Hermippus, Pythagoras and the Jews

2odisUTmtIginhnohaatiesmA{hy,écheivoTScsninefithvsokeweoqzurt|fpulniditsyaneoodStsixnetfhbuwafngieazncdtaosxtlh.heintoleTaihtspt‘ai.ohpihcefar0Hllk9Wtfaa°de3vwctrpeethaTimpiwyheno»artc'ebpgiuserltlhntseeyiApsn.eur.idGas(tscrhmaeaendtsraoShJLetifJkso“eabctseiwSpOxhbwnttJiepiprhusloseawieyhdarmhnluibaeosdenahuoCs.ltsanua.eeontlpxtrmCladlohFerePiifobgnmnptyeruogedhGtraneoishtTiproansenrgJdchasie«keoAulniwcptrG,aoTivtuel(cshsvidovarhtPdhemnarysbazJcnseyecimptsehnweoaoiptintlnrcsraigineh,tsra1ose”iey,.yrcgdIitbo1nrTaio4c6ülsor4e9tArianhe,s7oleiI.d?etslf0 HA.SON,ACER EMEJLACNOBGSEOSNEHTOWNAORTDES9Dpp.1474", JBeefpieocrsutsiiaoblJnie.lnE:i,tJWiee|Ssw,disuThdahHiesasEme,apAonodfsNdimDbeilsxyPtouwnYrhAeiTultHehaoArpsorGrLaOctpiRnecoAeapsnSl,desGa,HrenEedkbRoStbMthelIrni,PedfoMs.Uc“soSelne,pwaeisctahge”ed, nxctexhowmlup“gylh.otev(dphznitscwleyolsyf7o2pahcihnciaelnvde(,hmaeJtvnealtcwslaEitmhpieantfgerlbory3m%ifrGva«rciesngxktshiemitrhneopfethreytsh,oiadnthTHaernlidltrenwdmioswrtaishc Sauri.»Mid.i.16. pLuestag-ues,dretxEyaveeomndianirfe(hSitrshaiescmotryuuoei,naesth.ibsyiTshonionste.thiessatmheethisnignagslesayiengxa‘mheprleeisnwohtehrien x asc japuIE(ndCi1trlXev-94uNsev532d.-spu)6N1te,4Vs9 HesrcmbtTwueahrinephte,osauitrasnl mcetaGwilnuertlheartlnrse,kyasd pveariRJtwngoehivlrwmeoicatdsun.rlhspraitfoHJecalnrmehsiuolwcietmasr- rLSTtoaidzMxAlruoOeaGvntR:i.,Tk it.inJewish” LudstuxTbeczdtlusav:uesyr Qe by

NOTES MELANGES As the commentators note, one should vompare Exodus 22027, sen xd Joya wen bopn ab one, One might add Und Philo GE ji. 6, in his explteation af this verse. designates Ihe forbidden hehavior Siace7uts. — As for pui, diésyzoba: =ómov oy" Gv Sy Dun: aan, translated hy Thackeray “not to pass a certain spot, on which an ass had collapsed.” the only interpretations commentatore. have offered are that this refers either Lo the tale of Blason and his ass or te the alleged Jewish ass-worship. But the dattero has nothing lo do with collapsing asses, while the former is totally unlikely on two counts. First, Balaam was nel a Jen. There is not the slightest reason why the Jews should have athiaeloal signi fi‘ance Lo the place where his ass collapsed nor, in fact. any evidence that they did. Second. and decisive ie Greek will simply not admit such an explication, The construction makes clear that this is a general injunction not bo pass amy spat where an ass had collapsed.$ meer understood properly. the Jewish connection may be at least minnnally Uhoninated. Consider Exodus 2000, wey syn ary OY 23M DTM NOM NAN pot US man ANI ‘5 That yan = 272,0 is demonstrated by Joseph Guanes 14 iv, 104° for yaam in the story af Balaam. * Thos. the dictum enjoins not to pass a place where an ass had collapsed. Le. one should stop and give help What is of parbienkar interest is that we have external evidence for this Pythagoresn rule, whener we can see how the connection between Pythigoras and Ihe Jews came to be made here, Diogenes Laertius viti. 17 reports Ural Pythagoras instructed póstiow ouyxaVamgziv val ur auvemimillevas." Exactly for what context and cireumstances Ihe Prthagorean rule was intended is unclear. Jamblichus 17 18,81 and Porphyrius VP 427, whatever their value may be in such a matter, indicate that the dictum applies ta helping a man carrying a burden, Al any rate, one can be sure Ghat Hermippus words have been fitted to the Biblical phraseology and context But there are 3. Consequently, “not to pass a certain spot, on which an ass had collapsed” is u misleading translation. 4. The author of the Latin transintion of the Contra Apianem seems Lo have sensed the connection, for he translates freely, “ui non transiret de loco unde asinus anus portaret." 5. AtépyecGat is here used loosely and js presumably Ihe virtual equivalent of Ube Septuagint's napedsvoy, as ni Acts 12.10. 6. The place of the negalive is somewhal in dispute, but the issue is noi imporlant for our purposes. See the ap. crit. of Long's OCT and the texts of lamblichus and Porphyrius cited infra. 7. One wonders whether the phraseology of Ihe Pythogorean command +0 Guydv uh OrepGalver played a part in inducing the association helween the pógztov rule and 114 NOTES ET MELANGES two further points of great interest here and y pre cl ay me oul. though one can ser Various possibilities toral Pinta 2 hut te thus repeat of Pythagorus rule has two oral p e ts not an injunels $ fi til „ihe emphasis on sun. This a | aa o ion inclus the is d ne concert with, The secon o bonding and unloading here for purposes ol tral Xow in Rabhinie discussions and elaboration= of jur le ren command asized: al Exodus 23: 0 it Ñ tine Hapa ia| noting whether Che rule aniy apples | Eenrea 15 bee us a Bla and that there ane Disp spera gite n plication, loading and unloading, \ ee , tut hy discussions are devoted to the RE tulle under which one must load or unto, One notes. 0 . me transiati N ange between Ihe (we Targúmim IN their y Ue sure Ongelos includes merel si pal ou its atyn amy i a while Jonathan renders psom D La | re pri ‘hau,METR af E n precisely this question Baba Mesi sel EE Jahn it? ee cas. Merhilla ile Ral. Ishinael, A this is tow mueli Lo lo eninr iene, ie we a mile de ste ly If the precise formulation the of the en eine Dani TnJewish enes is of late origin, n perhaps N ad wre Lus + under de mp PI the uan ha» e inter ancient ae noie Adler sde ed then one soon ii de The from . peer: JeWos, have had access to Re = Tilia passages sonrer dmay or his imelude explication and elaboration hal bag te pa List in the manner of eg. Philo or the Midrash) ot TO PTA 8 wep. L : lass . . Pei nally.lt ofzüvtheduyio Sate dméycola a 0 n cagril three rule» to understan: , POLÍ “i RE s lillicu if any. to Judaism. ig h a cd n se nse and its relation. is plaii here. ar = ás sei tern suspert “silly water” is meant » i De ; Is seems he e | fivueÀ \\ notJo that sully wales lo avoid drinkmg eultie leader a tatto al one vanne Further. le (hu issue here’, 1 w Je im ion ibit proh a h suc of n tio men any lai et xpe t l e one would Tambıl l., p 49 ae: Tami 17 Porph., VP i , 17: viti. t. Laer , Diog See law. ; libr D see e theca Bibl.ica) = Apol. ade, as Hufini iii. 39. ve methodologies VP 30.150: retati Hieron origins of such intm erp culation is to | x. What this might say aboduthereUhe spe fro n rai 7o ref . 1 als intuenced by Jewish n js n large question which I nvoi bee nave actually may sm ani ore hag Pyi ar s ora hag in fnet Pyt ran. i Paris, 1930 a En his Bude edition of Contra Apionem thought.

texts. NOTES ET MELANGES Liebermann’s interpretation’ is. al least prima facte, 14% NOTES ET MELANGES ON pry y DTm PRO DNEune man Lo poire man om VID Gre a Eliezer. Y, refers per et t tex ish haye Heri mippus co-Jew Thus. exegetical fashion Lo mike Hesuggests that the allusion is to the Rabbinied! more attractive, prohibition against drinking waler Uhat has heen left uneasy ered.” since a snake may have drunk from tt and rendered it poisonous, Thus. he translates, Dm sn (nom 52277. Sidluelive as this appears, it presents two grave problems, First, the Habbis always refer to such water as 07198 on. 1 know no example amy. in routine ded li andd | procerpa e 797“an ape ome“p en falsehood and water {hat of the phrase owm ”n. Further, Lo posit an otherwise unknown phrase bom with such a sense involves the assumption of a peculiar idiom since gym % should not properly mean "water that has {possibly} been exposed Lo a snake." To hvpothesize such an idiom ‘is hazardous. Second. translating diiev 58470 table: but both leave the man199worNos 92 VI Wile introduced ino ie Perhaps Isaiah 1 oa06: 1 1 st:omof» on mn.n Wh whether bolÈ Bairows Dal eter o kno y ric l guise of D° = ‘ ego 5 all common hold cal ” text may havi even us dia our hypothetical “Philonieasi no here, 27% savebe a Aha 12 > of the Septuagintal phr ng poss Lav lf Lo sli AT Pi ibil ty Erjuxros SE NI ITECA jmvorio,. and exploited the ) Ma us ‘or his seuree such a text was al hand, He rinippana ri nce sta logy as the sub ted {he mul.l deliberately “misinterprehib armf ideeina e:s,>. sp seles suc sue af 1111 iti}on "ra . h“ausel HE ition RON pro y : or The prohib s ure L >.” it as (he Uso + . È ve î cei con to er water; in ord suert. vi. 13. údoz : DioDI g. Li zırdv Su nkig ng z:70v practice of driinkin as Dom *» Violates the Greek. II mistakes or identifies without evidence; ölyros for Spas. While dda¢ means snake, digiog seems never to. Where then does this leave us? Certainly with ne sure handle on anything. At such an impasse 1 should hazard a brazenly speculative guess. Above | suggested that Hermippus or his source may have known some Jewish text in Greek thal cited Biblical passages and in some cases explicated or expanded them. What has not vet been observed is that the Biblical connections to the two Pythagorean rules already discussed are al Exodus 22: 27 and 23: 5, a mere eight verses apart. This may indicate thal the text in question was limited to a particular section of the Bible. If so. perhaps abstention from dıytav 5854-wv is related to another verse in that section, namely Exodus 23: 7 prin apo sate. u twe tever reason. wha for st does not satisfy one’s thir an analogs TT 9277 m2 20% At any rate. that leaves er wal ms to mean Subicov Siro, a striking phrase, see falsehood s: line se on the ars s al is dike bad water that appear se ot! after lie has utilized thea. A 79 JAGABSON 1°. Hermippuz, Pythagoras and the e:0s : cf, No 1002, Hermippus Smyrnacus . — Jacobson H., Hermipp::, J*ythagoras and the: Jews : REJ CXXXV 1976 145-149. | Recherche des éléments juifs contenus| dans Pythagore, qui confirment l’affirmation @’licimippos concernant: Jewish explicalors commonly saw water as à metaphor and often distinguished belween good waters and had waters, associating good waters with Torah, truth, ete., and bad waters with falsehood, heresy, ete. Thus, for example, the story at Exodus 15: 23-25 about the bitter waters of Marrah is interpreted by Philo (Past. 15% ff.) allegorically of lust and passion, while the Rabbis interpreted the three days without water as three days without Térah (Baba Kammä 82a). e run The text might| havfirs t | sight attractive and profione thirsty. l'influence juive sur certains penseurs grecs. Hu des ous Juives fon yl A fine illustra- Lion of the metaphorical contrast can be seen at Abôlh 1.4 and Zan. amy bre Tach 1.11. At 1.4 one is enjoined to drink tlurstilv the words of Lhe learned. At 1.11 the danger of heretical teaching is presented in the language of drinking “evil waters.” At Damascus Covenanl. 1.15, and perhaps elsewhere in the scrolls from Qumran heretical or evil teaching is called 315 nn. An allegory at Pirké de Rabbi 10. S. Liebermann, Hayerushalmi Kiphshulo, 1 ‘Jerusalem, 1934), p. 49. 11. Infact, the main elements of Liebermann's interpretation had been anticipated by Reinach. See Reinach (supra, n. 9), p. 32, n.2 and Textes d'auleurs grers !Paris. 1895}, p. 40, n. 1, where he briefly noles the relevant lexts. [1999] 13 Vpelnek, ni s has. Hi 1" ee l usar, sov N 1FAV 77 1.07 7,5 1 =e pov.WiLoe [ut LEE nf Liits - 140 dica . . > . 1, D {. } 74 a alle vy il spent È x7 Bevis. ° 13. a Lam indebted Lo Professors Daniel Sperber valuable eriticısims. and Abraham M assi dj for their