PASSAGES RELATING TO JESUS
69
mention the third criminal by name. They read
that Onqelos called up ' the sinners of Israel'
(plural), which is obviously absurd.' The older
editions have ' the sinner of Israel,' which is gram-
matically correct, but the reading 'Jeshu 'is vouched
for by the work that contains all the expurgated
passages of the Talmud.' It is evident that some
individual person is referred to, and that this person
is not Balaam, since his case has just been disposed
of. Moreover, it was some one who had ' mocked
against the words of the wise,'
i.e.
the Rabbis.
Internal evidence alone would suffice to show that
Jesus was meant ; and as there is authority for the
reading 'Jeshu,' we may rest assured that he is
the person referred to.
The passage has been introduced here, as stated
above, in order to establish the fact that in the
Talmud, Balaam and Jesus are classed together, and
that therefore Balaam serves frequently as a type of
Jesus. I do not mean that wherever Balaam is
mentioned Jesus is intended, or that everything said
about the former is really meant for the latter. I
mean that wherever Balaam is mentioned, there is a
sort of under-current of reference to Jesus, and that
much more is told of Balaam than would have been
told if he and not Jesus had really been the person
thought of.3 I shall henceforth assume this close
1t The sinners of Israel' may, however, be the right reading in the last
line of the passage, because there the comparison is general between ' the
sinners of Israel' and 'the prophets of the heathen'
2
I have used the one published at Konigsberg, 1860, I1162h D-Itnip
D'tr'r 111VIDTL The invaluable work of Rabbinowicz is unfortunately not
available for the tractate G}ittin.
' There is a suggestive remark in b. Sanh.
106b
(immediately after
 |  |  |