What did the destruction of the second temple mean for the way Judaism would later evolve?
When I try googling all I find is Christians talking about how it proved that Jesus was right and that Jews are shit (and other things that must've served as a basis for a lot of Catholic antisemitism), but how did it affect the Jews themselves?
Did it reinforce the idea of God/YHVH as a punishing and wrathful god? Did it spread the Jewish diaspora in a way that made Judaism a more abstract and cultural thing rather than being firmly connected to a specific city and temple? How did they react?
>>290958
>What did the destruction of the second temple mean for the way Judaism would later evolve?
The single biggest and most immediate impact was that it broke the power struggle between the Pharisee and Sadducee "parties".
The Sadducees were more literal in their scriptural interpretations, had a number of differing beliefs on things like the afterlife and the proper role of Judaism in the world, and centered around Jerusalem and the Temple priesthood.
They kind of got wiped out, which left the Pharisees winning by default.
> but how did it affect the Jews themselves?
Less than you might think. After all, this had already happened once before, and Judaism bounced back from that. I would honestly argue that the diaspora following the Bar Kokhba revolt had a greater impact on Jewish life nad practice than the Temple sack.
>Did it reinforce the idea of God/YHVH as a punishing and wrathful god
To an extent, but I'm not sure how much. Judaism has had the notion of a cycle of righteousness, blessing, sin, punishment, and repentance for a very, very long time. This was just a punishment phase.
>Did it spread the Jewish diaspora in a way that made Judaism a more abstract and cultural thing rather than being firmly connected to a specific city and temple?
Not really. I mean most Jews didn't even live in Palestine in those times, you had a huge Jewish community in what's now Iraq and western Iran.
>How did they react?
A lot of whining and complaining and it provided the impetus to start writing down oral traditions that would later turn into the Mishnah and the Briasa.
.t Orthodox Jew.
From what I understand the whole city of Jerusalem was pretty much razed to the ground. Temple of Jupiter, similar to that of Baalbek Temple in Lebanon, was built on the site.
Jerome's commentary on Isaiah mentions an equestrian statue of the Emperor Hadrian being placed directly over the site of the Holy of the Holies on the Temple Mount.
Probably doesn't come as surprise that when old Jewish sources mention Hadrian it is always with the epitaph "may his bones be crushed"
>>291084
That's Bar Kokhba again. The temple sack of 70 was Vespasian (officially in command) and Titus (actually in command at the siege by the end).
As an interesting side note, Titus had a Jeiwsh girlfriend before the war, which was considered scandalous for both parties.
Hadrian was almost 50 years later.
Bumping for interest
Even thoug I have a Jewish grandma from the mother's side, which makes me technically a Jew
>>291143
... I know almost nothing about Judaism or Jewish culture
>>291155
Not the guy you responded to, but I used to go to /pol/ a bit, and every so often on a Jew thread, I would see the following Hebrew phrase.
>למה אתה כל כך שמן
What does it mean?
>>290958
It ended animal sacrifice entirely for the jews
>>291350
That would come out to "Why are you so fat?"
>>291019
Thank you, anon.
> I mean most Jews didn't even live in Palestine in those times, you had a huge Jewish community in what's now Iraq and western Iran.
Yeah I know that there were huge Jewish populations spread all over the middle east/mediterranean area, but didn't they all have a connection to Jerusalem? Similar to Muslims today have with Mecca?
> it provided the impetus to start writing down oral traditions that would later turn into the Mishnah and the Briasa.
I will try researching these more, thanks again
diaspora
>>291545
That is interesting, care to elaborate a little?
Was the temple in Jerusalem the only place where animal sacrifice was practiced?
>>291890
>Yeah I know that there were huge Jewish populations spread all over the middle east/mediterranean area, but didn't they all have a connection to Jerusalem? Similar to Muslims today have with Mecca?
Yes and no. In theory, the Temple in Jerusalem was the theological center of Judaism. In practice, a lot of people didn't give a damn, especially if you lived in Persia somewhere, it's just too much trouble to run all the way to Jerusalem to sacrifice a cow and then come back home.
Various rabbinical figures certainly saw no need to do homage to Jerusalem, and you get wonderful collections of quotes in the Mishnah like how a learned bastard is worth more than an illiterate high priest.(Horiyos, 3:8)
Theological centers were wherever prominent rabbis happened to set up shop, and Jerusalem wasn't considered particularly important on that score.
To be fair though, all of the above is pretty much the position of Pharasitic Judaism. I imagine the Sadducees had different opinions, but a lot less of their stuff survived.
>>291903
Not him, but by that time, yes: A lot of the stuff in the Bible indicates that before they built the first Temple, you did your animal sacrifices on an altar you built yourself, but afterwards, it was centralized and put under the control of a hereditary priesthood.
>>291903
The bible actually gives a pretty neat overview of this. Originally sacrifices were very commonly performed at "high places," (not an expert on Israelite archaeology but I think it's exactly what it sounds like) until King Josiah "found" the book of Deuteronomy (or a proto-Deuteronomy) which calls for sacrifices only at the place YHWH chooses as the dwelling for his name - Jerusalem.
>>291928
That makes sense, thanks
(Is Pharasitic really the official and proper term by the way? It almost makes /pol/'s job too easy...)
>>291939
>>291943
So temples in other cities than Jerusalem wouldn't have had animal sacrifices? Was the temple thre the only place YHWH called his home/dwelling place?
I have to say I like /his/ a lot so far by the way, I appreciate the informative answers
It ended the levitical priesthood and destroyed Jewish genealogies.
>>291981
>Is Pharasitic really the official and proper term by the way?
As an adjective of something pertaining to Pharisees of Phariseeism? Yes.
>So temples in other cities than Jerusalem wouldn't have had animal sacrifices?
Not by the sack of the Temple period, no. Earlier on, yeah, although the brief descriptions you get in the Tanach seem to indicate less temples and cities and more altars in some sort of place that's considered holy for whatever reason, without much if any supporting structure.
And as a minor technical point, it's sacrifices in general: They sacrificed more than just animals, things like wine and meal offerings (usually burnt)
>Was the temple thre the only place YHWH called his home/dwelling place?
Well, you had the Mishkan, which was a kind of precursor temple, that was portable and carried around by the Israelites as they wandered around.
