Who is the suffering servant?

WHO WAS THE SUFFERING SERVANT?

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

Recently, a friend asked me, who is the “suffering servant’ in the prophecies of Isaiah? 

Here is my answer: 

Second Isaiah, was an anonymous prophet who lived just before or after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE. His writings (chapt.40-55) have been added to those of the First Isaiah who lived in ancient Israel in the 8^th cent. BCE. Chapters 56-66 are usually ascribed to a group of unknown authors called Third Isaiah. 

The chapters assigned by critics to  Second Isaiah include four  “Servant Songs” that seem to form a literary unity, even though they are spread within  chapters 40-55.  It is not clear who was the author of these songs. In  53: 3, he describes the servant as an individual who is “despised, shunned by men; a man of suffering, familiar with disease.” Hence, the reference to a “suffering servant.”

The question is : whom did the prophet have in mind when he wrote these lines? As the Jewish  Study Bible puts it, this is “one of the most difficult and contested passage in the Bible” (p. 890). As expected, throughout the centuries, various opinions have been advanced in order to solve this problem. We can break them down to three different types of suggestions: 

A.       A collective interpretation: according to some critics the reference is to the people of Israel.

B.       An individual interpretation: according to others, the reference is to an historic personality of the past. Some argued that it referred to Moses , or king Jehoiachin, or the prophet Jeremiah or even the prophet himself.  

C.      A theological/mythological  interpretation: The New Testament says that Isaiah’s prophecies were fulfilled in the life of  Jesus. (See, the Letter to the Hebrews, chp. 5)  Others, including some medieval Rabbis and the Aramaic Targum,  maintain that it refers to an idealized king or to a future Messiah. 

In reality, it must be admitted, as Boadt did, that “we may never know all that Second Isaiah actually intended by his servant” (Reading the OT, p. 429).

 

 Who is a mamzer ?

WHO IS A MAMZER?

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

In Yiddish or even in Ladino the Hebrew word MAMZER means a bad guy, a real SOB. Hitler was a mamzer. Mussolini was a mamzer. Videla was a mamzer. What does it mean in the Bible and Jewish law? 

One thing is clear: In Jewish law the word, often translated as bastard, does not refer to a child born out of wedlock. 

The term MAMZER occurs twice in the Hebrew Bible: 
The first comes from Deut. 23: 3: “No MAMZER shall be admitted into the congregation of the Lord .” That is, he will not be able to marry an Israelite even in the tenth generation. The second, in an enigmatic passage in  Zech 9:6: “A MAMZER shall settle in Ashdod”. It is not clear what this word means in either case. Von Rad, in his commentary to the book of Deuteronomy, clearly states, “We do not know what is meant precisely by bastard (mamzer)” (p. 146.)

The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (cir. 250 BCE), says it means, the son of a prostitute. The Jewish Publication Society renders the word as “misbegotten.” The Jerusalem Bible has it as bastard, with a note saying that the word possibly refers to the offspring of a mixed marriage between the Hebrews and the Philistines. The Catholic Bible translates it as: “a child of an incestuous union.” 

In rabbinic times, the term began to assume a more concrete meaning. The Mishnah (cir. 200 CE), quoting Rabbi Akiva, maintains that the word MAMZER refers to the offspring of any marriage of near of kin (Yeb. 4:13). In other word, a person born out of an incestuous marriage. The Babylonian Talmud (cir. 600 CE) agrees with it and expands its meaning. (Yeb.76b and others). A good summary of the rabbinic position on this subject is found in The Spirit of Jewish Law, by G. Horowitz who writes that a MAMZER is “the offspring of a father and mother  between whom there could be , in law, no binding betrothal, the issue of either an adulterous connection between a married woman and a man not her husband , or of an incestuous  union within the forbidden  degrees defined in Lev. 18 and 20” (p. 264).  According to Jewish law a MAMZER has full civil rights but can only marry another MAMZER or a convert.

In my professional life I have had to deal with one or two people who caused me headaches,  but I managed to outlive them, for which I am  grateful. 

THE RABBIS AND CHESEBURGERS

RABBI RIFAT SONSINO, PH.D

According to the ancient Rabbis, a Jew cannot eat something like a cheeseburger. Why? It is based on a biblical law that states “You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk (ba-halev imo)” (Deut. 14: 21). The law is repeated in Ex. 23:19 and 34:26 but not in the list of prohibited food items in Lev. 11. Furthermore, the text is not clear, and no rationale is given. Biblical scholars have not found any written document about this topic in any of the writings of the ancient Near East. 

According to Maimonides, a famous Jewish philosopher and legal scholar who lived in the medieval times , this prohibition is based on a pagan custom (Guide, 3:48). Some modern critics think that the law shows sensitivity towards mothers. Others , reading helev (“fat”) instead of halav (“milk”), argue that the law prohibits boiling a kid in its mother’s fat, thus avoiding the economic loss of slaughtering two animals, one of which could still bear more young kids. Mendelssohn (d. 1786), the German Jewish philosopher,  simply gives up and writes, “The benefit arising from the many inexplicable laws of God is in their practice, and not in the understanding of their motives.”

 The ancient Rabbis forbade mixing meat and milk based on this law. In fact, the Mishnah, a second cent. CE text of Jewish law, clearly states, ““Every kind of flesh (of cattle, wild beast and fowl) is prohibited to cook in milk” (Hullin, 8:1, Neusner). They also add that in order to eat dairy products one must wait 6 hours after eating meat. But, according to many rabbinic sources, after eating cheese one can eat meat immediately thereafter. In other words, no cheeseburgers! That understanding is confirmed by Onkelos (2^nd cent CE) who, in his Aramaic translation of the Pentateuch, clearly writes, “you shall not eat meat and milk." Similarly, The Aramaic Targum Jonathan (perhaps 4th cent. CE) states, "no mixing meat and milk."

Christianity abrogated the Jewish dietary laws. In fact, in the Epistle of Barnabas (2^nd cent CE), the author tells us that the Torah’s dietary laws are symbolic   and are not meant to be literally observed. 

Islam has food that is either halal (“lawful”) or haram (“unlawful”), and that includes alcohol, pork and animals that died due to illness.

In Judaism, Orthodox and Conservative Jews observe the rabbinic dietary laws and do not mix meat and milk products. Most Reform Jews do not, arguing as they did in the Pittsburgh platform of 1885, that “all such Mosaic and rabbinical laws as regulate diet, priestly purity and dress originated in ages and under the influence of ideas entirely foreign to our present mental and spiritual state.”. 

In my case, I do eat crustaceans like shrimp but refuse to eat any pork products. 

 

KING DAVID AND THE RABBIS

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

In the Hebrew Bible, King David is portrayed as a military man, a national hero who killed the giant Goliath and went from being a simple shepherd to becoming the second king of Israel (10^th cent. BCE), but suffered personal tragedies and had a few moral failings.

In contrast, the ancient Rabbis had an idealized view of King David that was unrealistic. For example, we are told that a harp hung above David’s couch. When midnight arrived, it would swing. David would then rise and occupy himself with Torah study until dawn  (Ber. 3h). David was very modest. He would say, “I seek the honor of heaven and put aside my own honor” (Num R. 4:20). Absalom, David’s son, fell into evil ways, because his father refrained from chastising him for his disobedience (Ex. R. 1:1). Another Rabbi stated that in his army, David had 400 young squires who rode on golden chariots (Kid. 76b). God actually forgave David after he committed adultery with Batsheba (Shab.30a). King David is considered to be the author of the book of Psalms (BB 14b). In the distant future, say the rabbis , when the Messiah arrives to redeem all Jews, he will be a descendent of king David. Orthodox Jews still wait for the Messiah. Reform Jews do not, and use the term “messianic age,” to indicate a hope for an idealized society where true justice and peace will finally reign. 

 New Testament claims that Jesus was a descendent of David by adoption through Joseph and by blood through Mary (Rom. 1:3). In the Quran, David is considered a prophet ,a  messenger of Allah and the divinely anointed king of Israel as well as the author of the Zabur (Psalms). 

In reality, we have no archeological or textual proof that King David ever existed. However, given his prominence in the Bible, it is highly unlikely that he was only a literary figure. The only text we have that could possibly refer to  David as a person is the Tel Dan Stele, an Aramaic inscription written in the 9^th cent. BCE.  It mentions BTDVD, namely, Bet David, meaning, “the house of David.” Now, if there was a “house of David” it is assumed that there must have been a David at the beginning of the line. That’s all we have. 

 

TO MY VIEWERS

According to my blog, I am amazed that I have over a million viewers. I would very much like to know if you like what I write, or not; if you agree with my positions, or not; also where are you located? Any suggestions for future blogs? 

 To support my work, can you send me just $1  by mailing it to: 

I Lyman Street, Westborough, MA. 01581, USA

I look forward to hearing your comments. 

Rabbi Rifat Sonsino, Ph.D

rifatsonsino@gmail.com