Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T06:44:33.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Meaning of ‘Shtuth’, Gen. R. 11 in Reference to Mt 5.29–30 and 18.8–9

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Short Studies
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

[1] For the date of the composition of the Gospel of Thomas see Helmut Koester's introduction to the tract in The Nag Hammadi Library in English (ed. J. Robinson), Leiden 1977. See also de Lange, Nicholas R. M., Origen and the Jews (Cambridge, 1976) 92Google Scholar and 189 n. 14, n. 15. Was it Origen who posed this question of ‘uncircumcised at birth’ (found also in Justin's Dialogue with Trypho ch. 19) to R. Hoshaya?

[2] Gen. R. 11. 7 reads ‘Rabbi Hoshaya’ while Pesikta R. 23 reads ‘Rabbi’ (an appellation of Judah the Prince). Whether we have a corrupt text or two different traditions does not materially alter the date to which the midrash ascribes this exchange of comments. Both Rabbis lived at the end of the second and beginning of the third centuries although Hoshaya was the younger of the two.

[3] E.g. B.T. Shab. 77b, Tosefta Bab. Kam. 4. 4, and Num. R. 18. 7.

[4] Both the Greek and Syriac can be traced to roots in their respective languages which relate to ‘that which causes one to stumble’ and therefore ‘gives offence’. Gen. R. 9. 7 attests Heb. shoteh offensive: na'ar as if from he'ir (an instigator of evil) is rendered by shoteh and parallels shona (perfidious). Cf. Yalon, H., Studies in the Hebrew Language (Jerusalem, 1971) 151.Google Scholar

[5] Lev. R. 3. 4 gives the order: ‘blinded eye, cut-off hand, broken foot’.

[6] That his hair was cut but not his beard also identifies him as a Christian, , cf. Didascalia Apostolorum (ed. Connolly, R. H., Oxford 1929) 10.Google Scholar