The priesthood as you did not know it - Chapter XNUMX: Going to fight the Romans

The revolt is initiated by a member of the high priestly family and even puts himself at the head of the uprising, although his actions were only in the area of ​​the temple. It seems on his face that the atmosphere of bigotry that began to gather supporters hit some of the priesthood

In the previous list we referred to the priestly group that withdrew from Jerusalem and manned the sect of the Judean Desert with the intention of breaking out from there in rebellion against the Romans. In this list we will deal with the extreme priestly group that remained in Jerusalem and it was the one that lifted the miracle of the rebellion.

Yosef ben Mattathieu declares as follows: "At that time King Agrippa (the second) gave the high priesthood to Ishmael. He was Fabi's son. Then a quarrel arose between the high priests and between the other priests and the leaders of the people in Jerusalem, and each of them made for himself a regiment of extremely strong-minded people who pursued riots and had them as a leader. They collided and fought with each other and stoned each other. And there was no one who rejoiced in them, but things were done out of freedom, as in a city where there is no government. The lack of shame and boldness affected the high priests until they even sent slaves to the granaries, who would dig up the caves, which are the property of the lay priests, and it cost the poor priests to perish from want. To that extent the power of the disputants prevailed in all justice and honesty" (Kadmoniot Yehudis 181:179-XNUMX).
The picture of the situation before our eyes is indeed difficult. It presents the High Priesthood as involved in power conflicts in Jerusalem, as steeped in violence, as recruiting violent gangs to its ranks, as corrupt and lacking conscience and inner morality. The atmosphere in Jerusalem was anarchic and as if it signaled the waning of the rebellion, and there was a kind of expectation that the leadership, including the high priesthood, would take responsibility and calm the spirits, but the situation was reversed - the Jerusalem leadership, including the priesthood, poured boiling oil over the fire of the Jerusalem chaos.

Sage literature, which rarely refers to the Great Revolt, does not hold back and laments the atmosphere in Jerusalem in this way: "Woe to me from the house of Beytus, woe to me from Eltan; Woe to me from the house of Hanin, woe to their whisperers; Woe to me from the house of Catharos, woe to me from Columsen; Woe to me from the house of Ishmael son of Piabi, woe to me from their group, who are high priests, and whose sons are treasurers, and whose sons-in-law are mercenaries and whose servants beat the people with sticks" (Pesachim Nez p. XNUMX). The Talmudic description is no less terrible than Joseph's: the priesthoods mentioned here curse, use witchcraft, Nazism in writing, beat the people and are infected with general nepotism.

During the commission of Albinus (64-62 CE) it is said that Agrippa II again intervened in the appointment of the high priest. He took the position from Yosef and passed it on to Hanan's son, who was also named Hanan. And so Yosef ben Matthew: "They say about that old Hanan, that he was a very successful man, for he had five sons, and all of them were high priests of God. He himself was the first to be awarded the office of Kud for a very long time, something that did not happen to any of our high priests. And the younger Hanan, of whom we said he received the high priesthood, was arrogant in spirit and bold to an extent not found, and belonged to the sect of the Sadducees, who are stricter in judgment than all the Jews, as we have already told. And because Hanan was (of a nature) like that, he thought that this was his hour of fitness, because Festus (the previous commissioner) had died and Albinus (the current commissioner) was still on the way, and he seated a Sanhedrin of judges and brought before it the brother of Jesus called the Messiah - his name is Jacob - and other people and A category on them, as if they had broken a law, and handed them over to be stoned. However, those who were considered to be righteous in the city and strict with the laws regretted this, and modestly sent messengers to the king (Agrippa II) and asked him to order Hanan not to do this under any circumstances, since he had not acted according to the law even before. And some of them even went out to meet Albinus, who was on his way from Alexandria, and explained that Hanan did not have the authority to seat a Sanhedrin against his will. Albinus was convinced of this and wrote angrily to Hanan and threatened to get rid of him. Therefore, King Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, after he had rested for months, and appointed Yeshua son of Damani as high priest under him" (Ancestors of the Jews 203-197).

Seemingly before us is a high priest with dangerous personal caprices, but his adventurousness reflects to a certain extent another facet of the characteristics of the priesthood during the period on the eve of the Great Rebellion. Moreover, it is not for nothing that a man is remembered here (Jacob, brother of Jesus) whose brother, according to Christian tradition, was condemned by the Sanhedrin, before his handover to the Romans, and at the head of the court stood Caiaphas the high priest. Did Hanan the High Priest seek to become famous on the background of an event similar to the case of the Christian Jesus? Maybe. Also, the conduct of the Sanhedrin trial led by Hanan who sought to condemn Jacob to stoning was invalid from the outset because the laws of souls were confiscated from Judah in the Roman period, and any such attempt could have provoked the wrath of the Romans towards the High Priesthood.

The high priest at the beginning of Albinus' reign was Hananiah and he used to offer gifts (bribes) to the commissioner with a generous hand, and where did the money come from? Probably from the temple treasures. He used to recruit around him "very bad slaves", that is, gang members and thugs, who did despicable jobs for him such as forcibly taking dozens of junior priests, brought them to the disgrace of starvation, from which some simply did not rise.

Joseph Ben Matthieu concludes his essay "The Antiquity of the Jews" with a long and extensive reference to the High Priesthood. He reviews the beginnings of the priesthood from the biblical Aaron, Moses' brother, and onwards, when the succession procedures of the priesthood (inheritance of the firstborn son) were formulated, and that only from Aaron's family would the priests come, and not from another source, even if he is king.

The Great Rebellion broke out during the time of Commissioner Floros, who is considered the worst of all the commissioners who preceded him. Then the negative judgment of the emperor Nero regarding the status of the Jews of the city of Caesarea was published in May, 66 AD, and this served as a signal and sign for the outbreak of the rebellion among the Romans. But the stormy winds subsided and peace almost reigned in Judah again.
And Florus, who, according to Josephus, sought to fan the flames of rebellion, summoned the high priests (note: again in the plural!) and the elite elite in Jerusalem and informed them that only on the condition that they came out to honor with their presence the legions of the Roman army coming from Caesarea and with them the inhabitants of Jerusalem, he would see it A signal and a sign to calm the spirits of the people and that they will not expect any more acts of rebellion. The priests and the wealthy elite of Jerusalem gathered the Jewish public on the Temple Mount to appease the people and calm the spirits, but groups of fanatics, those seeking rebellion, emphatically announced that they would not listen to Floros's request/demand. Their shouts and provocations grew louder and received wider support from the public. At the same time Floros instructed the army commanders to attack the residents of Jerusalem if they took advantage of the aforementioned sensitive situation to insult the soldiers and provoke any sign of provocation.

The priests and Levites realized that the event of the battle could turn into a bloodbath and therefore they behaved in an unusual and unprecedented manner, and according to Joseph ben Mattathias: "... and they (the priests and Levites) carried before them (before the people who stood in Mary) the temple vessels and the priestly garments, in which they used to serve in the holy place, And the musicians (on the harps and violins) and the poets (the Levites) who were in the temple took the instruments of song and they all fell at the feet of the people and cursed him to keep the sacred instruments in their hands and without any pretext for the Romans to despise the treasures of the house of God" (Wars of the Jews, XNUMX:XNUMX-XNUMX) , and this view will not make it easier in our eyes: these sacred vessels were intended for the performance of worship only. Taking them out of the temple and in a matter that does not involve the sacred service indicates the great importance they attached to the topic of the expected event of the meeting between the Romans and the Jews. This step, which has the effect of deep despair, was supposed to present to the people the disproportionate Roman reaction to an expected damage to the temple, unless the disgruntled public came to terms and withdrew its hands from some rebellious move.
And Yosef ben Matthew continues with the dramatic description as follows: "How terrible was the appearance of the high priests with dirt on their heads and tearing their clothes and exposing their closed hearts. They called the people known for their piercing there, each one of them, and also begged the whole nation, lest this little thing be easy in their eyes and they would not surrender their holy city to the hands of those who want to destroy it" (The Wars of the Jews, ibid.).
The priests turn to the public as one man and slam the matter of arrogance, because what will actually happen if the public shows a measure of respect for the Romans? The high priests asked the public, or: how will they bear responsibility for their actions. "Herewith you will shut the mouth of Florus (the commissioner) who is asking him for an excuse to wage war on you, and that way you will have your city for booty and you will not add to the week of pain. It will be a terrible act of guilt, when such a large people hears the voices of quarrels every now and then, under forcing them to admit the words of the many" (ibid.).

It is true that Yosef ben Matthew wrote the words after the destruction, after he served as the commander of the Galilee in the rebellion, after he crossed the lines and after he often blamed the zealots (just as the Sages did) for causing the disaster that also led to the destruction of the Second Temple, and from that his words are slightly biased, but it is narrated by the historian Decent and reliable, who was good at analyzing the events, and the latest event certainly testifies to the tragedy of the destruction itself, when a delusional and bloodthirsty handful led the public to the brink of destruction.

The priests succeeded in this position to influence those who were dragged and dragged after the zealots and together they all went out to promote the arrival of the Roman army. As the regiments approached, the Jews greeted them with peace, but the Roman army did not respond (which was expected in light of the army's tough behavior as an army) and the Jewish provocateurs perceived this as the extraction of much loot and raised a shout. In response, the soldiers attacked the Jews and beat everyone who was caught. The rest fled everywhere.

The insurgents feared that Floros might take control of the Temple Mount and therefore severed the connection with the capital by destroying several halls. Immediately afterwards, Florus turned to the high priests and the Sanhedrin and assured them that he would take care of removing the troops from Jerusalem except for one battalion that would take care of order and peace.

In the meantime, King Agrippa II arrived in Judea and met with the high priests and the heads of the Sanhedrin. He heard from them about the cruelty of Florus and the acts of Roman provocation and made sure to give the Roman minister of the army, Neapolitanus, a guided tour of Jerusalem to closely monitor the calm, moderate and peaceful tendencies of the majority of the Jewish public.

The Jewish public in Jerusalem begged the king and the priests to send envoys to Emperor Nero to complain and complain about the actions of Florus, "because otherwise" - according to Josephus - "if the Jews turn a deaf ear to this horrible act of murder (referring to the sharp reaction of Florus's soldiers), they will allow them to be suspected, Because there really was a rebellion among them, and if they don't hurry to prove who started taunting them, it will look like they took the (rebellious) sword out of its scabbard" (The Jewish Wars there, XNUMX). This face shows how sorry the public is that there will be a handful of extreme fanatics.

Later, Agrippa II delivers his dramatic speech in front of the Jerusalem public, in which he drops one by one all the reasons, motives and infrastructures of the instigators of the strife and the supporters of the rebellion. The people are convinced and make sure to repair the damage they caused in the vicinity of the temple - the construction of the halls that bridged the temple and the capital - and are even ready to raise taxes for the Romans. However, the Jewish public did not back down from its demand that the Romans appoint another commissioner under Florus, which was clear that if it was done, it would not be done immediately, and therefore the public's anger, even though it took care to repair the damages and, as mentioned, raise the taxes.
This mix of emotions was immediately exploited by the supporters of the rebellion - "And at that time people gathered together, who harnessed all their strength to provoke the war, and rushed to the fort called Masada (Masada) and suddenly captured it and slaughtered all the Romans from the garrison stationed there and put in their place the men of their peace . While they were doing this, a bold-faced young man named Elazar, son of Hananiah, the high priest, and he was a clerk in the temple at that time, came out and incited the serving priests, lest they accept sacrifices from the hands of foreigners. And this thing was the beginning of the war (rebellion) among the Romans. Because in these actions the Jews canceled the sacrifice of the emperor. And even though the great and important priests of the people spoke their hearts out lest they break the law of offering sacrifices for the peace of the governors, the people did not listen to their voice, in their confidence in the size of the multitude, because the heroes of power from the crowd of objects of rebellion strengthened their hands and their eyes were fixed on Eleazar who stands at their head. (Wars of the Jews XNUMX:XNUMX XNUMX).

What comes before our eyes?

First - the rebellion is initiated by a member of the high priestly family and even puts himself at the head of the uprising, although his actions were only in the area of ​​the temple. It seems on his face that the atmosphere of fanaticism that began to gather supporters struck a part of the priesthood, and perhaps Eleazar even saw himself as an ideological scion of the ancient Hebrew fanaticism, the one that began with the biblical Pinchas, continued with Elijah and Matthew who called for rebellion in the Greeks and the Greeks, and he is from the family of the priesthood, from the Yehoirib guard. And perhaps the name Eleazar is mythologically linked to Eleazar the Elder who, together with the mother and her seven sons, were sanctified during the pre-revolt in Hellenism.
In the Babylonian Talmud in tractate Gitin it is stated that the initiator of the cessation of the sacrifice for the peace of the emperor was Zacharias ben Abaculos, also from the priestly family, and in Josephus ben Mattathias, Zacharias ben Amphiklos from the priestly family is remembered later who was zealous in his views and even initiated a bloodbath in Jerusalem by the Reds.

Second - the prohibition of accepting sacrifices from the hands of foreigners, as instigated by Elazar ben Hananiah, is connected to writing in the Sage sources that the students of Beit Shammai the fanatics announced on the eve of the rebellion a "Decree of 1983 Devar" which refers to a total and complete severance of contact between Jews and non-Jews and purification The land and the people from all idolatry. A group of sages gathered at the entrance of Hananiah ben Hezekiah ben Geron (or Gurion) to deal with Shabbat laws and then "the Rabbi of Beit Shammai was enumerated over Beit Hillel and eighteen things were decreed in it by day" (from Shabbat 86:XNUMX). This move cements a significant link in the bridge and the connection between the revolt against the Romans and the revolt of the Maccabees, the latter of whom saw war with foreign labor as a superior reason for rebellion. More will be noted, and this was first suggested by Rabbi Professor Aryeh Kosher in his book "The Great Revolt." The Reasons and Circumstances for its Breakout", XNUMX (p. XNUMX), that the faction of Hananiah ben Hezekiah was associated with the formulation of the "Fasting Scroll", and it is likely that the writing and distribution of this composition, in which the Hasmonean victories stand out in particular, were intended to embrace the hearts of the rebels and to mislead them into the feeling that They are the faithful successors of the Hasmonean tradition.
Furthermore, we learned throughout the days of the Second Temple that rulers, especially Romans, acted as a gesture of goodwill to offer sacrifices on their behalf in the Temple. This practice, which was stopped by Eleazar ben Hananiah, symbolizes the separation between Judah and Rome and from it - the beginning of the outbreak of the rebellion. It was also a step to encourage the rebels because God is with them.

Thirdly - the verb that emerges from the aforementioned decree is the abolition of the ancient, mythological practice of offering sacrifices for the peace of the emperor and the empress. It sounded like foreign work, and indeed it was. This is a practice that dates back to the Persian era, when thanksgiving funds were offered to the Persian king in the Temple. This practice continued in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. In the latter, a double daily sacrifice was offered in the Temple, as Sage sources also confirm, to the dea Roma (the women of Rome) and to the emperor. Idolatry? Indeed indeed. For many years the Jews put up with this practice and as evidence - its official cessation served as a signal and model for the outbreak of the rebellion against the Romans.

Fourth - the revolt against the Romans receives religious-ritual support and is led by a representative of the High Priesthood.

The series of articles "The Priesthood You Didn't Know" by Dr. Yehiam Sorek

• Part I - the end of the First Temple and the exile in Babylon
• Part II - Return to Zion
• Part III - The Hellenistic period
• Part XNUMX - The priesthood in Marumiya
• Part XNUMX - The priesthood makes muscles
• Part XNUMX - Matthew turns over in his grave
• Part XNUMX - The priesthood begins to lose height
• Part VIII - The reign of Hyrcanus
• Part IX - Herod stirs up the priesthood
• Part XNUMX - The Priesthood and the Christian Jesus
• Part XNUMX - There is life after Herod
• Part XNUMX - The priesthood deals with clothes
• Part XNUMX - Bureau for Exposing Corruption
• Chapter XNUMX - The priesthood in Mim Bemol
• Chapter XNUMX - The priesthood in the worship of the sun and the war cheer