Jesus in the Talmud

188 Notes to Appendix13. Editio princeps Venice; the name is deleted in Ms. Leiden, and the secondglossator added “Jesus Pantera.”14. The references according to Maier, Jesus von Nazareth, p. 299, n. 358.15. No name.16. Same.17. Same.18. Same.19. Editio princeps Venice; the name is deleted in Ms. Leiden, and the secondglossator added “in the name of Jesus son of Pandera.”20. Editio princeps Venice; the name is deleted in Ms. Leiden, and the secondglossator added “of Jesus Pantera.”21. According to Maier, Jesus von Nazareth, p. 301, n. 372, this is identical inall manuscripts and printed editions of QohR (with the exception of the Vilnaedition which again leaves an empty space for the name).22. Later addition that is not legible.23. Same.24. Same.25. Same.26. Same.27. No name mentioned.28. With the exception of QohR 10:5: just “son of Pandera.”29. With the exception of New York 15.30. In Ms. Firenze, just “Jesus.”31. Maier makes this claim over and over again; see his Jesus von Nazareth,pp. 13, 16, 63, 98, 110, 127, 165, 173.32. Particularly revealing is Maier’s discussion of R. Yehoshua b. Perahya’s attemptto push Jesus away (chapter 3). He quotes here a very similar story fromAvraham b. Azriel’s Arugat ha-Bosem, written around 1234 (i.e., before the implementationof Christian censorship in 1263), according to which R. Aqivapushes Jesus away with both his hands. Avraham b. Azriel’s version is obviously aconflation of the two Bavli stories in Berakhot 17b (my chapter 2) and in Sanhedrin107b/Sot 47a (my chapter 3), but crucial is the fact that Jesus is clearlymentioned. Instead of concluding that pre-censorship references to our Bavlistory do contain Jesus, and that Jesus therefore seems to be an integral part ofthis story, Maier resorts to the convoluted sentence: “this quotation demonstrateshow little we have actually gained by the ‘uncensored’ text because the earlier