CURIOUS ANECDOTE - Discovered in an Ancient Yemenite Prayer Book

[David Ben-Abraham]

CURIOUS ANECDOTE

We owe a great deal of respect and thanks for Rabbi Yehiya Bashiri who brought down this extraordinary and curious excerpt in his Baladi-rite Prayer Book.

From that ancient testimony found written in Yehiya Bashiri's Yemenite Baladi-rite Siddur (Prayer Book) (towards end of Microfilm # 26787 at the Hebrew University, or Microfilm # 1219 at the Ben Tzvi Institute), Simon Peter had forsaken the Christian religion at some time following Jesus' death, and he went off to live in Babylon. However, when he returned on a visit to the land of Israel, he was compelled by the local gentile inhabitants (those who were Christians and who controlled access to the Temple Mount) to remain amongst them in their own country, and not to return to Babylon. They had threatened him by saying that they would prevent Jews from entering the Temple Mount if he would refuse to do so.
The excerpt is here copied down as it appears in that handwritten manuscript. A translation follows:


והיה בבבל חכם גדול וראש סנהדרין ושמו שמעון כיפה. ולמה נקרא שמו שמעון כיפה שהיה עומד על האבן שנתנבא עליה יחזקאל והוא בנהר כבר והיתה האבן רועשת וצד האבן נענה ואומר בת קול נענה מן השמים לשמעון כיפה כיון ששמעו נצרים כך בבית המקדש ששמעון כיפה משתמש בבת קול ויש בו חכמה עד אין חקר ואין מספר והיו מתקנאין בישראל שאין בישראל כמותו. הכניס הקב"ה בלבו של שמעון כיפה עצה שיעלה לירושלם. כיון שעלה לירושלם והתפלל שם בחג הסכות נתקבצו אגמוטס והישיש הגדול של נצרים ובאו אצל שמעון כיפה להר הזיתים ביום הושענא. כיון שראו חכמתו אמרו נתיעץ ביחד ולא נניח כמות זה שיהיה בישראל. החזיקו בידו ואמרו לו לא נניחך שתחזור לבבל ותהיה עם היהודים אלא חזור עמנו ותהיה נצרי כמותינו ואנחנו נעשך ראש לכל הנצרים. אמר להם לא אניח דין ישראל. אמרו לו אם לא תחזור לדין נצרים אנו נהרוג אותך ונהרוג כל יהודי שיכנס למקדש. כשראו כך נתקבצו ונתחננו לו ואמרו לו אין עליך בזה הדבר כלום אשמה ועון. חזור עמהן ותהיה לישראל מושיע ותעשה ברוב חכמתך. כיון שראה שהגזירה קשה על ישראל חזר עם הנצרים ואמר להם אני חוזר לדינכם על מנת שלא תכו ולא תהרגו יהודי הבא בבית המקדש ולא תמנעום מן הזיתים. קבל הישיש עם שאר הנצרים אלו התנאים ושלא ימנעו יהודי מבית המקדש. ועוד התנה עליהם שיבנו לו מגדל גבוה ויכנס בתוכו ולא יאכל בעולם לא בשר ולא דבר אחר אלא לחם ומים לבד ואני אהיה מוריד (לרם) [לכם] קופה בחבל ותנו לי לחם בתוכה וכל כך עשה שלא יטמא במאכלם ולא ישתחוה לצלם. לאחר כך עשה סדור תפלות קרובוצות לכל השנה ויוצרות ומוספין על שמו כשם שעשה ר' אליעזר ביר' קילר. ושלח וקיבץ זקני ישראל וא"ל בבקשה מכם שתקחו ממני זה הסידור ותשלחוהו לבבל לראשי ישיבות אם ייטב בעיניהם ילמדוהו לחזנים ויתפללו בו כדי שיזכר שמי עמהם. שלחו אותו לר' נתן דצוציתא שהיה ראש גלות והראהו לראשי ישיבות ולסנהדרין ואמרו טוב הוא. ואמרו לזקנים קחו אותו ולמדוהו כל מי שרוצה יתפלל בו עד היום הזה. והיו מתפללין בו כל שבת וזה שמעון כיפה הוא שקורין אותו הנשטורין פטרוס. זה השלמת מעשה ישו. של ישו בן פנדירא דכפר באלהא רבא ואטעי עלמא בתרוי.

[Translation]:
"…Now there was in Babylon a great wise man and the head of the Sanhedrin, and his name was Simon Caipha. Now why was he called Simon Caipha? Because he used to stand upon the rock which Ezekiel prophesied upon when he was on the River Chabar, and the stone would shake [as if there was an earth quake] and one side of the stone would answer [him] and they would say the 'bath kol' (a heavenly voice) had answered Simon Caipha out of heaven. When the Nazoraeans heard this in the Temple precincts that Simon Peter (lit. Caipha) had recourse to the 'bath kol' (a heavenly voice), and that he was endowed with wisdom beyond compare, they became jealous of Israel, for there was no one in Israel like unto him. The Holy One, blessed be He, had put within the heart of Simon Caipha counsel to go up to Jerusalem. When he had come up to Jerusalem and prayed there on the Feast of Tabernacles (Heb. Hag Hasukkoth), there came together Agmost and the great elder of the Nazoraeans, and went unto Simon Caipha to the Mount of Olives during [the last day of the feast, known as] Hoshanna. When they had seen his wisdom, they said unto him: Let us take counsel together, for we will not let aught that is like unto this remain amongst [the people of] Israel [which live abroad]. They held fast his hand and said to him: We will not let you return to Babylon and to be with the Jews [there]. Rather, come back unto us and be a Nazoraean like us, and we will make you the chief of all the Nazoraeans. He said unto them: I shall not leave the religion of Israel. They said to him: If you do not return to the religion of the Nazoraeans, we will kill you and will kill every Jew that enters the Temple precincts. When they [of Israel] saw that things came to that, they gathered themselves together and pleaded with him, saying: You have nothing to fear about this matter, neither guilt nor iniquity. Go back to them and be for Israel as a saver of life, and do according to thy abundant wisdom. When he saw that the decree was hard upon Israel, he went back to the Nazoraeans and said to them: I am coming back to your religion on the condition that you do not smite or kill a single Jew that comes to the Temple precincts, neither hold-back from them their olives. The elder accepted of his conditions, as well as the other Nazoraeans, that they not prevent a Jew from entering the Temple precincts. He also made with them another stipulation that they should build for him a high tower, into which he would go, and that he would not eat in this world flesh or anything else besides bread and water alone, [saying] that I will lower down for you a basket by a rope and put therein for me bread. Now he did all this so that he might not be defiled by their foods, neither bow down to a graven image.

Afterwards, he made a Prayer Book (siddur tefillloth) of liturgies for the entire year, as well as the 'yotzer' verses and 'Musaf' prayers, under [the acrostics] of his name, just as Eleazar the son of Rabbi Killir did, and sent and gathered together the elders of Israel and said to them: I beseech thee that you take from me this Prayer Book (Siddur), and send it to Babylon, to the heads of the academies there. If it should be pleasing in their sight, let them teach it to their [synagogue] cantors, and pray in it, so that my name might be remembered amongst them. They then sent it to Rabbi Nathan of Susitha, who was the Exilarch [at that time], and he showed it to the heads of the academies and to the Sanhedrin (the council or assembly of judges), and they said that it was good. They then said to the elders: Take it and learn it. Anyone who wishes let him pray in it. [And thus we have it] to this very day. Now they would pray in it each Sabbath day. Now this Simon Caipha, he it is that is called by the Nestorians 'Peter' (Petros)…"

This extraordinary excerpt explains why Rabbi Simcha (a disciple of RASHI's), in his "Mahzor Vitri" (Section on the Passover Haggadah where he writes about "Birkas Hashir") mentions a common belief in his days that Simon Peter had written the liturgy known as "Nishmath Kol Hai" (The Breath of Every Living Thing), read by us each Sabbath morning in the synagogues. He, thinking that Simon Peter had never abdicated from that religion which is built upon falsehoods, derides Simon Peter in harsh terms by calling him "Peter Hamor" – which is a play on words. Peter, in Greek, means "rock." "Peter Hamor," in Hebrew, means "the firstborn of a donkey." Rabbi Simcha goes on to say that anyone who says that Simon Peter wrote "Nishmath Kol Hai" will, when the Temple is rebuilt, have to bring for his atonement a fat sin-offering!

What he failed to realize was that Simon Peter was no longer a deceived Christian, but rather a law-abiding Jew following the teachings and practices of Israel.

David

[Ovadia Ben Eliahu]

The case of Esther Ha Malka is surrounded by much deeper considerations, that are beyond this discussion, and certainly when it comes to your conception of convertion, then I can say that somebody that was converted by a lower bet din, remains a Jew if he does not adhere to kabalat mitzvoth? I don't think so.

And about the sons of Haman, Hashem gave him this zejut becase mida K'neged Mida, The Kidush Hashem that his ancester provoqued in this world, was rewarded in this way, the same hapen with Korach and his sons.

Conversely I can't see any Kiddush Hashem caused by Simon Peter.

But in the case of Ajmenadjin, he may be a Tzadik, in acordance with this views, because he belives in the unique Daeity that we belive, and not only that, he prays 5 times a day to the same Deity and we only three.

[David Ben-Abraham]

In Yemen, there have been incidences where Jews were compelled to convert to Islam, or suffer death. They chose to convert, but secretly practised their Judaism. Later, they returned to keep their religion openly.

Islam, generally speaking, is not considered a religion of idolatry, while Christianilty is. It is implied by that record of Simon Peter in that Baladi-rite Siddur that he only returned to the Nazoraeans "for appearance sake," but that he was NOT a practising Christian. The record also says that he would not eat of their meats - only bread and water. It also says that he lived in a tower so that he would not have to bow down to any graven image.

Ovadia, do you simply write-off all these things as being untrue?

David

[Aryeh Shore]

Well, it is been suggested that the Rambam understood enough about Islam that any statement of conversion that was not meant is not valid so he wrote to the Jews of Teman they could make an oral declaration of acceptance since it wasn't for real anyway.
As I said before, it is quite clear that a Jew who "converts" is still a Jew and you may not lend him money with rabit. However, in extreme situations like an Yibum which is not leaving Spain in spite of a number of chances to leave, there was a case where they declared him a non-jew. The question if one had to "convert" back to Judiasm is dealt with a number of times, in particular whether he had to go the mikveh and shave his whole body first.

[Ovadia Ben Eliahu]

Who am I to Deny or approve, what I say is that Simon Peter much well known as Saint Peter is not a Tzadik, History shows that there is no event in his life that caused any type of Kidush Hashem.

Quite to the contrary, he joined and institution that through history caused monumental damage to Jews, Physically and Spiritually.

Let me repeat a past posting directed, at that time to Aryeh:

"It seems that we Jews, don’t get it, The hole Torah is full of warnings about turning away and worship gods that are alien, shituf or not, and we still rationalize to make them Tzadiks.

Let me this time, be more graphic and show you the power of rationalization of some Jewish “Tzadiks” in actual times.

Please go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jv8TW2Pts_w&feature=related

And spend a Little time watching this, and I am sure you will appreciate the dangers of accommodating the Torah and his principles to what we think it should be".


After seeing this video I have to consider, that in some years probably hundreds. there is a possibility that somebody will interpret through a midrash, that this meeting, with Ajmenadjin is a proof that he was a Tzadik, because as I said, he was circumcised he pray to a unique God like we do, and among other things he does not eat pork etc.

It is very well known from Chazal that a single event reported by three persons would render three different stories.

The only way to judge the truth is through history, after time realy has gone by, and this certainly shows that Saint Peter was not a Tzadik, by any strech of the imagination.

But what really caught my attention is that two apparently knowledgeable men like you, David and Arieh, living in Israel, can not aprehend a truth so evident, like the fact that Kutach can not be eaten with meat.

If I accepted to continue this tread was, because the evidence at hand, is so clear that at the end, I thought, you will acquiesce.

I see with sadness that this is not the case, for the two of you, Saint Peter is Tzadik for me is not, and never will be. Quite the contrary.

So it is useless to continue this sterile interchange that would not enhance by any means the Great Name of Hashem.

Hatzlacha

[Aryeh Shore]

Dear Ovadiah,
You are confusing scholarship with value judgements.
If a midrash from a new source is presented, one asks it is authentic, i.e., it was written by the Jews. First one looks at the language and content. It is compatible with the time, e.g., does it use a word which was not used until the 11th century. Then one asked if any parallel midrash is found in other sources or non-Jewish sources. Then one decides (usually just the nul hypothesis that can not be proven to be a fake) if it is authentic.
The scholar is only concerned that it reflects a Jewish view at a period of time. It doesn't mean that we accept the midrash literally or draw any conclusions about one's view of Judiasm. Actually in this case, considering the other literature of Jewish-Christian polemics and the rather nasty improbable comments about Jesus and his origins, it is highly unlikely that the author meant it to be taken seriously by the Jews. I suggest that its origin is Toldat Yeshu from the 4th century which was unacceptable both to Christians and Jews.
Lets take Alfa Beta Ben Sira from the eighth century. No one knows why this parody was written. It is clearly not the Ben Sira of the second cenury BCE. However the absolutely insulting story of his origins as considered authentic by some and the Zohar actually quotes from theh book. Bottom line: Schloars clearly consider it a fraud but some Jewish sources use it to make value judgemnent anyways.

[David Ben-Abraham]

Ovadia, Shalom

I'm not saying that Simon Peter was a Tzadik. I was only quoting an ancient Hebrew source that, by the way, mentioned him in the context that we brought down above. As for "history," well, I guess that depends on where you read your histories. You can either take it, or leave it. I was not suggesting that you must accept what is stated there. If your facts are different, so let it be. I was only reporting the facts as I've seen them written in that Yemenite Baladi-rite Siddur and in Mahzor Vitri (a Siddur written by Rabbi Simcha, a disciple of Rashi).

By the way, in the uncensored editions of the Tosefta (Hullin, ch. 2), a story is related there about Rabbi Eliezer b. Hyrcanus who was caught with words of heresy, that is to say, he was enticed by the words of the son of Puntera. As everyone knows, Rabbi Eliezer was ostracized and ex-communicated because of this. He later expressed remorse because of that experience. In spite of all that happened to him, he is still mentioned in the Mishna. Rebbe Yehuda Hanassi did not decide to cross-out his name when he compiled the Mishna. Perhaps when I have the time, G-d willing, I will translate that excerpt for you.

David

[David Ben-Abraham]

CORRECTION:

It was Rabbi Hiyya the Great who compiled the Tosefta, and not Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi. Sorry. It was my mistake.