Yachiam Sorek tells about the Bar Kochba Revolt - the revolt that resulted in the loss of the chance for Jewish independence for almost a thousand years
The article was published for the first time on the website of the science on 25.2.2003
"He was a hero. He called the sparrow. The whole nation loved him, Bar Kochba a hero" the children of the kindergarten sang, and they still sing in Lag Bo'mer. The Zatots embrace the image of Bar Kochba, the legendary, fearlessly brave warrior, the hero of the Roman War of Independence. a hero? Freedom fighter? … really?!
Prof. Yehoshaphat Harkabi published over twenty years ago an innovative and interesting essay about Ben Khosba / Bar Kochba (vision, not fantasy, 1982), in which "our hero" was presented, without fatigue and idleness, as a passing violent phenomenon of a leader and adventurer, a hopeless charlatan, who put The very existence of the ancient people of Israel is in danger with the same crazy move he initiated, i.e. the rebellion. This book, which at the time was considered "foreign work", in terms of "photographer in the temple", naturally provoked many reactions, mainly stormy and angry, but over time the spirits were somewhat forgotten and calmed down, less for reasons of "the ticking of the clock" and more of a creeping agreement and a kind of acceptance with the main idea that was highlighted in the book in question. Quite a few became disillusioned, in this matter as in other matters, from the illusion of mythology and the sanctification of myths, and were prepared to examine the rebellion, its actions, and in particular the figure of the leader of the rebellion without fear and without bias. In this article presented to you, I would like to clarify several points in connection with the revolt and its leader, mainly against the background of the kind of transformation that took place in the Jewish public after the great revolt, which is the pursuit of reconciliation with the Roman presence in the Land of Israel. And therefore it can be emphasized even more strongly that Ben Kusava's course was indeed a dangerous episode, with almost no support from the Sanhedrin Jewish leadership of those days. First I would like to clarify, as it is correct to refer to almost every myth that is broken in the ancient history of our people, that one of the factors that make it difficult to crack the fraud of the myth lies in its mobilization in order to strengthen different teachings and ideologies, such as the national-romantic ones at the foundation of Zionism, and we will see this right away.
The problematic character of Ben Kusaba / Bar Kochba is immersed in the literature of the Sages, in the treasury of coins, in his bonds and in various allusions spread between Roman, Byzantine and Christian writings, and perhaps even emerges to us, imaginatively, from the layers of archaeological finds in the Judean desert in the lowlands, and from then on he sank into the depths of history and did not find Even one expression in medieval Jewish literature such as the vast literature of the questions-and-answers in Western and Central Europe. It is possible to assume that the children of Israel were exposed in one way or another to the mythological, ancient stories of the people, but we are not in a position to test the facts for sure.
And here, like a magic wand, the character of Bar Kochba is pulled out and becomes an exciting and vibrating nucleus at the end of the 19th century. How did this happen?
It all began with a sort of mythological and romantic encounter between a Jewish national movement, that is, Zionism, and the amateurish, somewhat embryonic growth of Jewish activists in the field of bodybuilding, in other words - in the field of gymnastics and sports. The relationship between the growth of national ideas and a physical and sports revival was well known and clear in Central Europe and the West from the end of the 18th century onwards, and this relationship was seen by the leaders of political Zionism, Herzl and Nordau, as a factor that should not be let go of and should be well exploited. And for the sake of proof - in his speech at the Second Zionist Congress, 1898, Torah Nordau makes clear passages about the importance of the physical resurrection of the people of Israel, regarding the renewal of the unknown ("regeneration") of the days of the Maccabees and Bar Kochba. Only a few weeks passed and a Jewish gymnastics club named "Bar Kochba Berlin" was established and its models were spread in various urban centers in Central Europe. Since then, intellectuals, writers, poets and various thinkers have been harnessed to try and extract from the history of the people of Israel the heroic expressions, to inflate them and move them to the front of the stage, so that they become attractive statues, magic hammers, especially for enthusiastic young people who see their membership in the Zionist camp and their attempts to immigrate to the land and bring others to it as a kind of fulfillment Exciting of an ancient and mythological dream.
The stories of ancient Jewish heroes became a kind of exciting and dynamic promoter which found its expression in the Jewish settlement in Israel (such as Yitzhak Lamdan's "Masada"), in official and semi-official educational frameworks such as in youth and underground movements and even within Wingate's "fire companies" and also merged into the "defense" frameworks ” and then to the IDF, where they established themselves. The pre-state and post-state education system warmly embraced the stories of the ancient heroes, appropriated them, sanctified them and stirred the currents of their plots into the veins of the population, from child to adult. These, who were sanctified in this way, became a myth in itself, sanctified and protected. All kinds of false and dangerous bookies have been connected to this phenomenon, such as the myth of the "few against the many" which somehow connected the battles of the macabres with the battles of the warriors of XNUMX, and if they could have invited Matathiu and his sons to the fire of the chizbats as well.
It follows from this that anyone who tried to provoke a little doubt and reflection regarding the truths of our heroic ancestors was immediately denounced and stamped on his forehead with the mark of Cain as a traitor, a masochist and just a charlatan.
And here, when examining the man (Ben Khosva), his actions (the initiative of the rebellion against the Romans) and his actions (his attitude towards his friends and his surroundings) we discover a different kind of character, far from the one depicted in the cults of personality in relation to his personality.
After the fall of Jerusalem in the Great Revolt and its destruction (70 CE), the alternative Jewish center was founded in Yavneh under the leadership of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakai first and then headed by Rabbi Gamaliel of the traditional presidential dynasty. This leadership and the Pharisaic Sanhedrin adopted a moderate and compromising line with the Roman ruler. This trend stemmed from a number of reasons: recognition of the outstanding military power of Rome, complete detachment from any attempt at rebellion and a basic assumption that the thawing of relations would only benefit the Jewish society and its leadership and upgrade its status and position. The compromising trend, the "defeatist", also stood out in the laws of the Sages who transmitted messages of peace and reconciliation with the Roman rule on the one hand and revealed an antagonistic position on the one hand and denying on the other hand the phenomenon of Jewish rebellion and fanaticism.
A practical expression of changing the line from rebellion to compliance is embodied, among other things, in the structure of the relationship between the leadership of the Sanhedrin, i.e. the presidency, and the Roman authorities, both at the imperial level (with the Imperial House) and at the local level (with the House of Commissioners in Syria and the Roman bureaucracy in Israel). A conciliatory and astonishing expression in itself is revealed in a Talmudic testimony (a bit problematic, if we admit the truth, in its chronological context, that is, we find it difficult to belong to an exact historical date) that tells of an imperial order to build the Temple, probably in the years 115-117 AD, and as a result an operation was carried out without - A precedent in scope to assist in the reception and passage of many pilgrims, those who, following the publication of the above information, wanted to witness with their own eyes the renewal of the central and sacred building for the people of Israel - the (Third) Temple. This testimony, imbued with legendary and mythological signs, ends in severe disappointment, when the Roman government withdraws from its unprecedented initiative. However, while carefully peeling away the little imagination surrounding the story, it can be seen as an interesting expression of the texture of the relationship between the Jews and the Romans and the completion of the Jewish leadership with the Roman rule and its presence in Judea.
At that very time, and perhaps in a certain context to the above story, a problematic rebellion of the Jews against the Romans is taking place in the Imperial East. It is about centers of rebellion in Egypt and Cyrene, two Roman provinces, which started with the rivalry between the Jews and the Greeks in the local polis cities, and continued in the incarnation of the rebellion against the Romans. The rebellion was initiated and ignited, this to emphasize, by zealous elements, refugees and escapees of the Great Revolt, who did not rest or calm down, even after the heavy disaster they befell the people of Israel during the days of the rebellion, and who wanted to light the fire of the rebellion in the two aforementioned provinces.
And here, to the "most wonder", with the exception of sporadic, weak and dull acts of resistance, Judah does not respond to the "calls" of revolt against the Romans from its nearby diasporas and maintains, from the leadership's point of course, a healthy and mature restraint. It is not a rebel, and therefore it does not bear punishments and is not tormented by suffering as were the lot of the Jewish communities in the rebellious diasporas in the eastern basin of the Mediterranean Sea. Judah therefore continues to maintain the same trend that has characterized it since the end of the great revolt against the Romans and that is: reconciliation, even on a pragmatic basis, with Roman rule and its presence in the land. Yehuda therefore learned the bitter lesson that was learned through the flesh of her sons following the great rebellion and took care, led by a Sanhedrin leadership and a sane, pragmatic president, to jump over every problematic obstacle in order to solve it peacefully, with moderation and patience. But internal struggles in the leadership of the people cracked the wall of logic and reasonable judgments. President Raban Gamaliel died and his son, his successor, Raban Shimon ben Gamaliel was a dwarf, who could not sit on the leadership throne. Moreover, the stability of the presidential leadership was undermined during the days of Rabbi Gamliel, when the president was removed for a time and/or from some of his powers. This seam was taken advantage of by fanatical elements, led by Ben Khosva / Bar Kochba, who, by waving the flag of resistance to the Roman decrees, imposed on Judah and its people days of terror and terror of a hopeless rebellion against the Romans, the results of which were severe and tragic.
And what about its factors and reasons? The revolt of Ben Khosba broke out in 132 AD, about 15 years after the end of the last revolt in the Jewish Diaspora, lasted about three years, and almost caused a total disaster for the entire Jewish people. The cause of its eruption is disputed to this day among the best researchers. Those two decrees - against the observance of the word and in favor of turning Jerusalem into a polytheistic city named "Ilia Capitolina" - are not so certain in their connection to the rebellion, that is, it is not clear enough whether they are talking about Roman moves, however puzzling, which provided the casus belli (pretext for war) - the reason for the instigation of the rebellion, or whether it is a question of post-rebellious Roman moves in consideration of punishment after the rebellion, and perhaps (with reference to the decree against the word) the reference to a sporadic and temporary, or even incomprehensible instruction.
Even if we start from a narrow point of assumption, because it is indeed two weighty decreed landings, which aroused the fervor of rebellion among fanatical groups, just like the zealots of the Great Rebellion and before them - the ancient fanatics Mattathias the Hasmonean and Judah the Maccabee - and they "didn't account to anyone" and rebelled against the Romans , one should definitely stand up and boldly ask some pointed questions:
First - who are you to lead a movement whose chances are limited to zero? Second - who are you to lead multitudes, most of whom are innocent and guilty, to their deaths? Third - who are you to challenge the familiar presidential leadership? Fourth - who are you to make Hinoka, the presidential scion, and his family members your hostages? Fifth - who are you to underestimate the pragmatic line taken by the sages, the members of the Sanhedrin? Sixth - who do you even name to lead the rebellion, almost contrary to the dominant position of the members of the Sanhedrin? Seventh - who are you to threaten the public and lead a political, economic and social regime steeped in terror in the "rebellion state"? Indeed, difficult questions, when each of them (in other circumstances, of course) is considered a logical reason to establish a state commission of inquiry.
Almost every student of history, and certainly the same is true of researchers of the times, sometimes amuse themselves with the question, which is admittedly irrelevant, but which provokes thought and thinking: could the particular event have been prevented, and in the context of the Ben-Kosva rebellion, it can be explicitly stated that one should not be amused too much because we are presented with evidence Interesting, midrash, from which we can draw an interesting conclusion. According to Midrash Beresheet Rabbah (S.D.), a group of Jews gathers in Beit Rimon valley that wants to rebel against the Romans, and it is led by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah, a well-known sage, a thinker, a man of advice and thought, as the Talmud calls him, the distinguished student of Rabbi Yochanan ben- Zakhai (the same pragmatist leader who seeks to instill the importance of a proper relationship with the Romans) with the help of a famous ancient parable about the chicken that pulled the bone out of the lion's throat/mouth, and in return the lion died: "It is enough for you that you entered the mouth of the lion in peace and came out in peace." The parable that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah sought to inculcate among the rebellious groups was: it is enough for you when Rome does not attack you even though you wanted to rebel. Let go of your anger and get back to normal. Rabbi Yehoshua's realism, which was mainly based on the power differences between the Jews and the Romans (a bird versus the king of predators), could, had the rebels obeyed him, stopped the rebellion from its inception and prevented the people of Israel from suffering such a terrible blow later on. This event brings us back to the famous dramatic speech of Agrippa II, right on the eve of the outbreak of the Great Revolt (66 AD), who seeks to make it clear to the public in Jerusalem, the hunger for rebellion and resistance, why its chances tend to zero. Agrippa tried and failed and the results of the rebellion are already known.
The preparations for the revolt and its course, from the point of view of achievements and failures, are analyzed by Prof. Hakavi ("Vision, not fantasy", 1982) and he repeatedly, as a priest and a priest, places Ben Kusva in the proper light of a figure who brought disaster and calamity to the people of Israel, and it is good that she was not than she was I have no intention of going deeper than this or of summarizing the great fiasco called the Ben-Kosva Rebellion nor of offering aspects of thinking and research in the various fields such as policy, leadership, organization, strategy, tactics, human relations and more, for which I would require tens of pages, and I will content myself with saying that there It is one of the research-scientific innovations, and it is: Ben Kusava's rebellion was not only among the Romans, and who for military and organizational reasons mainly failed and collapsed against them, Ben Kusava's rebellion was also among the Jews: and mainly in the leadership establishment, i.e. the Sanhedrin. The number of sages who supported the rebellion and the rebel were few, and even with regard to Rabbi Akiva, who is considered to be the greatest supporter of Ben Kusaba, the Sages' words about him are vague and do not present a clear position of support for the rebellion and the rebel. Even the tradition about the death of thousands of Rabbi Akiva's disciples does not have a solid and researched/scientific bridge between it and the condemned rebellion. Ben Khosva places the center of the rebellion in Beitar (Beit Ter) and not in Yavneh (the center of the Sanhedrin leadership) and we find in Beitar no less and no more the well-known, traditional presidential court of Beit Gamaliel. Rabbi Gamaliel died during the year 115 CE and his successor, Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel Hinoka, together with his friends, appear in Talmudic tradition in Beitar during the rebellion. The sages' massive opposition to Ben Khosva, to his character, leadership and policies, is clearly interpreted as a disapproval of Ben Khosva's path, and therefore it can be assumed that the presidential palace was unwillingly demolished, and I would even risk saying that Ben Khosva took the presidential Hinoka under his protection (perhaps even as a hostage ), to fortify and strengthen his rebellious leadership. It is interesting to examine a number of Talmudic traditions in which Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel Hinoka is depicted as a "devoted disciple" of the ben-Khosbaite indoctrination. He is portrayed as an ardent supporter of the rebellion (although his presidential house opposed rebellions and rebellions and favored pragmatic coexistence with the Romans). The same young man testifies to himself that when he and his friends, the school students, confront the Romans, they will attack them and stab them with
The "makatubim" (pointed quills) in their hands. It is interesting to note that on none of Ben Khosva's coins does the well-known and traditional house of the presidency appear - Beit Gamliel. Only one president appears on the coins of Ben Kuseva, and he is Ben Kuseva himself, and as it is written: "Try (the president) against Israel", which the authorities of the rebellion in Jerusalem did not dare to do (in minting the coins, for example) during the Great Revolt. If this is not a rebellion in the Sanhedrin establishment, I don't know what a rebellion is. Moreover, in one of the traditions it is said that the sages examined the statement of Ben Kusaba that he was the Messiah and found that he was a false Messiah and therefore killed him (!!!). This tradition is no better than it to present the sages' disapproving position towards the man and his policies.
We therefore saw how a group of fanatics degenerates the people into rebellion, led by an irresponsible, adventurous and belligerent leader. The rebellion had no chance from the beginning, its reasons are questionable, the support for it was marginal, the dire results could be predicted in advance, and above all - more than Shmerad ben Kusba in the Romans, he is a rebellion against the presidential establishment as a violent usurper. Ben Khosva became a brand, a national myth, one that served national goals, was internalized and assimilated into the veins of the people from kindergarten onwards, sanctified like the other myths and at a time when he wants to ask questions about the commander of the rebellion, his character and his ways, he is seen as the fox who sabotages the vineyards. Will the national truth cover the face of the historical truth, the answer is in your hands!
25 תגובות
I don't understand how a doctor is able to distort history so much. The exact opposite is true - Rabbi Akiva himself and all the sages of his generation without exception supported Bar-Kochva and saw him as a messiah!
The Rambam writes this explicitly: "And he (Rabbi Akiva) was the bearer of the vessels of Ben Khoziba the king. And he would say about him that he is the Messiah King. And Dima is and all the sages of his generation who is the Messiah King."
Is the learned doctor more qualified than the Maimonides to determine what the opinion of the sages of the Sanhedrin is?
Rabbi Dr. Eliyahu Zaini in his book "Etz Erez" Part II proved all of the above with clear proofs (I derive the sources from there).
The learned doctor also calls the Hasmoneans zealots. If yes, according to his method, the establishment of the Hasmonean dynasty is unnecessary and dangerous, and the Hanukkah holiday should be removed from the world because it perpetuates irresponsible thuggish behavior, right? Not to mention LG Baumer... and what about Mordechai Bahman's provocation? - Is this also an irresponsible taunting of the Gentiles? So Purim was also dropped from the chapter... oh, and of course the brazen, taunting and suicidal exit from Egypt on Pesach, and the song about the fall of Egypt on the seventh of Pesach. We will also erase Pesach. And Independence Day, which celebrates the dangerous declaration of a state, and Jerusalem Day, which celebrates the hasty, irresponsible, and suicidal departure for war - these are also not mentioned by Hess Mel... So which Judaism does the doctor belong to?
And what would he have offered to the Jews during the Hasmonean era or during Bar Kochba? To sit idly by and lovingly accept the cruel rule of the enemy who rapes women and executes for learning Torah? Is this what you have to offer the Jewish people?
And what about the new era? Why rebel against the nations of the world and establish a state in XNUMX and risk extinction at the hands of Arab armies?
The result of the doctor's words are exiled passivity, the mentality of murdered slaves and voluntary enslavement to murderous empires like the Romans?
And to Prof. Yehoshaphat Harkabi, the Chief of Staff Prof. Yigal Yadin has already given an answer that puts him on this defeatist historical distortion: "Dear Yehoshaphat Harkabi, I remember you at the General Staff on the eve of the Six Day War, where you also stated that it was madness to go to war... well?! "
Nonsense. This is your opinion and nothing else.
There was no choice but to rebel - both during the Great Revolt and during the days of Bar Kochba.
The Jews suffered at the hands of the menacing Romans, even when their faces were for peace and when they had already accepted the decree that the Romans ruled Israel. They took it for granted. They paid taxes on time and brought a gift to the emperor. Everything by the book.
The Romans were only interested in greed, money, prestige and status.
Countless times we complained to the emperor about the desire of the Jews to rebel, even though this was not the case - and under the auspices of this lie they would have massacred the Jews. In addition - decrees were passed on them that forbade the word of mouth, the Sabbath, and the study of Torah.
What is the value of their lives - if both the spiritual life and the physical life were denied to them? This is a situation of de facto death even without death itself. So if you have to die - at least fight. Because in war there is little chance of winning. Small - but there is.
Stop with this idle talk about "extremism" and "Messianicism" - I'm interested to see how you would behave if a foreign occupier abused you continuously time and time again for not wronging you. To recycle concepts that don't really exist.
Perverted Christian morality.
Dr. Yachiam
In your opinion, had it not been for the rebellion, the people of Israel would have lived in peace and tranquility under the rule of Rome.
You brought many sources from the Talmud and the like, I will also quote from the Talmud. See Wikipedia
According to what is told in the Babylonian Talmud, when Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Yossi, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, and Yehuda ben Grim were sitting together, they discussed the actions of the Romans and the development of the land by them and said:
Rabbi Yehuda opened and said how good the actions of this nation are: buy markets, buy bridges, buy baths, Rabbi Yossi kept silent. Rashbi responded and said everything they repaired they did not repair except for their own benefit - they repaired markets to seat prostitutes in, baths to purify themselves in, bridges to collect tolls from.
It is implied that Rome's rule was no different from Stalin's or Hitler's rule, those who opened their mouths would be reported on
and chase and kill him.
On the other hand, perhaps Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai would not have written the book of Zohar in the same cave he was forced to flee to with his son.
So it is possible that the Bar Kochba rebellion was one of the factors behind this masterpiece. After all, the act was after the rebellion and was due to the situation
after the rebellion.
If you come to check the behavior of Bar Kochba from a current perspective, I will allow myself the audacity and compare it to the rebellion in the ghettos in World War II. Even then the rebellion was doomed to failure. And even then it was especially rabbis who said that rebels bring disaster. And ghettos were destroyed. Basically they were destroyed because there was a terrible hawkish plan to destroy the Jewish people. But even the Romans in their internal affairs had no place for the means of the Jewish people. The people were prone to the situation they were in both before and after the rebellion. But we remember the rebels. We light bonfires in Lag BaOmer and stand still at the siren on Holocaust Day. And we remember the heroism of the Jewish partisans and underground people. History is not written in Jewish academies. It is written in battles. by fire and sword. How will we educate our children to be a stronghold for their family and homeland when we send them to all kinds of academies for Judaism? Rabbi Gamaliel taught Torah and Bar Kochba taught to protect the house. There is no existence without freedom. We learned this in Shafir and Main. We studied in Auschwitz. And we will learn more.
The fault has been fixed
There is an error in the article. you can not see a thing
There is no doubt that the debate about the rebellion is heated. Since it includes a lot of doubts, I will address only one point. The pride of Bar Kochba.
One of the claims is that Chev Kochba is a hero and a character who is an inspiration for generations. The big problem is that the attempt to build a "single pride" creates exactly the circular problem in which Jewish pride is the one that causes wrong judgment.
The pride after the six days was smashed in our faces on Yom Kippur and even in the following wars.
The institution that gained fame after putting its hand, quite by accident, on Khrushchev's speech and gaining worldwide fame, also proved to be vulnerable.
The Japanese, who relied on the heroics of Pearl Harbor, hijacked the Americans in a big way right after.
Ecclesiastes said: Wisdom is better than valor. And there is no doubt that Ber Kochba was smart, charismatic and another priest and priest with impressive qualities. But he was not smart.
The Japanese admiral who devised the surprise attack at Pearl Harbor and was praised by the commanders said in response: A good leader would have avoided this. And that's exactly the point. So it is true that the attack was finally carried out, but at least he was aware that he was not smart...
BDS
I remember a man who repeated claims in the style of "What is your name for a minister and judge.."
The same style expressed by the writer of the false and historically distorted hollow article.
He too, as the same one whom the Torah called "wicked" came and attacked someone who stood up to defend the people of Israel, he too tried to attribute a fanatical and adventurous barbarian character to a man who risked himself for the sake of Israel. And so he says to him, "Lahurgini, you say when you killed the Egyptian?" We have come to learn that indeed the historical picture repeats itself in every generation, and each member of the generation chooses to support one position or another.
Of course, it is important to mention that this behavioral critic is referred to in the Torah as "evil" and even his name is not mentioned. (Although the Sages said it was Dathan and Abiram) and the person who hijacked the verbal attack and the malicious accusations lacked the national backbone, that person was Moshe Rabinu who later became Israel's savior and the Lord of the Prophets.
Dr. Yechiam (a call for the spiritual and physical revival of the people) Shork (place where Samson met a woman who diluted his strength) May you be inspired by your own name and not by the dilution of the powers of the people of Israel, even though it is terribly tempting these days to break myths. You see, in general it is better build than break...
Aside from that, I'm interested in what you would say if the rebellion had been as successful as the Hasmonean rebellion, which in your opinion was also led by a small group of fanatics who did not object to the rule of the Greek Jews at that time. After all, there could have been great cooperation between them and the empire of that time against which they came The Hasmonean family of Matityahu.
And in general, if we had bowed to every empire that ruled over us and adopted its way of life, you too would not be here as a member of the Jewish people who was happy about the possibility of breaking things that build the spirit of the people.
Even though our standing throughout the persecution allowed people like you to open their mouths or let ink flow from their mouths, I still believe that the rebellion was important for building the spiritual character of the people of Israel.
The mental spirit left behind by a hero who died for his faith is stronger than superficial words spoken by a loose person.
The honorable doctor writes a propaganda article, more than a critical historical article. He is not only a sinner against history, but especially against the sources of sages.
First point. Rabbi Akiva of Magdol Hatanaim, and the spiritual leader of his generation, admired and admired Bar Kochba. Who can stand against Rabbi Akiva? Maimonides even reinforces this, and says that Rabbi Akiva was the bearer of Bar Kochba's tools. And all the sages of his generation supported him. If so, Bar Kochba was not in conflict with the sages, but the opposite. From the writings, it also appears that there was communication and dialogue between Bar Kochba and the sages, and Bar Kochba Even listens to them. Although there is a source in which they checked him if he was a messiah and "killed him", however, the claim was that he was not a messiah, but could still be a kosher leader.
Second point. Unlike the great rebellion in which there were sects of fanatics who did not unite and took over the people and killed each other with "gratuitous hatred", in this rebellion the Jews accepted Bar Kochba's rebellion and united with him. If not, we would hear about the phenomenon of sects and fratricidal wars.
Third point. This rebellion had a good chance of succeeding. In the Jewish sources it is written that because of Bar Kochba's arrogance and his killing by God, the Romans were unable to kill him. The well-known story with the snake that God sent to kill him. Beyond that, historically, it is a fact that his army was extremely strong, and the Romans preferred not to confront him in a frontal battle. Combined with the other rebellions in the kingdom, especially the war with the Parthians, there was a great chance that the Romans would allow the Jews to have autonomy in the Land of Israel.
Fourth point. It is possible that the people of Israel paid a heavy price for the rebellion. But if he had not done so and had given up the word, and other Jewish symbols in a creeping manner, he would have eventually assimilated and assimilated, and who knows if we would have existed here to tell the Jewish story. It is possible that today we were all descendants of Christians like the martyrs, who remember that in their past there were some Jewish customs.
In my opinion, the article is superficial and misleading
The article mainly relies on Talmudic sources that were compiled over two hundred years after the Bar Kusva rebellion, after its failure and results were known.
There is no doubt that, unlike the Great Revolt, the support for this rebellion was greatest in the majority of the people, and the main evidence for this is in the initial military results of the rebellion, in which three Roman legions were eliminated, so that Hadrian had to bring military leadership and fighters from Britain to suppress the rebellion. It was not possible to achieve such impressive military results, which posed a very substantial threat to the Roman Empire, without the massive support of the people.
I also don't think there is any doubt that Rabbi Akiva, who was the central spiritual leader at that time (and is considered so to this day, also in the Mishnah and the Talmud), was a serious supporter of Bar Kusva, and he was the one who demanded of him the way of the Star of Jacob, and his likeness to the Messiah son of David.
Indeed, the reasons for the outbreak of the rebellion are unknown, but it is known that the preparations for it lasted a long time, and were not the result of an immediate whim. Here was a measured and organized move that won the support of the majority of the people and its central spiritual leadership.
And regarding the results of the rebellion, although in the first phase they were extremely difficult (the number of dead and evicted), today most researchers maintain that they did not result in irreversible damage to the Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel, which was able to recover after only a few decades. The decrease in the value of the Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel happened gradually and over hundreds of years after the Bar Kosba rebellion.
In conclusion - the sages of the Talmud and the Mishnah in this case are wise in retrospect in their opposition to bar kosba. His defamation in this article is simply unfounded and does not rely on the historical evidence. It is easy to judge events and people in retrospect, when the circumstances are two thousand years away from us.
A little respect, at least the courage won't hurt!
This "Dr" has already disgraced our father Avraham in the past for saying about Sarah that she is his sister - to save his soul, and shattered all kinds of other national myths, which I don't remember at the moment.
But everyone and their role - Gideon Levi is responsible for his humiliation today and Shork is responsible for the humiliation of our history, and everyone is sure of the rightness of his actions. Also Tali Fahima...
Also, I would like to point out that it is not surprising that the left tries to stick its claws in this figure just to loosen our hands from fighting for our independence.
There is nothing new under the sun, even in the Bar-Kochva rebellion we witnessed the same phenomenon of a fifth recruit, as we know.
The worst article I have ever read on this topic. You see that the respected writer is not knowledgeable or even close to it in the Jewish and historical writings. The most ridiculous statement actually came from one of the commenters who wrote about the 'giant' Prof. Hakafi. For your information, Prof. Hakabi took Bialik's Sefer Agada as the basis for his Jewish sources since he was unable to read a single page of Gemara. Go out and learn what Prof. Hakavi and Prof. Yedin thought about the Hakavi 'giant'.
Just for information, there is no sage at that time who opposed the rebellion. Sorry, there was a man named Yohanan ben-Torta (a ger who was called because of the act of a cow). Anyone who knows a little about Halacha knows that it is forbidden to remind a ger of his origin and if the Sages still did it, it is not in his honor, to say the least. To teach you who the type is who stood up against Rabbi Akiva.
For further in-depth analysis with hundreds of sources, please refer to the book of Rabbi Dr. Eliyahu Zini Etz Erez Hav.
First, as a general rule: it is very desirable that you hear about the time when an article on a historical topic from the history of our people will be published, even if it was published in the past; It is important and deserving of new/young readers to know and understand this important topic; Also, if another/additional writer, will write an article, which in the system will be decided to publish it; This should be seen as an enrichment of the subject.
and regarding the article; If we consider such a possibility, such as not singing in kindergartens (as well as in other educational institutions), on Bar-Kochva Shohar Dror (practically: Shiva for freedom); Then we will deprive the children of an important asset on the appreciation of freedom, and without historical knowledge, which despite everything from time to time also contains values of heroism; The children will remain in a kind of empty space, which will be caught on the habits beginning with the agreement like: With all Dalim a man (Tract Baba Batra (page XNUMX, p. XNUMX)), continue as if we take for example the incident from the Bar-Kochba period, which also took on the essence of cruelty and cruelty to the people , when in the background are statements by the policy makers and decision makers in Rome, about the demands and the need to maintain the peace, while political and other difficult struggles are being waged within and among themselves, and sometimes to the point of murder - on the one hand, and on the other hand, they lead a life of cruel amusements (the gladiatorial battles), pleasures for the people (pools and bathhouses), and this culture also permeated the Roman tyrants who ruled throughout the empire, whose appetite for demands was insatiable.
As a suggestion for an explanatory idea:
In the geographical location where the Land of Israel is located (crossroads between the continents: Europe, Asia, and Africa), constant pressure was created by other nations, when one of them "dictated history", due to its strengthening to the point of becoming an empire; With this he imposed his culture on other peoples. The phenomenon gained momentum especially starting with the Greek Empire, when in our country it was manifested starting with the decrees of destruction by Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Kingdom (a product of Greek Hellenism). With the Roman expansion to the east, they also used coercive methods; And the spiritual plunder that was expressed in the decrees of destruction that Hadrian decreed (suppressing the Bar Kochba rebellion, which led to the death of hundreds of thousands during the rebellion, and most of the ten royal deaths before that), left no choice.
The Jewish people who found in their faith the purpose of their lives, and a solution to all their problems, which admittedly immunized them from the level of the individual to the level of family structures, and even tribal; not ripe for understanding the importance inherent in the governance system; And not only did he not draw any conclusions regarding the disintegration of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and the Hasmonean kingdom; The religious explanation for the above occurrences, was mainly exhausted as a decree from heaven, and because of this, and in addition to the oppression resulting from foreign occupation; It is inconceivable that another people would rule the Land of Israel, impose decrees on the Jewish people, and impose their culture upon them, and indeed: there is no known case of a people who settled in the Land of Israel, instead of the Jewish people who went into exile, who fought ferociously against their conquerors, especially against those who tried to rule The decrees of annihilation, like the Jewish people.
In summary: Bar-Kochva symbolizes the inability of the Jewish people to bear foreign rule, especially when decrees of annihilation are decreed upon it.
To my father
First, the "article" lacks any scientific or historical value. If you notice, the number of sentences with historical content is maybe ten percent of the article, the rest is pseudo-psychological "analyses" (which there is no dispute because they are not in the author's area of expertise) as well as a childish language, in market language, the fruit of the writer's feverish imagination.
Second, a dwarf, even if he stands all his life on the shoulders of giants, will always remain a dwarf. It is very little wisdom to mention in an article the work of a real historian, just to allow yourself to start an orgy of blabbermouths. By the way, there is a concern that the aforementioned did not even bother to read the book by Hakavi.
Thirdly, the fact that "Haaretz" fell into the trap and published the "article" does not qualify the creep, I thought that this site pretended to surpass Ha'aretz in value, at least from the scientific point of view.
to Jonathan I am debating whether to answer you and how.
Dr. Yehiam Sorek is a researcher at Beit Berel College, and he stands on the shoulders of giants like Prof. Yehoshaphat Hakavi.
A version of the article was published by Dr. Sorek separately in "Haaretz" (if I'm not mistaken, the publication on the Hidan website was first). Is it possible that your opinion on the article is derived from disagreements on other issues with Dr. Sorek.
The reason for the current upload is the sacrifice to LG Ba'omer, which caused multiple hits to the original news on the old and less readable website. From time to time I allow myself to upload such articles, which have constant relevance, not for the original date but to re-flood them here. Why is it possible to do this for articles dealing with aliens or time travel and not for an article in history about one of the most important periods?
To my father
I didn't know the site was in such dire straits that you got to the point where you're forced to recycle work at the level of a teenage boy. As the proverb says: "Like a dog he returned to Kio as a fool, different in his folly."
The Jewish people were almost annihilated, because the revolt failed and not because of the revolt.
By the way, it is worth noting that the very same people who explain to us why there was no chance for the Bar Kochba rebellion, in the same breath also explain to us with extreme knowledge, why today the IDF has no chance of defeating the gangs of Arab invaders, with the mentality and technology of the Stone Age, who took over Country.
For the first commenter - there are no fewer comments. There are fewer spam comments. Even so, I have to deal with filtering means with thousands of spam responses in English that someone runs to load the address systems in WordPress.
I am personally really against everything that goes as a very "trendy" thing in the last decades.. according to which we judge old behaviors according to modern tools
For example, every issue from the other side will not be used as a sign and example of the heroic courage and values of free people, turned into a group of suicidal fanatics who are more similar to suicidal terrorists than the heroes of the Jewish people...
As well as about Bar Kochba.. I happened to do a project on it as well.. during which I came across both defamatory articles and descriptions...
It's strange to me that only our people must always throw mud at the heroes of their past..you don't see it in Greek mythology or their history or the Romans..only we always have to crumble every vestige of pride that our people have..then and today..with all the glorious wars we had There's always something that shows how if you tell half the truth you'll get that basically our people are bloodthirsty, conquering, barbaric and cruel.. I'm personally tired of all this with all due respect..
According to the article, Bar Kochba was barbaric..and while all kinds of arguments are made as to why he was not the hero they made him out to be..there is not a single proof of his alleged barbarism and bullying..
In fact, historically, man was a military genius. He wiped entire Roman legions off the map with zero casualties.. and with relatively few forces he made life very, very difficult for the Romans.. According to one version or another, he liberated most of the country and we also had a powerful navy ..and despite all that..he was wise enough to know that he would not be able to hold Jerusalem and therefore, neither fanatically nor fanatically, he simply abandoned it in the end and did not commit suicide over it..In my opinion, as a former leader, this is one of the bravest things one can do in a world where religion and belief Holy sites had everything.
In the end, the Romans, who were unable due to the genius of the city to break through its fortress, were helped.
Yes, probably in any case there was no chance for our people .. and it was a lost battle in advance .. but the fact is that we as a people are still alive .. and every other people who accepted what the Romans decreed disappeared in one way or another .. our stubbornness and our sacrifice is what caused for us to exist as a people even though we were almost pushed to destruction quite a number of times in history...so my conclusion from the Bar Kochba rebellion is that if he had lived during the great rebellion...we would have had a chance to win...because at Bar Kochba there were not two camps...and Jews (with the exception of The traitor) did not fight against Jews..with him everything was planned to the last detail.
So please..some respect for our national heroes..we don't have too many of those today anyway.
In the years 1943-46 I studied at Ein Harod and Moshe Karmi emphasized the error and illusion of the Bed Kochba rebellion.
I still remember the saying "Let grass grow in your life, Rabbi Akiva, and Ben David has not yet come."
In order to survive or to win wars, you have to take things in proportion, with thought, planning and responsibility and not build sacred palaces of sacred ideologies.
Unfortunately, there are currents that build maximalist ideologies even today.
An interesting and fascinating article
Anyone had time to read the entire article, you're overkill! We are not paraprofessionals
The article about Bar Kochba is interesting
It is important to note that Nordau, who was one of Freud's students, wanted to embrace "Muscular Jewry" as part of the Zionist movement's approach of building a new Jew...
That is, a change in Jewish psychology, since the Jews were mainly merchants and brokers and not soldiers and swordsmen, therefore there was
It is appropriate at that time to use the mythological figure of Bar Kochba.
The article about Bar Kochba is interesting ……….
Hello to my father Blizovsky!
Have you noticed that since the website was changed, there are almost no reader comments?
Was that the purpose of the change, if so, then you succeeded.