Bar Kochba – Messiah or Jesus Envy? - A Chanukah Story

The disastrous Second Jewish Revolt against Rome (132–135/6) was orchestrated Shimon bar Kochba, and backed by the leading Pharisee Rabbi – Akiva. Akiva claimed that bar Kochba was not only a good military leader, but that he is also the Messiah. He was proven wrong, certainly on the latter, but however good a fighter bar Kochba, was, he engaged a superpower, and this cost 1 million Jewish lives, and the end of the Jewish settlement in Judea.

There are several questions to be asked: whether militarily it was strategically justified? Whether there was any religious basis to Akiva's claims? And what might have occurred had the Revolt not taken place?

The answer to the first question is difficult to assess. The campaign did have a short term success, for 3 years, until Roman forces were brought in from Europe to finish off not only the revolt but to totally raze Jerusalem.

The answer to the 3^rd question is speculation – perhaps the Jews could have sat out the oppression of Hadrian, or perhaps things would have deteriorated further. It is impossible to say what would have happened, although it might have been better to live under some oppression, rather than to start a suicidal campaign.

My focus is on the 2nd question, as it is a theological one. Was there any basis to Akiva's claims that bar Kochba was the Messiah?

Rabbinic sources suggest that Akiva was actively supporting bar Kochba, and in fact 24,000 of his yeshiva students served in the army, and were subsequently killed.

To claim that someone is the messiah, it is only viable if it meets the criteria set forth by the Torah. The Torah speaks explicitly of a King, and this is somebody chosen by God (Deut 17:15), i.e. through a prophet. There was no prophet in the time of the rebellion, and hence this could not have been a King, according to Torah law. A “messiah” must first of all be an anointed king.

Next, we have to look at what authority Akiva had, and what his background was. Akiva, was the son of a convert, and later in his life became a newly-religious rabbi. His followers claimed he had oral traditions coming from Sinai that even Moses was unaware of! Nevertheless, his colleagues realized that Bar Kochba was not the Messiah and they stopped backing him. In fact, the Talmud records that  Bar Kochba was so violent that he kicked to death a leading Rabbi, Elezar haModai.   This is somewhat un-Jewish behaviour, one would think!

There is another interesting parallel, or rather lack of one – the Hasmonean revolt. Whereas the Kohanim led revolt of the Hasmoneans was successful – against a tyrannical Seleucid regime, the Phariseeic revolt of Akiva/b. Kochba was an unmitigated disaster. The Hasmoneans were Karaite in their understanding of the TNK, and did not accept the pharisee oral law. Indeed, it was their opposition to rabbinic inventions such as the water – libation that led to the Jewish civil war, in the time of Alexander Janneus. It would be safe to assume that the Hasmoneans also kept the Omer count according to the written instructions, as did the Sadducees. It is also ironic that Akiva's 24,000 students were massacred during the Omer period, which they most certainly were counting according to the erroneous Rabbinic system.

Now, going back to the man Akiva, and his judgement in backing the doomed uprising. According to Rabbinic teaching, Akiva was a gifted sage, with knowledge even greater than that of Moses! Yet on a whim, and without any basis in the Torah (which he allegedly knew better than Moses) this descendant of gentiles is nominating the “messiah” and leading the Jews into a disastrous war which leads to genocide and a final expulsion from the land of Israel.

 It shows that as wise and gifted a scholar and Sage  can be, he is still not infallible.

 The Jerusalem Talmud  points out the criticism of Akiva by his colleagues:

Rav Shimon Ben Yochai taught:

 "Akiva my master would expound the verse a star will come from Jacob as 'Koziba will come from Jacob.' When Rabbi Akiva would see Bar Koziba he would say, 'There is the King Messiah.'"

 Rav Yochanan ben Torta said: "Akiva, grass will grow from your cheeks and still the son of David will not come." (Jerusalem Talmud, Taanit chapter 4:5 page 68d)

However, this is not saying that today we should be critical of Rabbi Akiva, as he plays a central role within Orthodox Judaism. The Talmud itself does the criticism. Indeed, it became an accepted rabbinic custom to avoid making Messianic predictions, precisely because it is impossible to predict the future without direct Prophetic inspiration.

-------------

Some sources support my claim that the Hasmoneans were not "rabbinic" and did not have an oral law:

• proof: in 1 Maccabees 2 there is no Sanhedrin, and no oral law or halacha. "39 When Mattathias and his friends heard the news about this, they were greatly saddened 40 and said to one another, If all of us do as these other Jews have done and refuse to fight the  Gentiles to defend our lives and our religion, we will soon be wiped off the face of the earth. 41 On that day they decided that if anyone attacked them on the Sabbath, they would defend themselves, so that they would not all die as other Jews ad died in the caves." Their decision making was pragmatic and not based on halacha handed down orally.
•  1 Macc. 3: "48 The Gentiles would have consulted their idols in such a situation, but the Israelites unrolled the book of the Law to search for God's guidance.49 They brought the priests' robes, the offerings of the first grain, and the tithes, and then they brought in some Nazirites who had completed their vows." 
  
   They were Karaites, reading only the Torah. They did not have an oral law, a kabbalah or Sanhedrin to consult. The consulted, instead, the Torah.