ʿAqivaʾ ben Yosef

views updated

ʿAQIVAʾ BEN YOSEF

ʿAQIVAʾ BEN YOSEF (c. 50–c. 135 ce), Palestinian tanna. ʿAqivaʾ lived during the time of the transformation of Palestinian Judaism from a religion centered on the Temple of Jerusalem to one focused on the study of Torah, the totality of God's revelation to Moses and the Jewish people. ʿAqivaʾ was born shortly before the destruction of the Temple in 70 ce and died during the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132–135), the Jews' last attempt to wrest freedom from the Romans. Described as a poor shepherd, ʿAqivaʾ, encouraged by his wife, supposedly began his rabbinic studies at the age of forty and learned the alphabet together with his young son (Avot de-Rabbi Natan 6; B.T., Ket. 62b–63a, Ned. 50a).

The influence of ʿAqivaʾ touched all areas of rabbinic thought and all levels of rabbinic lore. The Talmud relates that

the anonymous statements in the Mishnah [the earliest collection of rabbinic teachings] should be attributed to Meʾir, the anonymous statements in the Tosefta [a document that parallels the Mishnah but that did not achieve its official status] should be attributed to Neḥemyah, the anonymous statements in Sifraʿ [an early collection of exegetical statements on Leviticus ] should be attributed to Yehudah, the anonymous statements in Sifrei [an early collection of exegetical comments on Numbers and Deuteronomy ] should be attributed to Shim'on, and all of them are according to the opinion of ʿAqivaʾ. (B.T., San. 86a)

The major sages after ʿAqivaʾ traced their intellectual heritage back to him. Even the patriarch Gamliʾel of Yavneh acquiesced to the knowledge of ʿAqivaʾ (B.T., Ber. 27b–28a), and the greatest patriarch, Yehudah ha-Nasi', studied with the five major pupils of ʿAqivaʾ (B.T., Meg. 20a). Even Moses is said to have asked God why he revealed the Torah through him if he had such a one as ʿAqivaʾ (B.T., Men. 29b).

Scholars such as Jacob Brull, Jacob Zuri, and Zacharias Frankel attribute to ʿAqivaʾ a central role in the codification of the Mishnah; however, Jacob Neusner and his students have raised serious questions about the traditional view of how the Mishnah came into being and the role of ʿAqivaʾ in that process. Compilation of the early midrashim (collections of exegetical statements) by ʿAqivaʾ also has been the subject of scholarly debate since the time of David Hoffmann (late nineteenth century) and Chanoch Albeck.

The traditional picture of ʿAqivaʾ as a biblical exegete goes beyond the assigning of particular early collections of exegetical statements to him. It is commonly claimed that ʿAqivaʾ represents a major trend in early rabbinic biblical commentary (Heschel, 1962). He is said to have followed an imaginative and creative form of biblical exegesis and to have derived his comments from every aspect of the biblical text, including the shapes of the letters (B.T., Men. 29b) and the peculiarities of biblical Hebrew, such as the repetition of words and phrases and the appearance of certain prepositions, conjunctions, and adverbs (B.T., Ḥag. 12a, Shav. 26a; Gn. Rab. 1.14, 22.2, 53.20). The exegetical activity of ʿAqivaʾ is often contrasted to that of Yishmaʿeʾl ben Elishaʿ, who is said to have followed a more rational approach to the biblical text. For example, the repetition of "a man, a man" in Leviticus 22:4 led ʿAqivaʾ to conclude that the uncircumcised were included in the prohibition against eating the Passover sacrifice, while Yishmaʿeʾl proved this point by a citation of Leviticus 22:10 and Exodus 12:45 (Sifraʾ, Emor 4.18). However, recent work on the exegetical traditions of Yishmaʿeʾl and ʿAqivaʾ (Porton, 1976–1982) has demonstrated that the methods used by these two rabbis were more similar than most scholars have thought.

Just as the rabbinic tradition assigned ʿAqivaʾ a prominent place in the compilations of the legal and exegetical collections, so it assigned him a pivotal role in the formation of the mystical texts of Judaism. He is included, along with Ben ʿAzzʾai, Elishaʿ ben Avuyah, and Ben Zomaʾ, among those "who entered the garden," which is taken as a reference to mystical teachings, and he alone is said to have "left in peace" (B.T., Ḥag. 14b and parallels). His importance in the mystical tradition is seen in the attribution of sayings to him in the Heikhalot literature (collections of visions of those who traveled through God's palace) and by the attribution of Heikhalot zuṭratti to him.

ʿAqivaʾ did not limit himself to the sphere of the intellect. He was pictured as being actively involved in the Bar Kokhba Revolt. In fact, ʿAqivaʾ is normally said to have claimed that Bar Kokhba was the Messiah and to have been the major rabbinical supporter of the uprising (J.T., Taʿan. 68d). The rabbinic texts claim that he suffered a martyr's death at the hands of the Romans during the revolt (B.T., Ber. 61b). However, Peter Schafer has raised serious objections to the scholarly consensus concerning the revolt and the role of ʿAqivaʾ in it.

Although recent scholarship has challenged many of the details regarding the life of ʿAqivaʾ that are found in rabbinic texts, it does not detract from the impression he made on his contemporaries and on subsequent generations. The picture we find in the documents of ancient Judaism is one of an extraordinary talent. He is described as affecting every aspect of rabbinic thought—legal, exegetical, mystical, and even philosophical. "Man has free will," ʿAqivaʾ is reported to have said, "but all is foreseen by God" (Avot 3.16). His rise from poverty to greatness must have been an inspiration to many—so much so that he was placed at the center of the important historical and intellectual events of his time.

Bibliography

For traditional views of ʿAqivaʾ, see the Encyclopedia of Talmudic and Geonic Literature, edited by Mordechai Margalioth (Tel Aviv, 1945), vol. 2, pp. 725–731; Aaron Hyman's Toledot tannaʾim veamoraʾim (1910; reprint, Jerusalem, 1964), vol. 3, pp. 988–1008; Harry Freedman's "Akiva," in Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem, 1971), vol. 2, cols. 492–498; and the wholly uncritical study by Louis Finkelstein, Akiba: Scholar, Saint and Martyr (Philadelphia, 1934). Charles Primus deals with a small portion of the Akivan corpus in Aqiva's Contributions to the Law of Zeraʿim (Leiden, 1977), and I have dealt with the traditions of ʿAqivaʾ that occur with those of Yishmaʿeʾl ben Elishaʿ in my four-volume study The Traditions of Rabbi Ishmael (Leiden, 1976–1982). Abraham Joshua Heschel discusses the traditional distinctions between Yishmaʿeʾl and ʿAqivaʾ as biblical exegetes in the introduction to his Theology of Ancient Judaism, 2 vols. (New York, 1962), while my analysis in my fourth volume on Yishmaʿeʾl challenges the traditional picture. On the problem of rabbinic biography, see William S. Green's "What's in a Name? The Problematic of Rabbinic 'Biography,'" in his Approaches to Ancient Judaism (Missoula, Mont., 1978), vol. 1, pp. 77–96.