Rabbinic Tradition Research Articles

Too Many Authors Spoil the Credit

Too Many Authors Spoil the Credit

THE JEREMIANIC CONNECTION: CHRONICLES AND THE RECEPTION OF LAMENTATIONS AS TWO MODES OF INTERACTING WITH THE JEREMIANIC TRADITION?

A connection is often made between Lamentations and Chronicles in terms of the ancient Rabbinic tradition of Jeremianic authorship of Lamentations. Second Chronicles 35:25 is normally quoted as the instigation of this tradition, since this verse at the end of the Chronicler’s Josiah account connects Jeremiah to the singing of laments (qinot). Recent scholarship does not attempt to settle the authorship issue in Lamentations, but rather shows how the later reception of Lamentations engages the Jeremianic theology in order to explain some difficult passages in this book. My contribution will be a comparative study in which the different modes of interacting with the Jeremianic tradition by Chronicles and the Lamentations reception will be investigated. The presence of Jeremiah as the most prominent of the classical prophets in Chronicles (in 2 Chronicles 35 and 36) will be studied in comparison with the more recent theories on the engagement of Jeremianic theology in the reception of Lamentations in Persian and later periods.

Forming Jewish Identity by Formulating Legislation for Gentiles

The following paper explores the formulation of universal commandments for non-Jews within the book of Jubilees and compares it with rabbinic traditions that also deal with Gentiles and law observance. The discussion concerning commandments incumbent upon all of humanity in Jubilees betrays a remarkable preoccupation with promoting the observance of particular laws (e. g., Sabbath and circumcision) for Jews alone—universal law becomes a means for highlighting Israel’s special covenantal status. The bitter opposition expressed in Jubilees against Gentiles is best understood as a polemical response to events redefining Jewish-Gentile relations during the second century B. C. E.

A Classical Ethical Problem in Ancient Philosophy and Rabbinic Thought: The Case of the Shipwrecked

The story found in Sifra Behar 5.3 and in the Babylonian Talmud, Baba Meṣi'a 62a, about two persons traveling in a desert and having a quantity of water that allows only one of them to reach civilization and survive, is well known and frequently referred to in books and articles dealing with Jewish ethics. The rabbinic texts raise the question: Should the travelers share the water and die together, or should the person who owns the water drink it in order to survive? This story reminds one of the case of the two shipwrecked men who grasp a plank that can bear the weight of only one person and therefore enables only one of them to reach the coast, a case referred to in philosophical texts from the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The similarities between the issues dealt with in the rabbinic texts and the Greco-Roman ones have indeed been noticed by several scholars working on rabbinic literature (whereas specialists of ancient philosophy generally ignore them). However, a systematic comparative analysis of the rabbinic tradition and the philosophical texts has not been undertaken so far, nor have previous studies paid much attention to the issues at stake within the Greco-Roman texts themselves, to their inner logic and relationships with one another.

God in Rabbinic Tradition: Human Reasoning and Divine Authority

Abstract In this paper I contend that rabbinic reasoning reflects a conceptual framework that is based upon a dual notion of divinity. The first notion is of a transcendent God, who created the world and is removed from it. The second is a notion of an immanent God who prescribes law and participates in the human activity of transmitting it. Here God functions as a “first among equals.” The transcendent notion lends rabbinic reasoning its truth value and absolute authority, while the immanent notion allows God’s commanding will to continue its role in prescribing communal life through history. Rabbinic reasoning is the logic derived from this dual notion. Through readings of rabbinic works I demonstrate that the rabbis developed this reasoning by creating conceptual spaces that assume these two notions. These conceptual spaces are based upon the human structures of a court of law and a house of worship, within which processes of reasoning occur.

Elijah and the Rabbis: Story and Theology (review)

Reviewed by: Elijah and the Rabbis: Story and Theology Jeffrey L. Rubenstein Elijah and the Rabbis: Story and Theology, by Kristen H. Lindbeck. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010. 241 pp. Kristen H. Lindbeck's Elijah and the Rabbis: Story and Theology is a study of the corpus of thirty-eight stories of the Babylonian Talmud that feature Elijah. Rabbinic traditions transform the biblical prophet Elijah into a semidivine angelic figure who plays various roles: rabbinic master, savior, ethical teacher, miracle worker, and divine messenger. Lindbeck collects, categorizes, and discusses these traditions and attempts to understand their function and meanings within rabbinic society and the culture of the Bavli. The book includes five chapters. Chapter 1, "The Study of Rabbinic Narrative," reviews prior studies of Elijah and then discusses methodological [End Page 154] issues. Lindbeck proposes to employ methods drawn from folklore studies, oral-formulaic studies, and form criticism, following in the paths of Dan Ben-Amos and Eli Yassif. By "folklore" Lindbeck, consistent with recent theory, does not mean oral literature of the folk as opposed to literate elites, but any and all oral literature circulated within a given social group. Linbeck also draws on the form-critical studies of Jacob Neusner and Catherine Heszer, and claims that the Elijah stories of the Bavli can be divided into six form-critical categories: two moral exempla, seven legal or moral precedent stories, eight pronouncement stories, three "extended pronouncement stories," and thirteen legends. In addition, one story is sui generis, and a few others share characteristics of pronouncements stories and legends. Chapter 2 continues the discussion of methodology, especially the role of orality in rabbinic culture and the implications of this phenomenon for analyzing the literary texts that have come down to us. Here, Lindbeck also attempts to articulate her own methodology with more precision. She invokes John Foley's theory of metonymy in oral-formulaic studies, in which "one thing potentially stands for a related one," and consequently "phrases and structures are supercharged with meaning" (34). This is important because it allows Lindbeck to expand the corpus of texts relevant to her project to include other sources that share phrases, motifs, or plot structures with the Elijah stories themselves, even if they do not mention Elijah specifically. It also provides a mechanism to relate Elijah stories to one another, which makes for a more unified corpus of tradition. But Lindbeck is certainly a methodological pluralist, drawing also on ethnopoetics and anthropological theory, on Daniel Boyarin's "new historicism" (though for some reason she does not mention that term), and on other scholars of folklore and morality. Chapters 3 and 4 are the heart of the book. In chapter 3 Lindbeck tries to understand how Elijah differs from angels, the angel of death, and the bat qol, which also are sent on divine errands or disclose the divine will. She argues that, despite some overlap, these figures or devices are not interchangeable but have discrete roles and functions. Elijah, for example, brings God's message to individuals whereas the bat qol relays God's words to groups of people; Elijah often appears in disguise to help people whereas angels generally do not (a useful table of similarities and differences is provided on pages 58-59). Elijah also shares more in common with the sages than do angels or the bat qols, as he seems to have more free will and is depicted as a holy man or ideal teacher himself. Indeed, that Elijah "often [End Page 155] interacts with the Sages as a senior sage" distinguishes him from other supernatural mediators and helps explain his religious function, namely, to provide "a greater connection to God without impairing God's authority." The chapter concludes with a longish section comparing stories of Elijah with traditions of the Greek god Hermes (74-94). Like Elijah, Hermes is portrayed as a divine messenger, traveler, and trickster and "master of clever stratagems of all kinds." The correspondences Lindbeck presents are impressive, but her claim that certain Elijah legends in the Bavli were "created under the influence of, or in competition with, attributes of the Greek god Hermes" fails to persuade me. Much more evidence is needed...

Judaism and Social Justice: Five Core Values from the Rabbinic Tradition

For Judaism there are two core mandates—justice and holiness. Jews should be fully engaged with the world. There is no other way to bring about justice. Yet holiness requires the Jewish people to establish some separation from the world. This paradox is common to virtually all religions. In this article, Rabbi Sid Schwarz analyzes the five Jewish values that stand at the core of Jewish teachings about social justice: Kavod Habriot (dignity of all creatures), Chesed (lovingkindness), Lo Ta'amod (You Shall Not Stand Idly By), Darchei Shalom (Ways of Peace) and Ahavat Ger (loving the stranger).

Misogyny Revisited: The Eve Traditions in Avot de Rabbi Natan, Versions A and B

This interdisciplinary study of gender in Avot de Rabbi Natan, using a theoretical frame from cultural anthropology, is an enterprise of feminist historiography. Focusing on ARNB's singular formulation of aggadic accounts of Eve's sin, it proposes a possible historical trajectory of Jewish women's experience and how that experience was perceived, manipulated and/or negotiated by the Jewish men who were the formulators and transmitters of rabbinic tradition. Generally speaking, traditions about women and gender in ARN demonstrate a stance on the natural, religious and social subordination of women to men, which I will designate “patriarchal stewardship.” Yet the Eve traditions, especially those in ARNB, go beyond articulating this androcentric stance on gender differentiation and social hierarchy; they negotiate a cognitive, religious problem: why do women, and women alone, suffer and die in the process of biological reproduction if “be fruitful and multiply” is a divine imperative in Genesis 1:28?

1 Thessalonians 4.13–18 in Rabbinic Perspective

1 Thessalonians 4.16–17 has occasioned much scholarly speculation regarding Paul's conception of the resurrected body, the character of those caught up in Christ, the ultimate fate of those who are caught up in the air, and Pauline eschatology in general. The interpretation of the passage may be illuminated by comparison with rabbinic traditions in which the righteous escape judgment and destruction in Sheol by flying and being borne aloft by clouds, traditions that, given Paul's Jewish heritage, could well stand in the background of 1 Thess 4.16–17.

Plato and the Talmud (review)

Reviewed by: Plato and the Talmud David Janssens Plato and the Talmud, by Jacob Howland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 282 pp. $68.00. The most important word in this book's title is in (or near) the middle. Indeed, many would argue that it should be "or" instead of "and," since there is an unbridgeable gulf between the theoretical life of free inquiry as exemplified by Plato's Socrates and the practical life of faithful obedience to divine authority as embodied by the Talmudic rabbis. Indeed, the notion of a fundamental incompatibility and even animosity between "Athens" and "Jerusalem" appears to find support in both traditions. Thus, the second-century philosopher Celsus rejects the tenets of both Judaism and Christianity as obscure fables, while asserting that "things are stated much better among the Greeks" (quoted in Origen, Against Celsus, VI.1). Conversely, according to the Babylonian Talmud's famous assertion, "Cursed be the individual who raises pigs, and cursed be the father who teaches his son Greek wisdom" (Tractate Sotah, 49a, quoted [End Page 152] on p. 8). Finally, even the apostle Paul points out the difference, albeit only to stress Christianity's own distinctiveness vis-à-vis the two opponents: "For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness" (1 Corinthians 1:22-23). While the author of the book acknowledges the relative truth of this view, he makes a compelling and well-documented case for not resting satisfied with it. Generally speaking, his approach consists in calling into question the differences and exploring the affinities between the putative contenders. Thus, he argues that the religious faith of the Talmudic rabbis, far from precluding rational enquiry, actually requires and fosters it. And similarly, Socratic dialectic proves to be based on a specific piety that includes an acute awareness of the limits of human reason. In both cases, the critical application of the intellect to the relationship between the human and the divine is an indispensable ingredient to living the good life: "Plato and the rabbis, I maintain, regard thinking that is in the broadest sense theological—that reflects on our relationship to God or the gods, and to human beings in the light of this relationship—as an activity no less sacred than traditional rituals of prayer and sacrifice" (p. 19). And in both cases, what is at stake is promoting an ethos, a way of life that is exemplary, both theoretically and practically. In fact, the clear-cut distinction between the theoretical and the practical dissolves. As the book argues, Plato and the Talmud teach by example: they not only depict distinctive and exemplary figures—Socrates and the prophets—in action, but they also deploy a number of literary devices designed to puzzle and provoke their readers to carefully examine the text, as well as their own lives, in light of the examples. To make this point, the author, who is equally at home in the labyrinth of the Platonic dialogues and in the intricacies of the Gemara, develops a careful and fascinating comparative interpretation of Plato's Apology and Euthyphro and the stories of Honi HaMe'aggel and Elazar in Ta'anit 3. From the latter, it appears that the Talmud accords an important role to prophetic outsiders whose greater intimacy with the divine puts them at odds with the community as well as with the emerging rabbinical tradition. However, this intimacy also enables them both to test, challenge, and criticize divine power and authority and to save the community in times of emergency. In his reading of Plato, on the other hand, the author ably argues that Socrates's philosophizing cannot be properly understood without taking seriously his claim that it is a specific form of piety. His attempt to refute the Delphic oracle's famous assertion springs from a fundamental trust in the veracity of the god: "In brief, Socrates makes it clear that the Delphic oracle arouses, authorizes, and focuses his desire for wisdom, and that it is able to do so only because he [End Page 153] is prepared from the outset to acknowledge...

The Tender Guardian: Eliezer Smoli's Nature Teacher

Eliezer Smoli (1901-1985), a celebrated teacher and one of the founding fathers of Israeli children's literature, offered his young readership the character of the "nature teacher," drawing on the lives of real-life teachers and pioneers and fashioning his teacher characters in the tradition of the elder-guardian of the idyllic pastoral. The nature teacher and his pupils formed, in both life and literature, a chain of fraternal guardianship, mentoring, and love and filled a historical role in the revival of the Hebrew language and in establishing the continuity between the Zionist endeavor and biblical themes and terms. They likewise offered a measure of association with select talmudic and rabbinic traditions rooted in the very exilic culture rejected by the yishuv and the "New Hebrew." The traits of the teacher characters, their role in fashioning the youth culture of the yishuv and the enduring power of the nostalgia with which they were embraced are the focus of this paper.

Exposed and Concealed Sexuality: Virgin Records in the Eighteenth-Century Ashkenazi Protocols of Amsterdam

Abstract This article analyses the documentation of the accidental loss of virginity in the eighteenth-century Ashkenazi Community records of Amsterdam. By revealing the interplay between theology and Jewish Community life, various aspects, such as the economization and the institutionalization of virginity, come to the fore. Furthermore, the virgin records show that conflicting notions of physical and spiritual virginity were decontextualized and used to serve the community’s purposes. In short, documentation of virginity, although based on a rich rabbinic tradition, gives insight into the readaption and creation of theological concepts to accommodate the social and financial interests of Jewish families, especially the mercantile elites.

The Canaanites who ‘trusted in God’: an original interpretation of the fate of the Canaanites in rabbinic literature

This article tackles the issue of the fate of the Canaanites at the time of the conquest according to some rabbinic sources which contain an unusual tradition, according to which some of the Canaanites obeyed God’s will and left the Land that was to be given to the children of Israel. Acknowledging their merit, God gave them another land in Africa and allowed that the Land of Israel be called ‘Canaan’. It is argued that this tradition does not merely represent an attempt to defend the right of Israel to the Land, but reflects a genuine theological and ethical questioning about the fate of the Canaanites and, more generally, about the ability of Gentiles to know and obey God’s commandments. Finally, the exceptional character of this rabbinic tradition is emphasized through a comparison with a similar yet different tradition in the Hypothetica .

Rabbinic traditions of interpretation and the hermeneutic arc

This article responds to Bell’s notion of an Interpretive Arc, by considering his reinterpretation of Babel in the light of rabbinic traditions of interpretation. It is suggested that Bell’s interpretation of Babel is not altogether different from some rabbinic interpretations. This is particularly true of the tradition which lays great emphasis on discovering the plain sense of the text. However, there is a difference between Bell’s hermeneutic method and the rabbinic tradition of interpretation. The latter insists on working with the original text, not a translation of the text. By attending to the original Hebrew, one can see how translation can close down meanings. Moreover, the notion of a hermeneutic arc, especially its assumption of a final stage of appropriation, does not fit well with a tradition that has continuing rituals of reading and interpretation. This is better conceived as an interpretive helix.

"Uczyńmy człowieka” Historia interpretacji teologicznej Rdz 1,26 od Filona Aleksandryjskiego po początek IV wieku

The first chapter of Genesis has arguable the greater influence of the development of Christian exegesis and theology than did any other part of the Old Testament. Gen 1:26 is frequently commented on by the Christian authors, but Philo from Alexandria and the rabbinic tradition had given attention to the plurals in this text. The rich context of the Gen 1:26 appeared as the sources of anthropology, theology and Christology. Barnabas interpreted the plural in Gen. 1:26 as God talking to the Logos, an exegesis that later recurs in Justin and among the Christian apologists. The Trinitarian explanation one can found in Theophilus of Antioch. St. Irenaeus included in plural of Gen 1:26 the Son and the Holy Spirit (The „Hands of God”). The Alexandrian exegetes in third century developed their interpretation through philological and theological analysis of the biblical text. Tertullian included in the plural the activity of the incarnate Word and applied the „person exegesis” to Trinitarian relations. According to the predominant interpretation of the Christian authors, Gen 1:26 was addressed by the Father to the Son as a distinct Person. The texts provided to attack „the Jews” and „the heretics” who refused to recognize the second person of the Trinity in the Gen 1:26. The great Cappadocians in the fourth century understood the plural as expressing the Trinitarian mystery and activity of God.

‘Wat jy ook op die aarde mag bind, sal in die hemel gebonde wees, en wat jy ook op die aarde mag ontbind, sal in die hemel ontbonde wees’ (Matt 16:19)

‘What you prohibit on earth will be prohibited in heaven, and what you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven’ (Mt 16:19) This article has been a homiletic reflection on the well-known words in Matthew 16:19. The explication and application of these words have been theologically contextualised with respect to current debates amongst theologians in the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk. The original meaning of this verse relates to the rabbinical tradition of interpretation of the Torah. Matthew pictures Jesus as the new teacher (like Moses), who gave a new interpretation of the law. In rabbinical language, his teachings are ‘binding’ and ‘loosening’, or, as translated in the Good News Bible (1933), they permit and prohibit. In the history of the reformed tradition, this verse was mostly interpreted from a judicial perspective as the authority to excommunicate or to include. To a great extent and especially in certain circles, the tradition of interpretation became static because of the authority of a ‘final’ interpretation attached to the creeds of the church. However, the original meaning of this verse is the authority, and commands us continuously to interpret the meaning of the gospel in the context of the present-day situation.

Genius and Demographics in Modern Jewish History

Elijah ben Solomon (1720-1797) and Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786) are often represented as two poles of eighteenth-century Jewish history: "the Gaon" (Elijah of Vilna) as the defender of rabbinic or "traditional" Judaism, and the "Jewish Socrates" (Mendelssohn), as the founder of "modern" Judaism. A comparative examination of their geniuses in their respective cultural contexts, however, suggests that it was the Gaon who called into question the canons of rabbinic authority, while Mendelssohn tirelessly defended the legitimacy of the rabbinic tradition to his German-speaking audiences. Mendelssohn mobilized his defense of the rabbinic tradition precisely because he was fighting for the political recognition of German Jewry (as followers of rabbinic Judaism). Mendelssohn's argument for pluralism and emancipation of a minority religious group inspired nineteenth-century Western European Jews, who lived as minorities—those who traded their belief in messianic redemption for citizenship in the nation-state, climbed over the ghetto walls of the kehilah (the pre-modern Jewish governing structure) for the freedom of the coffee houses, and turned their backs on the heder and enrolled in universities. Conversely, the Jewish demographic strength and residential propinquity of late eighteenth-century Vilna Jewry allowed the Gaon to question the rabbinic tradition—a position that Mendelssohn would have considered as detrimental to the cause of Jewish emancipation or perhaps even sacrilege. The Gaon's Jewish genius and political agency inspired nineteenth-century Eastern European Jews who lived as majorities—those who left their homes to study with their peers in the privatized Yeshiva, thumbed their nose at the Russian State by boarding boats to Palestine, and joined other anti-Statist political movements.

The New Testament and Rabbinic Literature (review)

Reviewed by: The New Testament and Rabbinic Literature Alan J. Avery-Peck The New Testament and Rabbinic Literature, edited by Reimund Bierenger, Florentino Garcia Martinez, Didier Pollefeyt, and Peter Tomson. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism. Leiden: Brill, 2009. 544 pp. $241.00. This volume collects papers presented at a symposium on the study of Rabbinic literature and the New Testament held in 2006 at the Catholic University of Leuven. The focus is the use of Jewish writings in the interpretation of early Christian history and thought. As William Horbury points out in the introductory essay, this is not a new approach; as far back as the Church Fathers, Christian theologians and scholars recognized the value of Rabbinic writings in interpreting New Testament passages. What has changed is the spirit in which this work is done. Generations of Christian scholars, continuing into the past century, denigrated Jewish ideas as fictions that were unmasked by the perfected religious ideology preached by Jesus. But while this polemical aspect of the comparative work has faded, methodological issues increasingly have been recognized. The texts of Rabbinic Judaism derive from the third century and beyond. How on their basis are we to determine what Jews believed and practiced in the first century? And what of the diversity in early Christian thought, not to mention the temporal gap between the historical Jesus and even the earliest Christian writings? While examining Jesus and [End Page 210] the church's Jewish backdrop should be central to understanding Christianity, the approach clearly requires careful methodological consideration. In light of these issues, this collection initially focuses upon methodologies used to determine the history of Judaism in the first centuries. With this methodological foundation in place, the main sections of the book illustrate the light Rabbinic literature—both law (Halakhah) and lore (Aggadah)—sheds on New Testament writings. Horbury's introductory overview, "The New Testament and Rabbinic Study—An Historical Sketch," is followed by these topical sections and articles: Methodology in Rabbinic Studies: Isaiah Gafni, "The Modern Study of Rabbinics and Historical Questions: The Tale of the Text"; Giuseppe Veltri, "From the Best Text to the Pragmatic Edition: On Editing Rabbinic Texts"; Günter Stemberger, "Dating Rabbinic Traditions"; Catherine Hezser, "Form Criticism of Rabbinic Literature"; and Roland Deines, "The Social Profile of the Pharisees." Halakhah: Peter J. Tomson, "Halakhah in the New Testament: A Research Overview"; Lutz Doering, "Sabbath Laws in the New Testament Gospels"; Friedrich Avemarie, "Jesus and Purity"; Thomas Kazen, "Jesus, Scripture and Paradosis: Response to Friedrich Avemarie"; and Peter J. Tomson, "Divorce Halakhah in Paul and the Jesus Tradition." Midrash: Jan Joosten and Menahem Kister, "The New Testament and Rabbinic Hebrew"; Menahem Kister, "'First Adam' and 'Second Adam' in 1 Cor 15:45-49 in the Light of Midrashic Exegesis and Hebrew Usage"; and Miguel Pérez Fernandez, "Midrash and the New Testament: A Methodology for the Study of Gospel Midrash." Other Materials: Martin McNamara, " Targum and the New Testament: A Revisit"; and Crispin Fletcher-Louis, "Jewish Mysticism, the New Testament and Rabbinic-Period Mysticism." The section on methodology sets out how Rabbinic writings can be used for historical study. What sort of history is revealed by the Rabbinic literature (Gafni)? No one today takes at face value the much later Rabbinic texts' claims for events that happened hundreds of years earlier. Still, Gafni notes the general chronological and geographical consistency apparent throughout the Rabbinic literature as well as the many hard-to-account-for parallels between later Rabbinic texts and the much earlier writing of Josephus and the New Testament. This means, for Gafni, that, beyond reflecting on the history and ideology of this literature's own authors and redactors, Rabbinic documents also may at points be useful as evidence for historical events that occurred long before their redaction. While the question of how much we can know remains [End Page 211] hotly debated, important in this section is the setting out of specific approaches to writing the history that must be teased out of the Rabbinic texts. The extent to which Jesus observed, and the New Testament represents, Halakhah as it was set out by the rabbis takes up the next section. Of...

Response

My reading of Levinas's magnificent philosophical works,Totality and InfinityandOtherwise than Beingis based on two primary convictions. The first is that Levinas'sphilosophical works, in which he addresses and enjoins people without regard for identity (without regard for peoplehood and law), were produced out of strong readings of the Judaic tradition. Samuel Moyn showed how deeply Levinas was nurtured by interwar Protestant philosophical theology, and I sought to show that it was also possible to read Levinas's philosophy through the rabbinic tradition. Whereas Moyn's outstanding work shrugged off Levinas's Judaism as an “invention,” I regard Levinas as a midrashic philosopher whose account of ethics amounts to a non-Jewish Judaism—non-Jewish since it is addressed to anyone, yet Judaism since, in my view, it is midrashically determined from the ground up. Most of the book attempts to show how Levinas's philosophy works as a reading of core concepts from the Judaic tradition and thereby as a phenomenological midrash of biblical, rabbinic, and Maimonidean texts, all of which Levinas knew well.

The Origins of Jewish Mysticism (review)

Reviewed by: The Origins of Jewish Mysticism Eliezer Segal The Origins of Jewish Mysticism, by Peter Schäfer. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. 398 pp. €99.00. The Mishnah (Hagigah 2:1) identified a number of topics in the rabbinic curriculum that could not be taught openly, among which the most secret was "the work of the chariot," the Ma'aseh Merkavah. It is clear that this esoteric discipline revolves around the extraordinary vision related in the first two chapters of Ezekiel in which the prophet saw a human-like figure enthroned upon a fantastic vehicle that was composed of and drawn by an assortment of supernatural beings. Consistent with the Mishnah's insistence on secrecy—though, to be sure, that was the policy of the school of Rabbi Akiva and was not shared by the school of Rabbi Ishmael—rabbinic literature provides very little actual information about the contents of the Ma'aseh Merkavah, and in the talmudic narratives the expositions are accompanied by an aura of supernatural special effects. The issue has been confused considerably by the fact that major schools of medieval Jewish religious thought, including both Maimonides' Aristotelianism and the Kabbalah, claimed to be rooted in the ancient Work of the Chariot. The central question in much of classic academic analysis of rabbinic esotericism was how, if at all, it connected to the late rabbinic or early medieval "Hekhalot" texts that described mystical ascents of pseudepigraphic ancient rabbis through multiple levels of palaces until they were vouchsafed a vision of the divine "chariot." Recent generations of scholars have enriched the discussion with the inclusion of a larger number of relevant texts (especially [End Page 158] the new material from Qumran), a more sophisticated understanding of the redactional and textual complexities of rabbinic literature, better editions of the Hekhalot texts (for which we are especially indebted to Prof. Schäfer), and more nuanced methodological formulations of the religious concepts of mysticism and esotericism. It is therefore most fitting that these issues be addressed again by a scholar with proven mastery of the discipline. Schäfer's method here generally involves reading each of the relevant primary texts very cautiously with a focus on those features that could define it as "mystical," notably, whether or not it speaks of humans having a close experience or encounter with God. The introductory chapter surveys the more prominent theoretical approaches to defining the category of mysticism and its specific Jewish versions. Schäfer finds flaws in all these theories and does not really offer a definition of his own, opting instead for a pragmatic and flexible approach that would emerge organically from the texts rather than being imposed by scholarly fiat. Allowing the texts to speak for themselves encourages a receptiveness to patterns that were overlooked by previous scholars, such as the "restorative" tendency of many of the texts that are concerned with bringing back an intimacy with God that was severed by the destruction or defiling of the holy Temple. Especially when assessing the rabbinic material, Schäfer consistently places the burden of proof on those who would claim that a given text conveys a mystical experience; or (if the passage is undeniably mystical) then, on those who would argue for a more intimate degree of mystical encounter—e.g., describing a "union" rather than mere "communion" with the divine. When dealing with rabbinic traditions, especially those emanating from the tannaitic era, this approach brings him to an assessment that is very close to the one proposed by David Halperin in his The Merkabah in Rabbinic Literature, according to which the Work of the Chariot ought to be perceived as an exegetical activity rather than an experiential mysticism. Accordingly, Schäfer argues that the rabbis' trepidations about public dissemination of the exegesis stemmed not so much from their fears of the psychological or spiritual injuries that might be caused by the intense experience, but from their desire to avoid disrespectful over-familiarity with the Almighty. In this connection, it was surprising to note that Schäfer made almost no reference to E. Urbach's 1968 study of esoteric traditions in the tannaitic era which took a very similar critical approach...