AFTER ANTIGONOS OF SOCHO there began a period in Jewish history which was characterised by dual leadership. This period lasted for about five generations and was called the time of the “Pairs” because two men simultaneously led and governed the people. One of the two was generally the Nasi (Chief) and the other was called, the “Av Beth Din,” the father of the court.
At first these “Pairs” were in complete agreement on all fundamental issues and differed only on minor religious questions. Later these disagreements increased and reached the point of severe disputes which engendered dangerous bitterness.
In all there were five such “pairs”: 1) Jose b. Joezer of Zereda and Jose b. Jochanan of Jerusalem; 2) Joshua b. Perachia and Nittai of Arbella; 3) Jehuda b. Tabai and Simeon b. Shetach; 4) Shemaia and Avtalion; 5) Hillel and Shammai. The reverence with which the teachings of these leaders were considered is illustrated by the statement of one of their followers, Nachum Halavlar (the Scribe): “I received a tradition from Rabbi Miasha, who received it from his father, who heard it from the “Pairs” who received it from the Prophets as a law handed down to Moses from Mount Sinai.”1)פּאה פרק ב׳ משנה י׳. This saying indicates the mood of the people who believed that every word of the “Pairs” was a law handed down to Moses from Mount Sinai.
The first “pair” lived in the days of the High Priest Alkimos who allied himself with the Greeks against the Jews under the reign of Demetrius Soter (about 300 B. C.). This High Priest met with considerable opposition from the pious elements who objected to his treacherous actions and attempted to lead the people along the true paths.
Jewish history has known such dual leadership even before the time of Jose b. Joezer and Jose b. Jochanan. Thus we find Jehoshaphat the fourth king of Judea after Solomon, appointing two leaders to conduct the government. One, the priest Amariah, was the authority of the Word of God and the other, Zachariah b. Ishmael, was the lord of the commands of the king. After the return from the Babylonian captivity we find Zerubabel the secular leader and Jeshua b. Jozadak as High Priest. Still later the government was shared by Ezra and Nehemia. But in spite of this condition of dual leadership and the rarity of two leaders cooperating amicably, there arose no disputes among the first “Pair” except in the matter of one ritual question on which Jose b. Joezer and Jose b. Jochanan could not agree. This question was also disputed by the later “pairs.” It involved the problem of placing one’s hands on a sacrifice on a feast day.
The Bible enjoined a person to “place his hand” on the sacrifice which he brought and this was interpreted to mean that he was to assist in the slaughtering of the animal. Since this procedure involved a considerable effort it was held by some that a person should not do so on the Sabbath or on a feast day. Others maintained that the restrictions of the Sabbath are not operative in the Temple and the individual must therefore assist in the slaughtering of the sacrifice if it is to be offered according to the law.
The procedure of the “placing of hands” was as follows. The animal to be sacrificed was placed on the North side of the slaughter house and faced to the West. The person bringing the offering stood on the East facing the West. Then he placed his hands between the horns of the animal and confessed the sins for the atonement of which he brought the sacrifice. Those who prohibited this procedure of placing of hands on a feast day believed that it involved an effort and was therefore unnecessary; the others considered the whole procedure and the confession as sanctifying the sacrifice and permitted this effort in the Temple.
The problem of the Jews living outside of Palestine who sent their sacrifices to Jerusalem was of paramount importance in the discussion of this question. The decision involved the acceptance of the sacrifice without the presence of the penitent or a demand that the penitent must be present during the offering of the sacrifice. Those who permitted the offering of a sacrifice on a feast day without the presence of the owner feared that any undue severity might tend to encourage those Jews living outside of Palestine to erect altars wherever they live and thus to compete with the Temple in Jerusalem; they feared that it might even lead to idolatry. Those who opposed this leniency were motivated by opposition to the Sadducees who tried to make the regulations of conduct on the Sabbath or a feast day so severe as to be impossible of observance.
Two other decrees were introduced by Jose b. Joezer and Jose b. Jochanan. They declared all countries surrounding Palestine as impure where no Jew may live. One who does live in any of these lands must perform numerous ablutions and rites of purification before he may enter Palestine. In issuing this decree it was apparently aimed to limit the dispersion of the Jews among the neighboring nations, which was assuming large proportions due to the persecutions of the Greek government. This decree caused great hardships to those who refused to submit to the laws of the Palestine administration which attempted to eradicate Judaism. The second decree promulgated by them declared all glass vessels which were made by non Jews to be impure even as earthen dishes were.
In passing it is worth mentioning that both of these decrees were done away with in time. Even observing Jews settled in Gentile lands in later years and glass vessels were considered pure after being rinsed in water. Jose b. Joezer also introduced three rules which lightened the burden of the laws. During years of famine, when the people could not identify the four types of locust which the Bible permits to be used as food, he gave his sanction to the use of a locust which invaded the country from Babylonia. He permitted the people to use the water and the blood from the sacrificial slaughter house for household purposes and as garden fertilizer. He also declared that only the person who comes in direct contact with a dead body or an impure object is impure but such a person does not convey the impurity to other people. This declaration was of special significance due to the preparations which were then going on for a rebellion against the Greeks who persecuted the Jewish faith. Many were reluctant to go to war out of fear of becoming contaminated through contact with people that touched dead bodies. It was for this reason that Jose b. Joezer announced that only the first person touching a dead body is impure.
Jose b. Joezer is credited with the following moral saying: “Let thy house be a place of meeting for the wise and dust thyself with the dust of their feet and drink their words with thirst.”2)אָבות פרק א׳ משנה ד׳. These words were directed against the government which aimed to separate the people from their teachers; anyone who converted his home into a place of instruction risked his very life if he was caught.
Of Jose b. Jochanan’s life we know but little. Of his teachings there remained the following saying: “Let thy house be opened wide and let the poor be like thy household and talk not much with a woman, not even with thy own wife.”3)אָבות פרק א׳ משנה ה׳.
This statement too was aimed against the attempts of the government to introduce the morals of the Greeks and their lack of hospitality toward strangers and the poor. Since the Greeks worshipped goddesses Jose b. Jochanan feared that people might come to deify woman through sexual motives and he therefore sought to keep the sexes apart.
Jose b. Joezer was referred to as the “zealot of the priesthood.” The death of both Joses marked the end of the Encyclopedists who directed the nation in all spheres of life. The Talmud also states that from the death of Moses till the death of Jose b. Joezer the pursuit of study was at the same height as during the lifetime of Moses.
How Jose b. Jochanan died we know nothing but that Jose b. Joezer died at the hands of Greek soldiers. He was condemned to be crucified because of his anti government activities and his last words testify to his noble spirit and to the strength of his faith.
The High Priest Alkimos was related to Jose b. Joezer. In his endeavor to gain the favor of the rulers, Alkimos ordered the destruction of all pious Jews who refused to submit to the Greek religion. At his behest, sixty Jews were caught and sentenced to death; among them was Jose b. Joezer. As they were being led to execution, the High Priest Alkimos again tried to persuade his relative to submit to the government and save his life.
The following conversation between them was handed down through the generations.
Look, said the High Priest, at the wealth and great honor which I possess because I obey the orders of the government and also observe the misfortune which you have brought upon yourself that you have to die the death of a criminal.
To this Jose quietly replied; If those who anger God live as well as you do, you can readily imagine how good will be the share of those who do his will.
Alkimos further said: Can you show me another person who obeyed God’s will more than you did?
To which Jose replied: If those who do God’s will end as I do, what a terrible end must await those who anger him with their evil deeds.
These words made a deep impression on the High Priest and, according to the Midrash (Breshit Raba) he thereupon committed suicide. Others claim that he died from a stroke. (Josephus, Macabees).
Jose b. Joezer and Jose b. Jochanan were designated as “Ashkoloth,” (literally: clusters) because they united many virtues within themselves. Great as their scholarship was, they also excelled in their moral behavior. When they passed away the people mourned that with their death all virtue departed.4)ירושלמי סוטה פרק ט׳ הלכה ד׳.
It is also related that Jose b. Joezer had a son who was not capable and did not follow in the footsteps of his father. Jose therefore gave all his possessions for communal purposes.5)בבא בתרא קל״ג ב׳.
It was a time of unrest and wars between the kings of Egypt and Syria and Palestine was the battleground of the contending armies. In this turmoil little attention was paid by the people to learning and ignorance prevailed. The general tendency was to imitate the customs of the Gentiles, and the idea was current that Jews should assimilate with the ruling Greek nation. Among the first Greek customs to become popular were athletics and public tournaments. Many Jews were persuaded that their national welfare would be enhanced by training in the various sports and gladiatorial excercises. There might have been but little objection to these sports in themselves were it not for the Greek habit of engaging in these sports while altogether nude. It happened that when Jewish young men engaged in these exercises, they were ashamed of being circumcised and in various artificial manners tried to graft foreskins so as not to be recognized as Jews.
In time such manifestations of assimilation became secondary, and, as the party of the “Friends of the Greeks” expanded through the adherence of the richer elements of the population, they attempted to modify the service in the Temple to resemble more nearly the form of worship of the Greek temples.
Pious Jews considered such deeds as the peak of immorality and they rallied in a group which came to be known as “Assembly of the pious” or “Congregation of the just” in order to separate themselves still further from those friendly to the Greeks whom they considered to be Jews no longer.
There thus developed a great hatred between the two contending parties. The friends of the Greeks were denounced as “traitors to the covenant”, “dregs of the people” and “profaners of the holy covenant.” The assimilationist elements considered the pious people to be fools who observe strange ceremonies which hinder a closer understanding between Jews and Greeks, and before very long, the friends of the Greeks called on the government to come to their assistance in their struggle against the pious Jews.