Sanhedrin 136

1:
We explained at the beginning of the previous chapter that there is a discrepancy between the order that the last two chapters of our tractate appear in the Mishnah manuscripts and how they appear in the Talmud. We also explained that we have here preferred the order used by the Talmud, therefore our present (and last) chapter is marked as Chapter Eleven. This chapter is very different from the other chapters of the tractate – and from most other chapters of the Mishnah. Therefore our treatment of this chapter will have to be slightly different.

2:
After have spent several lengthy chapters expatiating on the four modes of execution, the first mishnah of this chapter makes a statement: even though all the miscreants mentioned in the foregoing chapters were found guilty of a capital offence, by suffering death they have made amends as it were and their offence has not been great enough to deny them their share in the next world. All Israel, even those killed by the judiciary, have their share in the next world. Our mishnah then goes on to enumerate three offences which are so heinous that anyone who is guilty of them has forfeited his share in the next world. (Rabbi Akiva holds that the offences are not three in number but five. It is not clear whether Abba Sha'ul holds that the number of such offences is four or six. We shall return to this much later.)

3:
The most obvious question that we must ask ourselves is what exactly is the meaning of the phrase "next world"? We can give two responses to this question. According to one very great authority the term is synonymous with "afterlife"; according to many other authorities the term is connected with the resurrection of the dead which is one of the three items enumerated by Tanna Kamma [the anonymous sage whose view is amplified by Rabbi Akiva and Abba Sha'ul]. Therefore, it seems most sensible to hold our discussion of both terms concurrently.

4:
In the Talmud of Eretz-Israel [Berakhot 4c] the following is reported:

5:
Despite rabbinic attempts to suggest otherwise by midrashic means which cover several folios of the Gemara on our present mishnah, actually there is no specific indication in the Biblical text of a belief in the resurrection of the dead. The verse that comes closest to fitting the bill is Daniel 12:2, which teaches that at the time of future redemption "many of those sleeping in the dusty ground will awaken to everlasting life and others to humiliation and eternal contumely". However, Daniel is a very late composition, almost certainly contemporary with the conceptual innovation under discussion. (Like many of the pseudepigraphic works in the Tanakh, it may even have been composed to "justify" the new concept.) In our modern discourse we tend to obfuscate the demarcation line between the concept of "the resurrection of the dead" and the concept of "life after death". In a hazy manner the Biblical record assumes "life after death" in some form or other, but does not explicate or define that which in any case cannot be explicated or defined in factual terms. For instance, while factually recounting the conversation that King Saul had with the deceased prophet Samuel on the eve of the disastrous battle of Mount Gilboa (a conversation that took place through the medium of the Woman of Ein-Dor), no attempt is made to explain the nature of Samuel's existence at that time or its "geography".

6:
The concept of "the resurrection of the dead" [teĥiyyat ha-metim] is different – and possibly not directly connected with the concept of "life after death". At some time during the epoch of the second Bet Mikdash this new belief took root. Scholars tend to date the introduction of this new belief to the period that preceded the Hasmonean uprising against the Syrian Hellenists. The apostasy that was enforced in Judah under the aegis of Antiochus Epiphanes during the first quarter of the second century BCE is graphically (but not necessarily historically) portrayed in accounts such as the death of Ĥannah and her seven sons. Incidents such as this one, multiplied many-fold, undermined the simple belief in direct retribution which teaches that the good are rewarded and the wicked get their just deserts in this life. Such a simple belief was now seen to be antagonistic towards the observed facts of life! According to the scholars, there now developed a new theology that would not run counter to the observed facts. While it is true that we all die, and that there is not necessarily justice in the vicissitudes of the life we live here and now, this will not always be the case: at some time in the future all the dead will be resurrected (i.e. restored to physical life) and in this "Next World" [olam ha-ba] there would take place a great judgment in which the righteous would receive the reward that they did not get "in this life" and the wicked would receive the punishment that their deeds during their lifetime require of Divine Justice. I must emphasize that it was held – as far as we can tell – that this judgment would not take place "after death" in a heavenly Tribunal, but on earth at some time in the future subsequent to a total and general "resurrection".

7:
That this theology was an innovation we can deduce from the fact that it was not universally accepted. Indeed, the breach between the Sadducees and the Pharisees probably became irreversible because of this item of Pharisaic creed. The Sadducees refused to accept it because, they claimed, it was completely unjustified by Holy Writ. (As I suggested above the attempts of the Pharisees to manipulate the text of the Torah in order to "prove" that "the resurrection of the dead is taught in the Torah" are – let us say with a modicum of charity – unconvincing.) However, this opposition only made the sages all the more determined to ensure that that this theology be accepted as a general religious truth. It was always found that the best way to ensure a certain belief was to make it a liturgical requirement. Thus, undetermined by opposition, the belief in the physical resurrection of the dead was made the lynch-pin of the second berakhah of the Amidah. We only have to pick up the Siddur [prayer-book] and count the number of times in this comparatively short paragraph that the concept "resurrection of the dead" appears to see how strongly this creed was hammered home. (The count must be done in Hebrew, since most modern "translations" of this text are in fact "interpretations" and, even worse, obfuscations. The Hebrew meĥayyeh metim might justly be rendered "injects life into the dead". Siddur "Sim Shalom" of the Rabbinical Assembly renders this recurrent phrase as "give life to the dead", which could just as easily refer to "life after death" as to "the resurrection of the dead". The Artscroll translator has a finer conscience and translates "resuscitates the dead", which while still being ambiguous is less so.)

8:
It is important to bear in mind the intentions of the sages in this second berakhah of the Amidah in order to correctly interpret other references that they included. "Those the sleep in the dust" is a direct reference to Daniel 12:2 (to which I made reference above) which teaches that at the time of future redemption "many of those sleeping in the dusty ground will awaken to everlasting life and others to humiliation and eternal contumely". "King who kills and resurrects" must also not be misconstrued. But how it was that "resurrection of the dead" gradually gave way to "life after death" in a heavenly paradise? That will be the subject of our next Shiur.

To be continued: