ביאורים באגדות החורבן באבות דרבי נתן

The legends concerning the destruction of the Second Temple in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan (Henceforth ARN) are dealt with in this article from various aspects: The context in ARN Version A and Version Β (henceforth: ARNA and ARNB respectively), the textual problems of each version, lexical problems, the development and metamorphoses of the traditions and their religio-historical background. A. The literary context of these clusters of legends differs in ARNA and ARNB . The author analyses the redactional considerations of ARNA and ARNB . B. The main textual problems of ARNA and ARNB in these chapters are studied: Aramaic versus Hebrew and enigmatic passages in the MSS of ARNA , pluses to the text of ARNB in Genizah MSS. In both ARNA and ARNB no single manuscript can be considered a solid basis for establishing the text; rather, the student of ARN has to determine the originality of each reading. The oldest manuscripts (Genizah fragments) have secondary additions to the original text alongside exclusive original readings. C. Lexical cruces in these clusters of legends are dealt with: , מפקיעין, קשת של זיר, פגושות קנאים, פילקרים, קטולין, מרה . Apparently, some of the hapax legomena in ARN(especially ARNB ) are relatively early. This is of importance in assessing the tradition that underlies ARN. D. The destruction traditions are studied from a philological (rather than a historical) point of view. Some traditions found only in ARNAre rather old: e.g., the Romans throwing a pig's head into the Temple Courtyard (found in Ambrose); the reasons for Titus' sacrilegious acts in the Temple (a striking parallel in Dio Cassius); a unique feature in the story of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai (paralleled by Josephus' report). Other traditions are preserved in ARN in a corrupt form, some of them apparently drawing upon Amoraic sources. The traditions that underlie ARN(especially ARNB ) are of importance, but, as frequently happens in the work, the original form of the tradition is disfigured, and it is often difficult to distinguish on internal grounds the early from the late. Among the traditions scrutinized in this paper are those concerning Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai's escape from Jerusalem and his dialogue with the Roman emperor. The very same biblical verse that served as Rabban Yohanan's proof-text in this dialogue for the predestined destruction of the Temple by Vespasian was interpreted by the rebels as a proof-text for their victory. This and similar pro-Roman Jewish interpretations were adopted into Flavian propaganda. The two appendices at the end of the article deal in a broader context with the contest between the rebels and their opponents concerning the interpretation of omens and biblical passages (Appendix A) and with the relationship between Jewish theology and theodicy and Roman propaganda in Josephus (Appendix B).