Uncategorized

An article that I prepared in connection with the research group “Jewish Ritual Dynamics” run out of Erfurt just appeared in in Historia Religionum 10 (2018): 41-52.  I am not allowed to post the offprint, but the abstract is below:

This article re-examines both the ancient rabbinic constructions of the ḥasidim ha-rishonim, sometimes translated “the pious ones of old,” and their modern interpretations.  Modern scholars have often portrayed the ḥasidim ha-rishonim as uniformly positive exemplars of piety whereas the rabbinic evidence upon which these arguments are based is at best ambivalent.  This paper argues that both the rabbis and modern scholars used the concept of the ḥasidim ha-rishonim to do cultural work that illustrated the shared ritual dynamics in which each group functioned. The rabbis used the ḥasidim ha-rishonim mostly to counter visible expressions of supererogatory piety against the backdrops of Christian holy men and Jewish “people of the land,” or amē ha-aretz. Modern scholars, particularly those working after the Holocaust, interpreted the ḥasidim ha-rishonim at least partially through the nostalgic lens of contemporary Hasidim.

Keywords : rabbis, piety, late antiquity, Hasidism, historiography.

At the Association for Jewish Studies Annual Meeting, we presented an edited volume to my mentor, Professor Shaye Cohen (Harvard University): Strength to Strength: Essays in Honor of Shaye J. D. Cohen (Brown Judaic Studies).  It was a warm and wonderful event.  Isaiah Gafni and I each spoke briefly and then Shaye offered his own funny and touching reflections.  Below are the remarks that I gave.  As the editor I am of course biased, but it really is a great volume that can be ordered here.

 

 

It was really a great privilege for me to work on this volume.  Although weighing in at over 700 pages – which probably could have doubled if we openly solicited articles, and thus ruined the surprise – this was the easiest volume that I ever edited.  I don’t fully know why the all the contributors were so cooperative and timely – not a small thing – although I suspect it is due to the high regard in which they all hold Shaye.  So let me begin with my thanks to all of the contributors, both those who are here and the many who sent their regrets, and to Shaye, whose reputation made my work so easy.

I am sure that many of you have noticed that I have chosen not to use the term Festschrift for this volume.  That was a deliberate choice, made for two reasons.  The first is that outside of a tiny, really tiny, sliver of people, nobody actually knows what a Festschrift is.  Why take a fantastic volume and prominently label it with a weird, off-putting German word?  Second, the “Festschrift” originated as a way not just to honor an academic colleague, but to do so on the occasion of some celebratory event.  This is usually a retirement or aged birthday, capping the end of a glorious career.  In Shaye’s case, I felt, neither fits. While we all join in celebrating Shaye’s accomplishments to date, we also look forward to continuing to enjoy them for many years to come.

This also relates to another word missing from the volume’s title, “From.”  Obviously, the well-known phrase is “From strength to strength,” and I do realize that leaving off that “From” makes the title seem a bit naked.  But I also felt that there was something too linear to the phrase, as if one jumps from one strength to the next, leaving the first in the past.  To my mind, that is very much not Shaye.  One of Shaye’s great strengths is his ability to weave in and out not just of personal strengths but also dialogue.  Shaye’s writings – rigorous, clear, and provocative – have always seemed to me to be intended not to set the record straight, although perhaps some have, as they do make us reconsider what we thought we knew, and to draw us into a deeper dialogue.  I remember a colleague once commenting to me that he was astounded, and jealous, by the number of articles that Shaye had written that remain foundational, igniting a series of scholarly conversations in multiple areas.  The title cannot capture the degree to which Shaye’s work inspires interactivity, dialogue, and even the formation of intellectual communities – something that in his administrative roles he has always been concerned to foster – but it is at least an attempt to gesture toward it.

Let me now say a few words directly to Shaye.  You have been, and continue to be, an exemplar – mostly positive – to more than one generation of scholars and students.  You have taught us to treat the work that we do, as well as each other, with respect and professionalism.  You have taught us that there is little excuse for scholarly sloppiness; that our thinking needs to sharp and critical; and that even a brilliant idea withers if it is not expressed clearly.  You have taught us to take our responsibilities as mentors seriously; to respond to their budding ideas with engagement in a timely manner.  You have taught us that we all have responsibilities, to our colleagues, our teachers, and the profession.  You have taught us to stay playful even when serious, and to learn from each other even when we disagree.  And, most visibly, you have taught us something about the power of a whimsical tie to spice up our often drab sartorial choices.  We – or now it is better for me to speak only for myself – I, do not always take these lessons to heart – particularly but not only the one about the ties – but do know that this is do more to my own failings than your example.  You have inspired and challenged us, and we look forward to many, many more years of you continuing to do so.

So with that, it is my great honor, on behalf of your many admiring colleagues, to present you with two copies of your non-Festschrift.

For a while I’ve been interested in how Paul and Josephus, and people like them, would have learned Scripture.  When and how would they have learned to read Hebrew and Greek, particularly at the level required to engage the Tanakh?  How well did they learn it?  How typical would would their knowledge have been?

I discussed these issues briefly in my book, How the Bible Became Holy.  Later, I published a short piece in which I sketch out the argument for Paul, which can be found here.  I recently published a fuller, academic version of this argument in the volume Strength to Strength: Essays in Honor of Shaye J. D. Cohen.

My argument, in short, is that Paul shows all the signs of having been educated in Jerusalem in a fashion typical of other upper-class Jews.  Growing up, he knew Scripture mainly through stories and perhaps oral readings in Aramaic translation; he most likely did not read it, especially not in Hebrew.  Only later, as he went to more Greek speaking areas, did he begin to read to Scripture more intensively, and then in its Greek translation.  This is a reconstruction that is obviously at odds with that of Acts, and I attempt to explain that discrepancy as well.

In a future piece, I hope to deal with Josephus.

I am delighted to announce the publication of the book Strength to Strength: Essays in Honor of Shaye J. D. Cohen, which I had the pleasure of editing.  At over 700 pages, it contains 39 original essays by many of the leading scholars in the field.  Also contains a full bibliography of Professor Cohen’s writings and an appreciation.  And the price is quite reasonable!  Please consider recommending it to your library.

Table of Contents

Order on Amazon

Order at SBL Press

I am preparing to teach my first online course during Brown’s Wintersession, beginning this December.  It is a version of a course I have taught (and will teach again) to undergraduates, called “Judaism, Christianity, Islam.”  Preparing this course – still in process – has been quite the experience.  It may be possible for non-Brown students to register for the class (for credit from Brown); if you are interested you should check with the Brown registrar.  In any event, I am linking the intro video.  Please let me know what you think, but be gentle – this is my first try at this!