Jesus in the Talmud

16 Chapter 1all kind of materials that might be used for writing, and of objects uponwhich one might write, and states that the prohibition of writing includesalso the use of one’s own body as a writing object. From this the logicalquestion arises: But what about tattoos? 2 Are they, too, to be regarded aswriting and hence forbidden on Sabbath? 3 According to R. Eliezer, the answeris yes (they are forbidden on Sabbath), whereas R. Yehoshua allows it(in the Tosefta parallel it is the Sages).The Tosefta and both the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud elaboratefurther upon this Mishna. According to the Tosefta, R. Eliezer respondsto the Sages: “But did not Ben Satra learn only in such a way?” 4 —in other words, did he not use the tattoos on his body as an aid to facilitatehis learning (hence, weren’t they clearly letters and therefore forbidden tobe “written” on Sabbath)? This is bad enough, but the two Talmudimcome up with an even worse explanation of why tattooing one’s body onSabbath is forbidden, when they have Eliezer ask: “But did not Ben Stadabring forth witchcraft from Egypt by means of scratches/tattoos (biseritah)upon his flesh?” 5 In all three versions the Sages dismiss R. Eliezer’s objectionwith the counterargument that Ben Satra/Stada 6 was a fool and thatthey would not let one fool’s behavior influence the implementation ofSabbath laws.It is within this context that the Talmud (Shab 104b) 7 proceeds with aclarification of the enigmatic “fool’s” family background. The text is onlypreserved in the uncensored manuscripts and printed editions of theBavli; I quote according to Ms. Munich 95 (written 1342 in Paris), withsome variations in the footnotes:(Was he) the son of Stada 8 (and not on the contrary) the son of Pandera?Said Rav Hisda: the husband (ba