Of Piso’s later writings, Esther, I Chron.

~ Daniel, Ecclesiastes
(Koh~let), Zacharlah and Ruth appear here in a series for a reason.
These were six books on which Aklva was required to place his signature

and apparently also to translate into Hebrew. They end with Zachariah
jUSt before Piso’s death in llS and before he had the opportunity to
also include mention of Zachariah by insertion into Ezekiel. They
start a few years after 105 with the writing of Father, wherein

Akiva changed his Hebrew name from Yaacov which totals@ 182~ to Akiva
which totaled 183. That was in order to insert his signature on the
story which Piso had started with an 180 day feast in the third year

of Ahas ueros’ reign.

By this time a number of thlngahave become increasingly apparest:

i. Aklva could not have written all these works alone. All except

Ruth and perhaps Esther are massive books. He must have been the

administrator of a schoo± of other rabbis and scribes. Th~ is hinted

at in b. Me~illah Taanith 7a ~here he appears with two other rabbis,

discussing the book of Fsther.. He is the middle one between R. ~leazar

and R. Meir. This implies the other two were his collea~ues in the

writing, and that he was the middle one in seniority, not the first.

2. Akiva was not the oldest of the rabbis who were writing. He
must have been actually at most 80 when 5he Romans murdered him by tearing

his flesh with hot combs after Bar Cochbah’s revolt was crushed

in 135. Thus n? m~st have been born about 60. When he went with four
other rabbis to Rome to confer with the certain min about the year 95

(96?), he was tl~ jm~ior rabbi present.

 By this time, after i00, the small school was ensconced in

Bnal Brak--no doubt too with Roman approval. By then they must have
been "encouraged" and asEisted in setting up a scrlptorum in which to
do the writings. The ha~adah, ritual book [or the Passover [east,
written in the early 700s, mentions a conversation where rabbis had

allegedly been up all night studying about the Passover, reclining

(in ROman style!) at Bnai Brak. They continued until their pupils
came to remind them they ~d re~ched morning and it was time to recite

the Shema\~he prays r stressing the oneness o[ Go~ The rabbis named

were~ Eliszer, Joshua, glazer the son o[ Azariah, Akiva~ and Tarphon.

Jewish scholars have sur~sed they were plotting revolt against Rome.
Thatis incorrect.
Theyhavebeenwriting
by candlelight
th o h
the night, meetin~ a ~eadline imposed by Piso.

Notice that the great Akiva was still not th~ senior rabbi.
H~ had moved up one place [rom when th~ live rabbis went ~c ~ome, but

he was only [ourth in precedence.

 7. Since he had colleagues assi~ir~ the translations, many

older than he~ why were their names not mention~d on their works
as was his? H£a older ~llea~es had bean impo~ant since their
youn~er days when no dm~h~ ~F ~. priests and teachers in the ~

Great Assem~ly~ in the Tsa~a~e.be$or~ ’i~s destruction in 70. The’

Talmud b.Bava ~asrah }~ attributes ~o the men of the G~eat Assemly

~he writin~ of Eeekiel~ the 12 m~-or prophets which included Zacharlah;

and Danlel and ~he scroll of ~s~hero

i an l ;w y bservt tanna oft.e

first century), dedicat~n~ his life ~o the preservation o£ the

Jewish people and religion, lend his efforts to tranecribln~

~ictional works by ~he Pisos? Wh7 would he, a man oE faith~ dare

~o write new works which were supposedly written several hundred

years pFeviously? And why would he be so insistent and £oolhard~

to place his names, by various methods~ on all these writin~s?

And suddenly the secret pieces fit together. The reason was

basically the survival o~ the Jewish people and religion. Akiva

and the o~h~r scholars must have been writin~ by ~ommand ~er£ormancs

and lit~rally so. Piso ~anted the creation o~ additional

prophetic books in the Hebrew bible in which ~o include more

foundations for the prophecies fulfilled by Jesus. That way~

~hese new ("ancient") books and including ~heir prophetic

concepts would seem legitimate, in the Hebrew as well as the Greek.

I~ mus~ be stressed ~ha~ Judea was s~ill con~u£red land.

Although depleted in population, le~ions were present or close

at hand. The head of the school when it was still at Yavneh~ Rsbban

G~m]iel of Yavneh, desc=ndan~ of the royal line of Hillel, was an

appointee of ~he Romans. But it fell to young Aklva to supervise

the writings. And he was required to place his name, in code, on

all ~he translations he supervise~. If anyDhin~ was too boldly

ane~hema to Piso’s ~reat secret~ he would know whom to blame!

 Thus far the question ~m~ns: why was it Akiva ~om Piso
c~se ~ ~ave ~s~n~ ~r these ~~n~ The mystery

is ~f~c~t to decipher, b~ not i~e.

It sends us first to N~d~s. His n~s in Greek ~a~ "victory

of the people" ~d becausee of w~m he was based on, was ~c~ of

the Judean defeat at the T~ple in the year 70. Justus first

introduces him as a ~ of the ~i~es, a r~er of t~ J~s

(Jo~ 3.1)--hence ~s ~t~ ~s based ~ a very ~ort~ m~.

In 3.2 he m~es h~ a ~ of Je~s--~ was done with ~u~

by h~ing him s~ to Jesus, "r~, ~ ~ ~u co~ from ~od."

But then in 3.~ Jesus te~i~ questions ~r he is the

"teacher of Israel."

Then ~ Jo~ ~.3~0, J~tus sets ~rth why he has inserted h~.
After Jose~ of ~i~thea ~osep~ obt~ns Jesus’ bo~ from Pilate

(19.3~), ~codemus brings spices (19.39) ~d in ~.A~A~ "they"

~paren~y Jose~ ~d Nico~mus, wrap the bo~ in ~nen with the

spices ~d lay it in the garden tomb. T~s Nicodemus is ~ imprint

a figure t~t he works ~th Joseph of ~imat~a in b~ng ~he bo~.

Nicodemus’ n~e, a~eviat~d to N~i, is carried ~a?d to

becom~ o~e of t}~ five pupils whom th~ Talmud a~tributes to Jesus.
Also the n~e Nak~mon (a close similarity to the n~e Nicode~us)

ben Oorion, will appear in the T~mud. Back in his Jewish ~ar

in 7~-80, Fiso had ~nored Shimon ~en G~li~ ~amaliel),descender

of Hillel ~d leader of t~ besieged Jude~ forces in the Temple, by
calling him bar Gioras, ~o~her great ~thagoras like himself. He

did no~ c~l him ~n of G~ali~ because he feared to imply the revol~
was ~r religious reasons, which it was. This Shimon ben Gamliel was

a fa~us rabbi, accepted by th~ Jud,ans as ~heir Icgitimat~ l~ader.

Their f~ily had bee~ thewe~st f~ily in Judea. Their leadership
h~ been loyal ~o ~om~.
 Now the Talmud had given Nakdimon a form of the same honorable

patronymic, Gorion. Shus it had borrowed the Nakdimon name from

Justus’ Nicodemus~ and the Gorion name from Piso’s Gioras.

And when the Talmud mentions that Nakdimon be~Gorion was (the

first) one of the three wealthiest men in Jerusalem when the Romans

besieged the Temple (b.Gittin 56a), it becomes obvious that this

is an insertion of a pseudonym for Shimon ben Gamliel.

This Nakdlmon ben Gorlon, the fictional alter ego of Shimon

ben O~mliel had his prayer granted when he prayed for the s4~ to

continue shining so he could repay a debt he had incurred for the

~ewi~sh people (b.Taani~h 19b),

What completes the circle to understanding the importance

of Akiva’s family~onnections is learning that Nakdlmon ben Gorion’s

son Kalba Shabua (an obviously fictional name) had in turn a daughter

who married young Akiva (b.Nadarim 5Ca). -AkITa’s f~the~:~n;law.sha~ ~}%is

wealth with him ¯ (Ibid.). Thus Akiva’s father-in-law’s father was

the %ste£med Shimon ben Gamliel. And even more so, his father in law~

Xalba Shabua’s true identity was probably that of the venerable Rabban

Gamliel of Yavneh!
This accounts for Piso choosing him to superintend the writings

at Bnai Brak. It also accounts for Bnai Brak being known as having

been his (emphasis added) school, and for the fact that the older

tannayim would respect his leadership and directions. Akiva~

although not formally the leader of the Judean tannayim, was the

unofficial lead,r, the one through whom Piso worked at the ~ime

in imposing his will upon them.

 Akiva labored m~st assiduously to place his name on these

translations. In being required to follow Piso’s Greek phaaseologyp

he encountered dlf£iculties. This is perhaps best illustrated by

the intricate pattern he was forced to use in I Chronicles with

aleph, k~, yUd, plus "9"; and in Daniel with bet and ayin plus

"3." He did this in compliancewith the Family’s orders and expecting it

to be able to decipher these insertions of his name. And this
shows how extensive Piso’s knowledge was, most probably through

his Herodi~n k~nsmen~See Romans 16.1~ of the codes used in Hebrew

by Akiva and the other tannaylm. Each side knew thoroughly what the

other side was saying, secretly as well aa openly, in its writinEs.

And thus the Family efforts to supplant the Jewish religion

with its own newly-created Faith encompassed a two-front strug~le.

There were of course the continuing wars. In addition a secret

wa~ o~- literature was being contemporaneously conducted. It

involved m~ny scholars, dictation-takers, scribes and messenger~

andscriptora in Bnai Brak as well as Rome. And in that literary

struggle Aklva had been delegated by Piso to play a leading role.

Piso must have "forgiven" Akiva’s attacks in the book of ~st~er

on his great secret. Probably he "appreciated" his overall efforts.

For the Family went back and added to Acts the names A~abus and Skevap
to "honor" him.

And thus it was that these six beautiful "ancient" books

have existed and been used by Christians and Jews alike for almost
1900 years. Yet few have realized that Akiva’s name was encoded

into the Hebrew versions, and why, when, where, and by whom they
had actually been written~.
 Yet Akiva’s forced cooperation wi~h Piso in translating

Piso’s recent Greek "biblical" wrltin~s inSo Hebrew was no5 his

sole involvement in the great struggle. Rather~ his son’s secret

identity involves another~ and the final, aspect of his life.

There is no hint 5ha5 Akiva was involved in the widespread

revolts of 115-117. But he was the leading supporter of Bar

Gochbah’s Judean revolt of 132-135, the final great revol~.

Tha~ revolt was supposedly because Emperor Hadrian, who loved

all things Greek, was in~endin~ to rebuild Jerusalem as a Greek ci~ye

The other tannayim largely r~fused to support Bar Cochbah.

And i~ seems neither the grea~ Kkiva, who supposedly sent 25,O00

of his students to assist Bar Oohbah, nor any of ~he Judean

people, would have followed Bar ~ochbah if he had not some~mw

descended from the leading family, They Mere the descendants of

Hillel, whose leaders were alternatively named Shimon and

Gamliel. Yet thus far ~here was nothing, other than his name Shimon
to even hint at a connection with the leading family. And
even " thou~ the family (descendants)
of ~abban Gamli~l
1
Yavneh, was believed to have been at Beitar, which was Bar Cochbah’s
2 ~i Alon
last stronghold durin~ the war. And a Sanhedrin sat there. Vol.II

~2Dp~..6217bid6
Akiva himself had a son named Shimon. And at the

catastrophic end of the Bar Cochbah revolt, and before the ~omans

imprisoned and ~hen murder, d him, he d~livered a funeral oration

for his two sons, Shimon and Ishmael (b.Moed Katan 21b and Semacho~

b.~Tb(1) and (2).

7
 And we suddenly r~member that Bar Cochb~h’s, name,meaning
son of a star, supposedly was taken from the H~brew biblical verse
in the OT Numbers 2~.17 that includes "there steppeth forth a star

out of Jacob." It is always assumed that the application of~is

title to Bar Cochbah meant that he was a descendant of Jacob/Israel,

that is of the Jewish people.

Yet we suddenly recall that we have met the name Jacob previously:
~hat Akiva’s original name must have been Jacob before it was changed
to Akiva. And we perceive that the reason this biblical verse was

used as the origin of the meaning of Bar Cochbah’s name was to

secretly hint that Bar Cochbah had come from that particular Jacob
whose name was later changed to Akiva. That is, that he was Akiva’s

son, and therefor~ the ~r~andson of Rabban Oamliel.

And this shows that Bar Cochbah’s revolt was the last-gasp
military effor~ by the family of Hillel’s descendants. It was ¯

their last military effort against that other great Family in Rome
which rul~d the world and was using its personnel and legions to

spread its created Faith.