Walter T. Wilson, «Matthew, Philo, and Mercy for Animals (Matt 12,9-14)», Vol. 96 (2015) 201-221
After comparing Matt 12,11-12 with its synoptic parallels (Mark 3,4; Luke 13,15-16; 14,5) and with texts that discuss the treatment of animals on the Sabbath (e.g., CD 11.13-14), the passage is compared with Philonic texts (Spec. 2.89; 4.218; Virt. 81, 133, 139-140, 160; cf. Plutarch, Cato 5.5; Esu carn. 996A; Iamblichus, Vit. Pythag. 30.186; Porphyry, Abst. 3.26.6) in which the Alexandrian discerns a principle informing a law that refers to the treatment of animals, and then suggests that the principle applies by analogy to the treatment of people, illuminating the principle with reference to mercy and similar concepts.
03_Wilson_201_221_201_221 10/07/15 12:41 Pagina 204
204 WALTER T. WILSON 204
Matthew renders Mark’s double set of alternatives as a simple
statement, converting the latter’s rhetorical question into the decla-
ration of a general rule 13. Evidently, for him the principle of saving
life on the Sabbath (for which see m. Yoma 8.6) does not apply to
the case at hand. What does apply is the illustration that he provides
in 12,11, one that has a parallel not in Mark 3,1-6 but in Luke 14,5.
ti,j e;stai evx u`mw/n a;nqrwpoj o]j e[xei pro,baton e[n kai. eva.n
evmpe,sh| tou/to toi/j sa,bbasin eivj bo,qunon( ouvci. krath,sei auvto.
kai. evgerei/È (Matt 12,11)
ti,noj u`mw/n ui`o.j h' bou/j eivj fre,ar pesei/tai( kai. ouvk euvqe,wj
avnaspa,sei auvto.n evn h`me,ra| tou/ sabba,touÈ (Luke 14,5)
Dissimilarities in wording and context suggest that Matthew and
Luke accessed the logion not from Q but from variants in their re-
spective Sondergut 14. In each case the application of the illustration
includes the use of an analogy between the treatment of animals
and the treatment of people in order to demonstrate the propriety
of healing on the Sabbath 15. The version in Matt 12,11 refers to a
sheep, in which case the illustration supports an a fortiori argument.
Implicitly, the man with a withered hand (12,10) is likened to the
sheep, Jesus is likened to the smallholder to whom the sheep be-
longs 16, and the man’s healing is likened to the act of lifting the
sheep out of the pit into which it has fallen 17. If “doing good” (12,12b)
13
He also emends avgaqo.n poih/sai to kalw/j poiei/n, for which cf. Matt 5,16.
14
M. TRAUTMANN, Zeichenhafte Handlungen Jesu. Ein Beitrag zur Frage
nach dem geschichtlichen Jesus (FB 37; Würzburg 1980) 309-315; C. HEIL,
Lukas und Q. Studien zur lukanischen Redaktion des Spruchevangeliums Q
(BZNW 111; Berlin 2003) 74-80.
15
For the question of healing on the Sabbath, see CD 11.9c-10a; m. Shab.
6.2-3; 14.3-4; 22.6; m. Yoma 8.5; m. ‘Ed. 2.5; t. Shab. 12.8-14; MEIER, A Mar-
ginal Jew, IV, 244-255; SALDARINI, Community, 133, 272; L. DOERING, Schab-
bat. Sabbathalacha und –praxis im antiken Judentum und Urchristentum
(TSAJ 78; Tübingen 1999) 449-450; N.L. COLLINS, Jesus, The Sabbath and
the Jewish Debate. Healing on the Sabbath in the 1st and 2nd Centuries CE
(LNTS 474; London 2014).
16
The verbal construction (pro,baton e[n) may suggest that this is the per-
son’s only sheep. See LUZ, Matthew, II, 187; DOERING, Schabbat, 461.
17
Matthew is particularly fond of sheep imagery (cf. 7,15; 9,36; 10,6.16;
15,24; 25,32-33; 26,31; and esp. 18,12-13). The reference to sheep in 12,11