Despite its title, this learned and sophisticated monograph argues that heresy plays no discernable role in the formation of the rabbinic community. This is so for two reasons, each of which constitutes one core piece of the book's overall argument. First, the entire category of heresy as commonly understood (primarily in light of Christian analogues) is both anachronistic and inadequate for the understanding of the rabbis and rabbinic literature. Second, careful analysis of rabbinic denigrations of deviant groups tells us more about the rabbis themselves than about their ostensible opponents. By undermining the category “heresy,” we can better understand the complexities involved in the formation of the rabbinic community.
In his introduction (subtitled, “The Formation of the Rabbinic Community,” 1–26), Grossberg dismisses traditional narratives of rabbinic emergence (e.g., the myth of Yavneh) and lays the foundation for his reconceptualization of the gradual emergence of the rabbinic collective. In chapter 1, titled “The Meaning and End of Heresy in Rabbinic Literature” (27–49), we can find Grossberg's case against this category in the ancient Jewish context. The argument is essentially two pronged: there is no rabbinic term or category that connotes what the technical term “heresy” does in Christian sources; nor does the occasional rabbinic denigration of boundary groups compare to Christian heresiology as manifest in the extended Christian literary works devoted to that purpose.
From this point on, the book proceeds phenomenologically, considering, one by one, the various groups castigated by rabbinic traditions sometimes deemed heresiological. The overall purpose of chapter 2, “Varieties of Minim in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Period” (50–91), is to establish the inherent fluidity of the category—deliberately untranslated—and to gainsay any association with Christianity in particular. All this is in keeping with Grossberg's overall iconoclastic thrust. Yet in this chapter we also begin to see Grossberg's creative inclination, especially in his provocative (and admittedly not provable) suggestion that the earliest rabbinic sources concerning minim, such as the reference to a “Galilean min” in M. Yadayim 4:8, were formulated with Josephus's “Fourth Philosophy” (founded by Judas the Galilean) in mind (esp. 69–73).
Subsequent chapters focus on the remainder of the rabbis’ deviant lineup. An analysis of extreme sinners in chapter 3, “Co-opting the Sinners of Israel” (92–115), is followed by chapter 4, “Meshumadim Who Provoke the Rabbis” (116–43), and chapter 5, “Apiqorsim Who Disrespect the Rabbis” (144–66). In these chapters, too, Grossberg argues for the fluidity (and untranslatability) of these categories, thereby severing rabbinic traditions from identifiable groups of others. These traditions, rather, are understood in light of a gradually crystallizing rabbinic self-definition. Chapter 6 (167–92) examines the “two powers” traditions—which Grossberg separates from minim—and the related legends concerning Elisha ben Abuya's visionary experience and transgression. The seventh chapter treats talmudic narratives concerning “Failed Rabbis and Those Who Cause the Public to Sin” (193–216). In these stories, Grossberg shows “how the rabbis formed their community rhetorically through the invention of the quintessential deviant insider, a failed rabbi” (193). Grossberg recapitulates his arguments in an economical conclusion (217–24). The end matter includes one appendix (a synoptic presentation of B. Ḥagigah 15a and the parallel tradition from 3 Enoch), a full bibliography, and detailed indices of primary sources, modern authors, and subjects.
Many readers of this book will be largely convinced by its broadest arguments: rabbinic categories like minim and ʾapikorsim may well be largely untranslatable “straw men” (50, 156), hybrid and fluid categories with little relation to identifiable groups. One can indeed discuss rabbinic deviants without making use of the terms “heresy” or “heretic” (48–49, 217). Surely the formation of the rabbinic community was an extended process, not “an event” (2, 217–18). Certainly, the rabbinic rhetorical reinvention of deviants and outsiders plays an important role in this extended process of rabbinic communal self-definition.
Other aspects of Grossberg's work may be less convincing. At times his argument seems directed against his own “straw men” (cf. 50, 156): I cannot imagine who understands the rabbinic community's establishment as an “event” (2) as opposed to a process. Nor is it clear who in recent years espouses the ecclesiastical approach to rabbinic Judaism displayed by Marcel Simon (16) or the empirical approach to “the sinners of Israel” taken by Arthur Marmorstein (94). While Grossberg establishes a number of key contrasts between Jewish and Christian approaches to deviance, at times one may wonder whether he has overly essentialized his Christian comparanda: after all, recent scholarship (correctly or not) argues for the fluidity and even falsehood of various Christian heresiological constructs (notably, “Gnosticism”). Grossberg's terminological precision also raises questions. He asks, “What does it mean to have a notion of heresy in a text that does not actually refer to heresy at all?” (43). But hesitation is inconsistently evident: this book speaks of the formation of the rabbinic “community” as an important stage in the larger historic expression of “Judaism” (221–24). But the rabbis have no term for “community” (cf. 8–10) or “Judaism” (cf. 223). Ironically, minut (trans.: “heresy”? “religious deviance”?) is one of the few such group-related abstract nouns that we do find in rabbinic literature (e.g., M. Megillah 4:8–9).
Nevertheless, readers who wonder about such matters will still benefit from this book, and how. Those interested in the religious deviants of rabbinic literature—whatever we may call them—will find a treasure trove of careful readings of primary sources and cunning critiques of recent scholarship. Readers can follow the direct implication of Grossberg's title and consider how rabbinic literature rhetorically constructs and names an array of religiously deviant groups (minim, meshumadim, ʾapikorsim, and others). Even if no single rabbinic text catalogues all the groups for us in the fashion of Hippolytus or Epiphanius, Grossberg has helpfully produced an encyclopedic collection of his own in this impressively well-researched and thought-provoking monograph. This book will therefore remain on the bookshelves of scholars interested in early Jewish thinking about heresy for some time to come.
