Although the
Wissenschaft des Judentums in nineteenth-century Germany was harshly criticized by Gershom Scholem (1897-1982), studies about Jesus by Abraham Geiger (1810-1874) have recently been reassessed favorably. Geiger demonstrated Jesus Jewishness through a comparison of the New Testament with rabbinic literature. S. Heschel evaluates this kind of approach, namely, exploiting the sources of adversary and brushing history
gegen den Strich, as a form of “Counterhistory”. This article aims to prove that the patristic studies by the
Wissenschat des Judentums, which originated with Heinrich Gr tz (1817-1891), also can be regarded as
Counterhistory. The targets of our analysis are works of Grätz, Moritz Rahmer (1837-1904), Samuel Krauss (1866-1948) and Louis Ginzberg (1873-1953). Comparing the
Hagadische Elemente of patristic literature, in particular written by Jerome (347-420), with the parallels in rabbinic literature, Jewish scholars were able to obtain the following five results. (1) To specify the original date to which Aggada in rabbinic literature can be retroactive. (2) To elucidate the meaning of Aggada, which is difficult to understand when viewed solely within the context of rabbinic literature. (3) To restore Aggada lost in rabbinic literature. (4) To find Aggada from the text of the Vulgate, and to use it for a textual criticism of the Masoretic text. (5) To reconstruct the life of Jews in the time of the Church Fathers. Thus, Jewish scholars demonstrated the magnitude of influence of Jewish traditions upon some Church Fathers. Christian scholars, for instance, Albert M.-J. Lagrange (1855-1938), Georg Grützmacher (1866-1939), Albert Condamin, Gustave Bardy and Pierre Nortin, critically refuted them as follows. First, the exegesis that Jerome is said to have learned from Jewish Sages was, in fact, derived from his Christian predecessors like Origen and Eusebius. Second, the reason why Jerome had to plagiarize their exegesis was his lack of facility with the Hebrew language. Christian Scholars attempted to eradicate the Jewish influence upon Jerome. Ultimately, it remains for contemporary studies about Jerome to weigh the appropriateness of these conflicting viewpoints.
抄録全体を表示