Shana Schwartz
Titus’s entry into the Second Temple after conquering Jerusalem is vividly recounted by the Sages of the Babylonian Talmud (Gittin 56b). After breaching the innermost wall of the city and embittering the lives of its unfortunate inhabitants, the Roman general entered the Temple and slashed the parokhet with a sword. Miraculously, blood spurted out of the curtain, convincing Titus that he had effectively destroyed the God of the Jews. Then, after depicting the height of Titus’s hubris, the Sages recount his demise. A lowly creature, a gnat, flew into his nostril and picked at his brain for seven years until it ultimately killed him. Some interpret this aggadic narrative as a parable for sacrilege and divine retribution,[1] while others view it as an allegorical representation of the spiritual and moral violation inflicted by Titus.[2] But this account of the fall of Titus, rich in physiological imagery, could also symbolize the continued survival of the Jewish people as a unified body politic. To understand this analogy, one must understand the medical knowledge available during the time of the Sages.
Talmud-Era Perspectives on Human Physiology
Prior to the discovery of nerves, Aristotle posited that the heart was responsible for motion, sensation, and nutrition. He believed that the heart radiated heat that sustained the body’s life and that the brain existed to cool the heart if it became excessively heated.[3] He considered the nose to be “the sink of the brain, by which the phlegm of the brain is purged.”[4] Hippocrates, however, believed the brain had the most important role in the body, stating that “some are mistaken when they claim to think with the heart.”[5] Later on, the veracity of Hippocrates’s cephalocentric theory was confirmed by the experiments of Galen, a Greco-Roman physician of the gladiators of Pergamon and later to Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius.
Galen maintained the Platonic theory of the tripartite soul―i.e., that the soul exists in three components in different locations within the human body.[6] The brain, according to Galen, houses the first soul, which “presides over reasoning and thought and provides sensation and motion.”[7] The second soul, situated in the heart, “controls the passion and is the vital force.” The third soul, located in the liver, “is in charge of nutrition.”[8] Nutrition, according to Galen, refers to the transformation of food into blood. This blood, he believed, was produced in the liver, transported to the right ventricle of the heart and passed through invisible pores of the septum to the left ventricle.[9] There, it was mixed with a substance called “pneuma,” supposedly inspired through the trachea, to gain “vital spirits.” Then, the blood flowed to the rete mirabile, which is a conglomeration of blood vessels at the base of some mammalian brains.[10] There, the vital spirit was transformed into the animal spirit and was dispersed throughout the body. Galenic physiology was widely accepted for centuries and is even described in R. Yehudah Ha-Levi’s Kuzari.[11] However, many of his antiquated ideas were ultimately disproved by later scientists.
These three scholars provide the framework of a well-known Talmudic discussion. In the Jerusalem Talmud (y. Yoma 8:5), the Sages discuss the permissibility of removing rubble on Shabbat to save a life. R. Yohanan states that one should continue excavating until it is clear that the victim is dead, which is determined either by checking for breathing at the nose or, according to another opinion, by observing the navel.[12] Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman provides two possible explanations for this latter opinion.[13] First, the navel could refer to the pulse of the abdominal aorta, which is indicative of a beating heart. However, he appears to reject this explanation. He writes that there is no mention of checking a pulse in the entirety of the Talmud and that the muscle and adipose tissue present in the abdomen make the pulsations of the abdominal aorta difficult to detect. He then posits that checking the navel refers to the protrusion of the abdominal wall when the diaphragm descends, which, like the nose, would be a sign of breathing. The same case of the collapsed house appears in the Babylonian Talmud as well (Yoma 85a). However, instead of the navel, the second opinion there says to check the victim’s heart, clearly referring to the heartbeat.
These opinions align well with those of Aristotle, Hippocrates, and Galen, respectively. According to Aristotle’s cardiocentrism, one would determine death by inactivity of the heart. Hippocrates would determine death at the brain. And, according to Galen, inactivity of the liver, located in the abdominal cavity, would indicate death. Both the Babylonian and Jerusalem versions of the case identify the prevailing opinion as the nose, which R. Yehudah Aryeh of Modena associates with the brain due to their close proximity to one another.[14] Modern physiology reveals a deeper relationship between them that supports the prevailing opinions of the Talmud. Breathing, detected most easily at the nose, is controlled by the brain’s medulla oblongata. Therefore, R. Moshe Feinstein ruled that death will inevitably occur when the brain ceases to function since it controls respiration.[15] Similarly, R. Moshe David Tendler believed that the death of the brain stem was enough to declare a patient dead.[16]
In addition to breathing, the brain controls and regulates other physiological systems in the body, indicating its superiority over the heart and liver. It is also the organ responsible for sensation and cognition. R. Yehudah Ha-Levi likens the priests and prophets to the human head due to their leadership positions.[17] From these positions, they unify the nation under their control like the nervous system does to the other physiological systems in the body. Without proper governance from the brain, the body systems would ultimately fail.
The same principles apply in consideration of the health of society. The Jewish nation cannot function properly without its leaders. Ultimately, Jerusalem fell to the Romans because the Jews failed to conserve proper leadership and unity and instead prioritized Roman defeat and Jewish independence. Jewish survival in exile is attributed to the wise leaders who redirected focus toward restoring unity, highlighting the brain’s crucial role in guiding the Jewish nation.
Roman Assault on the Jewish Body Politic
The first leader lost to the Jewish nation at this time was King Agrippa II, the last ruler of the Herodian dynasty.[18] During his reign, the Roman procurator of Judea, Gessius Florus, angered the Jews by abusing his authority, most notoriously by confiscating funds intended for the Temple. Wishing to maintain diplomatic relations between Rome and Jerusalem, Agrippa urged the Jews to remain peaceful. However, shortly after his address to the nation, a group of Jews assaulted the Roman fortress of Masada and brutally massacred the Romans who occupied it. Around the same time, Eleazar, the son of Ananias the High Priest and governor of the Temple, declared that no Jew should offer the customary sacrifice to the Roman emperor. This protest demonstrated obstinacy reminiscent of Pharaoh’s refusal to free the Israelites during the Egyptian exile. Instead of sustaining his power, Pharaoh’s stubbornness only perpetuated his own anguish as well as the suffering of his people. In Exodus 10:1, it is written that God “hardened [Pharaoh’s] heart.” The Midrash explains this to mean that Pharaoh’s heart became like a liver, which becomes tougher and more impenetrable each time it is boiled.[19] Similarly, each plague brought upon Pharaoh and his people only made him more obstinate. Like Pharaoh, the seditious Jews who resisted Agrippa’s influence perpetuated the suffering of their own nation through their stubbornness. Understanding the danger facing him, Agrippa fled Jerusalem, and the citizens were left without a king.
While the obstinacy of Pharaoh and the Second Temple–era zealots is compared to a liver, this characteristic is elsewhere associated with another anatomical structure. Throughout the Bible, the Jews are depicted as a “stiff-necked nation,” which, according to R. Samson Raphael Hirsch, is a positive attribute; it is the basis for dedication to the Torah.[20] The neck supports the head, holding it above all the other organs in the body. Therefore, preserving the monarchical leadership in Judea would have been a more positive manifestation of their stubbornness. These zealots were not, in fact, stiff-necked. Instead, their stubbornness manifested itself in the liver, neglecting the neck and allowing the head of the Jewish body politic to fall.
After intimidating Agrippa into fleeing the city, zealot leader Menahem of the Sicarii set fire to the house of Ananias the High Priest to punish him for his opposition to the revolt. Josephus refers to Ananias as the “nerves of the city,”[21] highlighting his role in maintaining peace and unity in Jerusalem like the nervous system synchronizes the physiological systems of the body. Therefore, his assassination eliminated any hope of achieving peace with the Romans and increased division amongst the Jews. In retaliation for murdering his father, Eleazar―himself a zealot―slew Menahem, and the factions of zealots multiplied.
Following a defeat at Jotapata, the Jews replaced the High Priest Ananus with a simple man named Phineas whom they selected by lot. Josephus writes that Ananus was a “prudent man, and had perhaps saved the city if he could but have escaped the hands of those that plotted against him.”[22] Instead, they selected a man who was unworthy of the position and “did not well know what the High-priesthood was.” His cluelessness thereby made him susceptible to control by seditious factions. The Sages seem to acknowledge this incident as one of the reasons for the destruction of Jerusalem, stating that the “small and great citizens were equated.”[23] The Talmud, quoting from Isaiah, specifically mentions that the “common people were like the priest”―precisely what occurred here.[24]
When John of Gischala, a zealot from the north, arrived in Jerusalem, he incited the zealots against Ananus, one of the heads of the Judean provisional government. Joined by the Idumeans, John commenced a brutal campaign of slaughter against the residents of Jerusalem. Ananus was killed, which, according to Josephus, marked the beginning of Jerusalem’s end. Now, instead of presenting a united front against the Roman forces, the factions engaged in internal power struggles and conflicts, diverting resources and attention away from the looming external threat. This infighting weakened the morale of the Jews in Jerusalem, diminishing their ability to withstand the Roman siege in the near future. The savagery ensued, and word of Jewish division―and therefore Jewish vulnerability―reached the general Vespasian.
The Temple Mount became a bloodbath with Jews slaying other Jews in every direction. R. Yehudah Ha-Nasi alludes to the inherent pitfalls of divided leadership when Peleimu asks him on which head a two-headed person should don phylacteries. He replies, “Either exile yourself or accept excommunication for asking such a ridiculous question.”[25] But his response when asked a similar question by a father of dicephalic twins is nowhere near as harsh. Tosafot explain that the two-headed person referenced by Peleimu exists only in the realm of demons,[26] which, according to Maimonides, refers to people who use their intelligence for evil.[27] Peleimu’s inquiry could perhaps be referencing divided leadership, like the multiple factions controlling Jerusalem. R. Yehudah Ha-Nasi therefore condemns the question because it manifests the evil ideas that resulted in the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the Jewish nation; this could also explain why he instructs Peleimu to exile himself for voicing it.
On the same Talmudic passage, Tosafot cite a midrash about King Solomon and his interaction with the demon Ashmedai, who introduces him to a two-headed demon.[28] R. Yehudah Aryeh of Modena describes how King Solomon covers one head and pours boiling water on the other.[29] Both heads cry out in pain, and King Solomon concludes that they are one person despite their two distinct minds. From this, R. J. David Bleich learns that “separate identity is predicated upon an independent nervous system.”[30] If one head feels pain and the other suffers as well, they share a nervous system and are not considered separate identities. According to R. Meir Blumenfeld, this represents the condition of the Jews in exile.[31] When Jews of one land are in pain, the Jews in another land feel it as well. However, sensitivity toward the pain of other Jews deteriorated with the political leadership during this time, prompting wiser men to take action.
After the deaths of emperors Nero, Galba, and Otho, the general Vespasian discovered his potential to become the next emperor of Rome and began to fight harder to prove his worth. He besieged Jerusalem during the Passover festival, when more Jews than usual were gathered in Jerusalem. To encourage other Jews to fight, the zealots set fire to the city’s food supply, starting the countdown to the city’s defeat. A famine broke out due to the scarcity of food, starving the many Jews trapped within the walls of the city until they began to die of extreme hunger. One of the zealot leaders, Abba Sikkara, was summoned by his uncle, R. Yohanan b. Zakkai, who criticized him for bringing the famine upon the city.[32] He promised his nephew salvation if he assisted him in sneaking out of the besieged city. Abba Sikkara successfully snuck him out, and the rabbi met with Vespasian, addressing him as the emperor. Vespasian, who at the time had only been a general, informed him that he was liable for two penalties of death: the first for referring to him as emperor, and the second for waiting so long to meet with him. R. Yohanan b. Zakkai answered by predicting Vespasian’s anointment and justified his delay by blaming the zealots. Understanding that R. Yohanan b. Zakkai would ask him to spare the Temple, Vespasian rhetorically asked him, “If there is a barrel of honey, and a snake [derakon] is wrapped around it, wouldn’t they break the barrel in order to kill the snake?” The snake refers to the zealots, and the barrel refers to the Temple. Vespasian conveys here that he cannot spare the Temple due to the presence of the zealots, whom he must destroy.
R. Yohanan b. Zakkai was silent, for which R. Akiva criticized him. R. Akiva contended that R. Yohanan b. Zakkai should have suggested removing the snake with a pair of tongs and killing it, while leaving the barrel intact. However, removing the zealots would have been far from simple. They manifest the liver’s stubbornness not only in their impenetrability but also in their ability to regenerate and grow in size. When one faction was destroyed, another would arise or diverge from a previous one. And they perpetuated the same barbarism as the factions preceding them. The only source of life for this malignant sect of Jews was the Temple, which, if left alone, would only have preserved the violence and savagery of the zealots.
A messenger then arrived from Rome and informed Vespasian that Emperor Vitellius had died, making Vespasian the new emperor. In his excitement, he allowed R. Yohanan b. Zakkai to make a request. Rather than asking him to spare the Temple, R. Yohanan b. Zakkai recognized the need to restore proper leadership for the Jewish people. He made three requests, all focused on preserving the Jewish leadership that the zealots attempted to destroy. His first request, the city of Yavneh, became a center of Torah study that restored leadership in Jewish law. It also minimized contradictions and debates in halakhic rulings. His second request was to spare the family of Rabban Gamliel, descendents of the dynasty of King David, thereby preserving political leadership.[33] His third request was to summon a doctor to heal R. Tzadok, a priest who had been fasting excessively during this time. By healing him, R. Yohanan b. Zakkai restored the priestly leadership.
After Vespasian assumed the throne, his son Titus became the Roman general. His father’s ascension filled him with the ambition to conquer Jerusalem to prove their dynasty’s worth. As the Roman troops approached the city, the factions continued to fight each other. Siege, famine, and infighting brought the city to defeat and destruction in just three weeks.
This is when the story of Titus’s entry into the Temple is believed to have occurred. According to Tosafot, the blood gushing from the parokhet was a miracle God performed to express His grief over the destruction of the Temple.[34] This bloody outpour of devastation illustrates the line in Lamentations, “My liver is poured out in grief over the destruction of the daughter of my people” (Lamentations 2:11).[35] When blood jetted out from the curtain, Titus believed he had killed God―a false notion perhaps based on Galenic physiology, which identifies the liver as the site of hematopoiesis. By stabbing the parokhet, Titus believed he effectively destroyed the liver of the God of Israel, which, according to Galen, was their source of life. Perhaps this is why he took the parokhet back to Rome, as a trophy of Jewish defeat.
However, as made evident by the Sages, the liver is not the source of life. During his return to Rome, God informed Titus that his own demise would occur through a “lowly creature,” referred to as such since it lacked a lower faculty to digest the food it eats. This creature is therefore able to survive without the organ symbolic of Titus’s perceived triumph. When he arrived at the shores of Rome, this lowly creature, a gnat, flew up his nostril, the place he should have checked in order to determine the death of Judaism. Had he assessed the brain, he would have discovered that Judaism was still very much alive and would outlive both him and the legacy of his empire. This cranial parasite catalyzed Titus’s death, highlighting the cruciality of the brain’s role in the body and, by analogy, the leader’s role in the nation. When he stabbed the parokhet and celebrated his victory, Titus did not realize that the nation he sought to destroy had already been immortalized by his own father when he granted the requests of R. Yohanan b. Zakkai. Nearly 2,000 years later, the Jews learn the same Torah that Titus paraded through the streets of Rome in celebration of their defeat―the very same Torah that R. Yohanan b. Zakkai preserved and revived in Yavneh.
The story of Titus and the gnat serves as an insightful metaphor not only for the downfall of a tyrant but also for the broader lesson that the Sages aimed to convey to the Jewish people. Titus’s perception of the liver as a symbol of power and triumph mirrors the obstinacy and militancy of the zealot factions. Their zeal for freedom from Roman rule and their relentless pursuit of independence resulted in a calamitous internal conflict that weakened the city’s defenses and cohesion. Instead of heeding advice from prominent leaders, they either assassinated them, scorned them, or banished them from the city, obliterating any attempt to establish peace. They resorted to extremism and savagery and murdered out of a desire for control of Jerusalem, failing to realize that their appalling actions are what caused them to lose it. They instead continued their brutal fighting, flooding the holy streets of Jerusalem with the blood of their brothers and sisters.
Amidst the dark history of the zealots shines the foresight and wisdom of R. Yohanan b. Zakkai. His strategic requests to Vespasian, focusing on the preservation of Torah, political lineage, and the priesthood, ensured the Jewish nation’s survival. These requests not only conserved old laws and traditions but also established a foundation for the Jewish people to rebuild their identity and unity in exile. This underscores the indispensable role of strong, unified leadership in maintaining a nation’s vitality, akin to the primacy of the brain in maintaining life. Just as the brain regulates and unifies the body’s functions, effective leadership is essential for guiding a nation toward unity and survival.
The aggadic account of Titus’s death emphasizes this as well. His illusion of defeat was short-lived by the deterioration of his brain, a process facilitated by an insect lacking the abdominal structure so crucial to ancient Roman medical teachings until hepatocentrism was disproven centuries later. Ancient Rome today exists only in museums and history textbooks, with its legacy fading as its history becomes more distant. But even after the destruction of the Second Temple, the brain of the Jewish nation lives on through the immortality of the Torah’s wisdom.
To this day, the Jewish people eagerly await the coming of the Messiah, envisioning a future foreseen by the prophet Hosea in which they will once again “assemble together and appoint one head over them,”[36] highlighting the significance of Jewish unity under a single, unified leadership. The forethought and wisdom of R. Yohanan b. Zakkai has enabled diaspora Jews to anticipate the fulfillment of this prophecy and their eventual return to Jerusalem, a future that Vespasian and Titus could never have envisioned. The years following the Temple’s destruction saw a resurgence of unity and Torah study that continued throughout the generations, strengthening the Jewish nation until their ultimate, permanent return to righteous sovereignty in their homeland.
[1] See, e.g., Azariah de Rossi, Me’or Einayim, Imrei Binah, ch. 16.
[2] Maharal, Be’er Ha-Golah 6:17.
[3] Aristotle, On the Parts of Animals III, trans. William Ogle (London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., 1882).
[4] The Works of Aristotle The Famous Philosopher, Aristotle’s Book of Problems, Of the Nose.
[5] Thomas Brandt and Doreen Huppert, “Brain Beats Heart: A Cross-Cultural Reflection,” Brain 144, no. 6 (July 28, 2021): 1617-1620.
[7] Claudius Galenus, Galen on the Usefulness of the Parts of the Body, trans. Margaret Tallmadge May (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1968), 45.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Steven A. Edwards, “The Circulatory System, from Galen to Harvey,” American Association for the Advancement of Science (December 15, 2011), https://www.aaas.org/taxonomy/term/10/circulatory-system-galen-harvey.
[10] Since Rome prohibited the dissection of human cadavers, Galen could only extrapolate that the rete mirabile was found in humans as well. See Connor T. A. Brenna, “Post-Mortem Pedagogy: A Brief History of the Practice of Anatomical Dissection,” Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal 12, no. 1 (January 2021), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33125320/.
[13] Edward Reichman, The Anatomy of Jewish Law (New York: OU Press, 2021): 440-441.
[14] Ibid., 450.
[15] Iggerot Moshe, Yoreh Deah 146, 174:2.
[16] Frank J. Veith, Jack M. Fein, Moses D. Tendler, “A Status Report of Ethical and Medical Considerations,” JAMA 238, no. 15 (1977): 1651-1655. (This opinion is met with much controversy.)
[18] The historical background here is borrowed from Josephus Flavius, The Wars of the Jews.
[20] Commentary of R. S.R. Hirsch to Exodus 34:8-9.
[21] Josephus, Wars of the Jews 2:17:6.
[26] Tosafot to Menahot 37a, s.v. “o kum galei.”
[27] Moreh Nevukhim 1:7; Kol Yehudah to Kuzari 3:5:5.
[28] Sup. n. 26.
[29] Ha-Boneh to Ein Ya’akov, Menahot 37a.
[30] J. David Bleich, “Conjoined Twins,” Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Jewish Thought 31, no. 1 (1996): 119.
[31] Meir Blumenfeld, Netivot Nevi’im 2 (Brooklyn: Balshan Press, 1965), 97-99.
[33] Rashi to Gittin 56b, s.v. “ve-shushilta de-Rabban Gamliel.”
[34] Tosafot to Gittin 56b, s.v. “ve-na’asah nes ve-hayah dam.”
Site Operations and Technology by The Berman Consulting Group.