, R.B ...Psalms of Solomon." In: J.H. Cbarlesworth (ed.), The Old Tutament PJeudepigropha. Yol. 2. (New Yoik, 1985; pp. 639-670). [English translation}. Psalm$ R11bbtlh Braude, W. The Midrash on Psa/ms. (2 vols; New Haven, 1959). [English translation]. Buber, S. Midrash Tehillim. (Wilna, 1892; repr. Jen~salem., 1967). [Hebrew]. Bibliqgraphy 351 Pseudo-Pililo: seealso Liber A.ntiquitatvm Bihlicarufll. Pseudo-Philo, 011. J••d Siegert, F. Drei helle11.istisch-jfldische Predigten. Ps.~Philon, 'Über Jona ', 'Ober Simson' und 'Ober die Gottuhezeichmmg wohltlltig 11erz«hrendes Fe~~.er'. Yo{. 1: Olxersetzung alts dem A.rmeni~ch11n und sprachliche .Erllhltenmgen. Vol. 2: Kommentar nebst Beobachtvngen zur hellenistischen Vorgeschichte der Bibelhumenllfltik. (2 vols; Wissenschaftliclle Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 20.61; Tllbingen, 1980, 1992). [Gmnan translation]. S~~~Mrlltnt Llturgy CowJey, A. The Samaritan Liturgy (2 voli!!; Oxfurd, 1909). Sa",.ritall Pe~ttateuc6: see Targumim. Seder Ell.JI•It• Zultl Friedmaun. M. Seder Eliahu rabba und Seder F.Jiahu mta (I'anna debe Eliahu). Nach einem vaticanischen Manuscripte aus dem Jahre J"'UJ/1 (1073) ediert. kritisch bearbeileJ 111Jd commentiert. (Vienna, 1902; repr. Jerusalem, 1969). [Hebrew]. Seder Rar~ 'A.mtom Gtl'on Goldschmidt. D. Seder Rt.N 'Anuam Ga 'on. Edited accOI'ding to MaiUIScript& and Prints wlth Additions, Yarianl Lections and lntrodltction. {Jemsalem, 1971). [Hebrew/Anlmaic]. Sedu Rlll' S.'•di• Gtl 'on Davidson, Y., S. Asaf and Y. Yoel. Siddur R.. Sa'adja Ga'on. (Jen~salem, 1941). [Arabic text with Hebrew translation]. Slll11'11t Yamim Elbogen, I. Studien .zur Geschichte du jüdischen Gottesdienstes. (Schriften der Lebraostltlt fllr die Wissemc:baft des Judenthums 1/l-2; Berlin, 1907). [Hebrew]. SibylliRe fh11f!ltt:1 CoUins, U. "Sibylline Orac:le$." ln~ J. Charleswortb (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigraplra. VoL I (New Yor.k, 19&3; pp. 317---472). [English translation). Geffcken, 1. Orac11la Sibyllina. (GCS 8; Leipzig 1902). [Greek text}. Sifttl FinkeJsteiD. L. Sifra on Ltllf/tiC'/1$ accOI'ding to Jlatican MaRIISCrlpt bsemani 66 with 11arianu .from the other manuscripts, Genizah fragments, early edition:s and quotatiom by medieWll 01tthoritie11 and with referencu to parallel passages and commentDI'ie:~~. (4 vols; New York. 1983-1990). [Hebrew}. Weiss, I.H. Sifra. (Vieona, 1&62, repr. New York 1947). ~/erlm Higpr, M. Swen Minor "!Teatises. (New York, 1930). Songs oftlte S.bbt116 Stzcrijice (4Q400-407; 11Ql7) Newsom, C. S01fl.$ o/the Sabbalh Socrifice: A Crltical Edition. (Harvard Semitic Studies 27; Atlanta [Ga.],1985). SongJ ofilleSage(4Q510 aad 4Q511) Baillet, M. Qumran grotte 4.111 (4Q482-4Q520). Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 7; Oxford, 1982; 215--262). The Story II/ the Ten Mill'(l-'r.t Reeg, G. Die Geschichte 11011 den Zelrn Martyrern. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaisnt JO; Tllbingen, 1985). [Hebre-w aud German tranJiation}. Talmud, BabyJoaiaa · Goldschmidt, L. D.r Babylonische Talm11d. (9 vols; Berlin 1897-193S). [Hebrew/Aramaie and Gennan traD$lation]. 352 Bibliography R.abbinovicz, R. Diqduqey Soferim. Variae Lectiones in Mischnam et in Talmud Babylonicum quum ex a/iis librls antiquissimls et scriptis et impressi.r 111m e Codiee Monacensi praestanti.rsimo co/lectae, annotationibus in.rtructae. Pars 4. Tract. RoschHaschanah etJoma. (Municb, 1871). [Hebrew/Aramaic]. Steinsaltz, A. Talmud Bavli, Massekhet Yoma Menuqad uMevu'ar. (Jerusalem, 1983). [Hebrew/Aramaic and Hebrew translation). · Wilna print, reprint Jerusalem, no date. [Hebrew/Aramaic]. Talmud, Palestinian Avemarie, F. Yoma - VersiJhnungstag. (Übersetzung des Talmud Yerushalmi 2:4; Tübingen, 1995). (Gennan translation]. Schäfer, P. and H.-J. Becker. Synop.re zum Talmud Yerv.rhalmi. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 31, 33, 35, 47, 67, 82, 83; 7 vols; Tübingen 1991-2001). [Hebrew/Aramaie]. Venice 1523-24, reprint Jerusa1em, no date. [Hebrew/Aramaic]. Targumim Clarke, E. G. et al. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan ofthe Pentateuch: Text and Concordance. (Hoboken [N.J.], 1984). [Aramaic]. Diez Macho, A. et al. Neophyti /. Targum Palestinense MS de Ia Biblioteca Vaticana. Tomo 111. Levitico. Edleion principe, Introducclon y ver.rion castellana, francesa y inglesa. (Barcelona, 1971). [Aramaic and Spanish, French and English translations]. Ginsburger, M. Pseudo--Jonathan (Thargum Jonathan ben Usiel zum Pentateuch). Nach der Londoner Handschrift (Brit. Mw. add. 27031). (Berlin, 1903). [Aramaic]. Maher, M. "Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Leviticus. Trans1ated with Notes." In: M. McNamara (ed.), The Aramaie Bible. Vol. 3. (Edinburgh, 1994). [English ttans1ation]. McNamara, M. (transl.) The Aramaie Bible. (Edinburgh, 1994). (English translation]. Sperber, A. The Pentateuch according to Targum Onkelos. (The Bible in Aramaie vol. 1; Leiden, 1959). [Aramaic]. .. Tal, Abraham. The Samaritan Targum of the Pentateuch. A Critical Edition. [With an lntroduction]. (3 vols; Tel Aviv, 1980, 1981, 1983). [Aramaic]. Testament of Solomon McCown, C.C. The Testament ofSolomon. (Leipzig, 1922). [Greek text]. Duling, D.C. "Testament of So1omon." In: J. Cbarlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1 (New York, 1983; pp. 935-987). [English trans1ation]. Testflmenu of the Twelve Patriarchs Oe Jonge, M. (in cooperation wilh H.W. Hollander, H.J. de Jonge and T. Korteweg). The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. A Critical Edition of the Greek Texts. (Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graeci Studia 1:2; Leiden, 1978). [Greek text). Kee, H.C. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. In: J. Charlesworth (ed.), The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1 (New York, 1983; pp. 775-828). [English translationJ. Tosefta Larsson, Bibliography 353 Jlitae Prophetarum See Pseudo-Epiphanius. under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." War Scroll (1 QM) Sukenik, E.L. The Dead Sea Scrolls ofthe Hebrew University. (Jerusalem, 1955). Yalqut Shim'oni Hyman, D., D.N. Lerrer and I. Shiloni. Yaltp11 Shim'oni 'al haTorah leRabbenu Shim'on haDarshan. (9 vols;Jerusalem, 1973-1991). [Hebrew]. Yannai Rabinovitz, Z.M. The Liturgical Poems ofRabbi Yannai according to the Triennial Cycle of the Penlateuch and the Holidays. Critical Edition with Jntroduction and Commentary. (2 vols; Jerusalem, 1985, 1987). [Hebrew]. Zlllai, M. Piyyutey Yannai. {Berlin, 1938). [Hebrew]. Yosse ben Yosse Mirsky, A. Yosse ben Yosse Poems. Editedwith an lntroduction, Commentary and Notes. (Jerusalem, '1991, 1977). [Hebrew]. 1.3 Christian and Gnostic Literature 1.3.1 General Collections The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations ofthe Writings ofthe Fathers down to A.D. 325; Grand Rapid.s [Mich.], 1986-1989, repr. ofEdinburgh 1885-1896. [ANF]. CoipnS Christianorum Series Latina; Tumhout, 1954ff. [CCSL]. CoipUS Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium; Paris, Rome and Louvain, 1903ff. [CSCO}. CoipUS Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum; Vienna, 1866ff. [CSELJ. Elliott, J.K. The Apocryphal New Testament. A Collection of Apocryphal Christfan Literature in an English Translation. {Oxford and New York, 1993). Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhwtderte; Berlin, 1897f'f. [GCS]. Hennecke, E. and W. Schneemelcher. Neutestamentliche Apokryphen in deutscher Übersel%ung. (Tiibingen, 6 1989-1990). Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Graeca; 161 vols; Paris, 1857-1866. [PG]. Patro1ogiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina; 221 vols; Paris, 1841-1864. [PL]. Patrologia Orientalis; Turnhout, 1903f'f. [PO]. Robinson, J.M. The Nag Hammadi Library in English. (Leiden, 3 1988). A Select Library of the Nicene and Post~Nicene Fathers ofthe Christi an Church. First Series. (14 vols; Grand Rapids [Mich.], Edinburgh, 1988, repr. ofEdinburgh 1886-1890). A Select Library ofthe Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers ofthe Christian Church. Second Series. (14 vols; Grand Rapids [Mich.}, Edinburgh, 1988, repr. ofEdinburgh 188S-1896). [NPNF] Sources Cbretiennes; Paris, 194lff. [SC]. Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. Version 8 [TLG]. Wengst, K. Didache (Apostellehre), Barnabasbrief. Zweiter Klemensbrief. Schrift an Diognet. Eingeleitet, herausgegeben, übertragen und erläutert. (Schriften des Urchristentums 2; Darmstadt, 1984). 1.3.2 Worlcs according to Author and Title lClement: See Apostolic Fathers. Alexander the Monk, On the Finding ofthe Venerable and Life-giving Cross PG 87:3:4021-84. [Greek and Latin translation]. 354 Bibliography Alexios Aristenos: see Tripartite Commentary to the Conci/iar Legislation. Amalar Hanssens, I.M. A.malarii ephcopi opera liturgica omnia. (Studie Testi 13&-140; Vatican City, 1948···1950). [Latin]. Ambrose, Commentary 011 Lllke Adriaen, M. Sancti Ambrosii Mediolammsis Opera. Pars IV. &positio Evangelii secundum Lucam. Fragmenta in Esaiam. (CCSL 14; Tumhout, 1957). [Latin]. Ambrose, Letter& Faller, 0. &lncli Ambrosii Opera. Pars Decima. Epistulae et Acta. Tom. /. Epistularum libri I-VI. (CSEL 82:1; Vießlla, 1968). [Latin}. Aaaphoru: See Cyril of Jerusalem and James. Andreas of Crete,Jn I'.XaltaJitmem S. Crucis oratftmes l-2 PG 97:1017-1036, 1035-1045. [Greek text aud Latin tran&lationJ. AnoRymou:s from·Jerusalem, CoiiUifellllli'J o11loke Reuss, J. Lulcas-KommentaYe aus der griechischm Kirche. Aus Katemmhandschriften gesammelt und herausgegeben. (Texte und Untersuchungen 130; Berlin, 1984), pp. 15-53. {Greek}. Anonymaus, CommeJttary Oll Milrk; s~ Pseudo-Jerome. Aptmolic Co11stit11tion# Merzger, M. LI!$ ConsriMions Apostoliquu. (3 vols; SC 320, 329, 336; Paris, 1985, 1986, 1987). [Greek text and French translation). Apostolic Fatbers , Holmes, M.W. The A.pcstolic Fathers. Oreelr. Texts rmd English Translations. (Grand Rapids [Mich.], 2 1999). [Greek text and English translation]. Aristides, Apology (Syria(:) Alpigiano, C. Artseide di Atene. Apologia (Biblioteca Patristica II; Florence, 1988). [Itatian translation]. Henneclte, E. Die Apologie des Aristides. Recension und Rekonstruktion des Textes. (Texte und Untersuchungen 4:3; Leipzig, 1893). Atllauaslus, On Sabbaths and Circumcision: Su Pseudo-Athanasius. Athaoasius, Testimonia e :Jcript11r11.: See Pseudo-Athanasius. Augustillt, L()r:UJionum in HeptaltllCIIIlm li6a terti11s Fraipont, I. &lncli Aurelii Augustini Quaes#onum in Heptate~tchum libri YII. Locutionum in Heplateuchvm libri VII. De octo qv.autionibus a veteri Te:~tame.nto. {CCSL 33; Tumbout, 1958; pp. 424-431). [Latin]. AugW1ti11e, (/ltll.ertlo~tllm in Hept.akllcltiUfl liber tertiru Fraipont, I. Sancti Armdii Augvstini QuOBSiiorrum in Heptateuchum libri VIL Locutionum in Heptateuchum libri YJJ. De octo qt;aestionibus a veteri TeiStamento. (CCSL 33; Tumhout, 1958; pp. 175-233). [Latin]. BornabllS Prigent, P. and R.A. Kraft. Epitre de Barnabe. (SC 172; Paris, 1971). [Greek text and Freneh translation]. Basil, Homily en Fa$/ing l PG 31:164-184. [Greek text and Latin translation]. Cano11s of th~ Apostl~s Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sources ofthe Early Middle Ages. {Detroit [Mich.} and Jerusalem, 1997), numbers l/1-4, pp. 26-27 and 104/947-950, pp. 562-563. Metzger, M. Les Constitutions. A.postoliques. (SC 336; Paris, 19&7). [Greek text and French translation]. Bibliography 355 Clm111ikon Put:lltlk Dindorf, L. Chronikon Paschale. (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae; Bollfl, 1832 ""PG 92:67-1028). [Greek text and Latin translation]. Whitby, Michael and Mary. Chronicon Paschale 284-628 AD. (Translated Texts for Historians 7; Liverpool, 1989). [English translation]. Cbrysostom, FNg~~renta in Prowrbia (ia c:ateuis) PG 64:659-740. [Greek and Latin ttanslation}. Cbryso.stom, In l11.udem cDnceptwnis $tJJJCti IOdtzllis Bt~ptistae: See P5eudo- Chrysostom. Clement of Alenadria, Exc.erptsfrom TTteodotuJ Ca.sey, R.P. The 'bcerpta a Tlteodoto of Clement of Aluandria.. Edited with Tran.slaJiqn, Introduction and Notes. (Studies and Documents I; London, 1934). {Eoglish tm!Slation]. Sapard, F. Clement d'Aierandrie. Extraits de Theodote. Tute grec. introduclion. . : traduction et notes. (SC 23; Paris, l 948). {Greek text and French translation]. ClemeBt of Aluaodria, SUolflll.leis Clevel.and Coxe, A . .in ANF 2:299-567.{Eoglish translation]. Le Boulluec, A. Climent d'Aluandrie.. Les Stromateu. Stromale V. Tom11 l Intrrxhfction, texte critique (iraduction] et indu. Tome JL commentaire, bihliographie er index. (SC 278-279; Paris, 1981). [Greek text with French translation]. Stlhlin, 0., L. Frtkbtel, and U. Treu. Cltmens A.laandrimu, vol. II end 111. (2 vols.; <JCS S2, 17; Ber1in, 41985; 2 1970). {Greek]. Come1 ofAlcain Chavasse, A. Le.s fectionnairu romai111 de Ia Messe au Vlle et Vllle sücle:s (2 vols; Spicilegü Friburgen.sis Subsidia 22; Friboutg, 1993). Coma of Wilnbltrg Chava5se, A. Le.J lectwnnairu romai111 de Ia Messe fJJI Ylle et YII/e sieclu (2 vols; Spi<:ilegii Fribw:ten.sis Subs:idia 22; Fribourg, 1993). Cosmas lodieop.eG$tes, Cb.ristltm TopngNphJ Wolslta.Conus, W. Cosmaslndicopleustes. Topogrt~phie Chr~tien~~e. (SC 141, 159, 197; Paris, 1968, 1970, 1973). {Greek: text and Fren<:b cranslation). Co••cil ofL11odkefl Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sources o.fthe Early Middle Ages. (De!roit [Mich. I ~d Jemsalem, 1997), number 66/806-307. pp. 463. [Greek text and English tnmslation of 1he relevant passage}. Callllcll of Tr•lla11anr Linder, A. 1"1111 Jews bl the Legal Soun:es ojthe Early Middte Ages. (Detroit {Mieh.] and Jerusalem, 1997), nwnber 64/802-80.3, pp. 459-460. [Greelc text and English translation of the relevant passage]. Cyprlao, Lmen Clarke, G. W. The Letters of St. Cypria12 o/Carthage. (3 vo1s; Ancient Christian Writers 44,46 and 47; New York, 1984-1989). [English trans!ation]. Dierck:s, G.F. Sancti Cypriani Episcopi Epistularum. (2 vols; CCSL 3b and Je; Tumhout, 1994, 1996). [Latin]. Cyprianus Gallos, HeptiJieuC/to!l Peiper, R, Cypriani Ga/li Poeta Heptateuchos. (CSEL 23; Vie.nna, 189l). {Latin]. Cyrll of Aleuadrla, Comment11ry illlsflitlll PG 70:9-1449. (Greek and Latin translation]. Cyril of Aleu•drla, Colftrillaliflllß111 PG 76:503-1002. [Grcek and Latin craoslation]. Blbliogrophy 356 Burguiere, P. md P. Evieux. Cyrille d'Aiexandrie. Contre Julien. lntrtJduction, tezte crttitp~e, troductiM et note!. (SC 322; Paris, 1985). [Gnlek text aad Fl'llD.ch ttanslation of the fust books]. Cyril of Alexandria, Ep&tula 41. Ad Acacium EplsCOJ*1'1 Sqtllopolls McEnerney, J.I. St. Cyril of Alexantil'lo: Letter&. (fathers of the Church 76--77; Washington 1987}. [English traoslation). Schwartz, E. Acta Concili0111m OecumenicOTIIm. (1928; vol. 1:1:4, pp. 40-48). [Greelc]. PG 77:201-221. [Greek and Latin trnnslation]. Cyril of Alexa•dria, G/11phyroN1m in Lcvltlctm~ llb" PG 69:539-590. [Greek.and Lalin translation]. Cyril of Ale:1ndria, Homilies on Luke Chabot, J.B. S. Cyrl/li A/exandrini Commentarii in Lucam (CSCO, Scriptores Syri Series Qwut.a, Tomus l; Paris, 1912). [Syriac]. · Payae Smith, R. A Comltfentory upon the G08pel occordlng toS. Luh, by S. Cyril Patriarch ofAlex.andria ntM fvst traMlflled into English from an Ancient Syrlac Yersion. (2 vols.; Oxford, 1859). [English translation]. Tonaeau, R.M. S. CyriUi A.lexandl'mi Commentarii i1l Lucam. (CSCO 140, Scriptores Syri 70; Louvain, l!iiS3). [Latin translation]. Cyril ol Alouadria, 01r tlle Adt~l'tltimr 11nd Worslllp rlf GtHI trt Spirit t",tl ilf Tr11tlt PG 68:133-1125. [Greek. and Latin translation). Cyril or Jerusalem, Cuteclleses ad illllnrmalldDI McCauley, L.P. and A.A. Stephenson~ Tl1e Work.s of Saint Cyril ofJerusolem. (2 vols; Fa!hers ofthe Church 6l, 64; Washington, 1969-1970; vol. l, pp. 91-249; vol. 2, pp. 4-140). [English translation]. Reisc:hl, W.K. and J. Rupp. Cyrl/11 Hierw;olymorum archiepiscopi opera. (Mu.nich, 1848, 1860 rt967, Hildesheim]). {Greok]. Cyril or Jerasalcm, Eplst11lo. ad Consttlntillm. Bihain, E. "L'epltrt: de Cyrille de I~alem Constau.ce sur Ia vision de la Croix. TOldition manuscrite et 6dition critiqu.e," Byzantion 43 (1973) 264-296. Cyril of Jerusalem.: Letten: See Pseu.do-Cyril of lerusalem. Cyrll An11pho,.. (Syriac) Raes, A. "Anapbora C)'rilli Hierosolymitani vel Aleundrini." ln: Anaphoroe Syriacae I/3 (Rom, 1944, pp. 323-363). [Syriae text and Latin traoslationj. Dc sDlftiJlu n tJqlliltocllls Botte, B. "De solstitiis et aequinoctiis." In: idem, Les origines de Ja Noil et de /'Epiphanie. Ehlde htstorique. (Texle:s et ~tudes lirurgiqu.es 1; Louvain, 1932; pp. 93-105). Dldt~che: See Apostolic Fathers. Rordorf, W. and A. Tuilier. lA doctrilftl d~.s dowe t:lp6tru (Dtdache). lntraduction, Ta:te, Traduction, Notes, Appendia et Index. (SC 248; Paris, 1978). [Greek text and.French lranslation). a DldtUCtJlifl VöGbus, A. The Dtdt~sctJiia Apostolorvm in Syriac. (4 vols; CSCO 401, 402, 401, 408, Scriptores Syri 175, 176, 179, 180; Louvaln, 1979). [Syriac text and Englisb translationJ. Dldyau1t, Commentarii ;" Zt~dtaritlm Doutrcleau, L. Didyme l'A:11eugle. SJir Zacharie.. Introdvctlon. texte critique. trodvctwn et notes. {3 vols; SC 83-85; Paris, 1962). (Gree.k. text and French traoslatio.n]. Bibliography 357 DioglrdUs: See Apostolic Fathers. Egeria, Dlilty Gingras, G.E. Egeria: Diary of tl Pilgrimage. Translated and Annotated. (Ancie.nt Cbristian Writers 38; New York and Ramsey [N.J.], 1970). (English tran.,lati.on]. Mo.ravat, P. Egerie. Journal de Voyage (iliniraire). lntrodu.ction, tezte critiqu.e, traduction, notu, inde;;c et cartes. (SC 296; Paris, 1982). [Latin text and French translation]. Ephrem, (Armealan) Commentai'JI on Lerltlcw: See Pseudo-Ephrem. J:pbreDI, (Syriae) Colltlllenlaty tm Leritkus: See Pseudo-Ephrem. Ephrem, COMmentaty on ExDdMs Amar, J.P., E.G. Mathews, and K. MeVey. St. Ephrem the Syrian. Selected Prose WDTks. ConrmentlU)' on Genesis. Commentary on El:odlls. Homily on 0111' Lord. Letter to Publius. (falhers ofthe Church 91; Washington D.C., 1994). (Eoglish tnmslation]. Tonneau. R.-M. Sancti Eplrraem Syrt in Genesi"m et in El:odJJm Commewtarii. (CSCO 152-153, Scriptores Syri 71-12; Louvain. 1955). [Syriac tex.t and Latin translation]. Ephrem, C~tmmatuy oa tlle Dkltel$tlrOif Leloir, L. Commf.lltaire de I'Evangile Concordant ou Diatessaron. Traduit du syriai}ue et de l'ormerden, introd~tction, lraduction u not11s. (SC 121; Paris, 1966). [French tl'lnslation]. MeCartby, C. Saint Ephrem's Commentary on Totlan's Diatusaron: an &glish 7'ranslotlon of Chester Beatty Syriac MS 709 with /ntrDductlon and Note.s. (Journal ofSemitic Studies Supplement 2; Oxford, 1993). (English translatioo]. Epbrem, Homilles 011 l 358 Bib/iography Eusebius of Caesarea, Demonuratio E~angelica Heikel, I.A. Eusebius Werke Yl. Die Demonstratio evange/ica (GCS 23; Leipzig, 1913). [Greek]. Eusebius of Caesarea, History of tlle Cllurcll Schwanz, E. Eu.sebius Werke li, l-3. Die Kirchengeschichte. (GCS 9:1-3; Leipzig, 1903-1909). [Greek). McGitrert, A.C. in NPNF 2:1, pp. 73-403. {English translation]. Eusebius of Caesarea, Vita Constantini Heikel, I.A. Eu.sebius Werke I. Uber das Leben Constantins. Constantins Rede an die heilige Yersamm/unge. Triannatsrede an Constantin. (GCS 7; Leipzig, 1902). [Greek). Richardson, E.C. in NPNF 2:1, pp. 405-559. [English translation]. Winkelmann, F. "Über das Leben des Kaisers Konstantin." In: idem, Eu.sebiu.s Werke 1: I. (GCS; Berlin, 1975; pp. 3-151). Euseblus.of Emesa, Commentuii in Octateucllllm (in Levilicum) Hovhannesian, V. Eusebe d'Emese, /. Commentaire de I'OcJateuque (Venice, 1980), pp. 125-134. [Annenian]. Expositio OfficioTum Ecclesiae: See Pseudo-George the Arab. Gelasian Sac1amentary Chavasse, A. Le Sacramentaire g~lasien (Yaticanus Reginensis 316), sacramentaire presbyteral en usage dans les titres romains au Ylle siecle. (BibliotMque de Th~o1ogie, st!rie 4/1; Tournai, \958). [Latin]. Genoadius, CommentaTll in s. Pauli epütulas Staab, K. Die Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche. (Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen 15; MilDster i.W., 1933; pp. 352-422). [Greek]. George tb.e Arab: Exposilio OfjicioTum Eccleshle: See Pseudo-George the Arab. Gospel of Pllilip (NHC 11,3) Isenberg, W.W. ''The Gospel of Philip (II,3)." In: J.M. Robinson. The Nag Hammadi Library in Eng/ish. (Leiden; 3 1988; pp. 139-160). [English rranslation). Gregor of Nazianz, Homilies 6-12 Calvet-Sevasti, M.-A. Gregoire de Nazianze. Discours 6-12. (SC 405; Paris, 1995). [Greek text and French translation]. PG 35:721-849. [Greek text and Latin translation]. Hesychius Luicogrspher Latte, K. Hesychii Alexandrini lezicon. (2 vols; Copenhagen, 1953, 1966). Hesycbius of Jerusalem, CommentarillSin Le~ltlcum PG 93:787-1180. [Latin]. Hildebert, liber lk sac1a er~charütia PL 171:1195-1212. [Latin]. Hildebert, versllS de mysterio missae PL 171:1177-1194. (Latin]. Hippolytus, On P,overbs Richard, M. "Les fragments du commentaire de S. Hippolyte sur les Proverbes de Salomon." Le Museon 19 (1966) 65-94. lgoatius, To tlle MagnesÜins: See Apostolic Fathers. lgoatius, To tlle Plliladelpllians: See Apostolic Fathers. lrenaeus, Against tlle Heresies Rousseau, A. and L. Doutreleau./renee de Lyon. Contre les hinisies. 1-111. (SC 263, 264, 293, 294, 210, 211; Paris 1979, 1979, 1982, 1982, 1974, 1974). [French lranslation}. Bibliography 359 Rousseau, A., B. Hemmerdinger, L. Doutreleau, and Ch. Mercier.Jrenee de Lyon. Contre /es herisies.IV. (SC 100*, 100**; Paris. 1965). [French translation]. Rousseau, A., L. Doutreleau, and Ch. Mercier. lrenee de Lyon. Contre les hiri.ries. V. (SC 152, 153; Paris, 1969). [French translation]. lsbodad ofMerv, Commentary on Lwiticus Van den Eynde, C. Commentaire d'lso'dad de Merv :rurl'Ancien Testament. 11. &odeDeuteronome (CSCO 176-177, Scriptores Syri So-81; Louvain, 1958). [Syriac text and Latin trans1ation]. lsidor (Pseudo-lsidor?), Quaestiones de ueteri et nouo Te:stamento (Levitico) PL 83:321-340. [Latin]. Ivo of Chartres, Sermo V si'l'e opusculum de con!lenientill veterls et nO'I'i sacrjficii PL 162, 535-562. (Latin]. . Jacob of Sarug, Homily on the SC11pego11t Bedjan, P. Homiliae Selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis. (S vols; Leipzig and Paris, 19051910; vol. 3, pp. 259-282). [Syriac]. St. James An11phora (Syriac) Heiming, 0. "Anaphora Sancti Iacob~ ftatris Domini." In Anaphorae Syriacae 1113 (Rome, 1953; pp. 107-177). (Syriac text and Latin translation]. Rücker, A. Die syrischen Jakabosanaphora nach der Rezension des Ja 'qob(h) 'I'On Edessa. Mit dem griechischen Paralleltext herausgegeben. (Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen 4; Münster in Westfalen, 1923). [Syriac text, Greek retroversion]. Jerome, Ag11lnst Jovirtian11s PL 23:211-338. [Latin]. Freemantle, W.H. in NPNF 2:6, pp. 346-416. [English trans1ation]. Jerome, Commentary on G11latlans PL 26:307-438. [Latin]. Jerome, Comment11ry on Mark: See Pseudo-Jerome. Jerome, Commentary on Zech11rillh Adriaen, M. S. Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera. Pars I. Opera &egetica 6: Commentarii in Prophetas Minores (CCSL 76A; Tumbout, 1970; pp. 747-900). [Latin]. Jerome, De 11iris i11lustrlbus Richardson, E. Hieronymus liber de viri:r inlustribus. Gennadius liber de 'l'iris inlustribus. (Texte und Untersuchungen 14; Leipzig, 1896). [Latin]. Jerome, Dialogus Adven11s Pelagill"os Moreschini, C. S. Hieronymi PresiJ)Iteri Opera. Pars IIL Opera Polemica. 1. Dialogus Ad'l'ersus Pelagianos. (CCSL SO; Tumhout, 1990). [Latin]. Freemantle, W.H. in NPNF 2:6, pp. 447-483. [English translation]. Jerome, Leiters: Hilberg, I. Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Epistulae (CSEL 54; 55; 56:1-2; Vienna, 2 1996). [Latin]. Freemantle, W.H. in NPNF 2:6, pp. 1-295. [English translation ofselected letters]. Jerusa1em Lectionary: see Old Armenion Lectionary and Old Georgian Lectionary. Jobannes Damascenus: see Pseudo-Johanoes Damascenus. Johaones Scbolasticus, Collection of Canons in 50 Titles Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sources ofthe Early Middle Ages. (Detroit [Mich.] and Jerusalem, 1997), nwnber 6/102-107, pp. 59-61. [Greek text and English translatioo of tbe relevant passage]. Jobannes Zonaras: see Tripartite Commentary to the Conciliar Legislation. Jobn Cbrysostom, Ag11inst the Jews PG 48:843-942. [Greek and Latin trans1ation]. 360 Bibliograplry Piadels, W., R. Brlndle, and M. Heimgartner, "Das bisher vermisste Textstück in 1ohannes Chrysostomus., .4dver$1lS Judaew, Oratio 2," Zeitschrift fllr .Antike und Chri.stelftrtm 5 (200 1) 23-49. [For the recently rediscovered missing part ofhomily 2}. Harkins, P. W. Saint John Clrtysoslom. Discnune.s t~gaiiut Judaizing ChristtaiU. (Fathers ofthe Cburcb 68; Wasbiggton, D.C., 1979). [Eaglish translation]. Bn'indle, R. and V. Jegber-Bucher. Acht Reden gegen Jr~de~t. (Bibliothek der griecbisehen Literarur 41; Stungart, 1995). (German trans!ation and commentary). Joha Cbrysostom, RomUies Oft Pint Ctttlntllitlas PG 61:9-382. fGreek and Latin lranslalion]. Cbambers, T.W. in NPNF 1:12, pp. 3-269. [Bnglish translation]. Jobu or Jerusalem (Pseudo-Joha ?), P111re.:ytk#s de IIIIICIII ecclaill domini van Esbroeck, M. "Une homelie sur l'Eglise attribuee 6 1eau de Ji'!rusalem." Le Musion 86 ( l973) 233-304 [AnneniaD text and Latin translation}. van Esbroeck, M. "Jean II de l6rusalem et les c:ulces deS. Etienne, de Ia Sainte·Sion et de Ia Croix." Analeeta Bollamliana 102 (1984) 99-134. [Frencb trau.slatiouJ. John Zoslmas, C11.le11dtJr Garitte, G. Le cqferrdrier palutino-georgien d1il Sinaiticus 34 (}( .ti.cla). {Subsidia Hagiographica 30; Bruxelles, 1958). [Georgian text and Frencb translatioo). Julius of Rome, Letten: See Pseudo.Cyril of lcrusalem. Justin, DüJ/JJgue wltll TryphtJ · Marcovich, M.lwtini Martyris Dialops cwm Tryphone. (Patristi5che Texte und Studien 47; BcrliD, New York, 1997). [Greek]. Falls, Tb.B. Saint Jwstin Martyr. (Fathers oftbe Cburch; New York, 1948; pp. 139-366). {English translation]. Justin, Fll'$t Apology Marcovich, M. l11stini Martyris ApolfJgioe pro Christiat~is. (Patristische Texte und Studieu 3&; Berlin, New York, 1994). [Gteek]. Falls, Th.B. St~int Ju.ttin Martyr. (Fathers of the Churcb; New York, 1948; pp. 33-lll ). [English translation}. Leo the Great, StrtnOJU Chavasse, A. Sancti Leonis Magni Romt~ni Pontiflci:s Tractatlls Septem et Nonaginta. (2 vols; CCSL 138, 138A; Tumhout, 1973). [LatinJ. · Dolle, R. Leonle Gl'and. Sermons. (SC 22, 49, 74, 200; Paris, 1964, 1969, 1971, 1973). {Latin text and Frencb translationJ. Conway, A.J. and J.P. Frecland, St. Leo t~ G.rfiQt: SermoiU (Fathers of lhe Cburch 93; Washington, D.C., 1996). [English translation]. Libet p011tijlca/i$ Duchosne, L. Le Iiber pontificali:s. Tu:te, introductio11 et commentaire (reprint of original edition (1886-92] with addition ofthird volume; Paris, 19SS -1951). [Latin]. Davis, R. The Book. of PfJntifft (Liber pomiftc~Jlis): The A.ncient Biographie: afthe First Ninety Rmnan Bishop1 to A.D 7/5. (Traoslated Texts for Historiaos. Latin Scries .S; Liverpool, 1989). [Englisb tnmslation). Martyrdom ef Po/ycatp: See Apostolic: Fathers. Muldle AI'Meniatt Luti81Ultiu Renoux, C. Le Lectionnaire de Jen~salem tm A.r111e11ie: Le Caloc'. (PO 44:4; 4&:2; Tumb.out, 1989, 1999). [Armeuian text IUid Fren(;b translalionJ. Bibliography N~>llloctllltlll 361 u Tilln in the Lsgal St>~~~ces ofthe Earl)' Middle.Ages. (Dettoit [Mieb.] a.nd Jeru.salem, 1997), number 7/108-128 (r". Photius) 7/129-187 (rec. Theodoros Balsamon), pp. 61--89. (Greek text and English lranslation of the relevant passage]. Linder, A. in Th~ Jt:ws Old Armmilln Lt.!Ctiollllty Renoux, A. Le codex amlfinim Jirusalem 121, T6me I: lntroduclion: .AIIX origines de Ia Iiturgie hiuosolymit Oria;o, Comtnentary ~,. Jt~hn Blanc, C. Origene. Commerrtaif'e nr Saint Jean. Textil. grec, avant~propO$, traduction et notes. (SC 120, 157, 222, 290; Paris, 1966, 1970, 1975, 1982). [Greek text and French translation). Heine, R.E. Origen. CommentDry on the Gospel Accordfng to John. (Fathers of the Churcb 80, 89; Washington, D.C., 1989). [E~isll translatiou]. Preusehen, E. Ortgenes Werke lY. Der Johanneslommmtar. (GCS 10; Leipzig, 1903). [Greek]. Origen, Exkortatitm to M•rtyrdfNit Koetscllau, P. Origene.r Werke I. Die Schrift vom Ml11'tyrium. JJuch I-IV gegen Cel!ws. (GCS 2; Leipzig. 1899; pp. 3-47). (Greek}. O'Meara, J.I. Prayer. &hortation to Martyrdom. (Ancient Christian Writers 19; New York., 1954). [Englisb traoslation]. Origen, HM~Uies olt Jeremiolr Hu.sson, P. and P. Nautin. Origene. Homelie:s sur Jerimie. (SC 232, 238; Paris, 1976, 1977). [Greek tcxt and French translation]. Klosterm:tun, E. Ori'genea Weh 111. Jeremialaomilien, Klageliedt~rlwmmentar, Erldäntng der Samusl- und Königabücher. (GCS 6; Leipzig. 1901; pp.-1-194). [Greek:]. Smith, J.C. Homilie.a on JeremiQh. Homily on 1 King.s 28. (The Fathel'$ of the Cburch 97; Washiß&ton, D.C., 1998). [English translation). OrigeR, .Homllles on Let'itkru Baehrens, W.A. Origenu Werke, sechster Band: Homilien .JWIJ He:xatewch in Rufins Obersetzung. Erste Teil: Die Homilien zu Genesis, 'EvJdus and Levilicus (GCS 29; Leipzig 1920). [G.reek). Barkley, G.W. Origen. Homilie.a Dn Lin'iticus J-16. (Fathers of tbe Cburcll 83; Washington, D.C., 1990). [English translation). Borret, M. Origine. Homelie.a sur le L~itique. (2 voJs; SC 286-'287; Pari$, 1981). (Latin text and Frcnch translarionJ. Paterius, De Exp«siUane Veltr& 11c NoPi Tattmrenil, Lnitku• PL 79:753-762. [Latia]. B;b/iography 362 Pbilllster, Dinr111r11m lleresrtHtliber Heylen, F. Filu.strii Episc<1pi ßrixlemis. Ditlersorum hereseon lib•r. (CCSL 9; Tumhout, 1957; pp. 207-324). [Latin]. Marx, F. Soncti Filastrii Episcopi Brixumsls. Ditleruuum hereseon über. (CSEL 38; Vienna, 1888). [Latin]. Pbotius: see Nomocanon in 14 Titlu. Polyc:arp, To the Philippians: See Apostolie Falben. Protf!WIIfgelium of James Cullmann, 0. "The Protevangeliwn of James." In: W. Scbneerneleher (ed.), New Te11ament A.pocrypha. Voi J. Gospels and Related Writings. (Louisville [Kentuclcy), 1991; pp. 421-438). {German translation]. De Sttycker, E. La forme Ia piUI attcilmne du Protlvangile deJacquu. RMclrerchesstJT le Papyrus Bodmer j avec tll'le edi'lion CTÜliiKe du texte grec el une lradltctlon onnotie. .Eil appendice: Les ve,.sions al'minienrte& traduitu e" Latin par Hans ·Quecke. (Subsidia Hagiograp.biica 33; Brussels, 1961). [Greelc text and French translationJ. Elliott,. J.K. Tlre A.pocryphai New Testament. A Collection of Apocryphal Christia:n Literat~o~re in an English TranslatiQn. (Oxford, New Yo:dc. 1993). {Euglish tnmslation]. Hock, R.F. The Jnfancy Gospel& of Jamu und Thomas witlr Introdll.ction, Note., and Original Tm /tal11ring the NEW Schofars Penlon Translation. (The Seholars Bible 2; Santa Rosa [Calif.], 1994). [Greek text and English translation]. Mara, M.G. Evangile de Pierre: lntroduction, te:cte critique, traduction, (SC 201; Paris 197S). [Greek text and French translation]. Pseudo-Athaaasius, On SabiHitlrs flltd Clrcumdslon PG 28:133--141. [Greek and Latin translation]. Pseudo-Athaoaslus, TestimfHiill e script11r11 PG 28:29-80. {Greek aod Latin translation). P.seudG-Cbrysostom,In laudem eoncq:~tloni:l Sllllt.:tllHnnls Baptist11e PG 50:787-792. [Greek and Latio translation). P.lie•do-Cyril ol Jerusalem and Pseudo-Julius of Rome, Letters PG 96:1436-1449. fGreek and Latin translation]. Pseudo-Epbrem, (AriReaiao) C0111111mtt1ry 011 LniticiiS Mathews, E.G. The Armenion Comrnentariell on &odus·Deflteronomy A.ttribllted to Ephrem tlre Syrian. (CSCO S87-S88; Scriptores Armelliaci 25-26; Louvain, 1998). {Atmeniao. text IIDd English translation). Pseudo-Epbrem., (Syriae) CttJIIIfU!IIItf11 011 Lc'lltie~~s Benedictus, P. Soncli Patris N()lltri Eph,.aem Syri Ope,.a Omnio quae ezstant Gro11ce. 3yriace, Latine, in Ilex tomos tlistributa ad MSS. Codices Yaticanos, oliosque collt;gata. multis oucta,. interpretlltione, proefationihwt, notis, Jlariontil:!ul Jeclionibull illu!ftrata Nunc prim11m sub A111lpicii.s Clernenti., XIL Pllntijicill Maximi e Bibllotheca Yaticano Prodtncnt. TomfiS Primus Syrioce et Latlne (Rome, 1737). [Syriac text and Latin translation]. Pseudo-Epipbaoius, Commentary 011 Lake Conybeare, F.C. "The Gospel Commentary of Epiphanius" Zeitsch,.ift ftJr die nelltestomentliche Wissensch(lft und die Kunde der ältw-en Kirche 7 (1906) 318332; 8 (1907) 221-225. Jlibliography 363 Pseudo-Epiphaaiu.s, De prop/ldtll'lllft vit• d 9bltu Samm, D. Biblical Propheü in Byzantine Palatine. Reassessi.ng the Lives af the Prophets (SIUdia in Vetm.s Tcstamco.li Pseudepigrapha 11; Leiden, 1995), pp. 121-123. [Englisb translation ofCodex Marchalianus]. Scherman, T. Prophetarum vüaefab~tlosae. (L&i.pzig, 1907). [Greek]. Scbwemer, A. Studien 1:11 den friihjfidischen Prophetenlegenden. Vitae PropbetaJ:11m. (2 vols; Textsand Studies in Ancient Jndaism 49 and 50; Tiibingen, 1995, 1996), vol. 2, pp. 3•-76•. [Synopsis ofthc most important Greek manuscripts]. Hare, D.R. "The Lives of the Prophets." In: J. Charleswonh (ed.), The 0/d Testament Pseudepigrapha. Yol. 2 (New York. 198.5; pp. 379-400). [English ttanslation of the short rec:ensio.n]. Pseudo-George the Arab. E~qU~sitio 0/Jicilln~m Eccluitle Connolly, R.H. Anonynti Aueloris !Zpositio 0/ficiorom Eccle.siae Georgio Arhelell.'li Vulgo Atlscripla. (4 vob:; CSCO 64; 12; 16; 7l; ScriptoTeS Syri 25; 29; 32; 28; Paris/Leipzig, 1911-1954). [Syriac text and Latin traoslation]. Pseudo·Isldor: see lsidor. Pseudo..Jerome. Ca~~~~~~at•ry t~n Merk Cabill, M. Expositio EvDngelii secrmdum Marcu.m. (CCSL 82; Tumhout. 1997). [Latin]. - - . The Fint Commeniary o" Marle: An Annotated Transitli/on (New Yorlt. OxCord, 1998). (English tTansJatioo]. Pseudo-Jobanaes Damascenus.. Sermo in fiiiiiUIItilltimlem bu.ttle Marille lli'Kirtis PG 96:648-661. [Greek and Latin translation). StlcrtJmentflrillm VellHielfse Ei:zenh6fer, L. P. Sifttin and L.C. Moblberg. Sacramentarlum Veronen.se (Cod[ex] Bibl[ioteca] Capit[olare} Yeron[ensis} I.lXXY [80]). (Rerum Ecclesiastiearum Do..:umenta, series maior Fontes [Sacramentarium Leanianum] 1; Rome, '1978). Souates, History oftlle Cll11rc.h Hansen, G.C. Sokrates. Kirchet~guchichte. Mit Beiträgen von Manja Sirinjan. (GCS, Neue Folge l; Berlin, 1995). Zenos, A.C. in NPNF 2:2, pp. l-178. (En,glish translation). Sopb_rooius. Hollril.Y 1111 tlre Extlltlltion of tlle Vetterdie Cross 1111d on the Holy ÄlltuiiiSis PG 87/3:3301-10. {Greelc and Latin translation]. Sozomenos, Hutory oftlle Churcfl Festugiere, A.-J., B. Grillet, and G. Sabbah. Sozomine: Hütoire Ecclhia11tique. Tut~ grec de Ndition J. Bider (SC 306, 418; Paris, 1983, 1996}. (Greek text and Freucb translation]. Haruanft, C.D. in NPNF 2;2, pp. 179-427. (English trauslation]. Step•anos Siwaec'i, ReponK 111a Hulltpets d'Alo111111h. Petrosyan, E. in Ejmlaz;n 41 (1984)44-50. Syriac Aristides, Apology: Sec Aristides. Tertullian, A.d nllliones Holmes in ANF 3:109-1.50. [English translation). Qllinri Septimi Florenti.s Tenvlliani Opera. Pars I. Opera Catholica. Adver3US Morcionem (CCSL 1; Turnhout. 1964; pp. 9-7S). [Latin]. Tertulliao, Against Marc/011 Holmes in ANF 3:269-476. [English translation]. Quinti Septimi Florentis Tertulliani Opera. Pars /. Opera CDtholica. Adversw Marcionem (CCSL I; Tumhout, 1964; pp. 437-726). {Latin]. Bibliograplry 364 1'ertullian, Agabul tlle Jew1 Oerlo, A. Quinti Sept/mi Florentis T~rtrtllitl1fi Opera. Pars Il. Opera Montanistlca. {CCSL 2; Tumbout, 1964; pp. 1337-1396). [Latin]. Thelwall, S. in ANF 3:151-174. [English b'Uislation.]. Trlnkle, H. Edition de QSF Tertllllianl Aduer.:t~~S llldaeos. (Wiesbaden, 1964}. [Latin}. Tertußian, Aptlhlgy Quinti Septimi Floremu Tertlllliani Opera. Pars I. Opera Catholica. tf.dver$11s MIV'cionem (CCSL 1; Tumbout, 1964; pp. 77-171). [LatiD]. Thelwa11., S. in ANF l: 17--60. [English translation]. Tertulliaa, On Bap&m Quinti Septl"'i Florenfis Tertlll/iani Opera. Pars I. Opl'ra Catholica. Advers11s Marcionem (CCSL l; Tumhout, 1964; pp. 275-295}. (Latin]. Thelwall., S. in ANF 3:669-679. (English tnmslation}. TertulliaD, On Ftlftilrg Gerlo, A. Q11inti Septimi FIOI'elftis Tertulliani Opera. Pars /1. Opera Monttl1fistka. (CCSL2; Tumhouc, 1964; pp. 1255-1277). [Latin}. Thelwall., S. in ANF 4:102-11:5. (Englisb translation]. Tertullian, 01J Prll~,. Brawt, R.. TertrJllien Contre Marcion. Tome /II (Livre///). (SC 399; PariA, 1994). [Latin text and Frencb translation]. · Quinti Septimi F/orentis Tert11llioni Opera. Pars I. Opera Catho/ica. Advers11s Marcionem (CCSL 1; Tumhout>t l964; pp. 255-274). [Latin]. Thelwall, S. in ANF 3:6U-691. {English translation]. Theodore bar Koaf, Sclrolifl Hespel, R. aDd R. Draguet. Thiodore bar Konl. Livre des Scolie.s (recension de Seert). L Mi",re 1-Y. (CSCO 431-432; Scriptores Syri 187-188; Louvain, 1981-1982). [Syriac text and French translation]. Tlleodoret, Co1IJIIU!fllury 1111 lscitllr Guinot, J.-N. Thiodoret dll Cyr. Commentaire STIT Jsare. Texte critique. tradiiCiion et notes. {SC 276, 295, 315; Paris. 1980, 1982, 1984). {Greek text aud Fnmch translation]. Tbeodoret, Ert~nlsle.s Et:tlinger, G. Theodoret ojCynJ:S: Erani&le~ (Oxford. 1975}. [Greek]. Jackson, B. in NPNF 2:3, pp. 160-249. [English translation}. Tbeodoret, {bt•estiona in Odt~teflcllllm Femande.z Marcos, N. and A. S~nz-Badillos. Theodoreti Cyrerrsls (Juaestiorra in Octateuchum {Textos y :Esrudios "Cardenal Cisneros" de Ia Biblia polliglota matritense 17; Madrid, 1979). [Greek}. Theodoros Balsamon: see Tripartite Commentary to the Conciliar Legislatlon aod Nomoctmon in 14 Titles. [Greek. text and Englisb IIanslation of tbe relevant passage]. Tbeodosius, De situtur•e Mneme Oeyer, P. lti11era Hiero.folymi:ana. Saeculi Illl-YJJ/. (CSEL 39; Vieuna. 1898; pp. 1351SO). [Latin]. Troditw AJWst•lltt~ Botte, B. Hippozyte de Rome. La traditlon ClJW5fOltque d'apr&t /es anciennes version. Jnrrothlctiorr. tradwction et notes. (SC I Ibis; Paris, 1968). (Latin text and French trauslation]. Bradshaw, P. M.E. lobnson 1111d L.E. Phillips (edited by H. Attridge). The Apostolic Tradition. A Cammentary. (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, 2002).{Eoglish translation]. Bibliography 365 Triptutite ColiUIWitary to tlle Co•cilitl' L#Jgl$/lltiolf Linder, A. The Jews in the Legal Sourcu. of the Eorly MiJJle Ages. (Detroit (Mich.] and Jerusalem, 1997), number 28/353-378, pp. 174-197. [Greek text and Englisll tnnslation ofthc relevant pllSsage]. Typicon •J CoRst•ntlnopl~ Mateos, J. Le typjcon Je lo grantk eglise. Ms. Samte-Croix "., 40, X! siicie. Tome I. Le cycle des Jouzt. mois. Tome II. cycle tks fites mobiles. (2 vols; Orientalia Cbristiana Analeeta 165-166; Rome, 1962-1963). [Greek text and French u translation]. Vt~lentlnlall Expositllln NHC zi,2 Pagels, E.H. (introd.) and J.D. Turner (trausl). "A Valentinian Exposition (XI,.?), wirb O.n the Anointing. On Baptism A and B, and On the Eucharist A and B." In: J.M. Robinson. The Nag Hommadi Ltbrary in English. (Leiden; ~1988; pp. 481-489). IEngtish translation). Victorblus of Poetovio, Commmtary on tlre Apoc•lyp6e Dulaey, M. Yictorin de PoetoYio. Sru l'apocalypse. Suivi thfragment chronologique et de Ia comtraction dal morufe. (SC 423; Paris, 1997). [l.atin text and French translation]. Vitll PHplletflrUIII: See Pselldo-Epiphanius. 1.4 Pagan Literature Aelias Herodta•as, De prosodia cal/Joliea Lentz, A. Orammatici Graeci. Vol. 3:1. Herodlani Technici reliqwioe. (Leipzig, 18671&70). [Oreek text}. Aesop, Fsf1alatt Hausrath, A. and H. Hunger. Corpru fabv/DI'Um Ae.ropicarum. (2 vols; Leipzig, 1959, 1970). [Greek mxt]. A&lltbarebides of Caidus Ster.a, M. Greek and Latin Avthors on Jews tmd Judal;r.m. Edited with lntroductions, Tram/ations and Commentary. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-·1984), number 30a, vol. 1, pp. 106-108. [Oreek with English lnDSiation ofrel.evant passage]. Aleua.der of Lycopolis, C011t'a Mlllliclltld Opitliones DI:Jpllllllio Stem, M. Greek and Llltin A.uthars on Jews and Judai""· Edited with lntrodvctions, Translations and Commentary. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-1984), numbu 468, vol. 2, pp. 486-4&7. [Oreek with English rranslation of relevant passaF]. Apollodoru& of Atbeas, Petl Theon Mnller, K. Fragmenta hisloricorum Grae~XJn~m. {S vols; Paris, 1841-1870; vol. 1, pp. 428-469). [Greek text]. Dio Chrysostomus, OrlllioiU!S Coboon, J.W. Dio Chrysostom. With an Engllsh Translatiort. Yol. I. Orations 1-1 I. (LCL 257; Cambridge [Mass.), 1971; repr. from 1932). [Greek wilh English translation]. BarpocraCioD, Lukott tlecem ottiiDreJ Altic81 Dindorf, W. H01pocrati01111 lcico11 in Jecem oratoreJ AtticOB. (Oxfonl, 1853; repr. Groningen, 1969; pp. 1-310}. [Greek text]. H«ateus, A.rgyplk• Srer.a. M. Greelc and Lattn Authors on Jews tmd Judaism. Edited with lntroductio'IU, Translatiom andCommentury. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 1974-1984), number II, vol. 1, pp. 26-35. {Grcek witb Eqlish translation ofrelevant passage]. m Bibliogrüplt)' 366 lsocrates, PhilipfJIIS (<mztio S) Norlia, G. lsocrates L (LCL 209; Cambridge {Mass.] and Lo11don, 1966). [Greek with English translation]. Julian, lf#•blst tlle GalUeons Wright, W.C. The Work.s of the Emperor Julian. With an English TranllaJi'on. (LCL, Julian 3; London and Cambrid~ {Mass.], 1961; pp. 319-427). [Greek with English translation]. Juveual, Strturoe .Ralnaay, G. JuYenal and Persius. (LCL; London and New Yorlc, 1928). [Latin·with EngUsh translation]. Plato, NoMoi Hülser, K. PlaJon. Nomoi. Griechisch und Deutlich. Sämtlicht!! Werke IX. [Nach der Oberutz11ng Frledrich &hlt.iermachers ergoff:ZI durch Übersetzungen von Franz Susemih/]. (Frankfurt am Main aod Leipzig, 1991). {Greek with German translalionJ. Pl•tarcb, Quull"ona Cont~iv•l41 Hoffleit, H.B. "Table Talk Books IV-V." Ju: idem and P. Clement. Plutarch's Moralia VIH. 612 B- 697 C. (LCL Plutarcb 8; Cambridgc [Mass.J aod London, 1969). [Greek with Englisb ttanslation]. Sueloaius, DiiiiiS A11g11&t11S Rolre, J.C. Svetonius. Yol. 1. (LCL; Cambridge [Mass.] and Loadon. 19'79). [Latin with , English translationJTacitus, llistorir~. Moore, C.H...Tacitus. The Histories Books IV-V." [n.: idem and J. Jackson. Tacillls. The Historie.s. Tlle Annals. (LCI. Tacitu.s 2; Cambridge [Mass.} and London. 194l). [Latin with English translation]. Tereuce, Phomtio Sargeaunt, J. Terence. With an English Translation. (2 vols; LCL 22-23; Cambridge, Mass and Londou, 1983; vol. 2, pp. 1-119. [Latin with English ttanslation]. XenophoB, Hellenic.a Marchant, E.C. Xell()phontis opertJ omnia. Yol. 1. (Oxford, 1900; repr. 1968). [Greek ten]. 1.5/slamic Literature Al·Biruai, Tlre ChNnology ofAllelalt N111ünrs Griveau, R. Martyrologes et Minologes orientaJa Jffl-XY/11. Les fttu des Melchites. par AI-Biroun;. (PO 10/4; Parisand Freiburg i.:Br., 1915; pp.189-312). (Arabic witb. French translation]. Sachau, C.E. The Chronology ofAncient Natialfll. A11 English Yersion ofthe Arabic Tut af Athar-Ul-Balciya qJ Albiruni, or Yestigu ofthe Past. Callecud and Reduced to Wriling by the Author inA.H. 39(}-1, A.D. 1000. Tra!Uiated illld EdiledwithNotes and lndu.. {London, 1379}. (English traoslation]. Qur'an Pick:thall, M.M. The Meanlng ofthe Glorious Qur 'an. (Cairo., Beirut, n. d. ). 1.6lnscriplions and Papyri Frcy, J.B. CorpllS 1975). lnscriptio~mm Judalcan~.m. (3 vuls; New Yorlc, 1936-1952, repr. Bi.bliogroplry 367 Grenfell, B., A. H1111t and D. Hoguth• .Foyum TowiU and Their Papyri. (Egypt Exploration Fund, Gn!.eco-Roman Branch; London, 1900). Paton, W.R. and E.L. Hicks. The I1111criptions o[Co11. (Oxford, l89l). Tcherikover, A. Corp~~s Popyrorum Judaicorvm. (3 vols; Cambridge [~illss.}. 19571964}. [CPJ]. 1. 7 Digitalized Databases TLG 8 - ThuaJUJU Linguae Graecae. PLD- Chadwyck-Healey (ed.). Potrologia Latino Databose. (Cambridge [UK), nD.}. Responsa 8- The Rapo1111o Project, Vusion8.0. (Bar-llan Uuiversity, 2000}. 2. Language Dietionaries Bauer, W. Griechisch-deutschu Worterblich zu Jen Schriftiln da Neu;n Testaments und der tlbrigen vrch,.istlichen Literatur. (Berlin, 1958). Bedrossian, Mattbias, New Dicrionary: Amr.enion-EngU&h. (Vtmice,l879). Blaise, A. and H. Chir11t. Dictionnaire lotin-fr~ais tk11 1111teun chretiens. (Tumhout, 1954). Georges, K.E. AII.Sfiihrlichu Lateini11ch-Deut1chu HandwiJiferbllch DII.S den Quellen ßllltimmengetragen und mit buondel'er- Bnugnahme tJII/ Synonymik 1111d Antiquittften unter Bet'iichichtigung der besten Hilftmittel. (2 vols; Hannover and Leipzig, 5 1913/1918). . Gesenius, W. Hebr/Jisches und aramäisches Handwlirt(fl'b•ch iJber das II/te Testament. (Berlin, 1962 = 17 1917). Jastrow, M. A Dictionary ofthe TfZI'gumim, the Talmttd Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Litt~ratll.re. (2 vols in one; repr. Jerusalem, n.d. = London and New York, 1903). Lampe, G.W.E. A Patril;tic Greek Lexicon. (Oxfurd. 1961). Levy, J. Neuhebrttil;ches und chalddischu Wtirterbuch uber die TGlm"dim ~~nd MidrGschim. (4 vols; Berlin and Vienna '1924 [repr. Dannstadll962]). Lewis, C.T. and C. Short. A Larin Dictiona'Y F~mnded on AndrewJ' Edftfon of Fre11nd':1 .l.Atin Dictiona7"Y. Rtrvised, Enlarged, anti in Gl'eat. Parts Rewrilten. (Oxford, 1969). Liddell, H.G., R. Scott, and H. Jones, A Greek-Engllsh Luicon. (Oxford, 9 1989). Payne Smith, R. and J. Margollouth. A Compendiowz Syriac Dictionary, fo'(JIAnded llJ'O" the The.taurvs l:i'yrioe~~.S of R. Payne Smith. (Oxford, f 903, repr. 1957). Sokoloff, M. Ä Dictionary ofJewish Paltslinian Aramoic ofthe Byzantine Period (Ba:rIIan, 1990). 3 ..Encyclopedias The Anchor Blble Dictionary. (Edited by D.N. Freedman; 6 vols; New YarJc. 1992). Dictionnaire d'orcheologie chrltienntl et de litllrgie. {Edited by F. Cabrol end H. Leclerq; 15 "YOls; Paris, 1907-1953). Dictionnolre de Ia Bible. Supplement. (Bdlted by L. Plrot, A. Robert, H. Cazelles, and A. Fenillet; II vols; Paris, 1928ff}. Bibliograph)~ 368 Dictionary of EtU'ly Christian Literalrue. (Bdited by S. OOpp lUid W. Gee:rliogs; New York, ~1999, traDJl. of Lexikon der antllwl chrisrltchen Litet~lur, Freiburg i.Br., Baseland Vienna, 3 1999). Dlctiomwire de 3plritvaliti ascitique et my.stiqtte, doctrine et histoire. (Edited by M. Viller, F.D. Cavallera, and J.D. Guibert; 16 vots; Paris, 1937-1995). Encyclopedia ofthe Early Church. (A. di Berardino; 2 vols; New Yorlc,. 1992). EncyclopediaJudoica. (16+ vols; Ierusalem, 1971). The Encyclopedia of Religion. (Edited by M. Eliade; 16 vols; New York and London, 1987). Handbuch religi()fl$1filse.t13chaftlicher Gnmdbegriffe. (Edited by G. Kehrer, H.G. Kippenberg, H. Cancilc, B. Gladigow, lUid M. Laubscher; S vols; Stuttga:rt, 1988ff). The Qxford Dictionary of Byzantivm. (Edited by A. Kazhdau; 3 vols; Ncw Yor.k, 1991). Pa11ly.s Re.al-Encyclopädie der cla:rsischen A.ltertutn$wissenschqft. (Stllttgart, Munieb~ 1394--1978). Reallaik Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament. (Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich; 10 vols; Stuttgart, 1932-1979). Theologische Ret:~lenzyklopädie. (Edited by G. Krause and G. MODer; 34+ vols; Berlin lUid Ncw York, 1977ff). 4. Concordances, Indices, and Other Auxiliary Literature Computer-Konkordaru Jvm IIOVIIm Testamenrum Graece von Nutle·Aiand und zum Greek N- Testament. Ed. by the "Iostitut ftlr Neutestameutlicbe Te:lrtforschwrg" and the "R.eehenzentrum der Univel'$itllt Milnstcr." (Berlin, ~1980). Geerard, M. and F. Glorie. Clavis Patrum Graecorum. (S voJs; Corpus Christianorum; Tumhont, 1974--1987). Geerard, M. and J. Notet. Clavis Patrum Grllecor~~m. Supplementvm. (Corpus Christianorum; Tumhout, 1998). Dekk.ers, E. and A. Gaar. Clavis Patrum Latinorum: qtta in corpw christianorum edtmdum optima.T qu.QSque scriptorum recensiones a Tertvlliano ad Bedam. (CCSL; Steenbrug, '199.5). Hatch, E. and H. Redpath. .4. Concordance to the Septu.agint and the Other Greek Versiotl3 qf the Old Testament (lncludtng thc Apocryphal Books). (3 vols; Graz, 197.5- Oxford, 1897). Lisowsky, G. Konkordanz ztlm hefJräischen .A.IttUJ Testament. (Darmstadt, 3 1992). Mayer, G. Index Philone11S. (Berlin, 1974). Rengstorf, K.H. .A. Complete Concordance to Flavius J03ephus. (4 voJs; l.eiden. 19731983). Bibliograp/ry 369 Scblfer, P. (In <:ollaboratioo with Gottfried Reeg and wida the help ofKlaus Hemnann, Claudia Robrbacher-Stricker, Guido Weyer and Rina Otterbach). Konkordanz zur Heklullot-Litt~ratur. (2 vol.s; Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 12 and 13; TObingen, 1986, 1988). 5. Secondary Literature AbeJ, F.-M. "La s4pulture de saint Jacques le Miu.eur." R.tw11e Biblique 16 (1919) 48()... 499. Abrahams, I. ATbe Lost •confession' of Samuel." Hebrew Union College Annual I (1924) 377--35. Abi.ISCb, R.. ...Rabbi lshmael's Mirac11lous Conception. Jewish R.odemption History in Anti-CbristiaD Polernic." ln: All. Beclcer and A. R.eed (eds.), The Wt.IY" tht1t Never Pa,.ted: Jew.t and ChristitiM in Antlqvity and the Early Middle Ages. (Texts and Srudies in Ancient Judaism 95; TUbiDgen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003; pp. 307-345). Acbtemeier, P.l. I Peter. (Hcrmenei.a; Minneapolis, 1996). Adna. J. "Der (k)ttesknecbt als triumphierender llild interzos.soriseher Messias. Die Rezeption von Jes 53 im Targum Jonathan untersucht mit besonderere Bero.cksi.chtigung des Messiasbildes." In: B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmac:her (eds.), Der leidende Gouesknecht. Jesaja 53 11nd sei11e Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie :ru Jes 53. (Forschungen zum Ahen Testament 14; TUbingen, 1996; pp. 129-158). Aland, B. "Erwahlqstheologie und Menscheoklassealehre. Die Theologie des Herakleon als SchlOsse! zum Verstiodnis der ehristliehen Gnosis." ln: M. Krause (ed.), Gno:lis and Gnostici'sm. Papers .Read at ihc Seventh lnternati01ral Coiiference 011 Palf'ütic Stildies (Oxford, September 8th-13th 1975). (Nag Hammadi Studies 8; Leide11, 1977; pp. 143-181). Albeck, H. lnlf'oduclion to 1/te Mishnah. [In Hebrew} (Jerusalem. 1959). Alett:i, J.-N. Co/Oßiens 1,15--20. Genreet clg~e ~ tate. F011ction de Ia thematique sapientielle. (Analecta Biblica 91; Rome, 1981). Alleobach, 1., A. Benoit.. D.A. Bertrand. A. Haoriot-Coustet, E. Junod, P. Maraval, A. Pautler and P. Prigeat. Biblia Palri:rtica. Index: des citations et allJUion~ bibliques dam Ja Iitterature patrllliq~~e. (7 vol.s; Paris, 197:5-). Allison, D.C. and W.D. Davies. .4 Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel A.ccording to Saint Matthew. Yol. 111 Commentary o1J Matt~ XlX-XXfll/1. (International Christian Commentary; EdiAburgh, 1997). Alon, G. "The Halakhah in the Epistle of Beroabas." [lo Hebrew] In: idem, Studi64 in Jewish History. (2 vols; Tel Aviv, l957; vol. l, pp. 293-312) = Tarbiz 12 {1940) 2:1-28,223. Altaner, B. "Der Stand der Isidorforschung." In: Miscellanea lsidof'iana (Rome, 1936). Altaner, B. and A. Stuiber. Patrologie. Leben, Schriften und Lehre der Kirchenväter. (Freiburg, Baseland Vienoa, 6 1963). Andcrsen, F.I.: see ~tbove,1Enoch under "Jewish literature." Anderson, H.: see above, 4Maccabees undcr "Jewish literature." Ascllim, A. "The Genre of 11QMel<:b.i.zedelc.'' In: F.H. Crycr aod T.L. Tbompson (eds.), Qrlm,.an between the Old and New Testaments. (Jownal for the Srudy oftbe Old Testament, Supplement Seriea 290; Sheffield. 1998; pp. 17-31). 370 Bibliovaphy Assmann, A. aud J. "Mythos." Handbuch religionswisseMchajtlicher Gnmdbegriffo 4 (!998) 179-200. Attridge, H. W. The Epistle to the H#Jbrews. (Hclllleoeia; Philadephia, 1989). Auf der Maur, H. Feiern im Rhythmzu der Zeit. Herruifeste in Woche und Jahr. (Gottesdienst der Kirehe. Handb11ch der Liturgiewissenschaft 511; Regensburg, 1983). Aune, D.E., Revelation. (Word Biblieal Commentary 52A-C; Nashville {TeliiL}, 1997, 199&, 1998). Aziza, C. Tertullien et lejudofsme. (Pilblications de Ia Faculte des Leltres et des Seiences Humaines d.c Nice 16; Nice, 1977). Baczko, B. Les imoginaires sociau:t. Memoires et espoirs colJectift. (Crltique de la politique; Paris, 1984). Baer, Y. "The Service of Sacritice in Sec:ond Temple Times." (ln Hebrew] Zion 40 (1965) 95-153. Baillet, M.: sec above, Festh>al Prayers under "J'ewish literature." Bammel, C. "Herakleon" Theologische Realencyclopiidie, vol. 15 (1986) 54---57. Barrett, C.K. ''The Lamb ofGod." New Tutament SIJ,dies 1 (1954-55) 216-2.18. - - . "The Eschatology ofthe Epistle to the Hebrews." In: D. Daube and W.D. Davies (eds.), The Background oft~ New Testament and lt1 Eschatology. FeJtschriftfor C.H. Dodd. (Cambridge, 1956; pp. 363-393). - - . Das Evangelium nach Johannes. (Kritisc:h-exegetischer Kommentar llber das Neue Testament; Göttingen, 1990). - - . Ä Critical and E:l;egetical Commentary on the Acts of tha Apostles. (2 vols; lntematiorlll Critical Commentary 44; Edinburgb, 1994, 1998). Banh M. and H. Blanke. Colosli4ns. A New Translation with lnlroduction and Commentary. (Anchor Bible J4B; New York, 1994). Baumgarten, J.M. "Yom Kippur in tbe Qumran Scrolls and Second Temple Sourc:es." Dead Sea Di&co~Jeries 6 (1999) 184···191. Baumstark. A. Festbrevi~~r und Kirchei'!Jahr der syri1chen Jakobiten. Eine liturgiegeschichtltchf Yorarbeit aufGnmd lrt~ndschriftlicher Sludfen in Jerusalenr und Damaskus, du Syrischen Hcmdschrifterrlr.ataloge von Berlin, Cambridge, London. Ox:ford, Par# und R(Nfl und des Unierten Mosiuler Futbrevterdrucus. (Paderbom, 1910). ---·-. Geschichte der syrischen LiteraiWr. (Boon, 1922). - - . "Ausstrahlungen des vorbyzantinischen Heiligenkalenders von Jernsalem." Orientalia Christiana P~riodica 2 (1936) 129-144. - - . Comparatille Liturgy. (Revised by Bemard Botte; EDglisb editioo by F.L. Cross; I.ondon, 19SS). D.P. "Review of Der Tod Jesu als Heiligtumsweihe. Eine UntersuchUilß zom U10feld der Sühnevorstellung in Umer 3,2S-26a, by Wolfgang Kraus." JOflmal of Theological Studies 45 (1994) 247-252. - - . ..Jesus as the Mercy Seat~ The Semanlies and Theology of Paul's Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25." (Ph.D. dissertation; University ofCambridge, 1999). --."[Dissertation summary:] Jesus as the Mercy Seat: The Se.m.antics and Tbeology of Paul's Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25." Tyndale Bulletin Sl (2000) 155158. ---···-. ''Greck Heroes Who Happen to Be Jewish: The Meaning of \).ocm'JPtov in 4 Maccabees 17:22" (nnpublished bandout to a paper given on the SBL, Toronto, 23.11.2002). Bell, C. Ritual. Perapectillll3 ond Dimen1ions. (New York and Oxford, 1997). B~tiley, Bihiiography 371 Bell, R.H. "Teshubah: The Idea of R.epentance in Ancient Judaism." The Journo/ of Progressive Judaism 5 (1995) 22-52. Berendls, A. Studien iiber Zacharias-Apolayphen und Zacharias-Legenden. (Leipzig, 1895). Betz, H.D. Galatians. A Commentaty on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia. (Hermeueia; Philadelphia. 1979). Beyse, K.-M. "'lVJ.'' Theologisches JYiJrterbuch zum Altiln Testament 8 (1995) 340-342. Bezalel, N. "Clement of Alexandria on an Unknown Custom in the Temple Service oftho Day of Atonement." [In Hebrew] Sinai 103 (1919) 177f. Bigg, Ch. Critical aml Eregetical CommBntary 011 the Epistles qJSt. Pe.ter and St Jude. (lntematiooal Critical Commentary; New York, 1901). Black, M. "The Festival of Encaenia Ecclesiae in the Ancient Church with special reference to Palestine and Syria." Journal of Ecclesiastir:al History S (19:54) 78-- 85. - - . See also above, 1Enoch under ..Jewish lilerature." Blenkinsopp, J. lsaiah 1..:39. (Anchor Bible 19; New York, 2000). Bloeher, H. "Zacharie 3. Josm! et Je Grand lour des Expiations.,; Et:Jdu Theologiques et Re.ligieU$eS S4 (1979)264-270. Boclcmuehl, M. '"The Form of God' (Phil. 2:6) Variations on a Theme of Jewish Mysticism." Journal ofTheologiCQl Studie.s 48 (1997) 1-23. Bolle, R. "Un docteur de l'aumOne, S. Uon le Grand." Yie~"pirltuelle (19S7) 266-287. Bomert, R. Les commentairu byzantins de Ia ditline Iiturgie du J"lle au XYe :riecl.t. (Archives dt: l'orient chrl!tien 6; Paris. 1966). Bousset, W...Eine jüdische Gebetssammlung im siebenten Bueh der Apostolischen Konstitutionen.~ Nachrichten 1101.1 der Gesellschaft ikr Wissenschaften zu Göttin.ge~~, Philosophisch-historische Klas:re 1915, pp. 435-489 ".. ReligiOIUwissenschaftliche Studien. Auflätze xur Religio~Uge.schichte des Hililenistischen Zeitaltera (ed. by A.F. Verbeule; Supplements to Novum Testamenturn :SO; Leiden, 1979; pp. 231-285). Bovon, F. Das Evangeltum nach LukM. I. Teilband Lk l,i-9,50. (EvangeliscltKatholisch.er Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 3:1; Zllrich and NeukirchenVIuyn, 1989}. Boyarin, D. "Semantic Differeru:es; or; 'Judaism'I'Chtistianity'." In: A. Becker and A. YO$hikO Reed, The f!Yays Thai Ne.ver Parted. Jews and Christians in Late Antiquily and the Earl:y Middle Ages. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 95; TUbingen, 2003; pp. 65-86). Brtndle, .R. "Christen und Juden in Aotiochien in den Jahren 386/387. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte allkirchlicher Judenfeindschaft." Judaica 43 ( 1987) 142-168. BräUdie and Jegher-Bucb.er: see above John Cbrysostorn, A.galnsl the Jews under "Christian and Gnostic Lirerature." Bremmer, J. "Scapegoat Rituals in Ancient Greece ... Harval'd St11.dies in Cla:rsical Philology 87 (1983)29~320. - · - . "Tbe Atooemem in the Interaction of Oreeb, Jews, and Christians." ln: idem and F.G. Martinez (eds.), Sacl'ed History and Sacred Texts in .E:arly J11daism. ..4. Symposium in Honour of A.S. lTQfl der Woude. (Coottibutions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 5; Kampen, 1992; pp. 77~3). Breytenbac:b, C. VeJ'söhn1111g. Eine Studie ZIIT paulinischen Soteriologie. (Wissenschaftliche Monographien aum Alten wtd Neuen Testament 60; Neuk.irchen, 1989). 372 Bibliography "Versilhnull8, Stellvertretung und S1Jhne. Semantisehen und traditionsgeschichtliche Bemerkungen am Beispiel der paulinisc:hen Briefe." New ---. Testament Studies 39 (1993) 59-79. Bronmiclc. N.M. The Liturgical Poetry ofYannai. Erplani:UiOIU and Interpretatiom with SuggeJtions for Textua/ Emendatioru and Completlona of L(H;fl11tJe. (Jerusalem, 2000}. Brown, R.E. The Gospel According lo John (1-:rii). lntroductio", TraMiatüm, and Noiu. (Anchor Bible; Garden City [NY], 1966). - - . The Epistlu ofJohn. (Anchor Bible 30: Garden City [NY], 1982). -····-. The Death of the Meuiah. From Geth.semane to the Grove. (The Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York, 1994). - - . A n Introduction to the New Testament. (New Yort. 1!191). Brox, N. Der erste Petru.sbrief {Evangelis.ch-Katholischer Kommenlar 21; Zfi.rich, Einsiedeln, Cologne and Neukirchen-Vluyn, 2 1986). Bruce, F.F. The Book. of the Acts. (New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1988). Bruckner, R. 'Christuslrymnen' oder 'epliklkltsche • Passagen? St11dien zuM Stilwecluel im Neutut Te1tament und 1einer Umwelt. (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 176; Gottingen, 1997). B!i.Chler, A. Studie& in S/11 ond Atonement. (London, 1928). Bil.ebsel, f'., and 1. Herrmann. "Hileos, hilaslromai, hilasmos, hilasterion." Theologi11ches Wörterbuch .rum Neuen Te:stamerrt 3 (1938) 300-324. Bock:ley, U. "A Cult-Mystecy in •Tbc Gospel ofPI\ilip'." Jo~tmal ofBiblical Literature 99 (1980) 569--581. Bugnini, A. "Croce. VII. La C[roc:e] nella liturgla." Enciclopedia Cottolica 4 {1950) 960-963. Bultmann, R. "Mythos und MYthologie IV (inl NT)." Religion in Geschichte uruJ Gegenwar~ 4 (1960) 1278-1282. - - . The Johannine Epistle.s. (Henneneia; Philadelphia. 2 1978). Burney, C.F. The Aramale Ortgin of the Fourth Gospel. (Orlord, 1922). Cahill, M.: see above, Pseudo-Jero.me, Commentory on Mark under "'Ciui:stiau and Goostie Literature." Carleton Paget, J. The Epi1tle ofBDTnabas. Outlook and Background. (Wissenscbaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, seoond series 64; Tiibingen, 1994). - - . "Paul and the Epist)e of Btii'IIObas." Novum Testament11m 33 (1996) 359-381. Cbarles, R.H.: see above, Genval CoUections and 1Enoch uoder "Jewish literature." Cbadesworth, J.H. "A Prolegomenon to a New Study ofthe Jewish Badl:ground ofthe Hymns and Prayers in the New Testament." Joarnal of Jewish Stildies 33 (1982) 265-281. Chavasse. A. "Les Qu.atre-Temps." In: A.G. Martlmort (ed.), L 'Eglise en Prier.:. lnlroduction d Ia Liturgie. (Paris, Tournai, Rome and New Yorlr. 1965; pp. 758767). . - - . '"Le sennon Ili de saim Uon et La date de Ia ceJcbration des Quatre-Temps de septembre." Revue des .science3 reltgleliSes 44 (1970} 77-84. - - . ~e also above, Leo the Grear, Come.s ofA.lcvin, Comes of Wilrzburg, Ge.lmian Sacramentary under "Christian and Gnostic Literatnre." Chazon, E. "Human and Angeli~: Prayer in Light of the Dea.d Sea Scrolls... {Unpublished lecture given on the fifth Orion International Symposium., 19-23 Jamurry, 2000, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem). Bibliography 373 Coakley, I.F. '"Typology and lbe Birtbday of Christ on 6Ianuary." Orientalia Chri3tlano Analecra236 (1988) 247-256. Cody, A. Heavenzy Sanctuory and Liturgy in the Epi3tle to the Hehrew.s. (St. Meinrad, 1960). Collins, JJ. "Methodological lssues in the Study ofl Enoch: Reflections on the Articles of P.D. Hanson and G.W. Nickelsburg." Soclel)l of Biblical Lituature Seminar PtlJHrS (1978) 315-322. - - . Daniel. (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, 1993). Coilin.~. J.J.: seealso above, Sibylline Oracles 1111der "Jewish lireratore." Connolly, R.H: sec above, Pseudo-George the Arab, üpo1itio Officiorum Eccle.siae undcr "Christian aDd Gnostic Literature." ConybeaR, F.C: see above, .Pseudo-EpiphaDius, Commentary tm Luu Ullder "Chmtian and Gnostic Literaturc." Conzelmann, H. Acts ofthe A.postla. (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, 1987). Cothenet, E. •Prot6vaugile de Jacques: origine, genre et signification d'un pmnier midrasb. ehrerlen sur Ia Nativit6 de Marie." In: W. Haase and H. Temporini (eds.), Aufttieg und NiedergW~g der R(;mischen Welt 1:25:6. (Berlin md New York, 1988; pp. 42.S2-4269). Cowley. A. Journalfor Egyptian Archeology (1915) 211-212. - - . See also above, Samaritan.Limrgy under "Iewish literature." Cremcr, F.G. Die Fastenansage Jesq. Mk 2,20 um/ Parallelen in der Sicht der Patristischen und Scholastischen Exegese. (Donner Biblische Beitrltge 23; Bonn, 1964). Cro.ssan, J.D. Four Other Gospels. (Minneapolis, 1985). - - . "Tbe Cross That Spote. The Earliest Namrtive of the Passion and ReSUJTection .., FORUM312 (1987) 3-12. - -. .The Cro:rs That Spoke. The Origins of the Passi011 Narrative. {San Francisco, 1988). · - - . The Hi:rtorical Jll!Sils. The Life of a Mediterranean Jewuh Peasant. (San Fram:isco, 1991 ). - - . Wlro Killed Jesll:t? üposing the Roots ofA.ntlsemltism in the Gospel Story ofthe Death ofJuu:;. (San FBncisco, 1995}. Cullmaon. 0.: see above, Protevangeli11m under "Chris!ian and Gnostic Ltterature." Culpepper, R.A. John, the Son of Zebedee. The Life of a ügend. (Studies 011 Personalities oftbe New Testament; Columbia [S.C.], 1994}. Da!y, R.J. "Sacrifice in Origen." Swdia Palristica 11 (1972) 12s.:..129. - - - . "Sacrificial Soteriology in Origen's Homilies on Leviticus... In: E.A. Livingstone (ed.), Shldta .Patristica 17:2. (Oxford, 1982; pp. 872-878). Daniel, S. hcherches sur le vocabttlaire dt.r cultc dans Ia Septante. (Etudes et commeataires 61; Paris, 1966). - - . See also above, Pbilo under «Jewish Literature." Danielou, J. •·Les Quatre-Temps de septembre et la fete des Tabemacles." La MaisonDiet.~46 (1956} 114-136. Damcll, D.R. and D.A. Fie.nsy: see above, HellenlsticS,flllgoga/ Prayers under "Iewish literature." Davila, I. "Mel~b.izedclc, Michael, md War in Heaven ... lo: Sociel)l ofBiblicoi Literatun J996Se'1Jtinar .Papers JS (Atlanta (Ga.],l996; pp. 259-272). Davidson, Y.: see above, Seder RtJII Sa 'odio Go 'on 1111der "Jewisb literature." Davison. J.E. "Structuml Similarities ud Dissimilarities in the Thoug.bt of Clemem of Alexaadria aud the Valea!inians." Second Century 3 (1983) 20 l-217. 374 ßibliography De Coninck, A...Entering God's Presence. Sac:ramentalism in tbe Gospel of Phllip." In: Society ofBiblical Literature SeminOI" Papers 37:1. {Atlama [Ga.), 1998; pp. 483523). De Halleux, A. "Le comput l!phtemien du c:yc:lo de Ia Dativit4." 1D: F. Van Segbroeck, C.M. Tuckett, G. Van Belle and I. Verbeyden (eds.), The Fow Gospels 1992. Festschrift Frans Neirynck. {Bibliotheca Ephemeridum TheologicatUD'I Lovaniensium 3; Leuven, 1992; pp. 2369-2382). Oe longe, M.: see also above, The Testaments of the Twelve PatriarchJ Wider "Jewish literature." De Ionge, M. and H.W. Hollander. The Testamen~ of the Twelve Patriarchs. A Commentary. {Studia in veteris testameDti pseudepigrapha 8; Leiden, 1985). De Lange, N. Qrjgen and theJews, (Cambrldge, 1915). De Stryclcer, E.: see above, Protetumgelium under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Delana, G. "ll Giomo del Kippiu in Filone di Alessandria." In: p; Vattioni (ed.), Sangue e antropologia. Ritf e culto. Ani della V Settimana Roma, 26 novembre - 1 dicembre 198-1. (Sangue e antropologia 5!2; R.ome, 1987; pp. 891~0S). - - . II giorna dell'espim:ione: ii kippur nella tradlzione blblica. (Supplementi all Revista Biblica 30; Bologna, 1994). Delssmann, A. Licht vom Osten. Das Neue Tes/(Jlflenl IUid die neuentdeckten Texte der hellenistisch.römischen Welt. (Tübingen, 4 1923). Denker, J. Die tlreologi~t~chichtliche Stellung du PetrusevangeJiums. (Europälsclle H~bschulscbriften, 23. Reihe, 3~; Bern, Frankfurt am MaiD, 1975). Der Nersessian, S. "La ." Annuaire de l'institut de phUologie el d'histoire orienta/es et &laves. Ha:yKoptrera. Melanges Henri Gregoire 10 (1950) 193-198. Dcrenbourg, I. "Essai do restitution de l'ancienne rl!dac:tion de MQSsechet Kippourim." ReVJte du ndesjuive., 6 (1882} 41-80. Desan, P. L 'imaginaire dconomlque de Ia Rsnais&ance. (Paris, 1993). Devreesse, R. "Aneieus commentueurs grecs de l'Octateuque.u Revue bihlique 44-45 (1935-1936) 166-191,201-220,364-384. ··--.Lu anciens commentateurs gr~tcs de l'Octateuqw et des Roi1 (Studie Testi 201; Vatican City, 1959). Dibelius, M. "Die alttestamentlichen Motive in der Leidensgeschiebte des Petrus- und Johannesevangeliums." Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fir die alttestamentliche Wisaenschaft 33 (1918) 125-1 SO. Dibellus, 0. "Studien zur Geschichte der Valentinianer." Zeitschrift for die nll.utestamemllche Wissenschaft rmd die Kunde der lJ/teren Kirche 9 (1908) 230247; 329-340. Dimant, D. "The Fallen Angels in the Dead Sca Scrolls and the Relall::d Apocryphes aod Pseudepigrapha." [In Hebrew with English sunllll3lyJ (Pb.D. dissertatiou, The Hebrew University of lerusalem, 1974). - - . "I Enoch 6-11: A Methodological Perspective." Society of Bibllcal Literatlire Seminar Papers (1976) 323-339. Dodd, C.H. The ImerpretatiOlt ofthe FarJrth Go.,pel. (Cambridge, 1953). Dolle, R..: see abovc, Leo the Great under "Christian and Gnostic Literacure ... Doutreleau, L.: see above., Didymus under ''Christian and G11ostic Ute~ture." Drab, H.A. "Eusebius on the True Cr065." Journal of EcclesiQSt/cal History 36 (1985) 1-22. BibUography 375 Drijvers, J.W. Helerw Augusta. Tht1 Mother ofConsttmtine thc Grilat and the Legetui of Her Finding the True Cross. (Brill's Studies in Intellectual History 27; Leiden, 1992). Dunn, J.D.G. The Epistle to the Galatifi1U. (Blaclc:'s New Testament Commentary Peabody [Mass.], 1993). - - . 1'he Act!l of the Apostles. (Narrative Commeotaries; Valley Forge [Penn.], 1996). ----..-. 711e Theology of Paul the Apostle. (Grand bpids [Mich.} and Cambridge {UK}, 1998). D11r.md, G. Lu structuru amhropologique.f de l'tmoginaire. (Paris, 12 1992- 1959). Duval, Y.-M. Le Iivre de JontJll dans la Iitterature chretienne grecque et /tltine. $()flrces el influence du Commentaire :mr JonilJ de saint Jbome. (2 vols; Paris, 1973). Eckey, W. Die Apostelguchichte. Der Weg des Evangeliums von Jervsalem nach Rom. (Neukirche11-Vluyn, 2000). Eizenböfer, L.: see above, Sacrilmentariu.m Veronense under "Christian and Gnostic UteratUR." Elbogen, J. Studien . zur Guchichte des jfi~chen Gottesdimates. (Schriften der Lehranstalt fiir die Wissenschaft des Judenthums lll-~; Berlin, 1907). - - - . "Die Tefilla für die Festtage:• Monatsschrift for Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentttms 55 {1911) 426--446, 586-599. - - . Der jildi8che Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung. (Hildesheim, 1967• repr. of'l93l). Elior, lt "From Earthly Temple ro Heavenly Shrines. Prayer and Sacred Song in the Helchalot Utcrature aud Its Relation to Temple Traditions." Jewish Sfudies Quarterly 4 {1997) 217-167. - - . "The Merka~~ah TraditiOJl and the fmcrgence of Jewish Mysticism." ln: A. Oppenb.eimer (ed.), Sino-J11daica. Jew1 and Chinese in Historictll Dialope. An International Colloqui~~~n NQnjing, JJ-19 October 1996. (Tel Aviv, 1999; pp. 101-158). . Ellior:t" J.H. I PeJer. A New Translation with Jnrroduction and Commentary. (Ancbor Bible 378; New Yorlc, 2000). Eogberding, H. "Der 25. Dezember als Tag der Feier der Geburt des Herrn." Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft 2 (l9S2) 2S-43. · - - . "Kann l'elnla der Iberer mit Dioaysius Areopagita identifiZiert werden?" Oriens Chrutianu:s 38 (1954) 68-J)S. Epstein, Y.N. Prolegomena ad Lillt~rQ.J Tannaiticas. [In Hebrew] (IeiUS8lem, 1957). Ettlinger, G.: see above, Theodoret, Eranistes under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Falk, D.K. Daily, Sabbatlt, and Festlvtll Prayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls. (Studies on the Texts oft.he Desert of Judah 27; Leiden, 1998). Fee, G.D. Paul'E Letter lo the Philippiaru. (New International CommentJtry to the New Testament; Gnmd Rapids [Mich.], 1995). Femändez Marcos, N. and A. Saeoz-Badillos: see above, Theodoret of Cyrus under "'Christian and Gnostic Literat:ure." Fiensy, D.A. Praye,.s AJ/eged to be Jewish. An &amination of the Constitutiones Apostoloruu1. (Brown Judaic Studies 65; Chico [Calif.], 1985). Fiensy, D.A. aod D.R. Damell: sce above, Helleninic Synagogal PrQ]IIIT's under "Jewish literature.,. Fine, S. This Holy Place. On the Sonctily of the Synagope during the Greco-Roman Puiod. (Christianity al:ld Judaism in Antiquity Se:ries 11; Notre Dame [lnd.], 199'7). 376 Bihliograpky Fischer, L. Die kirchlichen Quatember. Jhre EntJiehung, Ent.wi.clclrmg und Bedeutung m liturgischBr, rechtlich~~r rmd kuihlrhistori.tchBT Himichl. (Veroft'entl~hungen aus dem kirchenhistorischen Seminar Manchen IV. Reihe Nr. 3; Munich, 1914). Fitzmyer, I.A. Romaru. A New Trt111slation wüh lntroduction and Commentary. (The Anchor Bible 33; New Yorlt, 1992). - - . The Acta of IM Apostles.. A New TrDI'ISlation with Introduction and Commmtary. (Anchor Bible Conunentary 31A; New York, 1998)• .Fleist:her, B. El'etz~lsnzel Prayer and Prayer Rihlals at PortrQ)Htd in the Genizo Documenta. [In Hebrew] (Publications of the Perry Foun.dation in the Hebrew Univenity of Jerosalem; Jerusalem, 1988). - - . "Piyyut and Prayer in Mahzor Eretz ltrael." (ln Hebrew] Kiryat Sejer 63 (1990) 207-262. - - . "Inquiries Conceming the Triennial Reading of the Torah in Am:ient Eretzlsrael." {In Hebrew] Hebrew Union College Annual6l (1991) 43-tH. - - . "Annual and Triennial Reading ofthe Bible in the Old Synagogue." [In Hebrew witb English summary) Tarbiz 61 (1992) 2S-43. Foerster. W. Yon Yalfmlln zu Herakleon. Umer~uchrmgen tiber die Qvelfe.n und die Ent.wickl•ng der valentinianlschen Gnosis. (Beihafte zur Zeilschrift fllr die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der llteren Kirche 7; Giessen, 1928). Francis, E.T. The E11chorislic Theology ofA.malarius ofMetz. (Paris, 1977). Fr1112, A. Die Mes.w im Deliischen Mitts/alter. (Darmstadr, 1963, repr. Freiburg, 1902). Fraser, M.F. "Constantine and tbe En~ia." Studia Patriatica 29 (1997) 25-28. Frey; I. "Die 'tbeologia croc:if'"lxi' des Johanxaesevaugeliwns." In: A. Dettwiler and J. Zumstein (eds.), Kremestheologie im Neven Te:~tament. (Wissenschaftliche UntersuchliDgen zum Neuen Testament 151; Ttibingen 2002; pp. Hi9-238). Fro!ow, A. La relique de Ia vrale Croix. (Paris, 1961). Fuller, R.H. "Review of: Jolm Dominic Crossan, The Cross that Spoke. The Origin:l of the Passion Narrative (San Fzancisco: Harper and Row, 1988)." lntfll'pretation 45 (1991) 71-73. Fung. R. Y.K. Tl" Epist/e to the Galatimr.s. {The New International Commentary 011 the New Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1988). Gager, J.O. "Jews, Chr.ist$:~ and the Dllll&erous Ones in Between." In: Shlomo Bidennan and Ben· Ami Scharfstein (ed&.), Interpretation in Religions. (Philosophy and Religion, a Comparative Yearbook 2; Leiden. 1992; pp. 249257). Gagcr, J.G. Curse tabfett and binding spells from the oncienl world (New York. 1992). Garcia-Martioez, F. "l.as tradiciones sobre Melquisedec en Iot manuscritos c1e Qwnrän." Biblica 81 (2000) 70-80. Garitte, G.: see above, Joha Zosimus under "Cbristian and Gnostic Literature." Gartncr, Y. "The History ofthe kapparot Rite Regarding the Custom ofMarseille." [In Hebrew) Sinai 114 (1994) 198-·217. Geerard, M. aud F. Clrwu.s Ptltrflm Graec{}f'11111. Yolumen Y. Indices, lnitia, Concodantlae. (Corpus Christianorom; Turnhout, 1937). Geiger, A. "Zu den Apokryphen." Jiidlscht. Zeit:ichrift ftir Wisseruchaft vnd Leben 3 ( 1864) 196-204 .. G•otto, C. "Hcrac:leon" Encyclopedhl ofthe EarlyChW'ch (1992) wl. 1, p. 374. Gingras, G.E.: sec above: Egeria under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Ginzhetg. L. The Legends oftheJ~3. (7 vols; Philadelphia 1909-1938, reprinted 196768). Bibliograph)' 377 Girard, R. The Scape.goat. (Baltimore, 1986). Godu, G. "Epitres." Dictionnaire de l'archeologie chretie.nne er /ittJrgie SII (1922) 245344. - - . • (Wi.ssenschaftlicbe Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament" second series 33; l"llbingeo. 1988). Greenberg, M. Ezekiel 1-20. A New Translation wfth Jntroductlt:m and Commentary. (Anchor Bible 22; Gardeli City (New York), 1983). Grintz, Y.M. ·"A Seder Avodah for Yom .Kippur from Qumran." In: Chapter:; in the History af ihe Second Temple (peraqim betoledot bayt sheni). [In Hebrew] (Jerusalem, 1969; pp. l:SS-158). Griveau, R.: see above, AI·Biruni, The Chronology o/ Anclent NatiQIU mder "lslamic Literatw:e." Guinot, J.-N. "L'ex..!gese du bouc ~missai.re chez C)'rille d'Alexandria et TModoret de Cyr." Augusttnlanum 28 (1988) 603-630. - - . L 'uigi.se rie Thiodoret de Cyr (Tb6ologie. historiqne 100; Paris, 1995). - - - . See also above, Theodoret, Commentary on lsaiah mder ''Christian and Gnostie LiteraiUre." 378 Bibliograplry Hacbam, N. "Communal Fasts in tbe Jud.ean Desert Scrolls and Associated Literature." In: D.M. Goodblatt, A. PinDick and D.R. Schwanz (eds.). Historica/ Penrpectives: From the Hasmoneans to Bor KoJ.hba z'n Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Proccedlngs of the Fourth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of Dead Sea Scrol/s and A.ssociated Literature, 21-31 January, ·/999. (Studies on !he Texts of the Desert of Judah 37; Leiden, 200 I; pp. 127-14.S}. Hac:btt, H.B. A Commentary on lhB Original Text of the Acts of the Apt»tles. (Boston, 1867). . Hager, D.A. Mmthew U-28. (Word Biblic:al Comm.entary; Dalla.s [Texu], 1995). Halbwac:hs, M. La topt)graphie legendaire des evangiles en tvre sainte. Etude de mimolre col/ective. Prej.. de Ferna11d Dumont. (Paris, "1971). Hallit" J. "La Croix dans le rite byzautin." Parole de /'Orient 3 {1972) 262-3 I 1. Halton, T. "Hegesipp." Theologische R.ealeruykloptidie t4 (1985) S60-S62. Hamerton-Kelly, R.G. "Sac:red Violeace and the Cune ofthe Law (GalatiBlls 3.13): The Death of Christ as a Satrificial Traversy." New Te.stament Shldies 36 (1990) 98_:. 118. Hanhan, R. Sachurja. (Biblisc:her Kommentar. Altes Testament 14:7; Neukirchen-Vloyn, I 990ft). Hanson, P.D. "RebeUion in HeaveJa. Aza7..el, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6-Il." Joum~tl ofBiblical Literahmt96 (1977) 195-233. Hanson, R.P.C. The Acu in the Revlsed Standard Ver.sion. With lntroductwn and Commentary. {The New Clarendon Bible; Oxford, 1967). Hawting, G.R. "The Tawwabun, Atonement and Ashura." Jt~wish Studies in Arabic and Islam 17 (1994) 166-181. Heesterman, J.C. The Brolten WQI"/d ofSacriftce. (Chicago, 1993}. Heid. S. "Zwei an den Enbinien der Jerusalemer Grabeskirehe gehaltene Predigten des griechischen Ephram." Oriens Christiarws 84 (2000) 1-22. Heinemann, J. Prayer in lhi!! Perrod ofthB Tanna 'im and the A.mora 'im. lts Nature and Its Pmtern.s. (In Hebrew. with P.nglish Summary] (Publications of the Pell'}' Foundation for Biblical Reseatth in tbe Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jerusalem, 2 1966). - - . "The Aneient 'Orden of Benedictions' for New Year and Fasts." (In HebrewJ Tarbi:r; 45 {1976) 253-267. Heininger, B...SUndenrcinjgung (Hebr 1,3). Christologisehe Amnerkungen :zum Exordium des Hebrterbriefs." Biblüche üitschrift [N.F.] 41 (1997) 54-68. Helm, L. Studie" zur typologischen Schriflauslegrmg im zweiten Jahrh1mdert. Bamabas und Justin. (Heidelberg, 1971). Helm, R. «Azazel in Early Jewish Tradition.ft Andrttws University Seminary Studies 32 (1994) 217-226: Hengel, M. "Zur Wirkungsgeschichte von Jes 53 in vorchrist1icher Zeit." In: B. Janowslci and P. Stuhlmac:her (eds.), Der .leidende Gottednecht. Jesaja 53 und seine Wirk.ung.rgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie zu Jer 53. (ForscbUIJgen mm Alten Testament 14; Tüb.in,geD, 1996; pp. 49-91). - - . "Der Jude Paul\IS und sein Volk. Zu einem ncuen Acta-Kommentar." Theologuche Rund.schau66 (2001) 338-368. - - . "Jakobus det Herrenbruder - der erste Papst?'' In: idem, Po.ulus und Jakobu.s. Kleine Schriften 111. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testantont 141; TnbiDgen, 2002; pp. 549-582). Hennans, Th. Orighle, Theologie sacrificiel/11! du so.cerdoce des chretie~~&. (lb6ologie historique l 02; Pari5 1996}. Bibliography 379- Himmelfarb, M. "Heavenly Ascent and the Relatiooship of tbe Apocalypses and the HeltJralot Literature." Hebrf!W Union Collere .4.nnual 59 (1988) 73-100. - - . hcsnt to Heaven in Jewish anti Christion .4.pocalypses. (Oxford, 1993). Hock, R.F.: see above, Protevangelium uuder "Christiau and Gnostic Literature." Hoeek. J.M. "Stalld und Aufgaben der Damaskenos-Forschung." Orientalla Chrilliana Periodfca 11 (1951). Hoffman, L.A. The Canoni:ation of the Synagogue Service. (University of Notre Dame, Center for tbe Study of ludaism md Christlanity in ADtiquity 4; Notre Dame (Iod.] and London, 1979). Hofius, 0. Der Vorhang vor dem Thron Gottes. Eine exegetisch-religlonsge.schichtliche Untersuchung zu Hebriier 6, 19f und I 0,19f (Wi5senschaftlicbe Untersu.cbungen zum Neuen Testament 14; TUbingen, 1972). ----. Der ChrisMltymnus Phitipper 2,6-J 1. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum NeJJen Testament 17; Tflbingen, al991). --.·"Du vierte Gottesknech~lied in den Briefen des Neuen Testamentes." ln: B. Janowslci and P. Stuhlmacher (eds.), Der leidende GottesknliiCht. Jesajo 5J ~~nd seine Wfrkung.sguchiclrte mit einer Bibliographie zu Je:r 53. (Forschungen zurn Alten Testament 14; Tfibingen, 1996; pp. 107-127). - - . "'Erstgebonner vor aller Schöpfung' - 'Erstgeborener aus den Toten.' Erwägungen zu Struktur und Aussage des Christushymnus Kol l,lS-20!'1n: idetn. Paui"IIJ$tudien /1. (Wissensc,baftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 143; TUbingen, 2002; pp. 21j--233). HoII, K. "Die Entstehung der vier Fastenzeiten in der griechischen Kin-:he." ln: Gesammelte .4.'Uf:rtitze. Vol. 2. Der Osten. (Töbingen, 1923; pp. lSS-203). Holladay, C.R. 'Theias A.ner' in Helleni.rtiv-.llldoi.sm: o CrUique of the U8e of thls Category in New Testament Christology. (Society of Biblil:al Literature Dissenation Series 40; Missoula [Mont.}, 1977). Hollander, H. W. and M. De Ionge: see De Ionge. Horbury. W. "The Aaronic Priest:bood in tbe Epistle to the Hebrews." Journal for the SNdy ofthe. New Tastoment 19 (1983) 43-71. - - . "Jewish-Cbristian Relations in BarnaiHI.r and Justin Martyr." In: J.D.G. DIDlll (ed.), J~ anti Christians: The Parting of the Ways .4..D. 70 to 135. (WisseJJSchaftliche Untersuc.:bungen zum Neuen Testament first 15cries vol. 66; Tübingen,l992; pp. 315-345). Hruby, K.. "Le Yom Ha-Kippurim ou Jour de l'Expiation." Orient Syrien 10 (1965) 4174,161-192,413-442. Hunt, E.D. "'Consta.ntine and Jerusalem." Jownal "/ Eccltsiastic4l History 4S (1997) 405-424. Hurst, L.D. The Epistle to the Hebrew:r. lts Backg7ound ofThought. (Socicty for New Testament Stucties, Monograph Series 6$; Cambridge, 1990). Hvalvilc, R. The Stngglt for Sc,.iptvre and Cowmant. The Pvrpo.se o/ the Eplstle of Barnt~ba:r and Jewish-Cir.riJtian Competition in the Second Century. (Wissenschatl:licbe Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testll!lCP!, second seties 82; Tübingen, 1996). Hyldahl, N. "Hegesippus Hypomnemata." Studia Th~tologica 14 (1960) 7G-l13. lnbai, 0. "Historical Aspect1 of tbe Chtistian-Jewish Polemic Conceming the Clrurch of Ierusalem in the Folltth Century (In the Light of Patristic and Rabbinie Literatute)." [Io Hebrew with English summaryl (2 vols; Ph.D. dissertation, The Hcbrew Uuiversity of Ierusalem, 1993 ). 380 Bibliograph)! - - - . "Constantine and tlte Jews: the Prohibition agaiost Entering Jerusatem - History and Hagiopphy." [In Hebrew with Erqpish summary] Tarbiz 60 (1995) 129--178. lsaacs, M.E. "Hebrews 13.9-16 Revi.'lited." New Tutament Studiu 43 (1997) 268-284. Jacobson. H. A Commentary on Pseudo--Philo's Llber Antiquitahlm Bibllcarum with Latln Text and English Translati011. (2 vols; Arbeiten ZW' Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 31; Leiden, 19%). Janini, J. S. Siricio y tu Cllatro temporas. una investigacion sohre las foentu de la tspiritNalidad seglaf' y del Sacramentario Leoniano. Le.cciOI'I inagural del curso 1958-59. (Valencia, 1958}. .Janowski, B ...Er trug U11Sere Silnden. Jesaja 53 und die Dramatik der Stellverttetung." Zeitschriftfiir Theowgie und Kirche 90 (1993) l-24. - - . "Azazel." in K. van der Toom, B. Becking and P.W. \'811 der Hont (eds.), Dlctionary Of Deitiu and Demans in the Bible (Leiden, 1995; eol. 240-248). Janows.ki, B. and P. Stuhhnaeher {eds.). Derleid.nde Gottesknecht. Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie !11 Jes 53. (Forsc;huogen zum Alten Testament 14; Tnbingeo, 1996). Janssens., Y. "H6racl6on. Commentaire sur I'Evangile seton saint Jean." Le Museon 72 (1959) 101-151; 277-299. Jacquier, E. Les Actes des Apötres. (Etudes bibliques 18; Paris, 1926). Jeremlas, J. "Amnos, aren, arnioo." Theologisches Wiirterbuch '"m Heuen Testament 1 (1933) 342-345. Jervell, J. Die Apostelgeschichte. ! Obersetzt und erklärt. (Kritisch-exegetisl:her Kommentar llber das Neue Testament 3; Göttingea, 1991!). Jones, F.S. "The Martyrdom of James in Hegesippus, Clement of Alexandria, and Christian Apoerypba, Includiog Nag Hammadi: A Stndy of Textnal Relations." lo: D.J. Lull (ed.}, Society of Biblical Literature 1990 Semina; Papers. (SBLSP 29; Atlanta (Ga.], 1990; pp. 322-335). Jungma!ln, J.A. Missarum sollemnia. Eine genetische Erklänmg der r~mlschen Mu.se. (2 vols; Vienna, Freiburg i. Br. and Basel, '1962.). Kll.$emann, E. Da.' wandemde Gottuvolk. Eine Untusuchtmg zum Hebraubritf. (Forschungen 2:llf Religion nnd Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 55; GOttingen, '1959). Kelly, J.N.D. Golden Mouth. The Story ofJohn Chry.soatom. Ascetic, Preocher, Bishop. (Grand Rapids [Mich.}, 1995). Keooel, G. Priihchristliehe Hymnen? Gattungslaitische Studien zttr Frage 1101.:h den Liedern der /rlJ}ren Christenheit. (Wissenschafdiche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 71; Neukirchen-Vluyo, 1995). Kimelman, R. ..Idcntifying Jews and Christians in Roman Syria·Palestine." In: Erle M. Meyers (ed.), Galilee through the Centuries. Conjluence ofCultures (.Duke Judaic Studies Sedes I; Winona Lake [Ind.], 1999; pp.301-33S). Kirk, A. "Examiniug Priorities: Another Look at lhe Gospel ofPeter'.s Relationship to tbe New Testameot Gospels.,. New Testament Studies 40 ( 1994) 572-595. K.ister, M. "5Q13 aud the '.A.vodah: A Historical Survey and Its Signiticance... Dead Sea Discoveries 8 (2001) 136-148. K.lauck, H.-1. (transl.) 4. Ma/ckabi.ierbuch. (Jildische Sduiften aus henmisti.scher und rOmischer Zeit 3:6; G8tersloh, 1989). - - . aHellenimsehe Rhetorik im Diasporajudentum. Das Exordium des vierten M~erbucbs (4Makk 1,1-12).'' New Testament Studies3S ( 1989} 451-465. Bibliography 381 Klingshim, W. Cauari11s of Arie&. The Making of a Christion Comm11nity in Late Antique Gtn~l (Cambridge Studies jn Medicval Lifc aod Thought, Fourth Series 22; Cambrigdc 1994). · Knibb, M.: sce above, I El'IOch UDder ''Jewish litemture." Knobl, l., and S. Naeh. "MiUu'irn veKippurim." (In Hebn:w] Tarbiz 62 (1993) 17-44. Knüppler, Th. Siihne im Nt~lltm Tutame11t. Stvdien :vm vrchristlichen Verständnis der Heil:sbedtnJtllng des Todes Jesu. (Wßsenscbaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 88; Ncukirchen·Vluyn, 2001). Kobelski, P.J. Melchizedek tmd MelchireJa. (Catbolic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Series 10; Washington, D.C., 1981). Koester, C.R. The Dwelling of God. Tlre Tabernac/11 in tJJe Ofd TestoiJHint, llftertestamental Jewish Literatlire and th• New Testament. (Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Serles 22; Washington, D.C., 1989). - - . Hebrews. A. New.Trons/ation with lntrod11ction ond Commentary. (Anchor Bible 36; New York, 2001 ). Koester, H...'Outside the Camp': Hebrews 13:9-14." Harvord 'Ineologir:al Revitw SS {1962) 299-317. - - . "Apocrypßal aod Canonical Gospels." Harvard Theologica/ Review 73 (1980) IOS-130. --.lntrodur:tion 10 the New Testament. Yolume One: History, Cultvre, and Religion ofthe Hell6nistic A.ge. Yolume Two: History and Literaillre of Early Christianity. (Berlin, New York and Philadelphia, 1982). --·-. Ancient Christion Gospels. Their History and Development. (Philadelphia and Londo.o, 1990). - - . Synoptische Oberlieferung bei den · Apostolisr:hen Jläter'n. (Texte und Untersuchungen 6S; BerliD, 1957). Kohler, K. "The Origin and Composition of the Bightee.o. Benedictions witb a Translation of the Corresponding Essene Pmyers in the Apostolic Constitutions." Hehrew Union College An11ual 1 (1924) 387-425. Kosmala, H. "lom Kippar." Juda/ca 6 (1950) l-19. Köster, H. See: Kocster, H. Kötting, B. "Die Aufnabme des Beyiffs 'Hiereus' in den christlichen Sprachgebrauch." In: idem, Eccluia peregrinans. Das Gottesvolle unterwttgs. Gt~sflmmelte Allftdtre. (Miinsterische Beitrage zur Theologie 54:1; Münster i. W., 1988; pp. 356-364). Kovacs.l.L. '"Concealment and <Jnostic Exegesis: Clement of Alexandria's lnterpretation ofthe Tabemacle." Stvdia Palristica 31 (l997)414-437. Kraft, R.A. "The Epistle of Barnabas: lts Quotations and Their Sources." {Ph.D. dissertation, HarvaTd Univcrsity, 1961). - - . "The Weighing ofthe Parts. Pivotsand Pitfalls in the Study ofEarly Iudaisms and their Early Christian Offspring." In: A. Becker and A. Yoshiko R.eed, The Ways Thot Never Parted. Jews and Chri~tit.'lh$ in Lote Antiquity and the Early Middle Age.r. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 95; TllbingeD, 2003; pp. 8794). Kraus, W. "Der Jom Kippur, der Tod Jesu und die 'Biblische Theologie'. Ein Versuch, die jOdische Tradition iD die Auslegung von Röm 3, 2Sf einzubeüehen." In: 1. Baidermann (cd.), Altes Testament 11.11d christlicher Glaube. (Jahrbuch fllr Biblische Theologie 6; Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1991; pp. 157-172). - - . Der Tod Jes-u ab; Heiligtvmlfweihe. Eine Untersuchung zum Umfeld der SühnltW)rstellung in RtJmer 3,1J-26a. (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alteo und Neuen Testament 66; Neakirchen.Vluyn, 1991). Bibliography ·382 Krauss, S. Synagogale Altertiimer. (Berlin and Vienna, 1922). Kulik, A. "Apoc:alypse of Abraham. Towards the Lost Original." (PhD. dissertation, lbe Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2000). Lake, K. and HJ. CadbUiy, The Beginnings of Christianity PD1'1 1. The Acts of the Apostles. Vol. IV English Translation and Commentary. (Grand Rapids [Mich.], 1965 "'repr. 1932). Lampe, P. "An Early Christian Inscription in the Musei Capitolini." Studia Theo/ogica. Scandina~>ian Journal ofTheOIOffY 49 (1995) 79-92. Lane, D.J. The Peshitta of Llil"llitic:ua (Monographs of the Pesbitta Institute Leiden 6; Leiden, 1994}. Lane, W.L. HebrlfWs 9-13. (Word Biblic:al Commentary 478; Dallas (Texas), 1991). Lang. B. "1!ll." Theo/ogbche11 W'6rterbuch zum Alten Testament 4 (1984} 303-318. Laporte, J. "'Sacri.fic:e and Forgiveness in Pbilo of Alexandria." Stildia Philonica Annual I (1989) 34-42. - - . "The High Priest in Philo of A1exandria." Stildia Philonica Aimual3 (1991) 7182 (Ea:rle Hi)&ert Festschrift). Latte, K. Riimische ReligioMguchlchte. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft 5/4; Munich, 1960). Lauterbach, J. "A Significant Controversy Between the Sadducees and the Phari.sees." Hehrew Union College ÄPf11llal4 (1927) 173-205. - - . Rubbinic Essays. (Cinc:innati, 1951 ). - - . "The Ritual for the Kapparot Ceremony." In: idem, Stvdiu in Jewish Law, Custom and Folklore. (New York, 1970; pp. 133-142). - - . Studiu in Jewish Law, Custom and Folklore. (Edited by Bemard J. Bamberger; NewYork, 1970). - - . See also above, Mckilta ooder "Iewisb literature." Le Boulluec: see above, Clement of Alexandria under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Le D6aut, R.. "Aspeets de l'interc:ession dans le judaisme ancie.u." Jo11.rnal for the Study ofJvdaism 1 (1970}35--57. Le Goff, J. L 'imaginaire medir.~al (Paris, 19&5). Leclerq, H. "Lectionnaire.'' Dictionnaire de /'archeologie chritienne et Iiturgie 8:2 (1929) 2270-2306. - - . "'D6funts." Dictionnaire d'archeologie chretienne et de Iiturgie 4 (1921) 427456. Lecuyer, J ...J6sus, fils de Josi!dec, et le Sacerdoce du Cbrist.n Recherehes de Science Religlewe43 (1955) 82-103. Lebmann, M.R.. '"Yom Kippur' in Qumnm." Revue de Qrlmran 3 (19()111962) J 17-124. Lenbardt. P. "Neujahrsfest. III. Judentum... Theologische Realenzyklopadie 24 (1994) 322-324. Leonhard, C.lshodßd ofM~rw's Eztgeais ofthePsalms 119 and 139-147. A StudyofHis Interpretation in the Ligltt ofthe Syriac 1}Q111J/ation ofTheodore ofMopsutstia's Commentary. (CSCO 58S; Subsidia 107; Leuven, 2001). Leonhardt. J. JtJWbh Worship in Phl/o of Ale;tandria (Texts and Studics in Ancicnt Judaism 84, Ttlbingen, 2001). L6vy-Strauss, C. "La geste d' Asdiwal." In: idem. Anthropologie slructurale 11, (Paris, 1973; vol. 2, pp. 175-233). Lewy, H. "PhilologiS':bes 8U$ dem Talmnd." Phllologus 84 (1929) 377-398. Liebennan, S. "Hazonot Yannai.,. (In Hebrew) Sinal4 (1939) 219-250. - - . "The Temple: lts Lay-Out and hocedure." In: idem, Greek in Jewish Palestinc I Hellurism ii!Jt!Wish Palatine. (New Yorkand Jerusalem, 1994; pp. 164-179). Bibliography 383 - . S e e also above "Tosefta" under "Rabbinic literature." Liebreich. L. "Tbe Insertions in tbe Third Benediction ofthe Holy Days." Hebrm Union College Annlla/35 (1964) 79-1{11. Lieu, J. The Theology qf the Johannine Epistles. (New Testament Theology; Carnbridge [UK], 1991 ). - - . Image and Realiry. The Jews ln the World of the Christians in the Second Century. (Edinburgh, 1996). Ligier, L. "Autour du $acrifice eucharistique. Anaphores Orientales et anamnese juive de K.ippur," Nouvelle RfMie Tneologiqr.e 82 (1960) 40--55. - - . Nchfl d'Adam et peche du monde. Bi'ble, K.ipp~~r, E,.charistie (2 vols; Theologie 49; Paris 1960. 1961). • -."Anaphora orientales et prieres juives," Proehe Orient Chritien 13 (1963) 320. - - · "Penitence et Eucharistie en Orient. Theologie sur une interference de pribres et de rites." Orientalia Christiana Periodico 29 (1963) S-78 - - . "C6lebration divine et arwnn~e dans la premiere partie de 1' Anaphore ou Canon de la Messe Orientale," GregorianiUII 48 (l967) 225-252. LiUa, S. Clwmmt ofA.lerandria: a Study in Christian Platonilm and Gnostici11m. (Oxford, 1971). Linder, A. The Jews inthe LegDl Sources ofthe Eor/y Middle Age.s. (Detroit [Mich.] <111d Jerusalem, 1997). Loader, W.R.G. Sohn und Hoherpriester. (Wissenschaftlic:he Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 53; Neuklrc:hen-Vluyn, 1981). Lohmeyer, E. Der Brief an die Kolosser. (Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar tiber das Neue Testament; Göttingen, 1961, fust edition 1930). - - . Kyrios Je:s'IJII. Eine UntemJclnmg zu Phil2,5-ll. {Heidelberg, 2 1961). Lohse, E. Märtyrer tm.d Gottesknecht. Untersuchungen zur urchristlichen YerlcSindigung vom SU/rnelod Jesu Chri:Jti. (Forst.-bungen :r.ur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 64; Göttingen, 2 1963). Longenecker, R.N. Galati11ns. (Word Biblical Commentary4l; Dallas [Texas}, 1990). Louf, A. "Caper emissarius ut typus Redemptoris apud Patres." Jferbum Domini 38 (1960) 262-277. Lueken, W. Michael. Eine Darstellung und Vergleichung der jfJdischen rmd der morgenländisch-christlichen Tradition V!)lll Errengel Michael. (GMingeo, 1891). Lupieri, E. "Apocalisse, sacerdoz!o e Yom Kippur." Annali di Storia dell' Excges/ 19 (2002) 11-21. Luz, U. Das Evangelium nach Malthilus (Mt 26--28). (Evangelisch-Katbollscber Kommentar .lum Neuen Testament l/4; Nellicircllen·Vluyu, 2002). Lyonnet, S. "L'bymne <:hristologique de l'6pilre aux Colos:liens et 1a tete juive du nouvel an." Recherehes de Science Re/igier.tse 48 (1960} 93-100. Maccoby, H.Z. ''Jesus aod Barabbas." New Testament Studies 16 (1969170) SS-60. Ma<:donald, 1. A Critfca/ Edition of the Text ofthe Samaritan Yom Ha-Kippur(im} Liturgy, with Tram/ation thereuf and Comparison with the Corresponding Jewish Liturgies. (Leeds, 1958). Mach, M. Entwicklvngsstadien des jüdischen Engelglaubens in vorrabbinischer Zeit. (Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 34; Ttlbingen, 1992). Made. H. "The Souree of the Malkhl{f)IOt Bcnediction." Jewish Stu.dies Quarterly 9 (2002) 205-218. Maher, M.: see above, Targumim under ''Jewish literatme." Bibliography 384 Maicr, J. Yom K:u/1118 zur Gno.ris. Bund~lade, Gottesthron und Mllrkabah. (Salz.burg, 1964). - - . "The Piyyut 'Ha'omrim le-khiltJ)' shoa • llld Anti-Christian Polemics." In: E. :Fleischer and 1. Petuchowsky (eds.), Studies in Aggada, Targultl$ and Prayers oj Israel in Memory of Josef Heinemun.n. [In Hebrewl (Jerusalcm, 1981; pp. 100- llO). - - . "SUlme 1111d Vergebung iD der jildischen Liturgie.'' Jahrlnlch ftJr Biblische Theologie 9 (1994) 14S-171. Malachi, Z. "The 'Avoda' for Vom K.ippur." [In Hebcew] (Ph.D. dissertation; The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, l974). Manns, F. "Une ancienne tradition sur Ja jeunoesse dc Marie." In: idem, Essais sur le Judeo-Chrlstianisme. (Studium Biblicum franciscanum Allaleeta 12; Jerusalern, 1917; pp. 10~114). Marbacb, E. '"Nudipedalia." Pauli-Wissowa 1711 (1936) 1239-1241. Ma.rtyn, J.L. Galatians. A New TraM/ation with lnlrodvclion and Commentary. {Ancbor · Bible 33A; New York, 1997). MIWingberd Ford, J. "Vom Kippur and the Matthean Form ofthe PaterNoster." Worship 4l (1967) 609-619. - - . "The Forgiveness Clause in the Malthean Form of the OUT Father.'' äitschrift fti.r die neute:rtamentliclre Wlssen~haft und die K11nde der IIIIeren Kirehe S9 (1968) 127-lll. Mateos: see above, Typicon of COIIStalflinople Wider "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Matbews, E.G. (ed., traosl.). .The A.rmenian C0111menttuy on Genesis Alt1'ibuted to Ephrem the Syrian. (CSCO 572-573; ScriptOfCS Acmeniaei 23-24; Louvain, 1998). . - - . See also above, Pseudo-Ephrem, (Anncnian) Commentary on Leviticus under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Mayer, G...,Tl.. in TJ&eologi,cha Wörlerlnlch .trun Alten TestamentS (1986} 329-334. McCollough, C.T. "Theodoret of Cyrus as Biblic:a.t Interpreter and the Presence of Judai$m iD the Later Roman Empire." Stildia Patristica 18 (1983) 327-334. MeLean, B.H. The Cvr.sed Chrill. Mediterranean Expulsion Rituals and Ptndine SoteriologJ. (Jolllllal fur tbe Stud.y oftbe New Testament. Supplement Series 126; Sheffield, 1996). McNally, R..E. "Embet Days.." New Catholtc Encyc/(}pedia .S (1967) 296-298. MeNamara.. M. "Mclebizedek: Gen 14,17-20 in the Targums. in Rabbinie aad Ea:rly Christian Literature." Blblica 81 (2000) 1-31. Mehat, A. tt'Ude surfe:. 'Stromates· de Clim~mt d'Alexandrie. (Paris, 1966). Men;enl.er, R.P.F. and F. Paris. La priere des iglJsu de. rite byzantin. 11. Les fltes. 1. Grandufitufues. (Amay-sur-Meuse Belgiquc, 1939). Meritt, R..L. "Jesus BaJabbas and !he Paschal Pardon." Journal ofBiblical Literaturtl 104 (1985) 57-68. Merke!, J. "Die Begnadigung 3111 Passabfeste." Zeitachrift fiir die neututomentliclle Wissenschaft und die Kllnde du öltuen Kirche 6 (1905) 293-316. Merklein, H. "Der Tod Jesu als stellvertretender SUbnetod." In: idem, Stvdie.n Z1l J~~Sws und Poulw. (Wi.ssenschaftlicbe Untersuchungen zwn Neuen Testament 43; Ti1bingen, 1987;pp. UJ-191). - -...Die Bedeutung des K.reuustodes Christi ftlr die paulinische Gerechtigkeits- und Gesetzesthematik." ln: idem, Swdie.n :zu Jesa und Paulu.r. (Wi$8enschaft!iehe Unttrsuebungenzum Neuen Testament 43; Ttlbinge.n, 1987; pp. 1-106). Bibliogrophy 385 --."Der SObn~.~tod Jesu nach dem Ztrug~~is des Neuen Testaments." In: H.P. Heinz (ed.), Yersöhmtng in der jüdischen und cluütlichen Liturgie. (Quaestiones DisputalU 124; Freiburg i. Br, 1990; pp. 155-18:3). Michel, 0. "kokkinos." Th~ologl~che5 Wörterbach zum Neuen Tatawumt 3 (1938) 812- SlS. - - . D e r Briltf an die Hebrlier. (Kritisch-exegetischer Kommenrar iiber das Neue Testament l3; GöttingeB, 1960). Mi.c;hel, 0. and 0. BauemfeiDd: see above, Josephus uuder "Jewisb literature.n Milgrom. J. LevitiCIIs l-16. A New Translation with Jmroduction tmd Comm611tary. (ADdlor Bible 3A; New York, 1994). Milik, J.T. "Millci-sedeq et Millci-ma' dans les anciens ecrits jui:fs et chretieas." Journal for the Study ofJudaism in the Penian, HeUeniltic and Roman Period23 (1972) 95-144. - - . See also above, Fe8lival Pl'tl)lers and 4QEnoch uoder "Jewish literatw"e." Mirsk.y, A.: see above, Yosse ben Yosse under "Jewish litcrature.n Molenberg, C. "A Study of the Roles of Sbemihaza and 'Asa'el in 1 Enocb 6-11." JOUI'nal ojJt!Wi!lh St11dies 3S (1984) 136-146. MDo, D. The Old Testament in the Gospel Poaslon Narrative&. (Sbeffield, 1983). - - . The Epistle to the Romans. (New International Commentary to tbe New TC5tament; Grand R.apids [Mich.}, 15196). Morgan, M.H. "Greek and Roman Rain-Gods and Rain-Charms." Tranaaction.r and Proceeding:s ofthe American Phitologica/A.s.rocilllion 32 (1901} 83-109. Morgenstern, J. "Two Proph~ies ofthe Fourtb Century B.C. and tbe Evolution ofYom Kippv.r." Hebrew Union College Annual24 (19S2-19.S3) 1-74. MoriD, G. "L'origine des Quatte-Temps." Re~~ue Benedictine 14 (1897) 337-346. --."Review on Fisc:her 1914.'' Rtn~ue Benedlctine 31 (1914-1919) 349-51. Morray--Jones, C.R.A. ''Transfonnational My&ticism in the Apocalyplic-Merkabah Tradition." Jo11mal ofJewi~h Studi~ra 43 (1992) 1-31. - - . "Tbe Temple Within. The Embodimeot of lbe Divine Image and lts Worsbip in the Dead Sea Scrolls md Otber Early Jewish and Christia.n Sources." Society of Biblical Litwatwre SemimJr Paper:t31:1 (1998) 400-431. MW!Ck, 1. ''Presbyters and Disciples of the Lord in Papias. Exogetic Commeots on Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, III, 39." Harvard Theologi'col Review 52 (19.S9) 223-243. Naeh Uld Knohl: see Knobl. Nathan, G. ''The Rogation Ceremonie5 ofl.are Antique Gaul. Creation, Tfllll.Smission and the Role of tbe Bis.hop." Classica et MediallWJiia. ReJ.>ve danoise de philoiogp et d'histoire 49 (1998) 275-304. Nau, F. (ed.}. Morty,.ologes ei Mi11ologu orillntawc. Le.s Mtinologes du evangeliaires coptes-arabes. (PO 1012; Paris I Freiburg i.Br., 1915; pp. 165-244}. Neirynck, F. "Review of: lohn .Domioic Crossan. Who Killed lesus? Exposing tbe Roots of Anti-Semitism in tbe Gospel Story of tbe Deatb of Jesus. (San Francisco (Calif.], 1995)." Epltemeride:s Theologicae LovanieMes 71 (1995) 455-457. Newma.n. H. "Jerome and the lews." [In Hebrew witb. English summary) (Pb.D. dissertation, Tbe Hebrew University of Jeru.salem, 1997). Newsom, C. '"Sectually explicit' literature ftom Qumran." Jn: The Hebrew Btble and Itt Interpreters (1990) 167-187. --.See also above, Songs ofthe Sabbath Sacrificc under "Jewish literature." Nibley, H. "Chtistian Envy ofthe Temple." Jewilih Qvorterly Revit!W SO (1959/60) 97123, 227-240. 386 Bibliography Nick:elsburg, G.W.E. "Apocalyptic and Myth in l Enoch 6-11." J()JirnaJ of Bib/ical Lirratare. 96 (1977) 383-405. - - . "Review of: Jobn Dominic CrossaD, The Cross that Spoke. Tbc Origins of the Passion Narrative (San Francisco: HaTper and Row, 1988)." Journal of the. Ami!ricon A.cademy of.Religion 59 (1991) 159-162. - - . 1 Enoch I. A Commentary on tlrt~ Book of I Enoch, Chaplen 1-36; 8/-108. (Henncne[a; Minncapolis, 2001). Niederwimmer, K. Die Ditlach6. (KommelllaT zu den Apostolischen Vatern 1; GOtti.Dgen, 1993}. Nikiprowetzlcy, V. "La spiritualisation des sacrifices et le culte sacrificiel au Temple de J~!'USalem chez Philon d'Alexandrie." Semilica 17 (1967) 97-116. Ni~. B. Qumran Prayer and ReligioWI Pot1try. (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 12; Leiden, 1994) - - . "Repentance in the Dead Sea Serolls." fo: P.W. Flint and~.C. Vanderkam (eds.), Tlre Deatl Sea Scrol/s qftu Fifty J'etll's. A Compnhen.sive As.semnent; Yol 2. (Leiden, 1999; pp. 145-170). Nocent, A. "Le quattro tempora." ln: M. Augt, A. Nocent, M. Rooaey, I. Scicolone, A.J. Chupungco and A.M. Triacca (eds.), Antfm1U13is. Yol. 6: L 'anno liturgica: atorla teologia e ceiebrazione. (Oenoe, 1988; pp. 263-266). O'Brien, P.T. Colo5sicms, Philemon. (Word Biblica! Commentary 44; Waco [Texas], l9ll4). O'Feargbail, F. "Sir. 50:5-21: Yom Kippur or the Daily Wbole Offering." Bih/ica 69 (1978) 301-316. Offer, Joseph. "The Masoretic Divisions (Sedarim) in the Boob of tbe Prophets and Hagiographa." [In Hebrew with Englillh summary] Tarbiz 48 (1989) 155-189. Ormann, 0. Dtu Sfindenht.kf!nnmis dtt11 'f/ersohnungstages, sein Atifbau und :seine EntwidcliiiJg, in YerbiJidJmg mit Geniza-Texten untersucht. {Frankfurt, 1934). Oswalt, J.N. The Book ofIsaiah. Chapters 40-66. (New International Commentary to tbe Old Testament; Grand Rapids [Mich.) and Cambridge [UK], 1998). Pagels, E.H. The Johannine GrJspel in Gnostic Exegesis: Heracleon 's CommeniÜTJf on John. (Society ofBiblical Literature Monoyaph Series 17; Nashville [Tenll.} aod NewYork.1973). 'Painter, J. Just Jami!S. The Brother of Juus in History and Tradition. (Studies on Personalities ofthe Ncw Testament; Columb[a [S.C.], 1997). Patlagean, E. "L'bistoire de l'imaginaire." In: J. Le Goff, R. Cb.artier, and J. Revel (eds.) La Nowelle Histoire (Paris, 1978; pp. 249-269). Perrot, C. La Lectare de Ia Bible dans Ia Synagogue. Les ancienmm Jectures palestiniennu du Shabbat et cles fite:r. (Publica!ions de l'institut de rechetehe et d'histoire des te:x.tcs, section biblique et massor4tique, collection massorab Serie I. Etudes Classiques et Textes 1; Hildesheiro, l973). Pescb, R. Die Apostelguchichie. (Evangelisch Katholischer .Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 5; ZUrich, Neqkirchen-Vluyn, 1986). Pfann, S.J. "The Essene YearlyRenewa! Ceremony and tbe Baptism ofRepentance." In: D. W. Pany and E. Plrich (eds.), Tlle Provo International Corl[erflnci! on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Tt.clmological Innovation&, Nr!W Texts, ancl .ReformJtlatecl lssues. (Studies on the Texts oftbe Desert of Judah 30; Leideo. 1999; pp. 337-3S2}. Philonenko-Sayar, B. and M. Philonenko: see above, Apocalypse of Alm::,ham 11nder "Jewish literature." Bibliography 387 Pines, S. "The Jewisb Chri$tians of the Early Centuries of Christianity Acce>rding to a New Source." In: G.G. Stro\Ul\sa (ed.), The collectud wor/u of Shlomo Pinu. Yol. 4. Studies in the History of Religion. (Jerusalem, 1996; pp. 211-284). (= Procetdings o/the Israel Academy ofthe Seiences and Humanitiu 2 [1966] 237310). Porter, S. "Simeon 3 .... Anchol" Bible Dictionary 6 (1992) 26-28. PJadels, W., R. Brllndle and M. Heimgartner. "The Sequence and Dating of lohn Cbrysoslom's Eight Discourses Adver.rus ludaeos." Zeitschrift für Antike und Christentum 6 (2002) 9G-ll6. -----. see also above, Chrysostom, Against the JI!/Ws under "Cbristian and Gnostic Literature." Pralon, D. and P. Harle {transl.). Le Levitique. Troduction du texte grec de Ia Septante, inJroduction et nOfes. (La Bible d' Alexandrie 3; Paris, 1988). Pratscber, W. ~r Herrenbruder Jalrobus und die Jakobustradilion. (Forschungen zur ·Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 139; Gllttingen, i983). - - - . "Jakobus (Herrenbruder)." Realle:rilr.rm for Arttike und Christentum 18 (1998) 1227-1243. Prigent, P. L8s testimonla dans Je christianisme primitif. L'Epftre de BarnaM 1-XYJ et sc source&. (Ewde$ Sibliques 47; Paris, 1961). Procter, E. Christion conlroJJersy in Alexandria: C/ement'.s polemic against the Basilideans and Yt~lentinians. (A.merican university studies. Series VII, Tbeology and religion 172; New York, 1995). Prostmeier, F.R. Der Barnabasbrief Ober.sef%t und erklärt. (K.onunentar zu den Apostolischen Vätern 8; Göttingen, 1999). Puech, E. "Notes sur le manuscrit de XlQMellds~deq." Revue de Qumran 12 (1987) 483- 513. Quasten, J. and A. Di Berardino. Palrology. (3+1 vols; Westminster, [MD], l-III:l9S01960 [reprint 1992], and IV:l986). Rabbioovicz, R.: see ahove, Talmud, Babylonian under "Jewish literarure." Rabinovitz, Z.M.: see above, Yannai under "Jewisllliterature." Reed., A.Y. "From Asael and Semihazah to Uzzah, Azzah, and Azael: 3 Enoch .'i (§§ 7--8) and Jewish Reeeption·History of 1 EnQCh." Jewish Studies Quartcrly 8 (201H) 105-136. Reeg, G.: see above, The StOry ofthe Ten Martyrs under "Jewish Jiterature." Renoux, A: see above, Old Armenian Lectitmary under "Cbristim and Gnostic Literature." Renoux, Ch {=R.enoux, A.). "Les premiers systemes de leeture daas l'o;rient chretien, J~rusa!em, Edesse, Antioche, et Ia Synagogue.u In: A.M. Triacca and A. Pisto!a (eds.), La Iiturgie interprete de l'Ecriture. 1. Les leclures bibliq'lles pour lu dimiJnchu et fttes. Conferences Saint-Serge. XLVJJf sem11ine d'etudes lilurgiques. Paris, 25-28 Juin 2001. (Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 119; Rorae, 2002; pp. 99-·121) - - - . See also above, Middle A.rmenian Lectionary under "Christian and Gnostic Literaf:ll.re." Reuss: see above, anonymaus from Jerusalem, Commentary on Luke under "Cbristian and Gnostic Literature." Rlchard., M: see above, Hippolytus under "Christi an and Gnostic Literarure." Richter, K. "Ostern als Fest der Versöhnung." In: H.P. Heinz (ed.), Yer$ohmmg in der jfidischen und chrisllichetr Liturgie. (Quaestiones Disputatae 124; Freiburg i. Br, 1990; pp. 56--37). 388 Bibliograplry Ricoour, P. "Myth and History." Encyclopedia ofReligion JO (1987) 273-282. Rjgg. H.A. "Barabbas." Journal ofBiblical Literature 66 (1945) 417-4~6. Rissi, M. Die Theologie des Hebräerbrieft. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 41; TO.bingen. 1987). Ritter, A.M. "Erwiguugen zum Antisemitismus in der Alten Kirche: Acht Reden ober die Juden." In: B. Moeller aod G. Ruhbach (eds.), Bleibendes Im Wandel der Kirchengeschichte. (TD.bingen, 1973; pp. 71-91). Robill$011, I.M. 11re Nag Hammadi Library fn Engluh. (Leiden; 2 1988). Roloff, J. "hilasmos." Exegetfcal Dicti.,nary ofthe New Testamellt2 (1990) 186. Rordorf, W. a.nd A. Tuilier. La doctrine des dOIBe apotres (Didoche). lntroductlon, Texte. Traductitm, Notes, Appendice et /ndo:. (SC 248; Paris, 1978). Rosenberg:: see above. Misbnah ooder "Jewish literature." Roth, C. "Ecclesiasticus in tbe Synagogue Service." Jo11rnal of Biblical Literature 71 (1952) 171-178. Rouwhorst, G: Lu lrymnu pa.5calu d'Ephrem de Nuibe. Analyse lheo/ogique et recherche $18' /'holution de Ia jite puscale chritienrte Nisihe et Edesse et duns quelque:s Egllse:J voisinu au quatrieme siecle. (2 vols; Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 7; Leiden, 1989). - · - ·...leviticus 12-15 in Early Christiaaity." In: M. Poorthuis and J. Schwartt (eds.), Purity and Holinus. (Jewish a.nd Cbristia.n Perspectives Series 2; leiden, 2000; pp. 181-193). - - . "The Origins and Evoltati(}ll of jiarly Christlall Pentecost." Studia Po.tristica 3 5 (2001) 309-322. ' Rubiu, Z. "11le Churc:h of the Holy Sepulchre and the Contlict bctwec:n the Sees of Caesarea and Jerusalem." In: L.l. I.evine (ed.), The Jerusalem Cathedro. 2. (Jerusalem and Dctroit [Mich.], 1982; pp. 79-105). - - . "The Cuh (}f ihe Holy Places and Cbristia.n Politics in Byzantine Jerusalem." In: L.l. Levine (ed.), Jvasalem -lt:s Sunctity and Centralit]l tn Judaism, Christionity, and Islam. (New York, 1999; pp. 151-162). Rubinkiewicz, R. Die &cht~tologie von Henoch 9-1 1 und dtU Neue Testament. {Ö$terreichische Biblische Studien 6; Vienna, 1984). - - . See also above, Apocaly~e ofAbrahom under "Jewish literature."' Sabourin, L. "Christ made "sin" (2 Cor 5:21): Sacrifiee and redemption in the bistory of a f.ormula." In: idem and S. Lyonnet, Sin. Redemption and Sacri/ice. A Biblical emd Patristk Study. (Analec:ta Biblica 48; Rome, 1970; pp. !87-296). Saftai, S. "On the History of the Service in the Sec:o.nd Temple." [In Hebrew] Mehkore Eretz Yisrael(I955) 35-41. - - . "The Service ofYom Kippurin the Second Temple." [In HebtewJ Maharuzyim 49 (1961) 122·-125. - - . "Der Versobnungstag in Tempel und Synagoge." In: H.-P. Heinz (ed.), Yersi>lrmmg in der jiiduchen und christlichen Limrgie. (Quaestiones Disputatae 124; Freiburg i.Br., 1990; pp. 12-55). Samter, E. "Altrl.lmischer Regenzauber." Archiv ftr Religionswissenschaft 21 (1922) 317-339. Satran, D. Biblical Prophets in Byzantine Palest/ne. Reassessing the Lwes of the Prophet:s (Studia 1n Veteris Testamenli Pseudepigr.~pha 11; I..eiden, l99S). Scbarhert, J. "Stellvertretendes Sühneleiden in den Ebed-Jabwe-Uedem und in altorientalischen Ri~ltexten." Biblische Zeitsc.hrift [N.F.] 2 (19S8) 190-213. a a Biblicgraphy 389 Schol\elowitz, I. Das steJl'vertetende Huhnopfer. Mit besonderer Berucksichtigung des jüdischen Yolksglallbens. (Religionsgeschicbtlicbe Versuche und Vorarbeiten 14/3; Giessen, 1914). Schelkle, K..H. Die Petrvsbriefe. Der Judasbrief (Hcrdcm theologiscller .Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 1312; Freiburg, Basel, Vienna, 1961). Schennan, N.N.: see above, Ashkenazy Mah:wr under"Jewish literature." Schiffman, Lawrence H. "The case of the Day of Atonement ritual.'' Biblical Per.rpectives (1998) l&l-188. Schlesier, R. ..Apopompe." Handbuch re/igicn.swissenschaftlir:her Grvndbegriffe 2 (1990) 38-41. Scbmithals, W. Die Apostelgeschichte du Lull.os. (Zilrcher Bibelkommentare: Neues Testament ;3,2; ZDrich, 1982). Schmitz, 0. Die Opfuan:chaJluPJg de: späten Judentum$ und die Opferoutsagen de;s Neuerr Testaments. (Tilbingen, 1910). Schnackenburg, R. The Go!pel According to SI. John. (4 vols; Herder's Theological Comroentary on the New Testament l; Kent, 1968). Schnelle, U. Ein.le.itlmg in das Neue TeJtament. (Göttingen, ~1996). Schnusenberg, C. Das Yerhtlltflis von Kirche und Theater. Dargestellt an ausgewdhlten Schriften der KircheiJVäter und liturgischen Texten bis auf Ama/ariru 11011 Metz. (Bem, 1981). Scholem, G.G. Jewi&h GI'/Qsticism, Merkt:Jbah Mystfcism, and Talm11dic Tradition. Based an the: Israel Goldstein Lecture:s, Delivered at the Jewish Tbeological Seminary of America, New York. {New York, 1960). Schollgen, G., and F.-L. Hossfeld. "Heherpriester." Reallexikon for Antike und Christentum 16 (1994) 4-58. Sehramm, T. "Feste. IV. Urch.tistenrum." Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwan" 3 (2000) 91-93. Schlimmer, J. Die altchristliche Fastenpraxis, mit b;esonderer BerücksichtigtJTrg der Schriften Tertulliorrs. (Münster, 1933). Schwartz, D.R. "Two Pauline A!lusions to the Redemptive Mechanism of the Crudfixion." Journal ofBiblical Llterahlre 102 (1983) 259-283. - - . "'Philo's Priestly Descent." In: F.E. Greenspahn, E. Hilgert, and B.L. Mack (eds.), Nourishtd withPeace (Chico, 1984; pp. 15!5-171). Schwartz, E. "Zu Eusebius Kirchengeschichte." Zeitschrift fiJr die natestamentliche Wis~emchaft und di~ Krtndt der iilteren KiJ'che 4 (1903) 48-66. Schwartz, J. "'The Enca~nia ofthe Churcb ofthe Holy Sepulchre, the Temple ofSolomon and the Jews." Theologische Zeitschrift 43 (1987) 265-284. Schweizer, E.. Der Brief an die Kolosser. (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament; Neukirchen-Vluyn li.Dd Zürich, 1976). Schwemer, A. Studien zu den frühjüdischen Prophetenlegenden. Vitae Prophetarum.. (2 vols; Telds and Stildies in Ancient Judaism 49 and 50; Tübingen, 1995, 1996). Scullard, H.H. Festivalsand CeremonieJ ofthe R01n(llf Republic. (London, 1981). Scullion, J.f'. "A Traditio-Historical Srudy of the Day of Atonement." (Ph.D. dissertation, Washington, D.C., Catholic University, 1990). Shinan, A. "'Sermons, Targums, and the Reading ftom Scriptures in the Ancient Synagogue." In: L. Levine (ed.), The Synagogue in Late Antiquity. (A Centennial PuWicatioo of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America; Philadelphia, 1987~ pp. 97-110). Siegert, F.: see above, Pseudo-Phiton, On Jonah under "Jewish Uterarure." 390 Bibliography Signer, M.A. "Fleisch und Geist. Opfer und Versöhnung in den exegetischen Traditionen von Judentum und Christentum." In: H.-P. Heinz (ed.), Versöhnung in der judischen und christlichen Liturgie. (Freiburg i.Br., Basel, and Vienna, 1990; pp. 197-219). Siles, J.W. A Scripture Index to the Works of St. Augustine in English Translation. (Lanham, New York and London, 1995). Silver, D.J. "The Shrine and the Scroll." Journal ofRejormed Judaism 31 (1984) 31-42. Simon, M. "La pol~mique antijuive de Saint Jean Cluysostome et Je mouvement judaisant d'Antioche." In: idem, Recherehes d'histoire Judeo-Chretienne. (Etudes Juives 6; Paris, 1962; pp. 14(H53). . - - - . "Le Judaisme berb~re dans l'Afrique ancienne." In: idem, Recherehes d'histoire Judeo-Chretienne. {Etudes Juives 6; Paris, 1962; pp. 30-87). - - - . Veru.s Israel. A Study ojthe Relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire AD 135-425. (Littman Library of Jewish Civilization; London, 1996; French original, Paris 1964). Sindawi, K. "'Ashura' Day arui Yom Kippur." Ancient Near Eastem Studies 38 (2001) 200-214. Skarsaune, 0. The Prooffrom Prophecy. (Supplements to Novum Testamentom 56; Leiden, 1987). Smid, H. Protevangelium Jacobi. A Commentary. (Apocrypha Novi Testamenti 1:1; Assen, 1965). Spicq, C. L 'Epitre DIIX HebreiJX. Yol. I; Introduction. Vol. II: Commentaire. {2 vols; Etudes Bibliques; Paris, 1952/53). · Stemberger, G. Einleitung in Talmudund Midrasch. (Munich, 8 1992). - - - . Jews and Chri.stians in the Holy Land. Palestine in the Fourth Centwy. (Edinburgh, 2000). Sterling, G.E. "Ontology versus Eschatology: Tensions between Author and Community in Hebrews." Studia Philonica Annua/ 13 (ln the Spirit of Faith. Silldies in Philo and Early Christianity in Honor oj David Hay) (Leiden, 2001; pp. 190-211) [I only bad a pre-published version available]. Stern, M. Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Edited with Introductions, Translationsand Commentary. (3 vols; Jerusalem, 197~1984). Stettler, C. Der Kolosserhymnus. Untersuchungen zu Form, traditionsgeschichdichem Hintergrund und Aussage von Kol 1,15-20. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, second series 131; T1lbingen, 2000). Stökl, D. "Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic lmaginaire and the Roots of Jesus' High Priesthood. Yom Kippur in Zechariah 3, JEnoch 10, IIQMelkizedeq, Hebrews and the Apoca1ypse of Abraham 13." In: J. Assmann and G.G. Stroumsa (eds.), Transformations of the Inner Self in Ancient Religions. (Studies in the History of Religions 83; Leiden, 1999; pp. 349-366). - - - . "The Christian Exegesis of the Scapegoat between Jews and Pagans." in A.l. Baumgarten (ed.), Sacriftce in Religious Experience. (Studies in the History of Religions 93; Leiden, Boston, and Co1ogne, 2002; pp. 207-232). Stökl Ben Ezra, D. [= Stökl, D.] "'Christians' Celebrating 'Jewish' Festivals of Autwnn." In: P.J. Tomsou and D. Lambers-Petry (eds.), The Image ofthe Judaeo..Christians in Ancient Jewish and Christion Literatllre. Papers Delivered at the Colloqrtium of the Institrttllm Iudaicum, Brussels 18-19 N011ember, 200I. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 158; Ttlbingen, 2003; pp. 53-73). Bibliography 391 - - . "Whose Fast Is lt? The Ember Day and Yom Kippur." In: A.H. Becker and A. Reed (eds.), The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 95; Tübingen, 2003; pp. 259-282). Stone, M.E. "Apocalyptic- Vision or Hallucination?'' Mi/la wa-Milla 14 (1974) 47-56. - - . ''The Book of Enoch and Judaism in the Third Century B.C.E." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 (1978) 479-492. Strack, H.: see above, Mishnah under "Jewish literature." Strand, K.A. "An Overlooked Old-Testament Background to Rev 11:1." Andrews Unillersity Seminar Studies 22 (1984) 317-325. Strecker, G. The Johannine Letters. A Commentary on I, 2, and 3 John. (Hermeneia; Philadelphia [Penn.}, 1996). Stroumsa, G.G. '"Vetus Israel': Les juifs dans Ia littt6rature hierosolymitaine d'6poque byzantine." Revue de l'hlstoire des re/igions205 (1988) IIS-131. - - . "The Early Christian Fish Symbol Reconsidered." In: I. Gruenwald, S. Shaked and G. Stroumsa (eds.}, Messiah and Christos. Studies in the Jewish Origins of Christicmity [Festschrift D. Flusser]. (TObingen, 1992; pp. 199-205). Stuckenbruclc, L.T. The Book of Giants jrom Qumran. Tuts, Translation, and Commentary. (Texte und Studien zum antilcen Judentum 63; Tübingen, 1997). Stuhlmacher, P. "Zur neueren Exegese von Röm 3,24-26." In: idem, Versöhnung, Gesett und Gerechtigkeit. Aufsätze zur biblischen Theologie. (Göttingen, 1981; pp. 117135). - - - . "Das Lamm Gottes- eine Skizze." In: H. Cancik, H. Lichteoberger and P. Schäfer (eds.), Geschichle- Tradition- Reflexion (FS M Hengel). Vol. 3 Frühes Christentum. (Tübingen, 1996; pp. 529-542). - - - . ''Jes 53 in den Evangelien und in der Apostelgeschichte." In: B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmacher (eds.), Der leidende Gottesknecht. Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte mit einer Bibliographie zu Jes 53. (Forschungen zum Alten Testament 14; Tübingen, 1996; pp. 93-105). Sulcenilc, E.L. The Ancient Synagogue of Beth Alpha. An Account of the Ezccwations Conducted on Behalf of the Hebrew Unillersity, Jerusalem. (Jerusalem and London, 1932). Suntrup, R. Die Bedeutung der liturgischen Gebärden und Bewegungen in lateinischen und deutschen Auslegungen des 9. bis 13. Jahrhunderts. (Milnsterische Mittelalter-Schriften 37; Munich, 1978). Swartz, M. Mystical Prayer in Ancient Judaism. An Analysis of Ma'aseh Merkavah. (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 28; Tübingen, 1992). - - - . "Ritual about Myth about Ititual: Towards an Understanding of the Avodah in the Rabbinie Period." Journal ofJewish Thought and Philosoplry 6 (1997) 135155. - - - . "Sage, Priest,· and Poet. Typologies of Religious Leadership in the Ancient Synagogue." In: S. Fine (ed.), Jews, Christians, and Polytheists in the Ancient Synagogue. Cultural Interaction during the Greco-Roman Period. (Baltimore Studies in the History of Judaism; London and New York, 1999; pp. 101-117). - - - . "The Semiotics of the Priestly Vestments in Ancient Judaism." In A.l. Baumgarten (ed.), Sacriftce in Religious Experience. (Studies in the History of Religions 93; Leiden, Boston, and Cologne, 2002; pp. 57-80). Synge, F.C. Hebrews and the Scriptures. (London, 1959). Tabory, J. Jewish Festivals in the Time of the Mishnah and Talmud. [In Hebrew} (Jerosalem, 1995). 392 Bibliograplr.y Taft, R..F. aud A. Kazhdan. "Cross, Cult of the." The Ozford Dictionary of Byzanttum 1 (1991) 1-553. Talley, T J. "Thc Origin of the Ember Days . .All lncooelusive Postscript." In: Ritwls (MeleUJge:~ P.-M. Gy). (Paris, 1990; pp. 465-412). Tampellini, S. "L'esegesi del Levitico di E$icltio di Gerwalemme. Ossecvazioni introduttive e sondaggi prelinlin.ari." Annali di stor{Q dell'e:regesi 13/I (1996) 201-209. - - . "lntroduzione aJlo studio del Commentarius in Leviticum di Esichio di Gerusalemme." (Ph.D. dissertation; Bologna, 1998). Telfer, W. "Was Hegesippus a Iew?" Hul"'!ard Theological Rniew S3 (1960) 143-153. Ter Haar R.omeJW, B ...Early Antiochene Commentaries on Exodus." In: E.A. Livingstone (ed.), Studia Patri.stica 30. (Louvain, 1997; pp. I 14-119). Thoissen, G. Tlre Religion of tlre. Barliest Churche.s. C,.eatlr~g u Symbolic World. (Minneapolis, 1999). Theodor, 1. and C. Albeck: see above, Genesis Rabbah liDder "Jewish literature." Tidwell, N. "Didache XIV:l (KATA KYPIAKHN .6E KYPIOY) revisited." Jligiliae Christianoe 53 (1999) 197-207. Tigchelaar, E.J.C. Prophen of Old and the. Day of the End: Zechuriah,. the BooA of Watchers ar.dApocalyptic. (Oudtestamentische Studien 35; Leiden, 1996). Trlmlde, H.: see above, Tertullian under ..Christian aod Gnostic Litecature." Treat, J.C. "The Two Manuscript WilDesses to the Gospel ofPeter." In: D.J. Lull (ed.), Society of Biblicul Literature 199{) Seminar Papers. (Atlanta, 1990; pp. 391-399). Tyson, J. Images ofJurlafsm in Lulce-Acts (Columbia [S.C.J, 1992). - -...Jews llld ]udaism in Luke-Acts: Reading as a Godfearer." New Tutoment Studies 41 (1995) 19-38. Urbach, E.E. The Sages. Their CoiiCepts and Belieft. {2 vols; Jerusale~m, 1987 >- 2 1979). Vajda, G. "Jetioe musubnane etjellnejuif." Hebrew Union CollegeAnnua112-l3 (193738) 367-335. van den Hoelt, A. Clement of ,Cle:ot.~mMa, and His Use of Plrilo in the Stromatei.s. (Supplements to Vigiliae Christian.ae 3; Leiden, 19&8). van Esbroeck, M...Une hom61ie sur I'Eglise attribu~ 1\ Jean de Jerusalem." Le M!Aion 86 (1973) 283-304. - - . "Jean Il de J6rusalem et les cultes de S. Etienne, de la Sainto-Sion et de la Croix." Analeeta Bollandiana 102 (1984} 99-134, van Goudoever, l. Biblicol Calmdars. (Leiden, 1959). van Henten, J.W. "Martyrdom and Per.secution Rovisited: The Case of 4 Maccabcu." In: W. Ameling (ed.), Märtyr'er und Märtyrualden. (Attertumswi$SC11Sc:haftliches Kolloquium 6; Stnttgart, 2002; pp. 59-75). van Tongeren, L. ualtatio crucis. Hetfeest von KruuYerhejjing ende zingningvan het kntis in het Westen tijdcN tle vroege rniddeleeuwen: Een liturgie-historische .studle. (TFT Studie$ 2S; Tilburg, 199.5). - -...Vom Kretmitas zur Kreuzestheologie. Die Entstehun~geschichte des Festes der Kreuzerhöhung und seine erste Ausbreitung im Westen." Ephemeridu Liturgicae lli (1998)216-245. - - . üaltatiOfl of the Cross: Towardlt!r. OrigiN of the .FeilSt of the Cross ond the Meanmg of the Cross in Eorly Medieval Liturgy. (Liturgia condenda 11; Leuven, 2001). Vanderkam,. J., C. Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition. (Catholi.c Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Series 16; Wasblngton, D.C., 1984}; ss Bibliogrophy 393 Venetiaaer, L. "Ursprung und Bedeutuog der Propheten-Lektionen.'' ZeitJChrlft der Deutlehen Morge.nltilu:Jisclren Gesellschaft 63 (1909) 103-170. Verhelst. S. "La Iiturgie de Jt!rusalem a l'epoquc byzantine. Gen6se et structares de l'aanc!e liturgique." (Pb.D. disserta!ion, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1999). - - . "L'apoealypsc de 7..aeharic, Sim~ et Jacques." Re~~N4! Bibliqu~ lOS (1998) 81104. - - . "b .IS Aoil.t,1e 9 Av et 1e Kathisme... QuestiOM Liturgtquea 82 (2001) 161-191. ---."Une fonnule du Yöm ICippour." In: idem, Lu tradilionsjudlo-chr4tiMnes dans la LihlrgiB de 1aint Jacq11es. (forthcoming). Versnel, H.S. "Quid Athenis et Hierosolymis." In: 1.W. van Hcnten (ed.), Die Enutehung der jlldischen Martyriologle. (Leiden, 1989; pp. 162-196). Verstrepeo, J.-L. "Origines et installJ'ation des Quatre-Temps a R,ome." Re~~ue BenUictine 103 (1993) 339---365. Vjnc:ent, H., and F.-M. Abel. Jinlsalem: recherches tk topographie, d'archeologie et d'hlstoire. (2 Yols; Paris, 1912-26), Volgger, E. Die Feier des K.arfreitag!l bei Amalar von Metz (77$n8~JO). (Ph.D. dissertation; Vienna, 1993). Völker, W. Der wahre Gnostiker nach Clemens .4./uandrimtl. (Texte und Untersuchungen S7; Berlin, 1952). Vollenweider, S. "Der 'Raub' der Gottgleic:hheit: Ein R.eligionsgescbichtlicher Voncblag zu Phi12.6-(ll)." New Testament Studies 45 (1999) 413-433. Watts, J.D.W.Jsaiah 34-66. (Word Biblical Commentacy 25i Waco [Texas], 1987). Weinfeld, M. ;'Prayer and Liturgical Practice in the QtllllnUl Sec:t." In: D. Dimant and U. R.appaport (eds.), The Dead Se.a Scrolls. Forty Years of Rqearch (Studies on the Texts ofthe Desert ofJudah lO; Leiden, Jerusalem, 1992; pp. 241-258). Wei.s5, H.~F. Der Brief an die Hebräer. (X.ritiK:h·cxcgeti~her Kommentar über das Neue Testament 13; G~ttingen, 1991). Weiss, Z.E., and E. Netzet (eds). Promise und Re.demption. A Synagogtle Mosaicfrom Sepphoris. (Jerusalem, 1996). Weissman Jcnelit, J. "'Me.rry CbanukB': The Changing Holiday Practices of American Jews, 1880-1950." ln: J. Wertheimer {ed.), The Uses of Tradition. Jewish Contifll4ity in the Modern Ert1. (New York and Jerusalem., 1993; pp. 303-325). Welldland, H.-D. "Feste und Feiem 111. Im Urchristentum." Religion in Geschichw und Gegerrware2 (1958) 917-919. Wengst, K. Tradition 111rd Theologie du Bamabasbriefes. (Berlin and New York, 1971). Dru Johannesevangelium. (Theologischer Kommentar mm Neuen Testa..nent 4:1; Stuttgart, Berlin and Cologne, 2000). - - . See also above, General Collectlons under "Christian and Gnostic Literature." Wenschk:ewilz,. H. D;e Splrihlalisier~~~rg der Ku/tJUbegriffo. Tempel, Prifl8ltll' fmd Opfer Im Neaen Testament. (Angelos -Archiv fllr neutestamentliebe 7..eitgeschicbte und Kulturkunde 4; Leipzig, 1932). Werline, R..A. PenlterttiaJ Prayer in &cond Temple Judaism. 1'he Developrnent fJf Q Religiaw lMti/Jition. (Society of Biblieal Literatnre, Early Judaism aad Its Literature 13; Atlanta (Georgla], 1998). Werner, E. The Stlcred Bridge. Litu'1Jical Parallels in Synagogue and Early Church. (New York, 1959). Wieder, N. The Judean Scrolls and Karaism. (London, 1962). - - . "The Fonn ofthe Thlrd Benediction of the ·A.",idu on Rmth Hashshana and Yonr Kippur." [In Hebrew] Tarb~ 34 (1%4) 43-48. .Bibllograplry 394 Wilckens, U., Der .Brif.[ an die Rö~r~er, (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar 6:1-3; Neukirchen·Vluyn and ZOrich, 1978, 1980, 1982). Wildberger, H. Jesaja. 1. Teilband. Jesajtl 1-11. (Biblischer Kommentar X/I; Neukircben-Vluyn, 1972). Wilken, R. Judaism and the Early Christlall Mind. A Study of Cyril of Alexandria 's &egesi:~ and Theology. (New Haven [CoDD.] and London, 1971). - - . John Chr)lsoslom and the Jews. Rhetlroric artd Reality in the Late F - - . Egeria'sTl"avels to theHolyland. (Jerusalem, al981). William$, D.J. Act.s. (A Good News Commentary; San Fr.mcisco, 1985). Willis, G.G...Ember Days." ln: idem, Essays tn Early Roman Lit11rgy. (Aic;uin Club Col!ections 46; London, 1964; pp. 49-97). Windisch, H. Die apooto/i&chen Yätu 111. Der Baf'llabasbrief. (Handbuch zwn Neuen TellttU.nent. Ergänzungsband; Tllbi!.tgen, 1920). Winston, D. "Philo's Doelrine of Repentance." In~ I.P. Kenney (ed.), The School of Mosea. Studies irr ~ilo 01ld Helleni:tic Religion in Memory ofHorsi R. Moehring. (Studia Philoniea Monographs 1.: Brown Judaic Studies 304; Atlanta (Ga.), 1995; pp. 29-40). Wintermute, O.S.: see above, Apocal)lpae of Elijoh and Jubi/ees under "Iewish literarure." Witherington, B. The Act:1 oj the Apoatles. A Soci~·Rhethoric.:zl Commentary. (Grand Rapids (Mich.}, 1998). Wong, C.-K...The Interpretation of Zechariah 3,4 and 6 in the New Te.s.tament and Eady Christianity!' (Ph.D. dissertation, Westminster Theologjcal Seminary, 1992}. Wratislaw, A.H. "The Scapegoat-Barrabas." Expooitor)l Times 3 (1891192) 400-403. Wright, R.B.: sec above, Psolms ofSolomon under ..Jewi.1h Literatnre." Wrigltt, W.C.: see ilbove, Julian under "Pagan Litexature." W!!!l.der:er, C. Bruchsliicke einer afrik(JIIischen Bibeliiber~etzu1tg in der pat:lldocyprianilchen S.clrrift Exhortatio de paenitentia. (Programm der kgl, Bayer. Studienanstalt zu Erlangen; Erlangen. 1SS9). Yadin, Y.: see above, llQTempleScrol/under"Jewish Uteratore." Yabalom, J. Poetry und Society in J~i:Jh Golflee of Late A.ntiquity. (In Hebrew] (Tel Aviv, 1999). - - . See also above, 'A.romcm le 'EI and 'Az be 'Ei11 Kol under "Jewish lite.rature," Yonng. F. The Us« ofSacrificialldeas in Greek Christiall Writers. (Patristic: Monograph Series S; Philadelphia, 1979). Yonng, N.H. "The Impact ofthe Jewisb Day of Atonement upon the Tbought ofthe New Testament." (Ph.D. dissertation; Manchester, 1973). - - . "An Aristophanic Conttasl to Philippians 2:6-7." N~ Tutame111 Studies 4S (1999) 1S3-1S5. Bibliogrophy 395 Yuval, I. "Easter and Passover As Early Jewish-Christian Dlalogue.'' In: P. Bradshaw and L. Hoffinan (eds.), Passever ond Emter. Origin and History to Modern Times. (2 vols; Two Liturgical Traditions S aad 6; Notre Dame [Ind.], 1999; vol. 2, pp. 98-124). Zahn, T. "Brllder und Vettem .JeSil." ln: idem, Forschungerr zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen K.anoM und der altkirchlichen Literatur. (11 vols; Leipzig, 1900; vol. 612, pp. 225-372). Zani, A. "'Tracce di un'interessanle, ma sconosciuta. esegesi midrdica giadeo-eristiana di Lev 16 in un frammento di ippolito." Bibbla e Orirmle 24 (1982) 157-166. Ziromerli, W. Ezechiel. 1. Teilband: E~echiel 1-24. {Bibli$cher Kommentar XIIUl; Neukircheu·Vluyn, 1969). Zuck.schwerdt, E. "Das Nazirlat des Herrenbruders Jakobu.'l nach Hegesipp (Easeb, b.e. U 23,5-6)." Zeitschrift flJr die neutestamentliche Wissen&clraft 11nd die Kunde der dlteren Kirche 68 ( 1977} 276-287. Zulai, M.: see above, Yani:!ai under "Jewish Literanue." Index of Sources Old Testament Genesis 4:3 6:1-4 6:15 6:16 lS 17:23-27 123 86 199 199 92,237 123 22 129 22:13 37:21 37:31 37:31-33 38:30 61 96-91 126 67 170 Exodus 3 15:22-26 16 17:1-7 18 18:13 19:1 23:14 23:14-17 24 25:4 25:9LXX 25:17 25:17-22 2S:40LXX 26-28 26:1 26:31 28:36ff 28:38 29 30:10 32-33 32-34 32:11-14 237 47 47 47 121-122 121 32:30 33:9 34:lff 34:6--7 34:7 35-40 38:5-SLXX lOS lOS 183 238,239 4 4:20 5:5 89 ss. 122-123 123 89 95 lOS 113 8:9 104 26 187 24S 8-9 95 10 14 16 (selection) 95, 102,300 27, 170 .. 18, 21.28-33,5455, 62, 70-71, 8182, S6, 87, 93, 100, 117, 146, 171, 173, 187,262,318-321 95, 102,300 8 16:1 16:1-28 16:2-J 16:3 16:4 16:S 245 16:6 16:7-10 16:8 16:10 271 18, 30, 138-189 95 16:12-13 170 170 245 55, 123, 318,319, 321 122 Lcviticus 122 308 307 187 170 183 319 16:11 21 106 31 28,29,102,239 31, 102 26,29 29 103 26, 102, 103-104, 160 26,29 30, 193 lnda ofSqurcts 398 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:17 LXX 16:18-19 16:18-20 16:20 16:20-22 16:21 16:21-24 16:22 16:22-23 I6:23-24a 16:24 16:24-2.5 16:26 16:27 16:28 16:29 16:29-31 16:29-34 16:30 16:31 16:33 16:34 17:7 18 18:5 18:30 23 23:26-32 23:27 23:27LXX 23:27-32 23:28 23:29 23:32 23:34-43 23:39 25:9 25:9LXX 25:9-lO 25:9-13 106 30 30, 102, 160 30, 182-UJ 102, 110, 125, 181 110, 125 30 189 Sl, 102-103, 182183 160 26, 31, .SI, 88, 89, 96, 102, 123, 175 169 88, 94, 102, 117, 177 88 31 29, 31, 81, 102-103 32 104 32, 192 192 33,106 34 21, 26, 160, 212 47,53 16,33,102 102 !81 128 55,99,320 173 25:10 Nambers 3:4 S:7 6 6:1-7 14:18 14:18-20 19 29:7 29:7-11 29:8 29:8-10 29:8-11 29:11 104 102 26 24.5 248 89 56 170, 187-188 34, 106 18; 28,31-32,.54- ss, 32G-321 31 22,32 23 32, 150, 160 Deuteronomy 4:24 8:3 U:2 21:1··9 21:7-8 21:23 27:26 29:28 3!:16 32 32:2b 229 33, 47,97 90 169 169-170 1.54, 164, 173, 175, 178-179 154, 173, 175 39,339,341 38 44 44 55 76 62 15, 74, 104, 106 l.S 18, 26, 34, 54-55, 100, 160,318-321, 334 15, 104 74, 106, lSl, 219 74,106 318,319,321 39 15 u· 18, 91, 102-103 90 Joshua 4:19 97 I Kings 6:22 8 8:65-06 13:36ff 18:42-45 22:19 22:19-22 1Chron 28:11 LXX 253 123,291,294 293-294 ss 248 80 82 183 Index ofSoiiJ"ces 28:12LXX 28:18LXX 28:19LXX 183 183 183 2Cbroo 5-1 6--7 1 7:8-10 7:9-10 1 ):15 30:15-20 291 123 123 123,293 291 128 177 399 llO:J 110:4 119 {118):131 141 (140):1 141 (140):3 186 184 327-328 327-328 327-328 Proverbs 10:10 12:2.5-13:3 18:3 20:27 209 327-328 92.,93 337 lsaiah Ezra 3-S 9:6 1;11 195 53 6 Nehemia 1:3 8:1-10 9:33 Job 1:6 2:1 33:24 38:15 92-93 318,310-)21 43 80 so 66 285 Psahns 7:8-9 15:3 27 32:5LXX 34:13 37:11 37:19--20 47:IOLXX S9:8bLXX 69 (68):22 1:13-l4LXX 1:18 1:18-19 6:1 6:2 6:3 6:5-7 13:21 26:11 LXX 30:5 34:14 50:6 52:7 53 53:4 90 92-93 S6 89 70-71 98 98 295 295 151, 164 82:1-~ 90 83:5LXX 83:Jlb LXX 103 (102):4 103:14 106:6 107;10-21 295 29.5 93 39 43 66 SJ:S .53:6 53:7 53:7--8 53:8 53:9 53:10 53:10-12 53:11 53:12 S7:15ff .57:1S-58:14 58 58:1-S 58:3-5 58;4-S 254 15,34 130-131,268 268 79,80,82 80 80 80 80 128 186 92-93 128 159, 161, 165 90 116--117, 177-178, 179,208 . 111, 179 117, 177, 179 117 117, 177, 179 117 117, 177 179 117 177 117.179 117, 177, 179 55,320-321 5.5,321 56, 70, 72, 7.5-76, 71, ISS, 156,280 73 34 70-71 Index of&urces 400 SS;.Sff 58:6 61:1 61:1-3 320-321 56, ISS, 156, 160 56 90 Jeremiah 1:29 11:20 13:17 30:8-11 245 338 273 318-319,321 Ezek.iel 1 8:11 9-10 10 10:1 13:11 J3:9LXX 33:11 36:25-26 42:15 LXX 43 43:13 43:14 43:14--20 43:17 44:17-18 80 106 80 80 80 285 89 342-343 187 183-184 199-200 199-200 199-200 105 199-200 247 Daniel 90 7:9-10 9:5 9:25--26 80, 82, 229, 291 43 90 Obadiah 56 Jooab 55, 56, 58, 70-72, 75-76, 160,253, 280,320-321 2:7 3 93 34 Micah 7:14--20 7:18 7:18-20 7:19 Habaldc:uk 2:4 2:15 14 14:2-10 '14:2-3 14:3 14:10 56, 133,319 318-321,322 320 133 320 173 98 Haggai 1--2 2:26 195 183 Zechariah 195 1:8 2:13-3:4 3 80 3:1 3:1-5 3:2 6:1-3 Hosea 318-321,:322 56 56,319 267-268 6:9---15 8:14--19 8;19 327-328 79, 80-82, 92-94, 95, 101, 160, 165, 180, 194-197, 225, 333 8Q 163 92 80 !95 318-321 73, 306, 307, 310- 312 12:10 159, 161, 165 Maleal;bi Alllos 9 200 9:1 9:13-1.5 199 318-321 1:11 1:12-13 1:14 2:7 217,218 218 217,218 12.5 Inder of&urcQ 401 .New Testament Matthow 5:9 5:24 5:3&-48 6 6:17 6:16-18 7:9-11 9:9 10:10 10:45 26:3 26:57 26:62-63 27:12 27:14 27:15···23 27:15-26 27:16 27:17 27:20 27:21 27:28 27:28-31 27:30 163, 167, 224 209 212 179 72,75-76,170,313 70--71,280 34 253 168 249 205 168 168 179 179 179 147, 165-171,206, 226,227,267,330-331 145, 165 168 168 156, 168 168 .165,170 163 163 Mark 167,162 9 9:17-29 9:29 10:45 11:15-18 14:61 237 318 317,319 I:S9 294 179 }79 168 168 15:5 tS:9 15:11 Luke 1 1:1-20 1:9 1:13-17 2:25 163,331 323-324 327-328 252 2S4 244 2:25-3, 2:34 4:18-19 4:31-32 5:17-26 6:6 13:10 13:10--17 15:11-32 22:19-20 255 244 56 215 318 215 23:48 23:56 215 318 343 213 179 152 215 lohn 163,208 1:29 117, 138, 147, 176178, 179,224-225, 226,254 294 254 294 163 163 179 163, 165 177 163, 165 23:9 2:12-22 3:30 10:22-42 19:1 19:3 19:9 19:34 19:26 19:37 Acts 1:12 5:30 6:1 8:32-33 10:39 12:4 13:14 13:29 13:42 13:44 15:13 17:2 215 179 215 213 179 215 215 179 215 215 215 215 18:4 18:18 18:21 20:6 20:7 21S 215 215 215 2lS 402 20:16 20:28 21:24 22:1 27:9 Indu (1j' Sowces 21S 213 215 215 16, 2JII-21S, 22'7, 331 Romans 7 1:18 203 201,203 201 203,226 203 197-198 204,224-225 2:4-S 2:16 3 3:21 3:21-26 3:24 3:24-25 3:24-26 3:25 3:25-26 3:26 5:6-11 8:3 8:34 9:4 10:1!> 14:5-6 JS:24 145, 224, 197-205, 330 lOS, 115, 146,203, 205,206,221,225, 266,272 145,197-205,224-' 225,331 203 203 171, 175 189-190 203,221,224 175 215-216,227 17S 175 294 17S 224 186 IIRi 175 175 175 2Corinthians 1:16 5:21 8:18 Galatians 1:4 2:20 3 3-4 3:10 3:10-14 3:10-13 3:13 225 1Corinthians 1:17 1:18-24 4:17 5:7 15;25 1.5:26 16:3 16:6 !6:11 3:22 9:3 12:17 175 171, 173 175 3:13-14 4:4 4:4--5 4:4-6 4:4-7 4:6 4:9-10 4:10 175 17S 17S 154 173-174 173-174 173-176 145,331 147, 154, 159, 173176, 221, 224,226 206 164 117, 147, 154, l.S9, 171,173-.176, 178, 221,224,226,267 173-176 174 174-175 206 174 174 280 216,219 Ephesians 6:22 . 175 Philippians 2:6-11 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:19 2:23 2:25 2:28 4:16 61, 63,206,211212,226,330 212 212 212 212 175 115 l1S 175 17S Co! ossians 216,227 1:12 1:12-f" 1:12-20 210 207 61,63,200,207210,225,226,330 1:12-23 210 Index ofSowces 1:13 1:13-14 1:14 1:15 1:15-20 1:18 1:20 I :21 1:21-23 2:16-20 4:8 207 209 207,210 5:7 18~187, 184 ISS 210 5:8 6:19 6:19-20 6:20 7 7:3 7:14 207 7:16 21~217 7:17 7:25 207 209,210 207 207,209 175 7:26 1Thessalonians 3:2 3:5 175 175 7:27 8:1 8:1-5 8:2 175 2Tiroothy 1:10 186 Philemon 9:2 247 318-322 247 189 193 181,230,232 17:5 Hebrew& 180-197, 206, 266 189 184, 187 183 187 9:7 9:9 9:9--10 9:10 2:14 2:14-IS 2:17 2:17-18 2:18 3:1 3:1-6 3:2 4:14 4:14-16 4:15 4:15-5:10 4:16 S:S 5:6 184 194-195 191 184 181, 185, 189-190, 193 183, 184 181, 185 183, 187 183 182-183, 184, 189, 187 183, 184 181, 182, U9 298, 327-328 145-146, 193,266, 302,333 12 1:13 183, 191 190 184 8:4 8:5 8:6 8:7-9:10 9 9:2-12 9:3 9:3-4 1:10 191 271 2ThessaloiJ.ians 1:ll 1:1-4 1:3 403 191 116, 185, Ul6, 190, 193, 197 184 194 185, 189-190 194 298 184 183, 185, 193 189-190 184 187 190 184 184 9:4 9:ll 9:11-12 9:11-16 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:15-22 9:111-21 9:19 9:19--22 9:21 9:23 9:23-24 9:24 9:25 9:26 187 181 191 112-183 182 298 181 185, 187 184, 18:5 187-188 42 18:5, 187 193-194 185, 187 183, 184, 189, 193194 183 183, 185, 189-190 185 181, 185, J86 404 9:2S lO:l 10:10 10:11-18 10:12 10:13 10:19 10:19-20 10:19-22 10:22 10:25 10:27. 10:32-39 11 11:12 11:28 12:1-12 12:2 12:22-24 12:24 12:25 12:26 12:29 13:11-13 13:11-14 13:13 13:14 Index of Sources 181, 190, 193 183 181, ISS 185 182, 187 186 185, 187 183 190-191,193,236 185, 187-190 181, 191 186 181 336 183 177 181 187 182 185, 187 183, 183 183 182 159 192 lSl, 191-192 1Peter 1:2 2:4--5 2:22 2:22-24 189 189 2:25 179 117,147-148, 178179, 206--207 179,224,226 179 2Peter 146 Uohn 205-206,. 221,227, 2:24 1:7 1:7-2:2 1:9 l30 206 :5:15 205 206 189-190 205-206,266 178, 205, 206,273 176, 178, 205-206 253 Iude 6 88 2:1 2:1·-2 2:2 4:10 90 192 Revelation James 5:11 336 5:16-18 248 ~17 336 1:10 1:13 11:1 217 194, 196 146 Qumran Domascw Documtmt 16 x:6 W'ar Sero!I i:ll-17 IQS0 Rule ofBleuings iv:28 245 vi:l9 45 185 I QPesher Ho.bokkuk 100 xi:2-8 98 xi: 1QS Rule ofthe Community 209 1Q22Wordf o/Moses 100 iii:9-ll iii: 12-iv: 11 iv:l 41, 47,97 rn 115 Index 4Ql.S6 Targlllfl of Leviticru 4f.i,S4, 100 4Ql6l Peshu lsaiah 24.5 8-10 iü20 4Q171 Pesher on Psolms 98 ii:9-10 16 ii:9-ll 98 16 iii:2-3 98-99 iii:2-.S 4Ql80/l81 4Ql80 4Q180 t 7-8 4Ql81 87, 98, !01. 141, 329 87 87, 98, 101, 141, 329 Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice 65, 84-85, 100, 140, 191 4Q400-407 4Q401113 4Q40l223 4Q40S 15 ii-162 4Q405 l.S ii-16 s l1Ql7 84 91 91 231-232 231~232 84 4QEnoch Giafltr 81 4Q2037 i6 87 4QEnoch- 4Q201 iii 9 4Q202 iv 11 4Q204 ii26 86 88 86 83 4Q213a I i to-ll 341 Aramaie Levi Festival Prayers 1Q34 IQJ42+ll-4 34,37-46,100,209 37-38,43 38,44 uj'Svttr~s 1Q34 2+16 IQ342+16-7 1Q34 3 i 1Q34 3 ii 405 1Q34bis 38 38,44,4.5 41,45 42-43, 4$, 61, 63, 210 .37 4Q507 37-38 4Q.S08 4QS08 1 4Q508 11-3 4Q.S0821 4Q.S0821-6 4Q5082 3 4QS0824-5 4QS08 3 4QS087 4QS08 22+23 1 4QS08 22·~23 3 4Q.S08l0 4Q508 39 4QS0840 4Q.S08 41 37-38 41,45 41 39 38-39,45,48,51, ss, 210 16.16 37 43 43 38,45 39 43 43 43 43 4QS09 4Q.S09 3 1-9 4QS093 2-9 4QS095-6 ii 4Q509 7 4Q.S09 81 4Q.S0984 4QS09 12 i + 13 4Q.S09 16 4QS09 97+98 I 37-38,45 38 44 38,45 38,4.5 38,45 39 39-40,45 41,4S 42-43,45,61,210 Songs of the Sage 4QS10 4QS11 16 16 .SQJ3 44-45, 61, 63 11 QMelchuedek 40, 41,46, 79, 86, 90-92, 94, 9S, 98, lOo-101, 116, 121, 141, 185-186, 196197,210,329,330 406 ii 7-8 ii 18 iii7 Index ofSources 91 90 92 llQTemple Sero// 46, 100 xxv-xxvii 203 xxv:l-10 209 xxv:6 xxv:10-12 xxv:12-16 xxvi:IO xxvii:J-4 xxv:14-16 20,30 34 31 29,30 32 22 Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Apocalypse of A.braham14, 79, 81, 86, 90, 92-94, 196-197,329,330 13-14 93 13:1-14:14 92-93 13:6-7 92 13:7 93 13:10 94 14:5 94 Apocalypse of Elijah 1:15-21 47-48 Ascension oflsaiah 9-10 242 2Baruch 6:7 10:19 lEnoch 1-36 6-11 10 10:4 10:4a 10:4-8 10:4-10 10:6 10:7-8 10:8 10:8b 189,253 251-252 85-90,92,95,100101, 138, 185 79,85-86 86, 138-139 7, 40, 79, 8.5-90, 94, 116, 141, 18.5186,210,329,330 20, 31,88 87 19,31,88 87 88 88 88 87 10:9-10 10:10-16 10:11-17 10:13 10:13-14 10:17 10:18-11:2 10:20 12-16 13:1 14 14:8-25 14:9 14:10 14:14 14:14-23 14:19 14:21 14:24 15:2-16:4 88 186 89 185 92 89 89 89, 115 90 89 79,82-83,89,100, 136, 183,231,329 82 82 82 82 82 229 82,231 82 82 2Enoch 22 84 84, 136 Jubilees 16, 51, 79, 90, 9.597,99 95, 96, 100 34, 95-96, 100, 129, 160 96 96, 129 202-203 34,96 96,_129 95, 96, 129 177 5:17-18 34 34:10 34:12 34:12-19 34:13 34:13a 34:18 49:3 407 Index of Sources Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum (see under Pseudo-Philo) 2Maccabees 2:5 330 189 4Maccabees 14, 101-102, lOS, 115-116, 118, 198199 6:28-29 17 17:20--22 17:22 7, 221 11.5, 200--201 115,200 Psalms ofSolomon 3:8 34 Pseudo-Philo (Latin), Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 13:5-6 36 13:6 16,209,210 Pseudo-Philo (Annenian), OnJonah 1:11 1:23 1:30 1:35 1:37 1:38 1:41 1:48 51-59,118, 132, 330 36,58 58 57 51 57,58 35,57 36,57 57 Sibylline Oracles 118 1:360--75 164 8:285-309 164 Sirach 4:14 24:15 45:10 32-33 61 106 170 49:14-16 SO:S 50:5-10 SO:S-21 50:12-14 50:15 50:16 50:17 50:17-21 50:18-19 50:19 50:20 50:21 50:22 50:24-28 336 190 181 32-33,60,136 32 32 32, 136 32, 136 60 33 25,36 32, 136 32, 136 209 181 'Testaments ofthe Twelve Patriarchs Testament of Dan S:I0--11 Testament ofLevi 2:3 (Ms Mt. Athos) 2:5-5:7 2:6-7 2:10 3 3:4-6 s 185 19, 83-84, 100, 183 341 83 83 83 136 83 136 183 137 83, 136 83 196 185 5:1 5:5 8 8:1-18 8:2-10 18 Testament ofSimon 6:6 ISS Testament ofZebulon 9:8 185 Testament ofSolomon 21:2 105, 199 Vltae Prophetarum (see PseudoEpiphanius) 408 Index ofSovrcu Philo and Josephus Philo 7, 46-48, 107-114, 125,132,221,237239,242-243 Decherubim 25 199 D« cong~r~~ en~di.lionil gratia 89 107 107-108 25 15,107,206 15, 114,206 107 199 De d.rcalogo 159 l6, 107 De ebtiiltat4 86 87 135-136 136 107 ll3 107, 110, 112 109, 110 De foga et iftVentiorre 100 101 De giga"tibiiS 52 De plantatiolfe 199 199 107, llO IS, 19, 31, 88, 107, 112, 113,114 De posleritate Cai'li 48 IS, 107,206 70-72 48, 51, 107, 112, 113, 114 61 De11omniis 1:213-219 1:214 1:21S 1:215-216 1:220 2:188--189 96 28 109 1()7 96 110-111 2:189 107, 110 2:223-233 lll 2:230-231 110 2:231 107, 110 2:232 112 2:233 111 Despecio/ibu.r legibu 1:66-78 107 1:72 1:79-161 1:84 1:162-167 1:162-256 1:168 1:168-193 1:186 1:186-188 1:188 1:190 1:194-256 1:230 1:257-298 1:268 2:39-222 2:41 2;42-SS 2:56--70 2:14~144 2:145-149 2:150-161 2:162-175 2:176--187 2:188-192 2:193 2:193-194 2:193-195 2:193-203 2:194 2:195 2:196 2:196-199 2:197 2:198-199 2:200 2:200-202 2:203 2:204-213 30, 107, 110, 112, 113 107 107, 112 107 107 16, 107 107 16,34,46,108,325 107 22, 32, 94, 112, 114 32, 150, 160 107 109 107 188 108 16, 107 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108,209,209 16 16 108 107, 108 16 113 46,49 48 16 41,46 16 108 46, 48, 102-103 108 De vita Moail 2:20-23 2:23 2:23-24 2:24 2:26 2:95 214 16 107 46,48, 114 206 199 409 Index ofSovrca 2:95-135 2:97 2:109-110 Legalio ad Gai11m 306 306-307 109, 238-239 199 196 16, 20, 30, 112, 113,206,232 107, 112 4:79 1&8 5:166 11:134 16:182 16 16 200 112 98, 107, 112, 113 107, 112 47,107,114 17:165-166 18:94 Be/lum }11daiC11m 1:152 4:153 4:164 4:165 5:236 Contra A.pionem 16, 22,29 16,22 Legum al/egoriae 2:So-S6 2:.52 2:56 Josephus A.ntiq11itata jlldaicae. 2:312 177 3:246-243 22, 31 3:174 Qui1 rervm divirrt1Mim here.s sit 82-34 107 84 liO, 111 112 107 166 199 179 tS, 107,206 179-187 98, 112,113 187 107 1:209 2:282 247 117 117 117 22 . 71-72 22,214 Rabbinie and Medieval Jewish Literature Mishnah mlfbot 5:5 22 mBmah 5::2 mMak 36 3:2 120 mMeg 9:4 lriSanh 7:4 mSeb11 1;3-7 34 1:6 127 1:7 mSotah 7:7 m§eqal 26, 127 120 127 24 2:5 3:3 26 3:7 mMenoh 3;3 9:8 11:7 26,55 8:5 251-252. 20-2J 245 26 mSvkk4h mTa'on I 1:6 72 32, 150, 160 mParah 3:1 mPesah 7:7 28, 188 20-21 245 mRH 36 1:1 4:5-ti 49 mSabb 9:3 130, 131 2:1 2:2·-5 4 4:1 4:7 4:8 34 249 34, 56,72,343 4~ 311 49,49 249,249 35-36,51,69,72, 74,281 mTamid 7:2 136 Index ofSOUI'Ce.r 410 7:3 mroma 1 l:3 1:4-7 1:5 1:6 1:6-7 1-7 2 3 3:3 3:4 3:4---S 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 4 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:4 32, 136, 19-28,32, 171 21 125 22 23, 125 20,23,125 29 21 21 21 29 24 29 24,29,29 28 24, 26, 29, 51, 339 29 21 23,29 19, 24, 26, 29, 51, 130, 159 20,30 30 s 21 5:1 20, 21, 24, 30,30 21 127 30 24 21,30 24 30 19,21,160 29, 159 31, 137 5:2 5:2--4 5:3 5:3~ 5:4 5:5 .5:5-6 6 6:1 6:2 6:3 6:4 6:6 6:7 7 7:1 7:1-3 7:2 7:3 7:3--4 7:4 31 19, 31. 88, 89, 159 19, 29, 31, 130, 159, 160 31 21 26, 33, 55,60-61 24,25 31,36 22, 23,32 8 8:1 8:8 8:8-9 8:9 mZebah 8:12 21,312 34, 74,249 133 257 217 24.5 TO$efta tBef' 3:6 3:12 S2 49 tMeg 3:7 3:21-23 tRH 1:13 tSabb 6:1 7:11 tSotah 13:8 14:9 tYoma 1:6 1:7 t:a 1:12 2:10 3:18 3:19 4:2 4:6-8 4:9 4:14 4:14-15 26,55 72 210 131 131 125 131 125 125 30,12.5 125 284 24, 25,33 23 34 134 133 26,.52 52 Palestin.ian (Jerusalem) Talmud yAZ 2:3,41a 16 yßer 4:1, 7b 4:1, 7c 16 16, 49, 13.2 32 yMeg 24, 31, 32, 33, 69, l26 3:2, 74a 3:7, 74b 214 26,SS 4:5, 7Sb 62 Jndu qfSot~rces 13b yMQ 1:7, &Od bMeg 16 16 29a 31a )lb 71 26.5.5, 57 IJJ· 123-·124 bMenah lOOa 32 210 I06b yS1111h 10:8, 29c 214 49, 132 311 16 yYoma 1:1, 38a···C 1:1,38.: 1:3,39a 1:4,39a 1:5, 39a 1:5, 39a-b 3:7, 40d 5:3,42c 5:4, 42c 6:1, 43bc 6:3,43c 6:5, 43d 7:1,44a 7:3, 44b 7:5,44b 7:5,441>-e 8:6,4Sb 8;6, 45b-c 8:9, 4Sc 133 125 bMQ 123 bNed 39b 132 bPe.sah yTer 8:S.45c 109b 9a yTa'an 4:1, 67c 4:5, 20b 229 123 yPe'ah 7:4, 20b 8:9, 21b yRH I, 56b 1:3, 57a 411 123 125 125 125 125, 126 30 123 125 126 159 126,283 4a 54a 77a 75 132 245 bRH 10lr-11b 16a 16b 123--124 121 36,210 18b 21a 311 31b 284 121 32b 35a 88 .53 hSabb 131 25 53a 123,125,319 129 126 133 134 52, 123, 319, 338, 339 49b 131 bSotah 131 bTa'an 16b-17a 49 24b 248 26b 27b 30b 49 133 42, 122, 122 bTem Babylooian Talmud 29a bBB bYebrJm i2la bBer 42 Sb 17a 134 53 bGit 68b-70b 131 bHag l3a-14a 2ll 16 60b 245 bYoma 33 123 125 2a-6a &b l4b 18a 19b 20a 2Ja 20,20 115 34, JS, 126, 132 121,206 125 Index ofSm~rces 412 36b 39a-b 39b 40b 42a S3a SJb 54a 6la 67a 67b 68a 26,62,123,339 126 12.5, 283 284 130 30 64,248 126 127 l3I 128 88a 131 32 35,41,47,97 17, 133 129,134 S6, 133,319 34, 39, 42, 43, 51, .52,53 49 bZebah 88b 245 70b 74b 8Sb 86a 86a-b 87b Smaller T:ractates Scfrim 18:7 34 1~:-4 121 19:6 49 Avot ofRIJbbi Natlum (A) 25 121 Tannaitic Midrasbim Me/cl1ta de--Rabbi Yishmael (ed. Horovitz) p.180 p. 196 Slfra Ahar.e Mot 2:1 Ahore Mot 2:2 Aharte Mot 2:8 AhareMot3 AII(Jre Mot 4:4 Ahare Mot 4:.5 122 42, 121-122 Amoraic and Later Midrashim Genesis Robbah 3.5:3 123-124 123 84:31 130 Exod1.1s Rabbah 1.5:12 Levlticw Rabboh 177 22:3 3:3 20:2 20:12 21:1 21:10 21;11 21:12 26 l27 129 130, 139 56 123,319 llO, 125 110, 125 Del.lteronomy Rtrbbah 11:10 128 Psalm.s Rabbah On Ps, 86:8 131 Canticles Rabbah On Cant 4:4 (sign9) 133 Puiqla RabbDti 26:6 251-252 3.5 53 Pesi4ta Rov Kohana 24:1-12 54 24:11 24:17-19 S4 25 25:2 56 56 26:3 129-130 SS-56 26:11 130 Pirqe Rabbi Eiiner51 10 SS-56, 58 22 128 28 123 30 124 31 46 124 34, 35, 121, 122, 125, 128. 132 26 32 128 30 339 Medieval Literature Rov Sheshna Rashi 65-61 OubNid61a On b&lbb Slb On Exod 18:3 121 66 122 Jr,du. of Source;s Slrllllt:han 'Arulch r alqut Shim 'oni 413 Hekhaloi Rabbali 242 §108 138 §lll 135 34 1:44 67, 128 Seder Eliyah11 Zula 25 128 The Story ofthe Ten Martyr:r 138-139 139 I 51:2 r .st:7 139 139 11133:12 VII 31:34 139 IX 31:33 139 §§184-U.S §192 §299 §§313-314 135 135 135 136 Metatron §390 135 He.lchalot Z11lrati 242 135 §411 §424 135, 136 S~tder Rabba deBere'shit §811 135 §§814-816 135 Hekttalot Literature 134-139 1Enoch 138 4-S (Synopsis §§.S-8) 138 5 (Synopsis §§7-8} 13&-139 36 (Synopsis §§54) 13S Shi'ur Qomah §384 Ma'aseh Merkavalt §547 §548 §§548-549 39 (Synopsis §57) 135, 135 §SSS 135 138 52, 137, 137 137 135 Targumim T01'gum On/celos Genesis 49: 11 Lev 16:22 Lev 16:30 Num 31:17-18 170 Ta.rgv.111 Pseudo-Jonatltan 86 Ocn 37:31 126,130 Lcv9:3 67, 12&-130 Lev 16 SI, 88 Lev 16:10 128 Lev l6:2lb-22 128 Piyyutim and Prayers (according to lheir title) '~romem le'EI 245 Samaritan. Pentateuch Ex.od26:35 189 Exod 26:36 189 Exod 30:1-10 189 Jewish Liturgy 'A.I Het 'A.na 'Eioheinu Ya'aleh YeYaiiO 88 51 60,286 SO 50 414 Index ofSources 'A..sapper Gedolot ed. Mirsky, line 197 'A.shanen 'Allah Baharta beYisrael 'Attah Bahartanu 'Attah Barata 'Attah Konanta '0/am beROY Hesed ed. Mirsky,line 71 'Attah Yodea' Ma'amaqei Lev 'Attah Yodea 'Omqo shel Lev 'Attah Yodea' Razey '0/am 'Atsaltsel 'Aval ['Anahnu] Hatanu 'Az be 'Ein Kol ed. Yahalom, lines 214-215 ed. Yahalom, line 553 ed. Yahalom,lines 762-763 'Azkir Gevurot 'E/oah ed. Mirsky, lines 1-4 ed. Mirsky,line 119 ed. Mirsky,line 133 ed. Mirsky, line 160 'AzkirSela 'Ein Lanu Kohen Gadol ed. Mirsky, line 3 ed. Mirsky,line II ed. Mirsky,Jine 14 ed. Mirsky,line 32 'Eleh 'Ezkerah 'Elohai 'ad shelo Notsarti 'Eloheinu ve'Elohei 'Avoteinu Galleh 'E/oheinu ve'Eiohei 'Avoteinu Mehol Ha'Omrim leKhilayShoa' HaLo Kol haNistarot vehaNiglot 'Attah Yodea' Ki 'A11onoteinu RJ!bll miLemanot -Mah 'Anu uMah Hayyenu Mah Ne'emar Lefaneikha Yoshev baMarom M alkhllJiol MiMa 'amaqei Lev Ribon Ha '0/amim Riboni Hatati uMura' 'A.siti Shiv'at Yamim 49,60,286 32 63 so 42, so 45 49, 60, 63, 97, 287 287 53 53 39, 50, SI, 52, 53, 137-138, 139, 336-342 63 43, 50,53 60,286 285 129 286 49,60,287 287 '287 IS 97 63 34,286 286 286 287 287 138-139 53 SO 50 285 39 53 34 so 49,209 53 53 52 60,62-64 Index ofSou.rces Shofarot uvekhen Ten Pahdekha ve'Attah Hivdalta veHasi'enu VeHen 'Anu 'Allah keTo'im ve'Ein Levakesh veTitten Lanu Zekhor Lanu. Zikhronot 415 49,209 50,339 43 50 40 50 42 42,49,209 (Ashkenazy) Mahzor for the Days ofAwe (ed. Goldschmidt) 2:568-574 2:574-576 139 42 Seder Rav 'Amram Ga'on (ed. Goldschmidt) 49 39,340 39,56 56 63 60, 127 p. 161 p. 166 p. 168 p. 168:5-8 p. 168:7-8 Seder Rav Sa'adia Ga'on (ed. Davidson, Yoel and Asaf) 50 52,137-138 p.258 p.259 pp. 259-260 pp.259-264 p.26l p.262 52 42, 50,340 50 53 34,43,53,343 Christian and Gnostic Literature Alexander the Monk Ambrose Onthe Finding ofthe Venerable and Life-giving Cross 292 Commentary an Luke 1:22 250 Letters 3:13-14 Alexios Aristenos 276 Amalar 269,334 267 Anaphora.s Cyril (Syriac) St. James (Syriac) 337-342 337-342 Index ofSourcu 416 St. Jamu (Greek) Andreas of Crete In ezaltationem S. Crucis orationes 272 2-3 2-16 S-6 5:14 1 292 Anonymous from Jerusalem Commentary on Luke 2S0,326 A.postolic Constitutions 2:S5:1 5:7:12 6:12:13 7 7:5:5 7:23:4 7:30:1 8 8:9:8-9 8:12:1-15:11 8:12:6-26 8:12:9-20 8:47:1-85 27S,276 336 336 336 335 336 222 217 335 342-343 335 335 335 275 Aristides, A.pology (Syriac) 220,282, 14:4 331 Augustine Locutiorrum in Heptateuch11m CCSL33:428 Quaestiomim in Heptateuchum CCSL 33:211-214 CCSL 33:213 Barnabas 1-6 7:3 7:3-5 7:4 7:4-5 7:5 7:6 7:6-11 7:7 7:8 7:8-9 7:9 320 7:10 263 263,267 263 263 266,267 61-62, 146, 148-150, 157, 162, 164-165, 223-224, 227,281 149 7:11 7-8 149 149 149 163, 163 129, 146, 148-IS5, ISO, 157ISS, 160, 206,221, 223,225, 267-268, 330-331 16, 151, 152, 159, 164, 219 150-IS2 150, 151152, 159, 160 32 152, 160, 164,219 19, 29,153; 159 152-155 153, 159 19,29, 31, 89, 153, 159, 160, 163, 164, 164 19 153, 159, 160, 163, 194,196 19, 29, 153, 159 19, 29, 160, 164 149, 188 Basil Homiliu on Fasting 1-2 1:1 1:2 1:3 76,279 16 280 15 Index of Sources Canona of the Apostlea 70 Comes of Wiirzburg 275,331 275-277 417 304,317321 Cosmas lndicop1eustes Chronikon Paschale §334 296 291 Christion Topography 5:9 5:37 250 250 CoWlcil of Laodicea Canon37 Canon 38 276 276 Chrysostom (See John Chrysostom) Clement ofRome /Clement 1-12 36 40:1-5 55:1 61:3 64" 336 194 218 172 194 194 C1ement of Alexandria 229, 237-243 Cyprian of Carthage Leiters 63:14:4 Cyprian the Gaul Heptateuchos &cerpts from Theodotus 229,241 Cyril of Alexandria 27 Commentary on lsaiuh 27:5 34 37 37-39 38 59:2 59:2-3 64 Stromaleis 5 5:6 5:6:32-40 5:6:39:3-40:4 5:6:39:4 5:6:40:1 5:6:40:3 5:6:40:4 Comes of Alcuin 30,229,236, 238,240-243 242 230,231 231,234 231 229-231, 234,236, 231 230 241 241 239 238 237-239 239 239 239 239 304,317321 270-271 1:14 264 69 Contra Iulianum 9 267 Epistulu ad Acacium 267 On the ll.dorution and Worship ofGod in Spirit andin Truth 263 1105-8 1105BC 263 281 Glaphyrorum in Leviticum 263 liber 580A-589B 588A 267, 267 20, 29, 267268 Homilies on Luke 53 267,267 Cyril of Jerusalem Catechesea 4:10 10:19 13:4 299 299 299 Indu ofSources 418 Ep/:rtwla ad Constantivm 3 299 De :solstiliis et aequinoctiis (ed. Botte) 55, 250, 304, 308,325326 pp.96-98 253--254, p. 95:63-6.5 p. 95:81-85 pp. 95:84-96:105 325-326 308 308 307 Dldache 218 4:14 218 217 14:1-3 Dida:scalia 21 Homilies on the NatiPil)l 5:14 26:12 27:3 27:13 27:18 Epiphanius 24S PanQI'ion 29:4 78:13-14 78:14 245,246 246 248 Eusebius of Caesarea 246,249, 2.56, 291, 299 Didymus the Blind Commentarii in Zaclrariam 3:32 73 History oftlre Clrvrclr 219-220, 284,331 246-250, 256 De :rii gemmis 2:1 Damonstratto E11omgelica 3:1-4:1 325 HomiJies on the Exaltation 292 oftheCross 222 Diognet 250 250 250 250 1:3:2 2:23:4-1 2:23:5-6 3:31:3 5:24:3 5:24:17ff 15, 16,69 246 248 24.5,256 245,256 222 Ji'ito Co1Utantini Egeria, Diary 48-49 293-294, 298 291-292 Epbrem 3:28 4:40-46 271 291 Gelasius Lett(lr 14 313 305 Comtmmtary on Exodus 12:2 253 12:2-3 325,250 Comme11tary 011 the Diales:smqn 1:29 250,325 Homilies on Fa:sting 1:12 16, 73 2 73 2:1 10 73 76,280 Gospel of Philip 22S,232237 69:14-70:9 70:1-5 70:5-10 70:15-25 71:1-lS 76:J.-10 84:20-8!!:21 233 235 235 236 236 236 234-235 Jnd" of Sources 84:25-30 SS:t-5 236 235 lgBatius 85:1-21 85:5-10 86:1-5 235 9:1 Gospel of Petu 146, 161165 163 163 163, 164 235,236 235 3:6-9 3:7 3:8 163 163-164 151, 159, 164 152 3:9 5:15-16 5:16 7:25-27 217 217 9:35 12:50 419 Ta the MogneslaM 217 To the PhiladelphianJ 9:1 ~~ Irenaeus apud Eusebius, History of the Chr~rch 5:24: 11ff 222 Against the Here1ies 1:7:1 1:13:3-4 233 233 tat~ 233 3:10:1 3:11:8 252 252 lshodad of Merv Commel'llary on Leviticu!f 264 Gregory ofNazianz 16 23:23-26 Homily 10:4 271 Hegesippus 246-250, Hypo11f1Jemata 256 246 Heracleon 239 Corn.mentary on John 233-234 267-268 69 Isidore of Sevilla {Pseudo?) Quaefftiones de ueteri et nouo 264 Testamento Quaestiones in Lwiticum IS 266 Ivo of Chartres 269-270, 334 Hcsy~hius of le111Salem Commentory on Leviticus 263, 266 Jaeob ofSarug (ed. Bedjan) 16 267 Homi/y on the Scapegoat 23 23:27-32 76 281 vol. 3:259-282 vot. 3:.2.S9 vol. 3:263 vol. 3:264-266 vol. 3:267 vol. 3:27.S Hildebert 334 l.iber de ltiCra eucharislia269 Yer.sus tk myllterio Wlissae 269 267 69 69 267 69 69 Jerome Hippolytus On Proverbs ttgailtst Jovinianus lS&-159 1:1~ 7S Commentary on Galatians 1 75 420 Indo: afSoruces 2:8-9 15 4:10 306 Commentary 011 Zecharialr 8:18-19 306, 311 De viril inJvstribus 45 256 Dialogus Advl!r$u: Pelagia1101 1:35:78-91 267 Letters 46:5 46:13 271 296 76,306 296 15 52:10 J08:9 112:10 Jobn Chry.ostom 280 Againsillre Je:ws I (PG 48:ß54B) 276,301 1:1 69 274-275 1:1:4-5 1:2 1:4 1:4; PG 48:8460 1:4; PG 48:849C 1:4:7 Johannes Dama~cnus SermD in anmmtiationem beatae Mariae tJirglni:r 255 Johallnes Scholasticus 276 Jolwlnes ZODUas 276 Jt&Stin Martyr l.S!i-156 Fir.st Apology 61 Dialogue with Trypho 222 15 39 15.5, 156 1S5 40:4-S 16, 19, 29, 31, 76,154, 15.5-lSo, 1.59, 160, 279 16 72 41 ISS 72 42 155 14 46:2 111:1 116--117 us 160 Leo the Grc:at 311,312- 74 275 1:5 1:8 16 2 (page 123a} 4:7:6 76 6:5:9 69 279 279 6:7:1-7 278 6:7:2 279 7:·1 (PG 43:91 .5) 29.5 8:4 27S Clrrislmar Homily 2SO 3.S7BC 69,2:'10 Twelfth Homily on First Corinthians 131 John of Jel"U&alem PanegyriC'U de :soncta ecclesia dt;,mini 299,300 23 300 71 51 300 300 ISS 317,319, 320 Sermons 12:4 13:2 IS:l 1.5:2 17:1 18:2 19:2 20:1 20:2 20:3 78:1 78:2 78:4 79:1-2 81:1 81:4 86:1-:2 312-317 313, 314 313,314 313,314 306, 313 306 314 314 306 313,314 313, 314 306 314 314 306 306 314 313 421 I1Jckz ofSourcu 87:1 87:2 87:3 88:1 88:1-2 38:2 38:2-4 &8:3 88:5 89:1 89:2 89:3 89:4 89:6 90:1 92:1 92:2 313 312,317, 319 313 313 313 314 314 314,315 313 74-75,306, 312,315 314 313 306 93:3 94:1-2 94:4 294 12.S7 324 O~geo 12S Agairut Ceistls 1:31 266 234 10:33 Commentary an Romaru 198 E:thortation ta Martyrdom266 30:16 12:13 306,316 76,279,313, 9:1:1 313 313 Liber Pontijicali:J 304,306307 Martyrdom ofPolycarp 268 Homily on Jeremiah Homily on LeviliCU3 306 306,313, 313 172 Commentar;y 011 Jolur 313 306,316 316 92:4 1253 9:3:2 9:3:3 9:4:1 9:4:3 9:5:2 9:5:3 9:5:9 9:6:1 9:8:5 9:9:4 10:2:1 10:2:2 10:2:4 16,273 266,301, 332 335 159 266 159 266 266 266 269,268 266 268 268 273,27& 167,266 76,279 14:3 194 ()nPrayer 266 Maximus Confessor 324 Paterius 264 Philaster 311 Middle Armenicm Lectionary 295 Diversontm Herueon /.iber 149 304,306 0/d A.rmenian Lectionary 3. 292, 294- 295,327328 Old GeOI'glan Lec;ionary 3, 292, 294, 324,327- 122.S 1240 1247-1250 Photius 276 Pilgrim ofBordeaux 299 328 Polyearp: To the Philippians 327 293 298 12:2 194 422 Ind~a Polycrates apud Eusebius apud !erome i'rottwangdium ofJamu Pseudo-Epiphanius 245,256 256 :zso-25s, 323 S:l ofSourcu 245 8 2.S1 &-9 251 8:2 9:3 251 10 251 251 10:2 251 12:3 251 24 256 De ptophetorum vita et obitu Commentary on Luke 255 326 Pseudo-George the Arab 326-327 Pseudo(?)-lsisore of Sevilla (see Isidore of Sevilla) Pseudo-Jerome 167 Commentory on Mark l.S:l I 267 Seven1s of' Oabala Pseu Letters Pseudo-Aihanasius Socrates On Sabbaths and Circumci:ion TeJtimonia e $criphlro 267 Hfstoryofthe Church IS 1:33 291 2SS Pseudo-Chrysostom I 58 in ltJ'lldem conceptionis sancti Ioannis Bapti:toe 250 Sopbronius Homily ()II the Exoltfltion ofthe YUI.erahle Cross rmd on· the Holy Anastasis 292 So:ll>menas Pseudo-Cyprian Exhortation ro Pemtence 320 History ofthe Church 2:26 291-292, 295 Pseudo-Cyril of Jeru.salem Correspondence with Jaliwi ofRome Step'anos Siwnec•i 300 326 Tertullian Commentary on Levilicus 264, 267- 268 Pseudo-Ephrem (Syriillc) Commentary on Leviti=s 264, 267 1$2, 1.56158, 159 Pseudo-Epbrem (Annenian) Againsl Mareion 3:5-24 3:7:7-8 281 1.56 19, 29. 31, 12, IS4, 156-1.58, 1.59, 160 423 /ndez ofSource.s Theodoros Balsamon Ad natione.s 1:13:4 Agaimt the Jews 72 281 14:9 19, 29,31 14:9-10 72, 156-158 OnBaptism 17:1 0f1Fastlng 2:13-14 14:2-3 16 16:6 18 Tbeodosius, the Pilgrim 291, 323 270 281 Tradirio Apostolica 222 Typicon o/Constantinople 292,298 222 304,307 15 36,71-72 222 Theodore bar Koni Sclwlia 276 Yaientinian Expositio11 (NHC xi,2) 2S:l0-39 22&, 234, 236 Sacramentarium Veronense 304,305, 313 313 873 313 876 313 89S 26S Theodoret ofCyr Commentary on Jsaiah l~4 IS 267 Erallistes QuaestionllS in Octateuchum ifl Leviticum 22 267 in Leviticum 32 36, 73-74, Victorinus Commentary on the Apoculypse 4:4 252 280 Pagan Literature D11 prosodia catholica 68 Augustus Aelius Herodiam1s 199 Dio Cbrysostomus Fab11lae 199 OrationllS Aesop 103 Diodorus Siculw. Agatbarcltides of Cnidus 71-72 Aloxander of Lycopolis Contra Manichaei OpinionllS Dlsputatro 172 Harpocro~tion 109 tb.e Grammarian 103 Hecateus of Abdera Aegyptica 68 109 Apollodorus of Athens Perl Theon 103 Hesychius, tbe Lexic:ographor 103 Index 424 Isocrab:S ofSo~~rces Plutarch PhilipJIIIS (oratio 5) 103 Quaestiones Crmvivale1 266 Suetonius 36, 68--·69 Julian Agalnst the Galileans Divus Augustus Juvenal Sahu-ae 69-70, 74 6& 76:2 100:4 1S Tacitus Historia Pmonius 71 5:5:4 Satyrico11 7S Plato 133 Nomoi 103 Terence 7S Phorm.io Xenophon '!-. Hellenica 209 Islamic Literature Al Diruni 324,325 The Chro110logy qfA.ncie11t Nations (ed. Sadlau) p. 286 [291} Qur'an Sum3:J7 325 p. 326 [329] 32.5 pp.326f(329~ 325 251-252 Archaeological Sources Cotpus Inscriptionum Judaicarum 1:725 39, 47-48, 58 Mosaic in Sepphoris Synagogue 129 Frescoes Gf Dura Europos Synagogue Papyrus Fayum (ed. Grenfeii/Hunt) 118 337 lnscriptions of Cos (ed. Paton/Hiclcs) 81 199 341 199 199 Papyn1s Oxyr:byncbu.s {ed. Cowley) 6 Index ofModem Authors Abel, F.-M. Abnhams,I. Abosc:b,R. Acbterneicr, P. Adna,J. Aland,B. Albec:k, H. Aletti, J.-N. Allenbach, ·J. Allison, D Alon,G. Alpigiano, C. Altaner, B. Amar,J. Anderson, H. Asaf, S. Aschim, A. Assmlllll, A. AssmiDll, J. Attridge, H. AufderMaur Aune,D. Avemarie, F. Azir.a.,C. Bacl.ko, B. Baehrens, W. Baer, Y. Bailey,D. Baillet,M. Bammel,C. Barkley,O. Ba:rrett, C. Bartb, M. Bauernfeind, 0. BaumgarteD, J. 256, 294, 323 Baumstark, A. 50,52 139 Be'k.E. 179 116 Bedjan,P. 233-234 20 207,209 266 166, 167, 168, 170 29, 150, 159 220 264 253 115 34, 42. 50, 52, 53, 137, 339, 343. 90 7,264 7 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 191, 194, 242, 253 303,306,309 146, 196 19, 126, 133 71 7 262 28, 55, 107, 120, 125 105, 116, 198, 200, 203 37-43 233-234 262,273,278 176-177, 182, 214 207,216 117 35, 97, 99, 171 Becker, H.-J. Belayche, N. Bell, C. Bell, R. Berendts, A. Be.rger, K. Betz.H.-D. Beyse, K.-M. Bezalel, N. Bigg,C. Bihain, E. Billerbeck, P. Black,M. Blaise,A. Blanc,C. Blanke,H. Blenkinsopp, J. Blocher,H. Bockmuchl, M. Bolle, R. Bolotov Bomert,R. Borret,M. Botte, B. Bousset, W. Bovon, F. Boyarin, 0. Brllndle, R. Br.run, R. Bremmer, J. Breytenbach, C. Bronznick Brown,P. Brown,R. Brox,N. Bruc:e, F. 294,297,324 73 19 69,267 48 l-2,6 132 244 146 173-174 170 30,.241 178 299 13 82,87,88,174,294 75 234 207,216 80 81 211 313 324 269-270,272 262 308,325 335-339 56 l 74,274,301 1S7 171, 172 176 285 314 146, 149, 161, 162, 163, 164, 166, 177, 205,206 178 214 426 Index ofModern Authors Bruekner, R. Buchanan, G. Btk:hler, A. Ba.chsel, F. Bockley, J. Bugnini, A. Bultmann, R. Bumoy,C. Buth,R. 54 Cadbuty, H. 214 211 120, 132 104, lOS 232-233 291 7, 148. 204, 205 177 Cahill, M. 167 Calvet·Sebasti, M.·A. 271 Carleton Paget, J. 148, 150, 151, IS7, Casey, R. Chabot, 1. Charles, R. Charlcswortb, I. Chavasse, A. Chazon, E. Coakley, J. Cody,A. Collins, J. Colson, F. Connolly, R. Conway, A.I. Conybcare, F. Conzelmann, H. Cothenet, E. Cowley,A. Cremer, F.G. Crossan, J. Cullmann, 0. Culpepper, R. Daly,R. Danby,H. DI!Diel. S. Dani6lou, J. Damell, D.R. Davidson, Y. Davies, W. Davila,J. Davis, R. Davison, J. Oe Coninck, A. 126,232-2:!3,235, 237 de Halleux, A. deJonge,M. 252,325 212-213 158, 164, 196 229,230,240,241 267 ss 211 75, 303, 304, 305, 309,310,312, 313.• 317 ~ 85 252,325 182 80,86 46, 47, 109, 110, lll, 112, 113 326,327 15,304,315,316 326 214 251 44,62 222 146, lSO, 157, 161165, 167 251 244 265,269 36 102, 108 303,305,312 .342-343 34, 42, 50, 52, 53, 137,339,343 166, 167, 163, 170 91 307 237 dcLange, N. de Strycker, E. Deiana,G. Deissmann, A. Dekkers, E. Denker, J. Der Nersessian, S. Derenbourg, J. Dershowitt, N. Desan, P. Devreesse, R. Dibellus, M. Dibelius, 0. Dimant,D. Dindorf, L. Dindorf, W. Dodd, C. Dolle,R. Doutreleau, L. Draguet Drake,H. Drijvers, J. duCange,C. Ducbesne, L. Dunn, J. Dun.nd,G. Duval, Y.-M. Eckey, W. Eisler, R. Eizenhofer, L. Elbo,gen, I. 83 262-'263 251 18, 107, 108 48 264 161 291 62 300 9 265 161 240 85,87-88,90 291 103 176 304,315 73 265 299 299 272 307 173, 174,176,203, 214 7 57,58 214--215 256 304,313 24, 26, 3S, 49, 52, 54, 55, 56, 60, 62. 63, 120 134, 13.S Elior, .R. Elliott, J. 119 Engberding, H. ·308, 324 20 Ep~in, Y. Ettlinger, G. 267,267 37-45,97 Falle, D. 211 Fee,G. Femändez Marcos, N. 74, 263, 267, 280 291,295 Festugi~re, A.·I. Fiensy, D. 335,336,342-343 7l-72, 261,269 Fine, S. 303,305,312,312 Fischer, L. Index ofModern Authors Fitzmyer, J_ F~~.E. 204,214 42, 44, 49, 55,56 233-234 · 269-270 Fnnz, A. 269 Fraser, M. Freoland, J.P. Frcemmtle, W. 294, 296, 302 .Fleis.eher, E. Foerster, W _ Frey, J. Frey, I.-M. Friedlandcr Frolow, A. so, 54, Halbwacbs, M. Hallit, J. Halton, T. 80, 3l Hansoa,P. 7,85-89 Hanson, R..P.C. Haossens, J. Harlcins, P. Harl6, P. 214 274, 27S, 279, 279 103, 104 Harrington, D. Hatc:h, E. 210 104 H.awting, G. Hcininger, B. 34 2S 192 274, 301 234 25, 49,341 189 Hebn,L. Helm, .R. 151 85-86 Heiming, 0. Hengel, M. Henncckc, E. Hennans, 1'. Hemnann, J. 338 116, 213, 244-245 220 Hespel Hilberg, I. 265 SS 291 264 l, 48, 277 Garefa-Mart!n.ez, F. 90,91 Garitte, G. 292,324, 327,328 Gartner, Y. Geerard, M. 46 262 85, 88 71, 307 291,323 233-234 291-292 124 165 262 Godu, G. Goitein, S. 304, 317 34, 64 Goldschmi~ D. 39, 40, 49, SO, 52, S6, 60, 63, 127, 139,340 Goldscbmidt, L. 19 Goldstein, N. 120, 131 Goldstein Cohea, N.S6 Goodenough. E. 110, 335, 341 Goppelt, L. l 79 Gordon, R~P. 218 Grabbe, L. 85, 87, 88, 90, 91, Gramaglia, V. Hackett, H. Hager, D. 263, 267 16,97 214 166 S 291,300 246 Hamerton~JCelly, 162 Grbser, E. Green, J. Greenberg, M. Grillet, B. Grintz, Y. Griveau, R. N. Hanhart, R. 114 Gradwohl, R. H~ham. 271 176-177 48 Fuller, R. Gin,gras, 0. Glnz.berg, L. Girard, R. Glorie, f. Gulnot, J.-N. 75,304, 315, 316 Fq, R. Gaar,A. Gager, J. Geiger, A. Gerlo, A. Geyer, P. Gianotto, C. 427 161 170 1.57 185, 186, 187 Heestennan, J. Heid, S. Heimgartner, M. Heine, R. Heine:mann,J. Hinunelfarb, M. R.l74 269 269 104, lOS 75 82-84, 90, 114, 182,232,242 Hock,R. 2S1 Hoeck,J. Hoffieit,H. 255 68 Hofftoan, L. 49, 52,60 Hof'rus, 0. l16,182, 183,207, 2ll, 229,231-232 Holl, K. 303 149, 162 Holladay, C. Hollander, H. Holmes, M.W. Horbury, W. Hossfeld, F.-L. llO 83 217,220 148, 149, 188, 193 265 80 Hovhannesian, V. ;263 291,295 43, 61, 63, 97 Hruby, K. Hunt,E. 32S Hurst, L. 120 294,291,299 182, 183, 189 428 Hvalvik, R Hyldah1, N. Irshai, 0. Index ofModernAut/wrs 148, 149, 158 246 246,249,294,297, 298 lsaacs, M. 192 Isenberg, W. 232-233 Jacobson, H. 16,210 Jacquier, E. 214 303,306 Janini, J. Janowski, B. 87, 116 233-234 Janssens, Y. Jegher-Bucher, V. 74,274 Jeremias, J. 177,229 214-215 Jervell, J. 247 Jones,F. 7 Jung,C.G. 269 Jungmann Käsemann 185,204 Kazhdan, A. 291 Kelly, J. 274 Kennel,G. 211 Kimelrnan, R. 1 ~ Kirlc, A. 162 Kister, M. 44, 45, 61, 161 Klauck, H.-J. 115,201 314 Klingshim, W. Klostermann 273 Knibb, M. 86-87 Knohl, I. 123, 188, 313-314 Knöppler, T. 145-146, 197, 202, 204 Kobelski, P. 91 Koester, C. 182 see Köster, H. Koester, H. Kahler, K. 335,339 Kosmala, H. 284 146, 149, 161, 162, Köster, H. 163, 164, 170, 192 244 Klltting, B. Kovacs, J. 237,239,241,242 Kraft, R. 1, 148, 149, 150, 151 Kraus, W. 22, 95, 105, 127, 146, 197-203, 205, 272 71-72 Krauss, S. Kulilc, A. 92-94 Lake,K. 151, 153, 172,214 270,271,272 Lampe, G. Lampe, P. 232-233 Lane,D. Lane, W. Lang, B. Laporte, J. Larsson, G. Latte, K. Lauterbach 102 181, 188, 190, 191 127 107, 109 19 297. . 30, 42, 65~7. 106, 125-126 Lawlor, H. 247 237,238-239 Le Boulluec, A. Le~aut 190 Le Goff,J. 7 Leclerq, H. 304,343 Lecuyer, J. 195-196 Lebmann,M. 44 Lenhardt, P. 209-210 69,264 Leonhard, C. Leonhardt, J. 107,209 Uvy-Strauss, C. 9 Lewy, Heinrich 68, 70 Liddell, H. 104 128,251-252,285 Liebennan, S. see Liebennan, S. Liebennann, S. Liebreich, L. 49 119, 205 Lieu, J. 3, 272, 330n, 335Ligier, L. 342 237,241 Lilla, S. Linder, A. 11,276,277 Loader, W. 182, 184, 185, 190, 193-196 207, 208, 209, 211 Lohmeyer, E. Lohse, E. 115, 185, 197 Longenecker, R. 174 Lauf, A. 157, 167 Lueken, W. 91,231 196 Lupieri, E. 166 Luz, U. Lyonnet, S 209 Maccoby, H. 166 Macdonald, J. 44 Mach,M. 242 49 Mack,H. Maher,M. 129 49, 135,285 Maier,J. Malachi,Z. 54, 59, 60, 61 Manns, F. 251·· Mara,M. 161, 163, 164 Marbach, E. 34,75 92 Mare, P. Indez ofModern A11thors Marcovich, M. Marrou,H. Martyn, J. Marx, F. Massingberd Ford, Mateos, J. Mathews, E. Mayer, G. McCollough, T. McLean, B.H. 155 231,231 174 306 J. 170 292,298 253,264 245 263 127, 171, 173, 174, 175, 176 McNally, R. 304 McNamara, M. 91 McVey,K. 253 M~hat,A. 237 Meinho1d, J. 19 Mercenier, R. 291,300 Meritt, R. 167 166 Merket, J. Merklein, H. 197,204 Metzger, M. 217,222,275,343 Michei,O. 117, 170, 182, 185, 186 Milgrom, J. 18, 29, 30, 31, 100, 106, 127 37, 87, 88, 90, 91, Milik, J. 97, 115 Mirkin,A. 177. Mirslcy, A. 15, 32, 34, 59, 64, 97,286,287 Mittmann-Richert, U. 213 304,313 Mohlberg, L. 88 Molenberg. C. Moo,D. 149, 162, 197, 199, 199,202,204 Morgan, M.H. 75 Morgenstern, J. 56 Marin, G. 303,309,312 Morray-Jones, C. 85,242 103 Müller, K. Munclc, J. 247 Mutius, H.G. von 52, 134 Naeh, S. 123, 188, 313-314 Nathan, G. 314 Nau,F. 323,324 Neirynclc, F. 162 129 Netzer, E. 20 Neusner, J. 71-72 Newman,H. Newsom,C. 84, 85, 91 429 Nibley,H. 270 Nickelsburg, G. 82, 86, 87, 89, 162 Niederwimmer, K. 218 Nilciprowetzky, V. 109 Nitzan, B. 37-44, 132 303, 312 Nocent, A. Norlin, G. 103 O'Brien, P.T. 207,216,217 O'Fearghail, F. 32 54 Offer, J. Onnann,G. 52 Oswalt, J. 117 Otto, R. 46 Pagels, E. 233-234 Painter, J. 244 Paris,F. 291,300 7 Patlagean, E. Payne Smith 324 264 Peiper, R. Perrot, C. 54, 56,97 Pesch, R. 214 Pettosyan, E. 300 Pfann, S. 132 92,93,94 Philonenlco Philonenlco-Sayar, B. 92, 93, 94 Pines, S. 277 Porter, S. 244 Pradels, W. 274,301 Pralon,D. 103, 104 Pratscher, W. 244,247 Prigent, P. 148, 149, 150, 151, 154, 157, 158 Procter, E. 240-241 Prostmeier, F. 148, 194, 196 90,91 Puech, E. Rabbinovicz, R. 19, 31, 52, 53, 59, 284 59,285 Rabinovitz, Z. Raes,A. 337 Ramsay, G.G. 69 Redpath,H. 104 Reed, A. 138 Reeg, G. 139 Reingold, E. 300 Rengstorf, K. 105 Renoux, Ch. [""A.) 292,294,295,298, 300 Reuss, J. 326 Richard, M. 158 Ricoeur, P. 8 lndfDI. ofModern AllthorJ 430 Rigg,H. Rissi, M. Rittec,A. Robinson, 1. Rolfe,l.C. Roloff, J. R.ordorf, W. Rosenberg, Y. Roth, C. Rouwhorst, 0. 166 182 274 232 68 205 213 19, 24, 31, 59, 131 32,60 213,222,265 Rubin,Z. 299 Rubinkiewitz, R. 85, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94 Rilck.er, Ao 338 Sabbah, (lo 291,295 Sabourin, Lo 173 Sltenz-Badillos, A. 74, 263, 267, 2&0 Safrai, S. 20,32,120 Sagnud,F. 229, 230, 238-239, 240 Samter, E. 15 Satran, D. 255 19, 52, 134, 135, Scbllfer, P. 231 Scharbcrt, J. Schcftolowitz, I. Schellcle, K. Scberman. N. Schiffinan, L. Schlesier, R. Sthltiter, M. Sehmithals, W. Stbmitz, 0. Schnaekenburg.Ro Schnelle, U. Schnusenberg, C. Sc::holem,G. Schöllgen, 0. Schramm, T. Schlimmer, J. Schwart:z., D.R. 0 Schwartz, E. Schw~J. Schweizer, E. Scbwemer, A. Scott, R. Scullard, H. Scullion, JoP. Sbillan,A. 116 46 178 40,65,339 98 103 52, 134 214 107 177-178 176, 205, 124 269-270 134,231 265,270 212 303 30, 107, 112, ! 17, 173,174,175,252 247 294, 299, 301 207,209,216 255 104 297 22, 107 54 St!Obaro Steinor, E. Siegert, F. Siffrin, P. Signec,M. Sitc:s, lo Silver, DoJ. Simon,M. Sindawi,K. Skarsaune, 0 0 284 35,36,57-58 304,313 265 320 27 1-2,72,274 35 ISO, l.SS, 156, 160, 196 Smid,Ho Spicq, C. 2Sl 182 238-239 Stahliu, 0. Stemberger, G. 55, 118, 1!9, 120, 123, 128, 129, 301, 302 183-184 Sterling. G. Storn,M. 3,68-72.109,172 207,209,210,216 Stettlec, C. Stökl, D. {=Stökl Beh Ezra, D.) 8, 79, 86, 171-172, 173, 194,195,268 Stökl Ben Ezra, D. 68, 212, 246, 303, 319 82,84 Stone,M. Straclc, H. 62 Strand, K. 146 Strecker, 0. Stroumsa, 0. Stuckenbruc.k, L. Stuhhnacber, P. 206 19S, 302 86-87 116, 176-177, 197, 200 129 Sukenik, E. 269 Suntrup, R. 52, 59, 63, 64, 97, Swartz,M. 137-138 Synge,F.C. 195-196 Tabory, J. 34, 49, ss, 106, l20 Taft, R. 291 303,305,309,310, Talley, T. 317 263,265,282 Tampellini, S. Tuchlliscbvili, M. 292, 294, 298, 324, 327 Telfer, W. 246 ter Haar Romeny, B. 263 TI.eissen. 0. 1 71,307 Thelwall, S. Thoruton 161 Tidwell,N. 217 lt~dt1% of Modern A.uthors Tigchcla.tt, E. Tischendorf ToMeau, R.-M. 86, 90, 91 251 267 Trllnkle, W. 156, 158 Treat, J. Tuilicr, A. Turner, J. Tyson,I. Urbac:h, E. Vajda, G. van den Eynde. C. van den Hoek:, A. van der Woude, A. van Esbroeck. M. van Goudoever, J. van Renten, J.W. van Tongeren, L. VanderKam, J. Veltri,G. Verwtianer, L. Verhelst, S 162, 164 218 234 215 120, 132 34 69,264 237-238 90,91 295, 299, 300, 302 294, 295 91, 116,201 291, 296,299 86 131 317, 320 3, 222, 2:51, 256, 292, 293, 294, 296, 298,300,327,337- Weng.st, K. Wemer,E. Whitby. M.&:M. Wieder, N. Wilckens,. U. Wildberger Wilken,R. Willdnson, J. Winiams,D. Willis,. G. Windiscb, H. Winston, D. Winl.ermute, 0. Witberington, B. Wolfsou Wong,C.·K. Wratislaw, A.H. Wright, R.B. Wri.gbt. W. Wunderer, C. 342 172 Yadin, Y. Yahalom,J. Verstrepen, J.·L. Vinc;ent, H. Volgger, E. 303,306, 308,312 294 269-270 Yoel, Y. Völker, W. 237 Youug, N.H. Vollenweider, S. Watts, J. Weinfeld, M. 21.1 117 39, 43 183, 193 129 Welssman Joselit, J. 282 Wendland, H.-D. 212 148, ISO, 151, 156, 177 We.nscl!kewitz, H. 107. 109 Werline, ll 37 Versnel, H. Weiss, H.~F. Weiss, Z. 431 317 291 35,49,97 204 80 263,265,274,282 294 214 303 148, ISO, J 57 132 48, 84, 96, 129 214 241 195-196 147, 167 34 266 320 30 59,60,63,64, 129, 285,286 34, 42. .so. 52, 53, 137,339,343 Yuval, 1. Zahn,T. Zaoi,A. Zimmerli, W. Zackscbwerdt, E. Zulai, M. 22, 107, 145, 146, 173, 177, 178, 179, 187, 189, 197, 211 l 247,256 158 80, 187 248 59,285 Index ofNames and Subjects Aaron 44n, 59,63--64, 187-1811,336, 343n his priestbood 108, 244 his ord.ination 63n. 95, 123, 123129,140,188,271-272 h.isrod 271 bis sons 9S, 102n. 123 Abel336 ablutiou {see purification) Abrab1Dl44n, 111, 32Sn , 336 as higb priest 124n blessing of 173 eircwncision of 123-[24, 140 bis sacrifice of lsaac 66-fJ7 in the Apoealypse of A. 92-94 abstinence 33--34, 108, 248-249, from eating and dr:inking 34, 47, 51, 71-72.74-75,312,315 from hair<:uning 248-249 from oiliag 34 ftom sex 34, 51, 249 from sleep 22-23,29,34-35, 57, 132 from washiag 34, 249 from wearing sboes 74,249 from w.ine and meat 248-249 fromwod33,312, 315 (.ree also kuluut, nudipedalia, sex, vigil) Adam 59, 236, 280, 336 adoption (see influence) affiictions 33-36 mouming 33-35,40, 70--71, ?Sn. 96, 99-101, 106, I29n, 1!10-152, 160, 219,249 sorrow 44-45,95, 100 wearirlg sackeioth and ashes 34, S7, 70--71, lC6, 151,219, 280 weeping 34, 40, 45, 96, 100, J29n wipping ooeself 34n wounding oneself 34a (.see als-o abstinence, atonement, .fast, joy, nudipedalia, tears) Afdca334 Aggadah (s-ee Midrash) Alexandria 148n Cbristian oommunity in 205 Jewish pn~yers in 36-37, 46-48, Sln, 61, 65, 77 (see aLso Barnabas, Clement, Cyril, Orlpn, Philo, Pseodi>-Pbilo) allegory in Clement 238-243and ritual implicaJ.ions for ritual 7, 204, 220-221 in Origen 266-267 in Pbilo 1, 78. 107-114 in polemies 278 almsgiving 134,268,313-31.5 Alltalek 122, 124n Ambrose 2SO, 255, 261. 332 Amidah 37n, 49-50 additions to 42, 43n, 49n, SOn, S2n, · 209,339 aod the high-priestly prayer 24-25 angeJs 80--94, 252-256 arc;bangels 89, 230, 240 fallen 86-90,92-94, 100, 121, 140, 330 fasting people ~ompared to 132 Gabriel meeting Zechllriah 325 God surrounded or seJVed by 82-83, BS, 136,182,23Q-231,240--242 high priest campared to 125, 132, 141. 189,242, 328 bigh priest meeting 110-81, 125, 252-256 Mary niD'tured by an 2.51 n polemies against worship of216, 220 Indcc ofName$ Md SltbjectlS 433 animal sacrifice 28-·33, 6!'1-67 (sH also bumt offering, goats, lt4pparot, rams) 116, 116-117, 130, 176,268 and the deatb ofJesus 145, 151, 153, ISS, 171, 20!5-206, 208, 215, 219, annuaciation of Gabriel to Zechariah 221-222,226,273-274 escbat()logical81-82, 91 expi.ation vs. propitiatio.n 15, 17 and bigh-priestly ganneots 81, 126127 250-255,322-328,332-333 Alltiocb 10, 51, lOS, 224, 261, 27l-2Tl, 301,322 apocalypticism 79-101, 329-330 A:zazel in 85-101 and Gnosticism231-232, 236,242243, :md Hebrews liS-186, 194-197 and Hekhalot texts 136 bigb priest ln 79-85, 89-92, 185186, 194-197 and Philo 112, llS-116 aod RabbiDie Iiterature 128-130 (see also imaginaire, apocalyptic; priests) apos.tolic Gfee inßuenee) apotropaic 67,130-131,176, 177n, 24.5, 309n, 31 On, 314 Arabic 2, 324 (see also AI-Biruni) Aramaie 54, &7n, 88n, 92, 122n, 177178,204,218,253n,255 Aravit 49 (:um also evening) Aristides 220, 282n, 331 arkofthecovenant21-22,80,105,198, 203,271,278-279 Armenian 2, 4n, .57-59, 262, 263, 264n, 272n,291,299-300,30ln ~ae!SS-90,92, 138-139 Asbura 34n, 325n ~laminor ll9u, J48n, 16ln,2S6 atonement 2-3, 114, 126-127 and afflictions 47n, 96-97, 101, 114, 134,181.222,253-254,268 and blood sacrifice (lett sacrific:e aad kopparot) and c:harity or good deeds 134,268, 313-315 Cbristian in opposition to Jewish 151, 153, 155,273-275, 278-~80, 283 and ~reation 63-64,208-210 and lhc death of the sinner 133-134, 286 and tbe death of a martyr I 02, 115- and the high-priestly inte.n:e.ssion 190,194,206,253-254 aod bigh-priestly ritual 83-84, 318 and kapparot 6cHS1, 126-127 for mythological sins 96-97, 122123 as name ofYom K.ippur 15-17 and popular confessions 113-114, 126,205-206,217,268 and prayer 114, 222, 3 Jln aad red ribbon 131, 170, 284 and repentaru:e 114, 126, 134, 217, · 253-254 and sacrifiees lOS, 114, 126, 156, 190,200 aod sc:apegoat 88, 94, 106,113, 116117, 127-129, 156 and tbe True Cross 298-302 Ulli\'ersalll3, 133,206,208 vicarious 102, 115-ll6, 116-117, 130,145,205-206,219,221-222, 226,268,286 Augustine 263, 266, 2ö7n, 283, 314, 320n Allgustus 68u. 70 Azaze19&, 141,160 as Demoo 24.n, 67,79-80, 85-JJS, 98, 121 goat for 24n, 29, 128 and kapparot 61 mythologization of79, 80, 85-95, 141 Babylonian prayers (.ree prayers) baptism 193, 206, 210n, 293n, 233, 239,268, 313n Barabb8$ 147, 16!5-171, 224, 266,267, 330 ·us, bibliQI (see influc.nee) blood absc.nce of83, 100, 108,279 allcgori.%ed ll2-113 and Joseph 96-97 434 lnda ofNames and Subjects I!Dimal ilßd human 130 atooing 91, lOS, 115, 126-127, 127, D~r304,305n,306n,308n, 309,311,323,324n 172,198,205,208 Calendar, Qumran 37 Jesus' 166, 172, 187-193, 19&, 205, Canoni23tion ofChristian texts 3, 146,226,261, 208 sacrifices 25-32, 65-67, 105, 127130,187-193,205-206 in Seder Avodalr 60 (see alro sprinlding) Boeth.u~ians 30, 106, 126n boolcish (see influence) Booths (see Suldcot) Brabm;ms2.5 bridal chamber 3, 85, 126, 228, 232237,239,242-243,330 bumt afferings 2ln, 29n, 31, 32, 129, 152-153,254,271 Caesarea 77, 132, 261, 262n, 273, 277, 299n CaJo 336 Calendar, Babylonian 296-297, 309311,323-327 .. Tishri 4, 69, 123-124, 253-254, 290, 293n,301-302,308n,311,320,322, 323,324-327,331-333 Marheshvan, Heshvan 301, 326 Kialev 308n, 326 Tevet 311, 326 Shwt326 Adar326 Nisan 97, 123-124, 213n, 256, 308n, 3Un, 326, 327n, 3:11 Sivan308n Tammuz .56n, 311, 327 Av249, 31 I, 327 Elut 136, 326 Calen.dar, festal (see festival) Calendar, 1ulian 296-297, 309-311, 323-327 Januacy 309,311 March 326, 327n Aprii2SOn, 311a, 326 June 308-311 July 309-311, 327 August 296n, 297n, 309-311 September 4, 74, 253-254, 293-303, 303-322, 323-327, 328n October 254, 296n, Jllo, 323-327 November 309, 324n 267,331 of Jewish prayers 54 of Jubilees 99 ofMishnah 119 Celsus 172 Christ (1ee Jesus) Christian Jews dermition ofte.tm 10 festival calendar 6, 204, 212n, 213218,273 and high priests 256 imaginaire 78, 35, 94-95, 118, 145227,329 ilßd the templo 7n, 218, 221 Christmall 9-10, 253,257, 2&1-282, 290,30Sn,324n Cbrysostom (see John Clu:ysostom) circumcision 220, 273 of Abraham 123-124, 140 Clement of Alexandria JOn, 228, 232, 237-243,330 Clement of Rome 172, 194n, 213n, 270 compassion (.se:e mercy) compulsion (see iofluence) confession and atonemeut :59--60, 114, 126 and Jesus 186-187 and thc lrapparot61 and mystical prayer 131 in the Passion narrative 167-170 as prayer (viddllj') 39, 48, SO, Sl-54, 59-60,65,126,127,205-206,212. 217,268,286,314,335-342 in the temple 2ln, 24-27, 29n, 31, 59-60, 127, 136, 169 Constantine 295,297, 299n Coptic 2, 324 cosmology, cosmological 79, 83, 94, 108-114,132,180,216,226,231 Coun.c:il ofLaodicea 276n covenant 42, 44n, 187--188 renewal of 42, 45, 95, 122, 124, 188 crealion in Christian pJS.yers 336, 342-343 in Colossians 207-210 Index ofNames and Svbjects in Hebrews 189 in Philo 108, 113 in Qumran prayers 41, 43, 210n in rabbinie texts 122, 123 in Seder Av()dah 4Sn, 59, 63-64 in Sirach 209n curse andscapegoat 3ln, 10&, 152-154, 157,175 of Jesus 154, 164, 173-176 against Jewish priests 279 against Cbristian priests 287 Cypri:an of Ca.thage 270-271 ofGaul264,282,283 Pseudo- 320n Cyril of Alexandria 4n, 20n. 29n. 69, 77, 262-268, 279--283 of Jerusalem. 274, 297-299, 302, 326a DamasciiS 205 dance 36,57 Iewish d. in Jewish sources 36, 57 Jewish d. on Sukkot 296 Jewisb d. witnessed by pagans 6970, 12, 74, 77, 2501:!, 280-282 Muslim d. on Ashura 34n d:angerous ones in between 1, 273, 333 (see also Ckristian Jc:ws, Godfearers, Jewish Christians and Judaizers) Daniel bar Tubanita 264 Days of Awe 73, 121 David 18Jn, 194 Delos 39, 48, 58 demo.as (3ee Azazel, Shemibaza, devil, Satao) demytbo1ogizalion 106 destruction ofthe temple 13, 18-19, 35, 126,135,139,221,227,236,283284,311,329,331 Dionysus68 devil (aee Satao) 67, 80-81, 94, 121, 127-130, 136, 180, 185, 193, 206, 314, 3 I 8, 328 (see also demO.DS) diaspora Babylonian 54-59, 65, 119 Mediterranean 14, 33-34, 45-48, s. 435 54-59, 101-118, 119,223 (see al:ro prayers, Philo, Septu.agint) Dio Cluysostomus 199 dream. 22, 165, 169 Dura Europos 118 Euter 4n, 124, 213n, 21&, 256,290, 292n,293,307,317,32ln (aee olao Passover) Egypt 45, 95, 111, 172, 292n, 334 (see alsD Alexandria) Elijab SS, 248, 324o Apocolypse of4& Eli!ba 343n Ember Days 303-322, 333 Encaenia 290-303, 332 Enoch 82---$3, 89, 343n (:ree also lEn()Ch) Entrance (.see high priest aod holy of holies) Ephretn oll Cbrist's birth 255 on Yom Kippur 16n, 73, 76-77, 280-283,332 on Zechariah 250, 253n, 325, 328 Pseudo-Epbrem 264, 267n, 268n, 293JI. Epiphanius 245, 246-249, 256n escbatology, eschatological76, 85-.95, 97-100, llS-116, 181-197,203204,226-227,318,329-330 atonement91, 181,226-227 high-priestly liberator 90-92, 101, 185-186,226-227 in Gnosticism 229-23 I, 236, 243 in Philo 108, 112 judgment 82 Iiberation 95, 98-99, 140, !81, 185186 mea11S7 purifi<:ation 81, 91, 115 victory over evil 41, 85-.90, 94, 9S, 98, 115-116, 138, 141, 181, 18:5186 esoteric knowledge 23, 84, 130n, 137139,237, 241 (.!II!B OUo priests, secret knowledl!:e) Essenes (see Qumran) Euebarist contrasted with fast 72, 151···161, 210n. 219,224 436 Index: ofNf.l.mu and Suhjectr and templization 226, 233, 261, 269-272 and Yom Kippur269-272, 4n, 33.5343 Eusebius of Caesarea on YomKippur 15,68-69,274, lß:Z-283,332 on James 246-249, on the Holy Sepulcher 271,291,297 Eusebius ofEmesa 263 Eve59, 236 evening of Jacob lamenling 96, 129n star 280 Tamid29.o.,32 ofYom Kippur 73-74 (see also Alavit) Exaltation of lhe Cross 4, 290-303, 332 Exegesis of LevitiCU$ Christian 76, 148-149,161-289 function ofS, 76-77, 268, 277-283 ' Jewisb 18-19,21, 23, 27, 113, 283288 (see also allegory, typology) expiatlon (see atoneme.nt) fast apotroic :function 314 and the battle with Amalek 122 described bynon-JCW!I 68-77,253254,278-283,315-316,326-327 on the Exaltation ofthe Cross 300302 of Ged.aliah 318 as means ofatonement 140, 73n, 313 as name forYom Kippur 15-17, 107, 117 in the Diaspora 106-107, 114, 117 in Islam 34n in Karaism 34n and public fasts 56n, S1-S8, 64, 72n observed by non-Jews 22n, 213-218, 227,273-277,330-331,343 polemicized against by Christians 219-223,277-283,331 purifyiag aspect 48n as punishmcnt 101 in Qumran 100 iD Samaritanism 34n of tbe Sevenlh Monlh (.see Ember Days) on Yom Kippw- 34 pascbal4n, 222n, 307, 308o, 317 Fast of the Seventh Monlh (aee Ember Days). festivals Chri.stirm panicipation in Jewish 7172,74,77,157,213-223,261,273277,282,283,288,306,31.5-316, 322,329,331-334 Jewish observance of 415, 306 pagan obsenation of71-72, 214 Jewish iofluence on Christian 290328 (see alto Hannukah, New Moon, Passover, Rosh Hasbanah, Sabbath Shuvah, Sukkot; Christmas, Easter, Ember Days, Eru::aenia. Epiplwly, Exaltation, Lent, Penteca&t, Sunday; Ashura; Ides, Ludi RoiiUini, Thmgelia) food prohibitions (see fast, Kashrut) foxgivene$S (see atonement, mercy) Gabrie187-88,250--2S4,322-329 Gaon.ites SOn, 56, 60, 65-61, 134 garments bells on 155 cliaage of2ß-32, 81,93-94,111112,135-136,193,239,241-243 festal garments ofpeople 36, 57-58, 71-72,77,128,280 garb of light 233, 235, 238, 239 garmcnt of opinions 112 golden gannents 22n, 28-32, 9611, l70n, 196n, 240 heavenly gannents 80, 93, 12S, 135136,239 interpntation of golden garments 96-97, 111-112,122-123, 126, ISS, 238 Ioseph's ganncnt 96, 129n linen garments ofhigh prie.st28-32, 58,81-83,122-123,247 linen garments of priests 80, 82-83 mcssianic 163, 170 ofphormakos 171 ra.sgOO clotbes 74-75, 315 white gannents of people 35 wbite ß811Dents o.f priests 82, 125 (see also sackcloth) lnde% ofNi.!mu and Subj~cls Gentile Christian(s) audieni:e 22n, 148n, 176,201-202, 22411 definition 10, 274n festat calendar 212n, 216,222-223, 227,331 Hegesippus as 246n mission to the 158-159, 173 salvation for 174-176,203-204 Georgian 2, 291-293, 339n. g~zera sh~ZV~~ah 26n, 122n Gnosticism 30n, 79, 134, 140, 18S.n, 228-244 goats 127-130, 150-161, 165-171, 202-203, 266-267 and Ioseph 67, 95-97 and kapparot 66--01, 128-130 lottery between 21n. 29, 98, I 13, 117, 165, 166-169~ 278 sacrificial goat 2')..-.32, 60-61, 96.n, 138, 152-161, 169-171, 187, 192, 208,279 similarity oftwo 29, 152-157, IS9160,167-170,266 third goat 28n, 32, 150-152, 1.57, 160-161 as two kinds ofhumans 113 (.ree aho scapegoat) God compassion of39, 4.5, 48n, 9.5, 122-· 123,129, 134,203,2S3,295,313 grace of46 judgment by 52, 58, 121. 122-123, 201,210 lotof98 omniscieace of39, 4&n, .58, 201, 341 preseo~ of39, 48n, 79, 81, 106, 126. 135, 180-191,193-194,208, 249,256 throne of 80, 82 vision of79-&5, 100, 107, 110-112, 114,134-139,232,236-243 wrath of200, 203, 279 (see also name) God-fearers 214-215,219,222, 34:2 golden garments (see garments) Gregory ofNazianz 4.n, 271-272 Haftarah 55-59,16, U6, 280 Halakhah and Dirladle 218 437 and bisroricity 19-28 and Josepbus 22 anti kapparot 61 and Matthew 169 aud Pbilo 61-62 and polemies 284, 288 of post-temple prayers 49- 218,225-226,229-230,233-234, 253-254,261,265-266,318-320 JobDas 256 Messiah 90-92, 101, 195-196,223 mystic as 79--&S, 110-112, 134-139, 233-243 in polemies 278-279, 284-288 popul&r imitati.on of 132 popular obsentation of32, 6~1, 269 praying 19, 24-2&. 30, 32, 83, I 09, 113, 186-1&7, l89,247-248,2S3254,2S6-2S7 438 lnda ofNames and Subjects 312,317,328n,321-322,339-l41 apostolic 4, 5, 145-227,243, 306, JlQ-312,316 bib)jcal 5, 311-312,317,339-341 book:ish S, 57-SB, 261-262, 282, reading 24--27,32-33, 55, 58-59,61 sacrificing28-33, 59-64, 187-189, 335-336 Simeon as 255-256 in Valentiniao. Soteriology 228-243 vigil22-23, 29, 132 visions ofGod 79-8S, 110-112, 134-139, 233-243 wise man as 11Q-H2 Zedwiah as 2SQ-255, 322-328 288,301,31~321,328,331 compulsion S-6 defmitions of types of 4-6 Ortsgeist 5, 301, 333 reaction 5-6, 289, 32011, 321 (see also polemics) iniquity 39-40, 42, 43n, 51, S3n, 92n, 138, 175,338 (see also sin) intercession of animals SB (see also visions of God) Hippolytus 154, 158--159, 195,224, 256, :B2 boly of holies in Christian cllurehes 271-272, 296 entered by believers 188, 190-191 entered by Gnostics 230,233-237, of Enocb 82-83 241 entered by hip priest lQ-31, 80, 229-243 entered by James 247-248 entered by Jesus 180-197 entered by mysti~: 79-85, 11 0-1 !2, 134-139,238-243 entered by Zechariah lSO heavenly 83-85, 110-112 (see also high priest. interc:ession, sprinlding) Holy Sepulcher 271, 290, 293,301-302 hymns 206-212 (see also pi;.')IVI, Seder Avodah) ldes of September 297 Ignatius of Antioch 10, 194n, 217n imagbraire definition of 8-10 ofYom Kippur: Apocalyptic 79-100, 112, 115, 136, 193-197,226 early Chtistian IOl, 145-227,327 .Gnostic 100,228-243 GreekDiaspora 101-118 Jewish 7&-139, 243,252,255 Rabbinie I 18-134 lncense 21n, 24, 28, 30, BOn, 84, 100, 106, 1011, 111-113, 126, 193,250, 252,279 incmse altar 188-189, 193n, 24o241,242n,253n inßuencc adoption 5-6,243, 288-289, 310- t of higb priest 30, 83n, 246-249, 253-255,269,222,245,269 of Jaroes 218,221,246-250 of Jesll! 181, 185, 189-190, 193194,206,222,253 ofMoses SS, 318 popular intercession replacing hlghpriestly 222, 269, 313n prophetic 83n of Zechariah 251-255 (see also high pric&t) lrenaeus 222n, 228, 233, 252n Isaac 43, 66-67, 129-130, 151,336 [slaro 34n, 2S2n, 325n, 333 I vo of Chartre.s 269, 270o Jacob 43. 44o., 95-96, 128-129, 32Sn, 336 Jacob ofSarug 69,267,281 Jaroes the Iust 3, 218.243-250,256257,323,331 Jcrome 75n, 76,247,256,267,271, 296,306,311,332 Pseudo·letome 167 Jerusalem benediction about 24n Chtistian Jews of192, 215, 218,256 charthfathers ftom 77, 250n, 263, 271,274,282 date for aununc:iation to Zechariah 324-327 daughters of36 findhlg of relics in 323 mountains ofSS in polemic:.s 155-156,273 /ndu ofNames Qltt/ Subjects 439 (see also anonymous of Jerusal.em, Juliall 266 Justin Martyr 1.55-156, 157-160,281, 283, 332. 336 Cyril, Encaenia, Exaltation, Justinian 6 Hesycbius, temple} Juvenal69-70, 74 fcappOTOI 65--{11 kapparfit {ilacn'ljp\Ov, m1!ll, ~w.uupw.U) 30, 80, 104-106, li.S, 127, 187, 197-20:5, 261, 266, 270, 212, 299-·· qiblato12n transition ofpric:ats from 64 Jesus as atonetnent IS6, 205-206 crucifvdon of 149, 154, 166--167, 187 as high priest 180--197 identical with Barabbas 167-169 as kapporet J 97-205 Parousia of 154-160, 167, 181, 190, 300, 302, 331 Karaites 34n, 35 193 kashnlt216, 220 Kingdom ofGod 49n, 135, 136, 138, U9, 153, 1.54, 207, 208, 209n (see Passion of147, 143--161, 161-165, 165-171, 180,223,22S,236,291n also "malkhuyot'') Lamb ofGod 147, 176--179, 226, 2.54 as s~:apegoat 147-179,206,267263,270n (.see also atonement., curse, higb priest, interc:ession, sc:apegoat) Jewish Christians community in Jerusalem 301-302 definition 10 fostival calendar 212-213, 21!, 222223,244,245-246,257,273-274 and Goostics 243 inflnenc::e on ..Judaizers" 277, 321322,342 legends 244-2.57 (see also Hegesippus, Porphyry) Job 336, 343n John Chrysostom. 74-77,221-222. 250, 274-275,278-233,295,315,331333 Josef126n, 138-139,336 Josephus 22-23, 78, lOS, 117, 130, 199-200,202,214,330 Joshua son Jebotadak 8HI, 9S, 195, 200 Joshua son ofNun 195, 200, 336, 34Jn joy 33-36,69,72-73,77,99,280-281 (see also affiictioos; dance; hilb priest, c:e1ebration) Judaizers 77,273-275, 277,306,315-317,321-322 judgment 121-122, 163, 165,203, 210 Yom Kippur asjudgnlent day 36, 52, 51, BOn, 82, 8Jn, 87-88,91,94, 124, 140 Lections (see reading) Lent 304, 30.5, 321n Leo the Great 74-17, 281-283, 304306,312-317,320--322,332-333 Levi (Amoraite) S3 Levi (son ofJacob}44n, 64, 83, 113, J37n, 23!, 284 (aee also Aaron) Levite 95, 148n, 234n, 238, 239, 244, 2SS, 330 (see also Aaron) liturgy (see festi vals, ritual) Lot 336, 343n Iudi Romani 297 magic 66, 131 maona 33, 41, 45, 47, 73n, 97, 100, 124n, 271 Mardan 156 martyrs, manyrdom 78, 115-116, l39n, 154, 176, 198--201, 223n, 268 Mary 251, 255, 2.56n, 323, 327n Melchizedek 64,90--92, 98-99, 184, 191,232,284,334,336 memory collective 4, Sn, 14.5 and the Passion narrative 149 ofthe temple rit11a! 19, 23,27-28, 88, 139 mercy 134, 137, 342-343 and afflictions 34n, 4.5, 100, 253 alms and 313-314 Christian requests for divine 29S, 298 and name of Yom Kippur 16, and repentaDce 9.5, 440 /mlez oj'Names am/ Subjecn and sacrif"u:es 129, 313-314 spec.ialscason of 45, 95 mercy seat (see A:Dpporet) Merkavah (see Hekhalot) Metatron l3.S Michael84n, 89,90-91, 184n, 231n, 29ln Michael Syros 264 Minhalt 49, SOn, S.S-56, 60n miRdes 22n, 47, 125,288 Mishnab attitude towards high priest:I12S and historicity 19-28, 136-137, 202 Temple ritual28-33, 119-120, 124131 ritual ofthe people 33-36, 49-6.S, 119-120, 133, 202,217, 249 (:see aLso rabbis) mission to the Gentiles (see Gentiles) Mordecb$i 343n Mo.ses 47, SS, 73n, lll, 121-·122, 318, 32Sn, 336 mouming (.see afflictions) Mysticism Clementine l37-243 Hekhalot 134-139 Phitonic ll0-ll2, 237-239,242243 proto-mysticism 79-SS Valeotinian 228-243 (see also visions) myth, mythical, Mythology defmition 7-8 and Gnostic soteriology 228-232 and the Holy Land 6, 301-302 and imaginaire 9 and Passion 145-171, 173-206, 221--226, 329 mytbologic;al events connected to Yom K.ippur 6H7, 85-95,95-97, 121-124, 128, 140, 181,328,329 mythologization 79 of~l85-95, 128-129 of high priest 79-85 ofJesus 145-171. 173-206,223226, 268, 329 (1ee also demylbologization) Nachmanides 67 Nadav and Avihu 95 ueme(s) God's 41, 60, 135-139, 189, 2ll2l2,217,24G-242,338 Jesus' 189, 211-212 ofYom Kippur 15-17 Nazi.rites 215n. 245, 248-249 Ne'ilah 43n, 49, SOu, 56, 132, 343 New Moo.n 108n, 136,216.220 Noah 43, 44n, 95, 140, 199, 300n, 32Sn, 336 nudipcdalia 3411, 7011, 74-75, 315, 322 observance of Yom IGppur by Christians 213-223, 273-277 by lews 46,71-72 by pagans 214n (.ree also God·fearers) observation of hip priest by people {.see high priest) ordo commendarion.f.s animae 343 Orige.o 15, 77,HO. 168, 172,220-224, 234,261-269,273-283,289,329, 331-332 Ort:~geist (see influence) Oxyrhynchos 62 Pagans 1,3,8,199-200,220 celebrating Yom Kippur 71-72, 214n as converts to eady Christianity 222-223,227,268,332 describmg the Jewish Yom K.ippur 68-70 enculturatioD. of pagan concepts in Judaism 101-106 and the Enc:aenia 297 majority of ~bitants of Jerusalern 301-302 origin ofthe EmberDays 309-310, 322 (see also nudipedalia, pharmal~ Iudi Roman1') Palestine 5, 16, 33, Christbin Jewish com.petitioo in 273-274,278,283-289,334-343 Jewish pra)'ers 37--46, 49, 50, 52 readings in 54-59 (see aLso Apocalyp~e ofAbraham, Encaenia, Exaltation, 1Enoch, Eusebius, Jerusalem, Joscphus, Jubilees, Origeo, pRyers, Sedu Index ofNamu tmd Subjects ifvodah. temple ritual, Testament o/ LfiiVi, Zechariah) Palm Sunday 296n Parou.sia 1.54-161, 181, 190, 193 Participation ofPeople (see bigh priest· popular Observation of; observance of Y om KippW") Pas.sover, Pascbal2, 41 Aqedah on 123-124 Christian observance of273 circumcision of Abraham on 123-· 124 Lamb 155, 176-177 release of prisoner on 166 (.ree also Easter) Paul 171,173-176,197-205,208,211- 212, 214n, 215-216,219,221,224-227,266,330-331,343n Peace 44, 49n, 65n, 98, 11 J, ll3n, 132, 167,208,210 Pentecost 2, 213, 215a, 290,304, 305n, 308n,310,312n,317 Persia (.see ~:~/so Babylonia) Peter343n Pbari.s4!es 30, 99, 113, 126,202,316 pharmokos 147, ISS, 171-173, 176, 223n,224,268,332 Philo 46-48, 107-114, 237-239, 242243 Pinbas343n Plato ilßdPlatonism 103n, 112,114, 182-184 P1Ulan:h 36, 68-69 polemies anti-Christian 283-289 a.nti-Jewish 72, 148-161, 219-222, 277-289,295,315-317 pagan 68-70 (.ree Dlso intluertce, polemical) Polycarp 194, 256 Polycrates 245,256 Porpbyry staW"Opbylax 299 prayers 36-65,207-212,284-289,314315, 335-343 atoning function 46 Babylonian 49-64 Christian 314-·315, 330,335-343 contimlity of synagogue with temple 18··19, 24-28, 64-65, 136 441 day-long 45, 46, 49, 61 in the Dia.spOTa 46-48 heavenly 82, 85, 135, 135-139,240, 241-242 Hekhalot 137-138, 139 obligatory 49-50, 58 observed by Christians 71-73,76, 77,280-281 Palestinian 37-46, 49, 50, 52 Qumran 37-46 . rabbinie 49-64, 284-288, 335-343 sacrifices and 100, 102, 133 (&~1: also confession, Aravit, Haftarab. high priest, intercession, James, Minhah, Ne'ilah, observance of Yom Kippur. Priesler blessing, readiflgs. Seder Avodalt, Shaharit, templi.vdioo, Zechariah) presence ofOod (see Ood) priest(s), priestly and apoca!ypticism 79, 82-Sj, 232 and Bornabos 148n benediction over 24 blessing49 in Christianity 215n, 245,270-271, 332 eatio,g sin affering 32, 150-152, 157 Josephus as 22 ordination of84n, 123, 187-n8, 313 and Philo 30n, I08-113, 118 and polemics, 7, 82n, 152-156, 184, 278-279,284-288,332 priestly ori,giD of Seder A-.odah 45n, 63~. 284--288 rivaley wilh sages 125 secret priestly knowledge 23, 14, 130n, 135-139,237 Sirneon as 256-257 the wic:lced 98 (see Gnosti 442 Index ofNames and Suhjects eschatological 81, 89, 91 and the Fast of the Seventh Month 309n, 312···316, 322 Greek p. rites 171 md Isaiah SOn by Jesus 187-1851, 205-206 ofthe land 81, 89, 115 ofthe mystic 135-136 ofpeople 96, 99, 108n, 137-189 ofthe sanctuary 106, 182n, 187-189 before Yom K.ippur 29, 73 Qaraites (see Karaites) Quam.decimans 256 ~an37-46,90-92,97-100 Rab:S2 Rabbi 133 Rabbi Abbahu 125n, 133n Rabbi Aqiva 23, 32n, 102n, 136, 139, 284 Rabbi Ba bar Bina 52 Rabbi Eliezer 23, 32n Rabbi Haronuna 53 Rabbi Meit 12ln, 133 Rabbi Yehudah 53, 62, 121, IJJn Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi 17n, 19 Rabbi Yishmaell28n, l30n, 131, 133- 134, 135 Rabbi Yohanan 132 Rabbi Yooathan 53 Rabbi Yosef248 Rabbi YosefQaN 67 Rabbis 28-33,49-65, 118-134,283- 284 rain 44, 7Sn, 248 ram and tbe Aqedah 129 Christian typologi2ation of266 confused with goets 128 in lhc kapparot ritua16tHi7, 130 mom.eut ofsacrifiee of 23, 31 number of22, 28n, 31, 112n P bllo on the sac:rifice of tbe 108 thc rabbis on thc sacrifice of the J24, 128 Rashba67 Rava 53 Ravya bar Qisi 117n, 130, 140,330 reaction (see iotluence) readiogs high priestly 24-27, 32-33, 55, 58-- 59,61 on Sabbath Shuva 56, 319 on the Anuunciation to Zechariah 244,327-:328 on the Encaenia 294-295, 298 on the Fast ofthe Seventh Montb 76, 304,310,317-322 on Yom Kippur 54-59, 65, 76, 77, 99,31~-321,321-322 ritual sratus of 58-59 (see also Haftarah) Rechabites 249, 2S6n Red Heifer 169, 170n, 188n red ribbon 29, 124, 129, 130-131, 159- 160, 165,268,279,2&3-284 redemption 12.1, 123-124, 140, 173176,186,189-191,198,207-210, 233 rcenactment ofeschatological myth 98, 141 of Jewi$h Cbristian Iegeiids 322-329 reciting Bible as !14, 61 rec;iting thc Mishnah as 28 in Second Temple Judaism 33, 4546,61-62,65,114,140, 16ln in Seder Avodah 33, .50, 5 l, 59-61, 127 renewal of covenant (see covenant) repentance of Azazel12S and Christian litwgy 318-319, 320n, 342-343 confession as manifestation of 54 creatcd before the world 132 in de solatitfia 253-254 golden calfand 124, 129 in Hebrews 186 in Hek:halot Iiterature 13 6 Joseph' s brothers and 48, .51, 95-96, 100, 101, l26n, 132 in JU$tin lSS-156, 160 Noah's95 in Origen 266 in Philo 108, 114, 132 as nio~~~; 201 in Pseudo-Jonah 57 in Qumran 3&-39, 45, 132 inrabbioicsources24n.ll9, 121, 124, 126, 128, 132-134 and the readings ofthe Fast of lndez ofNa11Je& t171d SvbjeCIS ~tnd the rogations 314n Sep~berJl&-319 in Romans 201, 203 ofShemihaza 128 ten Days of Awe and 121 vieariou.s Npentance 13 3 (see aJso atonement, mercy) resurrection 213n, 2.B, 271 (.ree also Jesus, Parousia, Passion) revelation in Gnosticism 236-237 on MoUDt Sinai 9~ naturallaws illld 325 and Zechariah 250-2S2, 257, 32S, 328 rite6-7 definition of 6 (.see also affiietions. animal sacrifice, baptism, bridal chamber, ein:umcision, Eucharlst, ritual, scapegoat, spriDkling) ritual6-7 definition of 6 ofrhe people 33-n, 107-109, 132134 in the temple 28-33, 109-114, 124132 (see also affiictions, animal sacrifice, bridal cluunber, entrance, Eudlarist, festivals, N&ding, reenactment, temp Je rit\1.111) Rome 70, 74-75,205,214-216, 221, 273, 303-322, 329 {see also Clement, Hippolytns, Justin, Juvenal, Leo) Rosb Hasbanab and creation208-209 and Christians 275, 318-319 liSjudgmentday 36n, 38n. 39n, 121, 210 mythologlcal events on 123-124 prayen 44n, 208-209, 285 and Sbofar 76 Sabbatb, Saturday anti-Cbrislion polemies aud 2&5 Cbrisrian polemies against 216,220 Christian obscrvance of212n, 21Sn Christianization of 2 and Ember Days 304-305, 307,310312,317-318,320 443 and name ofYom Kippur 16,69-70, 217-2(8 in pagan texts 68 in Philo 108n prayers on 49 prohibition to fast on 307 rest89, 98n as Yom Kippur69-70, 89, 98n, 217- 218 Yom Kippur falling on 120 (see olso Sabbatb Sbuva, Songs of tlte Sabbatlt Sacrifice) Sabbatb Shuva 56,318-319 sac:kcloth and 8$l1es 34, 57, 70, 71n, 106, 151, 219,280 sacred space open space 70-72, 280 (.see also synagoguc, temple, ehurch) sacredtime in Hcbrews 181 in Qumran 97-100 (see also calendar, eschatotogical, festivals) sacrifice, sac:rificial animal28-33, 65-67, 120, 150 human65-66,117,130, 158,171173, 181, 187 rabbinie Interpretation of 124-130 spi1it"Ua125, 64-65, 84-85, 108, 112--114, 132-133, 180, 181, 186, 187-189, 265-272 and suffering setvant 116-117 (see also blood, bumt offeriog, bigh prie$t,pltarmaA:a~, prayer, priest, sm offering, temple) Sadducees 30, 106, 113, 126,202, 284n Samarkans34n,44,48n, 189n Satan (see devil) Scapegoat 29, 3 I abused 31, 88-89, 152-159, Barabbas as 165-171 as Catalyst 176--179 confessionon 60, 113, 167-170 cursed 94, 108, 152-159 as dcmon 79, 85-95 human beings as 116--117, 130, 140, 165-171, 330 and kapparot 66-61, 128-130 killed3l,l14, 152-159 sending away 31, 89, 94. 96n, 104, 444 Index ofNams.s and Subjects 113, 152-1;54, 158, 159-160, 169, 174-179,206 and suffering servant 116-1 J7 (see al:~o goats, Jesu5, pharmakos, red ribbon) SGd,rA.vodah28,59-64 and Christian liturgy 335-336 and polemies 284-288 in the Second Temple period 43-45, 59-62,161,212,223 in Siddurim 50 (see a4o reenactment) Scptuagint 15-16, 94, 102-106, 110, 113, 117,125,200 Servant ofGod 116-117, 176-178,226 Seth 336 Shaharit 49, .SOn, SS, 60n Shemihau 86, 89-92, 121, 128. Shim'on Jsh Mltzpeh 20 Shmuel (Amoraite) 53 Siddur 49-50 (see Dlso Sedu Rav 'Amram Ga'on, , Seder Rav Sa 'ad/11 Ga'on) Sirneon 244, 246, 2SS-256, 323 sin(s) beginning of 86, 94, 12 I collcctive 115, 124,314 end of 88, 94 · heredituy 139 hlstocy of 43, 86, 89 secret39, 58,201,337-341 types ofS9 (.ree also golderl calf, iniquity, Joseph, trensgression) sin affering 28a, 29, 32, 61, 128, 152, 191,214,223,286 sinless 108, 178, 184, 286 sleep (see abstinence) Socrates 291 sorrows (s«e aftlictions) soull07, 108n, 109-I 14,240-243, 313, 329 Sozomenos 291-293, 29S Spirit, Holy 42, 152n, 173, 174,219, 254,271,316 spiritualization (ses allegory, templization, typology) sprink.ling apo,alyptic te)[tS on 84 ashes and water 29 blood24, 29-31,81 in Christian worship 272, 300 Hebrews o.n 180, 187-189, 191, 193 Pbilo on 108, 112-113 in polemies 179 Rabbis on 126-127 RomiiiS on t 98, 200, 203 in Sedu AvodDh S9-60, 127 Stepheo. 205, 224 Sukkot 70n, 120n, in Qwnran prayers 39n, 41, Chli.stian polemies against 29S e<~nfused with Yom Kippur 68-69, 250, 253-255, aad the Encaenia 294-296, 297n. 298n, 301-302 and the Fast of September 312, 318319, and Palm Sunday 296D and the Temple dedication 123, and 1..echatiah 326n Sunday 218, 285, 295n, 300n, 304, 312 {see QUO Palm Swtday) Susa:ona 343n synagogue non-Jews .in 222, 273-277, 277mosaics 129 Yom Kippurritual in 51-65, 127, 1.S6,212,319-320 and temple ritua124-28, 32, 51, 120 templization 71-72, 278-279 (see also sacred space) tabema~le 95. 150n, 182, 183n, 193, 238,318 Tabernacles (ree Suldoot) Tacitus 71n Tamid 2ln, 29, 32, 177n Targum and confessions 51 liturgical use of.S4, 100 on Mekhlzedek 91 in Qumran 46, 54, 100, translation technique 101, 102, tos. 106 temple allegorization of 109-114 attitudes to 213-214. 220-223, 223225,244-257,286 and c~h (1ee templization} in 1el1.1Salem 28-33, 82, 88, 99, 135, Int.kx ofName.s and Su.hjects 141 heavenly 79--85, 134-139, 182-184, 229-243 in polemies 278-279 rabbinie interpretation of 124-131 reenacted in Sedu Avodah 59-64 and synagogue (.see templization) (see alto destruc:tion of the temple, 01'tsgei$t) temple ritual 28-33 (see also allegory, animal sacrifice, high priest, incense, sprink!ing. typology) templizatioa 71, 261, 269-272,278279,296,341 Tertullian on the rontemporary Yom Kippur 36,71-72,76-77,280-283 on &sting on Saturdays 307-308 typologizing Yom K.ippur 156-161, 267,332 Thargelion 171 Thecla343n Theodotus 228-243 Tlberius 61n, 254 Ti*h'a be'Av249, 31ln Torah blessing of24 giving of 42-43, 55, 122, 124, 129, 140,210,342-343 in temple 11ervice 2.5, 32 (.tee also exegesis, Haftarah, reading) transgression 39-40, 51, 53n, 9ln, 92n, 95-96,123, )28, 133-134,213,217, 268, 275, 286 (.see al.so sin) typology of covenant institutioo 187 ofhigh-priestly ritual 180-197, 22S, 445 230,265-266,271-272,320,328 of kltpporet 191·-205, 225 ofordination ofLevites 1&7 oframs266 ofR.ed Heifer 187 ofred ribbon 159-l60, l6S, 268 ritual implications of21.3, 219-223, 271-272,329,331 of sacrific:ial goat 148-161,225 ofscapegoat 98, 138, 147-179,206, 224,225,266-267,331 oftabemacleltemple 180-197, 271- 172,297,330 ofveil225 (see also allegory, exegesis, templization) Valent.inians 3, 71-79, 84-8S, 118, 126n, 137,191,228-243,329-330, viddll]l (.ree c:onfession) vigil (.see abstinence, affiictions, high priest) visions of God in apocalyptic sou.rces 79-85 in gnostic soun:es 229-237 in mystic:al texts 110-112, 134-139 (1ee a&o dreams, high priest) war with Amalek 122, 124n esc:hatological78, 87~8. 186 weeping (see affiic:tions) white garment.s (s«e garments) women, daughter 34n, 35-36, 75n, 9Sn, 96,128,171, l74,292n,23S-236, :ns, 343n Zechariah be11 Qabutar 20 Zechariah, father of John 244, 247, 2S0-25S,2S6-257,322-328,332, 333

The impact of Yom Kippur on early Christianity: the Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the fifth century Read more Studies in the Jewish Background of Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament) Read more 'The 'Son of Man''' as the Son of God (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 30) Read more Forschungen zur Apostelgeschichte (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 137) Read more Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1-4 in Early Jewish Literature (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament) Read more Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Read more Angel Veneration & Christology: A Study in Early Judaism & the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament. Reihe 2, 70) Read more Methodenlehre zum Neuen Testament Read more On the Fifth Day Read more Jews and Christians in Their Graeco-Roman Context: Selected Essays on Early Judaism, Samaritanism, Hellenism & Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 196) Read more Jews or Christians? : The Followers of Jesus in Search of Their Own Identity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament) Read more Yom Kippur 1973 Read more Inconsistency in Paul? A Critique of the Work of Heikki Räisänen (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 2. Reihe) Read more The Power of Saving Wisdom: An Investigation of Spirit & Wisdom in Relation to the Soteriology of the Fourth Gospel (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament II:148) Read more Hermeneutic and Composition in I Peter (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament II 30) Read more Image of the Judaeo-Christians in Ancient Jewish & Christian Literature (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament, 158) Read more Lent, Yom Kippur, and Other Atonement Days (Holidays and Celebrations) Read more Derhetorizing Paul: A Dynamic Perspective on Pauline Theology and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 124) Read more Yom Kippur War 1973: The Sinai Read more The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord: Samaritan and Jewish Concepts of Intermediation and the Origin of Gnosticism (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 36) Read more Marcus Magus: Kult, Lehre und Gemeindeleben einer Valentinianischen Gnostikergruppe (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 114) Read more Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament WUNT 2) Read more Israel, Kirche und die Völker im Matthäusevangelium (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 215) Read more Studien zur Soziologie des Urchristentums, 3. Auflage (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 19) Read more Griechische Grammatik zum Neuen Testament Read more Day of Atonement Read more Day of Atonement Read more Day of Atonement Read more Day Of Atonement Read more Day of Atonement Read more

Recommend Documents The impact of Yom Kippur on early Christianity: the Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the fifth century Daniel Sti:ikl Ben Ezra The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism ... Studies in the Jewish Background of Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament) Studies in the Jewish Background of Christianity by Daniel R. Schwartz J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) Tubingen Wissensch... 'The 'Son of Man''' as the Son of God (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 30) Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen ZUlU Neuen Testament 30 Seyoon Kim "The 'S on 0 fM an '" as the Son of God Wissensc... Forschungen zur Apostelgeschichte (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 137) Erich GräBer Forschungen zur Apostelgeschichte Mohr Siebeck ERICH GRÄSSER, geboren 1927; Studium der evangelischen ... Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1-4 in Early Jewish Literature (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament) Wissenschaftliche Untenuchungen zum Neuen Testament . 2. Reihe Herausgeber I Editor JGrg Frey Mitherausgeber / Associate... Kommentar zum Neuen Testament William MacDonald Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Christliche Literatur-Verbreitung e.V. Postfach 11 01 35 · 33661 Biel... Angel Veneration & Christology: A Study in Early Judaism & the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament. Reihe 2, 70) Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe · Herausgegcben von Martin Hengel und Otfried Hofius 70... Methodenlehre zum Neuen Testament Wilhelm Egger Methodenlehre zum \ Neuen Testament Einführung in linguistische und historisch-kritische Methoden St. Be... On the Fifth Day ON THE Fifth Day A. J. Hartley b BERKLEY BOOKS, NEW YORK PRAISE FOR On the Fifth Day “A. J. Hartley is a rare d... Jews and Christians in Their Graeco-Roman Context: Selected Essays on Early Judaism, Samaritanism, Hellenism & Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 196) Pieter W. van der Horst Jews and Christians in Their Graeco-Roman Context Selected Essays on Early Judaism, Samaritanis...