History the Karaite Jews - Forgotten Books

PRE F AC E .

THE BOOK now presented to English readers is the firstvolume in our language that has been entirely devoted t o

the history of Karaite Jews. Writers on Jewish history

have usually given a chapter, an appendix, or a few

common-place unstudied sentences to this branch of their

subject. The subject in itself was deemed int eresting,

but so scant and imperfect were the materials that it was

impossible to treat i t satisfactorily.

Two hundred years ago, James Triglan d, a learned

Dutch theologian, advanced far beyond his predecessors

in the study ofKaraism. His industry was rewarded byvaluable contributions from intelligent Karaites

,and two

or three o ther scholars followed his example . Their

works or materials collected for further study are con

t ain ed in the Thesaurus of Sacred Oriental Antiquities ,which consists of works on Hebrew and Jewish subj ect s ,brought together by Blasius Ugolinus in thirty-four

sumptuous foli o volumes, but sealed from the sight of all

who cannot or will n ot break through the Latin and

Hebrew swathings that cover those precious remains from

the hard-wrought servants of the Press in these busy

times. Since Triglan d’

s time lit tle has been done t o

bring Karaism to light until very recently. Professor

vi PREFACE .

Kosegart en , of the University of Jena, roused the learned

again to some feeling of interest by his publication of

port ions of the ‘ Book of the Crown of the Law,’ by

Aaron , son of Elij ah the Karaite, with translation and

n otes, in the year 1 824 . But this, too, is a Latin book .

The precious materials furn ished by Ugolinus and

Kosegart en ; contribut ions of travellers within the last

half-century ; miscellanea collect ed from other Hebrewsources in the course of study ; Karait e liturgies ; frag

ments published from the F irkowitsch manuscripts ; all

these being duly acknowledged in the following pages,and collated with Biblical and other subsidia of hist orical

study, have enabled the author t o essay the composition

ofwhat he may presume t o call a History of the Karaite

Jews.

Dr. Julius Furst completed last year his Geschichte

de s Karaérthums,’ the fruit ofmuch patient labour. It is

chiefly an account of eminent Karait es, obtained from the

mass ofmanuscript lit erature n ow referred t o, and laid up

in the libraries of Odessa and St. Petersburg, added tothe litt le that had been previously extant in Europe .

Burst ’s history is n ot only valuable on its own account,

but is an extremely useful aid to st udy with the ‘An

merkun gen ,

’ or passages extracted from the Hebrew

originals, and most Copious references to those originals,from first t o last. That work is entirely different from

the present in it s arran gement, and if it is ever trans

lat ed into English, as it well deserves to be, the obj ect

pursued and course taken in each of the Histories will

be found entirely distinct an d independent.

By whomsoever written, the history of the Karaites

PREFACE . v ii

is comparative . They are a people honourably known by

faithful maintenance of the principle of submission t o

acknowledged authority, and also by firmness in exer

cising their own reason in order to ascertain the suffi

c ien cy of that which claims to be authoritative . Nothing

with them is authoritative which is not D ivine—God only

i s to them the fountain of authority. They profess

willingness t o submit t o Him, and to submit at any cost.

This is the normal principle ofKaraism. Submission to

human authority in matters of faith and religious duty,unless that authority be manifestly supported by D ivine

Revelat ion, they justly consider to be no better than

blind and servile superst ition .

They pay unbounded reverence to the Written Law ot

God,cont ained in the Old Testament. They utterly

reject what is called the Oral Law, and is n ow contained

in the Talmud— at least, so far as i t can be made out by

those who spend their life in learning.

The Talmud, however, is but the latest edit ion of the

Oral Law— the last collection of traditions and miscella

n eous writ ings for the illustration or exposition of the tra

dit ion al sentences ; and we have now tomark the divergence

of two parties— the faithful followers of God’s Law, and

the vot aries ofhuman tradition . In other words, we havet o trace the progress of a schism from the beginning ; an d

to select at discret ion a point from which t o commence

the story anywhere along the widely wandering lines of

progress would be t o lose sight of all that gav e its

peculiar character to the schism itself, from first to last.

Hence arose a necessity for the first eight chapters of

this book, from Chapter I. which defines the canon of

viii PREFACE.

Inspired Scripture, to Chapter VIII. which briefly charact erises the body of traditions : that is to say , from the

point where all Israelites were once agreed, onward t othe Opposite brinks of the great gulf of an impassable

division.

A deliberate survey of the gradual progress and con

summation of the Karaite schism obviates the controversy

that would otherwise arise, and prevents difficulties other

wise insoluble ; whereas, to begin our history with Ahnan ,for example, and to date the origin of Karaism from the

year 7 5 0, or even at the beginning of the Christian era ,would be contrary t o every known ant ecedent, would

shift us on to ground utterly untenable, and would, if

that were possible, reduce one of the most important

divisions recorded in the religious history of the Hebrew

people t o the in sign ifican ce of an unquiet uprising against

ecclesiastical authority. This is what the Rabban it es

might wish t o do, but justice and truth forbid us to

attempt it. That would now be impossible .Neither may we consent t o darken history by taking

up the allegation that the Karaites are descended from

the Sadducees. A dispassion ate survey of the whol e

period from the closing of the Canon of the Old Testament by Simon the Just to the compilation of the

Mishnah, while it shows what influences operated on

the Jewish mind,and tended to bring about the decisive

separation of two great parties, makes it clear as day

that Sadduceeism and Karaism are just as contrary the

on e to the other as unbelief and faith . On this groundthe author takes his st and without fear of successful con

t radict ion , and here he differs from J ost and some other

PREFACE . ix

historians, and from the Rabban it es both ancient and

modern. As to the alleged Sadduce ean ism of the earli erKaraites

,which is maintained by some, Furst for ex

ample, who yet acknowledge their historical antiquity ,the author reiterates an unqualified dissent, and hopes

that his justification will be found in the history that is

t o follow.

With regard to the date of Karaism, so far as it may

be indicated by i ts name, on e or two observations should

be made in addition t o what has been said in the body

of this book .

A sect suddenly sprung up after the nomenclature of

Judaism was set t led, when the extension of any one sect

over the vast areas of the dispersion became difficult, if n ot

impossible, would have borne a name of reproach, if given

by their enemies while a name of honour, if assumed by

themselves, would have been disputed ; or a descriptivedesignation, if generally allowed, would have borne somespecial mark significant of local origin or of a dogmat ic

or political characteristic . But in the present instance

there is no such name acknowledged, and even in the

Babylonian Talmud a man of distinction for wisdom or

l earning is called a R ea der (Karait e)map, or it is said

that such an one reads (mp). In the earlier JerusalemTalmud, the expression Go and read is of n ot unfre

quent occurrence, both Talmuds agrge ing in the same

style . Rashi i s quoted as saying that many eminent

scholars were solemnly ordained with the title of Mas ter

of the Read ing (mpp n spa), the very title borne by

Karaites. Perhaps on this account it is so often noted

that Rabbi Khan in ah reads, although the common form

X PREFACE .

would be that Rabbi such an one say s thus and thus .1

For some centuries,therefore , the honourable t it le re

t ain ed i ts place, eviden tly t o distinguish him who quotes

or recites the Law as he reads it , from him who appeals

t o the Tradit ion .

As if to countenance the idea that the origin of Ka

rait e s may be dated so l ate as the eighth century, they are

some t imes called Ahn an i t e s by their ant agonist s, and

although they never so call themselves, they so respect

this man ’s memory as n ot t o repudiate his name when it

is put upon them. Still they only submit in silence , for

it i s n ot their proper name , and the celebrated Arabgeographer and historian Ah-ul-F eda expressly marks

the Ahn an i te s as ent irely dist inct from both the Rabba

nit es and the Karait es. He says that they take their

n ame from Ahnan, son of D avid, chief of the captivity.

He even marks their doctrine so strongly as t o show that

their t eacher was, properly speaking , an innovator among

them, on e of those Palest inian Jews, of whom there is

mention in our sixth chapter, who were brought under

s trongly Christian influence ; that he taught his followers

t o acknowledge the discourses and parables of Christ as

true and prophet ic ; that they honoured the Pentat euch,and said all men should be recommended to read i t

,and

that Jesus Himself was on e of the Prophe t s of Israel,but that they religiously observed the Law of Moses.

In common with the Karaites, they said, according t o

Ab-ul-F eda,that Jesus never put Himself forward as a

messenger of God, or author of a new law that should

set aside the Law ofMoses, but professed Himself t o be

FRANKEL,swim/mmman , fol. D’P Vrat islaviae, 1 870.

PREFACE . xi

no more than on e of those holy men who sincerely devot e

themselves t o Grod.

l

How far the Karaite congregations may sometimes

have received Christ ian impressions the reader is invit ed

to judge for himself, an d future studies may more dis

t in ctly ascertain , but the secondary influences of Karaism

i n relation to Christianity are indubitable . The subject

of the fourteenth chapter, Karaism in Spain, cannot fail

to attract attent ion , especially in relation to the Helvetian

and Gallic varieties of the Christian Reformat ion of the

sixt eenth century . The author hopes that future research

may throw some light on the entire question of the influ

ence of Karait e principles on the Reformation in the

South ofEurope . How far, again , may not the present

history afford illustration of the spirit of part ies in the

conflict between the claiin s ofHoly Scripture and e ccle si

ast ical tradit ion which is repeated in our own day . The

pen of Rabbi Aaron , son of Elij ah, may now be borrowed

with advantage, and the author remembers how,thirty

years ago, he translated into Spanish for the benefit of

Spain the eloquent portraiture of Jewish traditionism

from the Hebrew of the “Crown of the Law ’ by that

accomplished Karaite . He has again t ranslated it into

English for the information ofhis own count rymen.

With regard t o the execut ion of this work , he can only

say that it has cost him much labour, and that

,while he

has done his utmost to avoid mist akes, and trusts that he

has not been quite unsuccessful in any matter of main

importance, he will be thankful to any one who can

assist him in detecting such errors and defects as are

1 Fle ischer, AbulfedwHistori a An te islamz’

ca , p . 1 6 1 . Lip s . 1 831 .

PREFACE .

almost inseparable from the reproduction of rare and

remote intelligence . The book is but small, but should

a second edition b e called for, enlightening criticism,

whether friendly or adverse, on any doubtful questions,whether it proceeds from Jew or Christian, shall not beoverlooked.

W H . R.

CROYDONAp ril 7th, 1 870.

CHAPTER

C ON TE N T S .

PAGE

PREFACETHE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENTTE E BEGINNINGS OF SCHISMHYRCANUS , JANNAI , AND BEN SEE TAxE

THE HOUSES OF HILLEL AND SHAMMAITHE NEW TESTAMENT AND CHRISTIAN INFLI’ENCETIBERIAS AND PALESTINETEE MISHNAH

BABYLONIA .—TBE TALMUD

THE KARAITE S AFTER THE TALMUDVOWEL-POINTS AND ACCENTSAENAN AND THE RENEWAL OF KARAISMDISTINCTIVE DOCTRINERITUAL AND CUSTOMKARAITE S IN SPAIN

DECLINE OF KARAI SMPRE SENT STATE OF SYNAGOGUE-WORSHIP IN RUSSIA

PRESENT STATE OF SOME KARAITE SETTLEMENTS, &C .

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJAH. (His Exp os i tion ofKarai te Princ ip les .)

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJAH . (Hi s Commen tary on the

Pen tateuch.)

FACSIMILEFROM A MS. OF THE 1 0TH CENTURY, AT ODESSA, WITH

THE VOWEL POINTS USUALLY CALLED ‘ A SSYRIAN OB

BABYLONIAN ’

HI STORY

TH E KARAI TE J EW S .

CHAPTER I .

THE C ANON OF THE OLD TE STAMENT.

A CHRISTIAN STUDENT undertakes to investigate thehistory of a portion of the Hebrew people Whom theirbrethren usually regard as heretics. He entered on thesubject with the Single desire to ascertain the facts ofhistory, and with n o ulterior obj ect except that ofpublishinga trustworthy account of one of the most interesting

,yet

least known , of religious bodies . He writes under anever-strengthening feeling of respect to hi s Hebrewbrethren— a feeling so proper t o be entertained, that itwould be superfluous to make the least profession of i t , ifit were not for the s ake of bespeaking the confidence of

any Jew into whose hands this book may fall. He is notwritin g t o make prosely tes, much as he wishes that everyJew were a Christian ; and whatever may have to be saidwi ll be said freely. It may be understood at once that heis n o traditionist, —that he shall n ot attempt t o t one downany sentiment he entertains, ,nor to soften away anyfeature of the portraiture he endeavours to delineate .

B

2 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

There will be n o temptation to such an expedient, becausethere is nothing likely to be said that could possibly Ofl

'

en d

either of the two parties concerned, and he has never hada Jewish friend who would wish him t o forget that he is aChristian . Let this now be said once for all.There can be but on e reason for Karaism ; namely,

reverence for the written Law of God— such profound andundi vided reverence as requires the rej ection of what iscalled the Oral Law . The Law ofGod, as written in theF ive Books of Moses, and in the other books of HolyScripture onward to the latest of the Prophets, is acknowledged by a s a ll to be divinely inspired

, an d of divineauthority. It is necessary, however, to introduce the subj e ct to the attention of the reader by a few thoughts onour common standard, the Ca non of the Old Te s tamen t .

In thi s sacred volume lies the point at which we convergein cordial agreement, and at which the two sections ofJewry again diverge the sons of the Scripture andthe masters of tradition .

’

The Karaites are the sons of the Scripture, Or, as theyprefer t o say , mp7; 933, son s of the R ea ding , or text of theO ld Testament. Yet, when we look into the matterclosely, we detect a considerable difference between theJewish and the C hristian view of it but , to avoid confusion, let us now suppose that we take our stand side byside with a devout Israelite, a few years before the des t ruct ion of the second Temple, and before the books ofthe New Testament were any of them known t o bewritten. At that time the Hebrew Scriptures were n ot

y e t accepted by our spiritual fathers as of equal authority .

Indeed, such authority was not yet given to them. Theywere not spoken of by the Jews as one homogeneous coll ection

,but as three— the Law,

the Prop he ts, and theP sa lms . So they were called by our Lord . SO theystand in the Hebrew Bibles. Neither Jew nor Chri stian

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT . 3

could receive any one of the three, nor any part of thaton e without a divine and final authenticat ion . Such anauthentication had n ot then been given, but it was givengradually , and had to be confirm ed.

F irs t, THE LAW, or F ive Books OfMoses—The inspired writer of those books stood before the world in acharacter never before sustained by any man . He was

commissioned by the Lord Himself to deliver the Israelitesfrom Egypt. He executed that commission with everymark of authority, t o prove that God was with him. Hereceived a di vine Law for the people whom he led out ofEgypt. At every step miracle attended him. To himand t o Jacob,

’ whom he led like a flock, the se a-bed andthe burn ing desert were equally made passable . Shelter,sustenance, guidance, and victory were afforded to a mult itude feeble, empty, and without weapons of war, or foresight, Or any adequate degree of skill, even in the mostfavourable circumstances. The very course ofnature wassuspended for forty years, and one of the last things whichMoses di d was to write this Law,

’ consisting of a marvellous historical preamble setting forth the great eventswhich most concerned humanity— the creation of theworld ; the relations that subsisted between God and manfor many ages ; the F all ; the expulsion from Paradise ;the D eluge the post-diluvian families ofmen the call ofAbraham the covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacobthe Egyptian captivity, and the deliverance from Egypt.Then came the givin g of the Law, wi th the twofold Objectof separating the chosen people from the heathen, and ofestablishing a form for solemn worship of the on e trueGod . A full account of this was necessarily inclusive ofmuch continuous history. This history could not bedoubted. The divine sanctions of the entire system werevisible and indisputable . The Pentat euch

, mm law, was

irresist ibly accepted as divine . It was preserved with


most religious care . It, and it only, was laid up in theark by divine command. Its precepts were tobe obeyedby all . They only who fell away into idolatry cast off itsrestraint, and when such apostasy became general, thenation fell.After the Law, THE PROPHE TS.

Theformer Prop he ts, amt/mmDfixfinj , or historical booksof Joshua, Judges, Samuel , and Kings . -These writingsof men justly reputed to be inspired, and therefore calledprophets, were accept ed as authentic muniments of sacredhistory, written in continuation of the Mosaic historyitself, and were preserved and cherished with the strongestfeelings of patriotism and piety.

The la t ter Prop he ts , D'Jfi nx ow n , are Isaiah,Jeremiah,Ezekiel

,Hosea, Joel , Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,

Nahum, Habbakuk, Z ephaniah, Haggai, Z achariah, andMalachi . IVhile the books classed t ogether in the preceding division contain the history of Israel and Judahfrom the decease of Moses down to the Babylon ish capt ivity , these latter Prophets have the authorship of thoseinspired messengers whom the Lord sent to his peoplefrom the t ime when the Assyrians began to desolate theircountry and burn their cities, and whom He continued tosend until Malachi delivered the last prophetic announcement about four centuries before the birth of Christ.THE SCR IPTURE S, (3 93m) , or PSALMS, as they are alsocalled in the New Testament, because the Psalter is thefirst of them,

constitute the last division of the Old Test ament. They are the Book of Psalms, written by variouspersons besides D avid, the Proverbs, J ob, Song of Songs,Ruth, Lamentations , Ecclesiastes, Esther, D aniel, Ezra,Nehemiah, Chronicles. This division is miscellaneous.The Psalms, written at various times, are collected intoone book . J ob i s a personal narrat ive, whereon thesacred writer framed a didactic composition . Ruth is an

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

6 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS.

proper title, S crip tures, to the whole code of ancient revelation, sayin g, Search the Scriptures, for in them yethink ye have eternal life, and they are they that testifyof me .

’

Some further observation on this canon is necessary toour present purpose, for the Old Testament was thestandard of Hebrew faith, and an enlargement of the finalstandard of canonicity attempted soon after i ts publication gave rise to the great controversy that will engageour attention .

Down to the time of Antiochus Epiphan es (R C .

the LAW was read in the Temple on high festivities, andin the synagogues every Sabbath-day, for which purposeit was divided into fifty-four sections, mam; and it is saidthat when Antiochus had forbidden the reading of theLaw

,and endeavoured to destroy the Law itself, as well

as t o prevent its observance, the Jews selected an equalnumber of lessons, mmgn, out of the Prophets

,t o be

read instead. Whenever the reading of the Prophetsbegan

,it i s certainly ment ioned in the New Testament,

and it is equally cert ain that the institution of this reading of the Prophets was subsequent to the complete collection of the prophetic Scriptures. The last divi sion of

the Old Testament was not so used, but it ent ers largelyinto the Liturgies which began in the times of Ezra andhis successors . ‘

Rabbi Bechai writes thus concern ing the prayer which they call T he

Eighteen Peti tion s You must know that from the t ime ofMose s , our mas

t er , un t il the men ofthe Great Synagogue , there was n ot any form ofprayerin Israel, but each man made a prayer for himself, and prayed alon e , ac ~

cording to his own knowledge , wisdom, and eloquen ce , un t i l the men of the

Great Synagogue came , and composed the HWY/V rum/j (Eighteen ), that theI sraelit e s might have an equal and common form of prayer. Whereforealso they con ce ived i t in the most Simple and easy languag e , t hat the mindan d heart might n ot be d istract ed about the mean ing of words ; and that

all Israeli tes , learn ed and wise , unle t t ered and rude , might use the same

form.

’—Johan . Baxtorfii Patris Synagoga Judai’

ca, cap . x.


Ezra, Nehemiah, and aft er them the high priests insuccession until Simon the Just, were at the head ofwhat is called the Great Synagogue . Those two greatrestorers of city and Temple were above all things carefulto establish the reading and observance of the Law,

andwould also be careful to preserve and promote the reading of the prOphe t ic books, all which they possessed,except the Book of Malachi . Their successors collat edCopies of the writin gs which were to supplement the Law,

which foretold the ful were to bethe standard of faith and rule that standardshou ld be crowned by the D er of a moreperfect Church, whom the Law prefigured and to whomthe Prophets all bare witness . Doubtless the men of the

Great Synagogue rej ected much that their sacred studyindisposed them to receive, but they were n ot inspired ;they certainly did well, but they could do no more thanapply such tests as . are continually applied by the learnedand the wise . Their decision as to what ought t o bereceived into the list was not final, and could not beauthoritative until a superior judge had confirmed theirjudgment.Simon the Just closed the collection, l but he could notset to it the seal of unquestionable authentication. Hecould not produce credentials like those ofMoses . Hewrought n ot any miracle, neither did he utter any pro

phecy , but he represented the highest order of uninspiredmen ,

and delivered the collective suffrage of their learning, sincerity, and piety . He commended these books tothe acceptance of his nation, and it is t o be noted that noone after him ever presumed to add another. The Law,

the Prophets, and the Scriptures were soon translatedinto Greek , and the Law, at least, into Chaldee ,b eforeOnecame with power to stamp the canon with final sanction .

1 This is according to the gen erally received tradit ion .


Greek Jews wrote , and Greeks accepted, certain bookswhich are known as apocryphal, but were n ot acknowledged by ‘

the Jews as worthy of reception in the syna

gogues, nor are they y e t regarded as of much value .Their historical merits are various, their number um

certain,and the content s of some erroneous and trifling .

None of them were acknowledged by our Lord Jesus,whereas He and his disciples quoted or referred to allthe books collected by the predecessors of Simon theJust

,and included in hi s list or canon , except two,

perhaps three of the minor Scriptures in the last division,— a very unimportant omission. Our faith in their authority is thus confirmed, and we can venture to fix on thedate B .C . 340—320 as a time when there was not yet anyopen divergence from the sole authority of the writtenLaw of God in the teaching of the Jewish doctors . Weconsider it indisputable that t o the mind of the Hebrewnation at that time the Scriptures of the Old Testamentcontained all that

'

could be regarded as of divine autho

rity— all that the Israelite was boun d t o obey. If therewas any lurking notion of an oral law

,there was n o

claim put forth on i t s behalf, no traditionist s, n o Pharisees.

On the contrary, the labours of the most exalted andvenerated men in all the nation swayed such an influencet hat if any distinguishing name could be given to thepeople with whom n o n ew sectarianism was as yet e st ablished, we might call them Scripturists, as indeedthey were . Reverence of Holy Scripture was coext en

sive with the profession of earnest piety, apart from allvarying Opinions ; the Word of God was exclusive andabsolute .But godliness decayed ; men solemnly consecrated tothe service of the altar gave themselves t o inferiorstudies ; the Great Synagogue ’ having ceased, theSanhedrim arose, and its chiefs pretended to an oracular


wisdom with which they might prosecu te an un fin ishedfllabour of their fathers ; unanimity was broken,HS weshall se e presently, and itm a divineauthority should interpose on the Side of authentic revelation against human traditions, an d, by a decisive sentence

, obviate all pretext for doubt in future as to thesufficiency of the writ ings which mankind a t large mightconfident ly believe to be of God.

This is what our Saviour did. He constantly quotedthe Sacred Books with such expressions of honour andsubmission as to assure both Jews an d Gent iles that theywere written by the inspirat ion of the Holy Ghost, andthat all who would hope t o escape con demnation in theDay of Judgment must receive them as such . ThoseScriptures were the only code of revealed t ruth at thefirst promulgation of Christianity, whose D ivine F ounderand his servants appealed to them for att estat ion of his

mi ssion , an d for support of their arguments in the defenceand advancement ofhis Gospel . On this ancient foun dation rest ed the fabric ofChrist ianity. Without the Law

and the Prophets the New Testament,as it is

,could not

have been written, n or the way prepared for the Lord.

’

His way being thus laid open,the marvellous dispensa

tion of redeeming mercy was established ; a new class of

supernatural evidence was afforded ; the fountain of inspirat ion , aft er being closed for centuries, was openedagain ; the canon of the New Testament in due t imefollowed, in addit ion t o that of the Old, and the entireBible was given t o the whole world. Moses, the Pro

phe t s, the Evangelist s, and the Apostles united to delivera mass of independent, yet concurrent evidences Of oneunchangin g and imperishable truth, and thus each port ion of the incomparable volume sheds light on all theres t . By this our faith abides, and it is n ow needless torecount the assaults it has withstood and the conquests it

1 0 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

has won . Generations of men pass away in witheringage . The Word of the Lord flourishes as in an everfreshening youth.

Such is the result of the authentication of the OldTestament by means of the New, and whoever wouldfully apprehend the necessity of such an authenticationhas only to read the history of more than four hundredyears that elapsed between the last of the Prophets andthe first of the Evan gelists. During that period the

unreserved confession of the Law of God was well-nighforgot ten

,and the rudiment s of what they call the rep e

t it ion of it, but in reality the subvers ion , were fullydeveloped, and only required assortment into a system to

become practically rival and subversive, as they afterWards proved to be .

CHAPTER II .

THE BEGINNINGS OF SCH ISM .

A KARA ITE , author of the Tract DISH, S chism, whichwas read in manuscript by J. Triglan d,

l finds the sourceof Rabban ism in fact s relat ed by some of the lat t erProphets. F rom those t rusty witnesses he describes themoral state of the Jews between the return from Babylonand the date of the Book of Malachi . In copying hissentences I shall perhaps fall into his style .I . The doc tors of the Law were guilty of grea t n egli

gen e e .—The priests

,whose lips should have kept know

ledge, that the people might seek the law at their mouth,themselves wandered out of the way, caused many t o

stumble at the law, and corrupted the covenant of Levi.

(Mal. ii. 7 , 8 . The people fell away after the ill exampleof their t eachers, who were guilty of negligence and contempt of God’s service ; and while they dwelt in cieledhouses, left the Lord

’s house to lie waste. (Hag. l .

Grown insolent at last, their words were stout againstthe Lord. ‘ It is vain

,

’ said they,

‘ t o serve God, andwhat profit is it that we have kept his ordinances, and

l J . Trigland ti Diatribe de See ta Karrmorum, cap . v u. Trigland was pro

fe ssor of theology in Leyden in the lat t er part of the seven t e en th cen tury .

HIS at te n t ion had be en drawn by a learn ed friend t o the Karait es , whose

h istory was then almost unknown . He prosecut ed his in quiri e s Wi thgreat earn e stn e ss , depending en t irely on the Karait e s themselve s for In

format ion . I have to ackn owledge myselfmuch indebt ed t o his invaluabledissertat ion .

1 2 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS.

have walked mournfully before the Lord of Hosts ? ’

They called the proud happy, and insolent ly murmuredthat even they who provoked God to anger did so withimpunity. (Mal. iii. 1 32 . The j udges were corrup t .

—They spake falsehoodevery man t o his neighbour ; they did not execute thejudgment of truth and peace in their gates. They ima

gin ed evil in their hearts, and loved false oaths . ( Z ech.

v iii . 1 6 , They encouraged sorcerers, adulterers,perjurers, and those that oppressed the hireling in hiswages, the widow and the fatherless . They turned asidethe st ranger from his right

,having no fear ofGod. (Mal.

iii . Therefore they were made contempt ible and basebefore all the people , because they did n ot keep God’sways, but were part ial in the law. (Mal . ii.3. The solemn i t ies of D iv in e worship a nd the san c t i t ies

of re lig ion were g en era lly se t a t nought , as is clearly ap

parent in the prophetic writ ings of that period.The wise men ,

’ instead ofbetaking themselves to penit en t ial humiliat ion and prayer, and earnes t ly striving toarouse both priests and people t o amend their lives, faithfully teaching them the will of God as made known byHimself, so following many bright examples, those selfcalled wise men departed from the Fountain of Truth,secret ly forsook the one Source of living Power and setabout devising n ew methods of reformation which mightseem plausible, but were unauthorised and dan gerous ;just like many devices among us Christians in lat er times,wherewith some of us have wickedly attempt ed t o supplement the revealed Word of God, as if— as we profanelyfanc ied— the Gospel were n ot by itself sufficient foradaptation t o the new and shifting exigencies of our own

day. This was the error of the Jews .As this author affirms, the Rabbis of a succeeding ageendeavoured to meet the threefold declension w ith a



Law .

’ They wrought folly indeed, and n ow the fatal consequence is too notorious. Instead of the fortress ofeternal truth, those Ta n a im— doctors oftradition—did nomore than prepare for coming generations an evercrumbling heap of their own empty sayings .

But the catalogue of sins that prevailed, even in thelifetime of the Prophets, is not yet exhausted. Theauthor of Hillfik proceed4 . Men gave themselves over aga in to the s tudy of

things rela t ing to s tra nge gods, as is plainly written in theBook of Malachi .—This is overlooked when we repeatwhat we have often heard, and too readily believe, thatthe Jews did not relapse into idolatry after the Babylonishcaptivity . The Prophet’s words are these : Judah hathdealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed inIsrael and in Jerusalem ; for Judah hath profaned theholiness of the Lord which he loved, and hath marriedthe daughter of a strange god.

’

(Mal . ii. Thislanguage is too plain t o be mistaken, and the Karaite is ent irely supported by the Septuagint, which thus translatesthe last decisive words — §7refl j85 va sv sis 9 5 0 159 dkkorp t

'

ovs,

‘ he ha th s tudiously gon e after s tra nge gods .

’ It is truethat they did not again set up idols and construct chambers of imagery in Jerusalem, as in times before thatcaptivity ; but they continually deserted t o paganism,

andmany Of them— the Herodians, for example, in the timeof our Lord’s ministry— lived more like heathens thanJews

,Judah marrying, so to speak, the daughter of a

strange god.5 . They trea ted the ir wives crue lly . The Lord hathbeen witness between thee and the wife of thy youth,against whom thou has t dealt treacherously : yet she isthy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.

’

(Mal . ii.The Karaite understood this literally, and whether

his interpretation is correct or not, he was too honest to

THE BEG INNINGS OF SCHISM. 5

cloke the disgraceful fact under the veil ofmetaphor. Heknew that the hearts of the Israelites were n ot softer inthe days of Malachi than in those of Moses. How cruellythe Jews divorced their wives for no sufficient cause isnotorious .6 . They were gui lty of Sabba th-breaking , as is evidentfrom the full account of their proceedings given byNehemiah (xii i. 1 5 who could not restrain the peopleunder his government by persuasion, and had t o employforce to maintain order in Jerusalem on Sabbath-days.They were nothing i mproved since the time of Isaiah .

7 . They con tra c ted marriages with the hea then , as welearn from the same hi story (Nehem. xii i. 23 and sofell into the inevitable snare of idolatry, as we have beenjust now reminded.

The Karaites do not deny that the wise men endeavoured t o prevent these sin s, but complain that they setabout counteracting them by adding to the Law supplementary injunctions of their own, whereas they ought tohave enforced the Law as it stood, and should have aecom

pan ied the administration of healthful discipline wi th faithful instructions and holy example . For instance

,in order

to enforce the right obs ervance of the Sabbath-day,t hey

added my ), sabba th-keep ings, directing that some portionof a common day should be added to the Sabbath-day

,

which is actually done by ordaining a three hours ’ preparation . [HOW far this can fairly be called a Sabbathkeeping must depend on the manner of observance but

the question is for Karaites and Rabban it es to decide between themselves , al though we cannot but observe thatthere is express ment ion of the p rep a ra t ion in the Gospels

(Matt. xxvii . without a word of disapproval. ] And,

to prevent the doing of work on that day, they went beyond the explicit direction Of the D ecalogue, for thatwhich is prohibited is ngxhn, ordina ry bus in ess, and they


made it unlawful to swim in water,or to climb a tree .

Not content with enforcing that prohibition which restrains the priest from marrying a heathen woman

,they

made it criminal for him to marry a Hebrew woman thathad been unfortunately carried captive into a heathencountry, or otherwise associated, however unwillingly,with even heathen women in her own land. It is notorions that some of their most eminent and holiest ancestors,Moses for example, married heathen women without incurring censure, but the sages who pretended to supplydeficiencies in the Law of God endeavoured to enforcetheir own gratuitous commandment, and di d great mischief. Hence their offensive conduct towards Hyrcanus.

[Here, again, the Karaite must be watched as well as hisantagonists, and we must not forget what was indeed thelaw concerning intermarriages w ith Hebrews and Gentiles ] Full of the fatal notion of supplementing God’slaw

,in order to make it stronger or easier to be couve

n ien tly administered, they called the devotees Of thisvoluntary religion tarp on, Khas idim, Asidcea n s, E ssenes

,

or Relig ious, and gave them the very questionable praiseof being mmn 11 93-13 macaw, s tud ious of the in crease of the

Law,which some think accounts for the epithet Ra

ban im,which would be understood to mean In crea sers.

Hence we say Rabban ites n ot Rabbinists .

Consequently, while volunteering an excessive study toenlarge that exceedin g broad commandment which, intruth

,reaches to every secret thought and intent of the

heart,they lost the wheat among the chaff, or they mis

took chaff for wheat. Some, like the Sadducees, ceasedto believe the truth itself, their understanding beingstrained and warped by an unhealthy habit of contention .

In time,people ignorantly retained supplementary sta

tut e s, and overlooked original commandments. Others,attaching themselves to the Essenes, who were indeed

THE BEGINNINGS OF SCHISM. 1 7‘

righteous overmuch,’ neglected the holy services Of the

Temple, and gave themselves to a sort of philosophicalretreat , with meditation , spiritual exercises i s the

special phrase, —and t o the promot ion ofparticular virtues,such as charity to the poor, 1 placing religion in that onething

,with emulation Of Py thagoras and Plato, rather

than obedience to Moses . So it was even in the days ofJeremiah, who therefore writ es What is the chaffto thewheat ? saith the Lord. Is not my word like as a fire ?saith the Lord ; and like a hammer that breaketh the rockin pieces ? Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets ,saith the Lord, that steal my words every on e from hisneighbour. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith theLord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.

’

(Jer.xxiii. 28So far we follow the strictures in the Karaite tract onschism, and n ow we observe that some of the grossestforms ofmisbelief have been provoked by the refined Ofliciousn e ss which labours t o make faith easy by some hastyillustrat ion , or novelmethod. The Sadducean heresy hadsuch a beginning. In the first of the Chapters of theFathers ’ we read that one Antigonus, a man of Socoh,(the place ment ioned in Joshua xv. a disciple ofSimon the Just, was used to say to his disciples, Be n otlike servants who serve their master well in hope of receiving mg (a gift ,

2 or present); but be like servant s whoserve their masters with the understanding that they willn ot receive any gift

,and let the fear of Heaven be upon

you . The saying was, no doubt, charac t erist ic of theSpeaker, for as such it is preserved in the Mishnah, and is

Dwelling, perhaps , on the lit eral mean ing of a word , as np‘

rg , in a

few places in the.Old Te stamen t (Oma zoaévn in Mat t . vi . for ben e

volen ce or alms-giviii g.

2 This word is qui t e different from wages.

C


perfectly clear and unobj ectionable , but it may have beenso repeated , enforced, and enlarged upon, as to convey av ery false impression . Not p resen ts, to quicken the diligence of a mercenary hireling, but wages promised to afaithful servant and bestowed of grace, not debt, are to beexpected at the Last Day . Some of the hearers ofAnti

gon us, whether by his fault or their own, did n ot perceivethe difference. As two ofthem, Sadok and Bai thos, lefthis presence, they fell into conversation on this favouritemaxim ofhis . Our master,’ said Sadok, evidently beli e ve s that however well a man may do, he must notexpect any reward at all

,and that -if he does badly, he

n eeds n ot be afraid of punishment. ’ To this conclusionBai thos assented . Fortifying each other in unbelief, theyboth withdrew from his instruct ions, and began to propagate their heresy.

The Jews tell us that Sadok did n ot beli eve in angelor spirit, nor in the resurrection at the Last Day . Hisn ame passed on to his disciples the Sadohim, or Sadduce es . The Rabbis are wont to associate the twonames , and call such infidels Sadducean s and Bai thosian s,

so keeping the Mishnaic legend in remembrance . Maimon ide s says that the Opinions of the two heretics differedwidely, and that each became head of a separate sect.He adds—but that is mere invention—that although theSadducees were all agreed in denyin g the resurrection ofthe dead

,they eventually agreed again to renounce that

article of disbelief, and adopt the current faith in order

t o avoid the scandal Of infidelity. Still, according to the

same fable, they persisted in denying the Oral Law , andin cast in g Off its constitutions and Observances . F rom

these,’

says the son of Maimon, ‘ came t hose accursedheret ics, the Karaites, but our wise men

‘

éall them Sa

dokit e s and Bai thosit e s.

’ These are they who declaim

against tradition , and expound Holy Script ii re after their

THE BEGINNINGS OF SCHISM. 1 9

own mind, having rej ected the decisions of the wise , contrary to what is written, Thou shalt come unto thepriests, the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be inthose days, and enquire ; and they shall shew thee thesentence ofjudgment : And thou shalt do according to thesentence, which they of that place which the Lord shallchoose Shall shew thee ; and thou shalt Observe to doaccording to all that they inform thee : According to thesentence of the law which they shall teach thee, andaccording to the judgment which they shall tell thee,thou shalt do Thou shalt not decline from the sentencewhich they shall shew thee, to the right hand, nor to theleft. ’ (Deut. xvii . 9To this the heretics retorted, not without reason, that

the traditions the Rabbis endeavoured t o enforce wereperversions of the Law which they were appointed toexplain, as judges that should sit in Moses’ seat .On this narrative of the rise of the Sadducean sect, Ihave only to note that it is only introduced here for thesake of sayi ng that the alleged identity of Sadducees andKaraites is fabulous. The disciple s of Sadok followedtheir master in dogged unbelief, but the Karaites, whofollowed no man , had n o master from whom they couldreceive a name. The Sadducees left the orthodox teachersof the synagogue on the question of eternal reward andpunishment after the resurrection of the dead . TheKaraites gradually severed themselves from communionwith their brethren on the single question of tradition.There is no coincidence of time, place, or doctrine to

justify a confusion of the two. The Karaites are of allthe Jews most loyal to Moses’ Law, whereas the Sadduce es were among the least faithful to it.The heresy of Sadok, however, called forth an emphatic

profession of the truth which he denied, for then it wasC 2


that instead of the Single word chum, from everlast ing,

repeated at the close of prayers in the Temple andsynagogue services, there was introduced a fuller form

(BL/"um “m chum), from everla s t ing to everlas t ing . This

‘

was to signify that there are two worlds, or ages, thepast and the future, and to enable the whole congregation to proclaim with one voice that as there was aneternity past, so after the resurrection there will come asecond and eternal state of being. The echo of thisgrand suffrage is daily heard in our own Christian assemblies when they respond, As it was in the beginnin g,is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

’

If the Karaite question had been treated as fairly asthe Sadducean, and the alternative of abidin g either bythe Law of God or the traditions of men had been considered honestly as a purely religious question, the dec ision might have tended to the universal ackn owledgment of a cardinal truth, diverting the entire course ofJewish history into a different channel. But it was notso . Controversy on a religious question was the hypocritical pretext, at the period which we n ow approach,for a conflict between bigot and infidel where the realmotives were personal hatred and party antagonism.

There was an interval of nearly two centuries betweenthe secession of Sadok from the school of Antigonusand the outburst of revolt against the government ofHyrcanus which led to the eventual establishment ofKaraism, for which no date can possibly be assigned,inasmuch as there is no account of any critical conjun cture—no moment of transition . We shall however seethat learned men whose only sources of information werethe writings of Rabban it es were utterlymisled when theydescribed the Karaites as reformed Sadducees, and that



CHAPTER III.

HYRCANUS, JANNAI AND BEN SHETAKH .

AF TER the victori es of the Maccabees over their SyroGrecian tyrants, Judea rose again into the condition of akingdom— feeble in deed, yet a kingdom. The newlycreated royalty was in a dependence on Rome very likevassalage. Simon was the first who bore the name ofking in this humiliat ing relation . John Hyrcan us, sonof Simon, succeeded to his father, and in t ime attained tothe twofold dignity of high priest and king, for thepriest s and elders had been pleased to decide that thecrown and mitre should be worn by the same person,and that this royal pon t ificat e should be hereditary. Sothey created for themselves a mock theocracy. Underthe sublime theocracy of Moses and of David, God wasKing indeed. He elected men to serve Him as kingschoose their ministers. He gave the laws for civil gov ernmen t , and appointed one of his own servants to beking and captain of the people . His voice gave commandfor the army to march ; his sword transfixed Israel ’senemies. He held his court at the Sanctuary in Jerusalem, amidst august solemnities, such as no earthlysovereign ever had around him, nor ever could have .That King was holy, omnipotent, eternal. Heaven andearth were fi lled with the maj esty of his glory. There,in the same Jerusalem, after the glory had departed,when the visible splendour was extinguished, and the

HYRCANUS, JANNAI, AND BEN SHETAKH. 23

moral grandeur lost, John Hyrcan us became the mimictheocrat . Moses, when marching in a path made by theadvancing pillar Of glory, was far less in his own eyesthan John Hyrcan us, the Jewish tributary to paganRome .He was in the twenty-eighth year ofhis kingship

,and

fortieth of his high-priesthood. Under the tut elage of

the Roman Senate, and aft er a succe ssion of victories, itpleased him to make a splendi d banquet for the ent ertainmen t of his princes and ministers, with the officers ofthe lit t l e army of Judah and Benjamin, and a numerousassemblage ofWise Men . These were the governors Of

his earthly kingdom, the capt ains of the army of whichhe was general, and the hierarchy over whom he ruled aspont iff.When he had well drunk, and his heart was merrywith wine, the fest ive company seemed t o him as grandas the mult itude of princes and lords who feasted aroundBelshazzar in the palace of Babylon ; so he felt able t ogive free vent to the conceit which had grown strongwithin him, and began to recount the mult itude of goodand honourable works that he had done . He t ook praiseto himself for uprightness, justice, and be n eficen ce . Nonepresumed t o cont radict him, but the cold smiles of some,and the servile applause of others, persuaded him t hat hehad the cordial consent of all. Aft er this oration a fewmore win e-draught s sank him into a mood of sweethumility, and in this happy st at e he appealed to all thereverend sages there present , t o say whether he had n ot

always willingly received their correction and reproof forany bad or wicked act ion he had happened t o commit.Then the Wise Men gave the response expected, praisinghim aloud. Their spokesman rose during the acclamat ion, and , as it subsided, began his due address . Thouhast told the truth, O king ! For indeed thou art inst .


and upright, and faithful. Thou art a servant of God,an d his high priest, therefore praise and dominion becomethee well . ’ The king received the incense with com

placent thoughtfulness, while the company waited hisreply, and there being no second voice to interrupt thepause, he answered most graciously to this effect : I willalways listen to your words . I will welcome your reproofwhenever I have done anything beyond the bound thatlimits what a righteous judge should do. ’

Either emboldened by the royal declaration of submission, even humble submission to reproof, or moved bya sense of his master’s hypocrisy, a Wise Man namedEliezer boldly rose, and gave utterance to thoughts longpent up within his bosom.

O King Hyrcanus, live for ever ! If thou art sow ishful to be just ,— if indeed thou art so fond of honestcorrection,— come down, come down from the sacredthrone of the priesthood, and content thyself with thecrown of the kingdom.

’

Then tell me why,’ said Hyrcanus, suddenly inter

rup t ing him then tell me why .

’

I will tell thee,’ answered Eliezer. ‘When thy

mother was carried captive to the city of Medi th, inthe days of Antiochus , King of the Greeks, -when theheathens pressed hard on thy father Simon, whom theybesieged in the mountain where his wives were captive,he betook himself to flight, and left them there . It istrue that he got back again aft er he had rallied his forcesand beaten the enemy, but that notwithstanding, therehas always been a whisper that KingHyrcanus is profane.It is therefore not fit that thou shouldest go into theHoly of Holies . ’

Now these were hard words to say to an old man whohad been high priest forty years . He had n ot bidden

for such cutting faithfulness as this, which was all the

HYRCANUS, JANNAI, AND BEN SHETAKH. 25

more cruel as the statement was unanswerably true . Madwith rage

,Hyrcanus rushed from his seat. The banquet

broke up -all was confusion . F rom that hour there wasnothing in Jerusalem but enmity and strife .The king tried to quiet men ’s murmurs by a stroke Ofpower— last resource of despot s who feel themselvesfalling. He at once declared the Rabbis guilty of conspiracy , and charged Eliezer wi th being chief of theconspirators. The charge was not without some shadeof reason ; for, notwithstandin g all their flat t eries duringthe entert ainment, that one sentence of truth had reducedthe whole of them to Silence, and inst ead ofdragging theinsolent di sturber out of the royal presence, they had lethim say what he would, and with tacit unanimity gaveconsent to every word. Those Rabbis were thereforegreatly to blame : after keeping politic silence all theirlife, and on that very occasion volunteering fulsomeflattery

,their flattery was as contemptible as their

brother’s faithfulness was tardy. The aged king, inuncont rollable vengeance, had them all made prisoners atonce, and then killed with the sword. Eliezer

,their

leader as he thought, he caused to be burnt alive .F rom that time forward there was bitter hatred betweenthe Asmonean king-priests and the whol e body of theclergy. As for Hyrcanus, he died soon afterwards andwhen on e Of his sons, though not the rightful heir, hadreigned about twelve months, his eldest son, AlexanderJannai, took the crown . But Alexander had a troublousreign, an d in that reign came the first event that we can

mark as decisive in relation to our present history.

Jannai began prosperously. He was victorious in war,and the affairs ofhis priesthood went on smoothly enough ;but mischief was brooding in secret. One year

,at the

F east of Tabernacles, as he officiated at the altar, one ofthe disaffected Rabbis approached him rudely, crying as


he came, ‘Woe t o thee, thou son of a profane woman !What art thou doing ? How canst thou dare to meddlewith the priesthood ? Thymother 1 was a profane woman,and thou art not fit to be high priest. ’ SO saying, theman flung a citron, which struck him violently in the face .Startled and alarmed at the assault, and perhaps ex

p ec t in g to be at tacked murderously by those around, heshout ed,2 The sword I the sword upon the Wise Men !

’

The soldiers rushed into the midst of the Temple,and the

blood of six thousand victims flooded the sacred courts .Not cont ent with this horrible sat isfaction, AlexanderJannai

,High Priest of the Jews, declared himself a

Sadducee, and n ow the faith of the State was to bechanged. Jeroboam was the first who made the Israeli t es to be idolaters ; Alexander Jannai, successor ofthe noble Maccabees, descendant Of a race of martyrs, isthe first who invited them to become open infidels, byproclaiming that there is neither angel nor spirit, n or finalj udgment, nor any resurrect ion from the dead. As fortraditions, he would abolish them but although the chiefteachers of tradit ion have b een slaughtered, and war iswaged against their successors in the litt le kingdom ofJudea, the Oral Law will be honoured all the more forthe sufferings of its advocates, and the n ow persecutedsect of Pharisees wi l l flourish more proudly than ever.But a schism never t o be healed is at i t s height.Rabbi Caleb 3 relates that Alexander Jannai proceededto great er lengths than Hyrcanus, and put to death nofewer than three thousand persons, in addit ion to the sixthousand that were slaughtered in the Temple . Hat redraged hotter and hotter between him and the Wise Men,

Mother mean ing his grandmother, mother ofHyrcanus .

2 me an 51: awn Jan9n land quot es from aMS. of this Rabbi ,with t itle ofmama; mm),

The Ten Sen tences .

HYRCANUS,JANNAI

,AND BEN SHETAKH.

until he had killed them nearly all. Only about eighthundred evaded his fury for a little, lying in concealmentat Bathshemesh. To that place he pursued them, tookthe city, carried them prisoners to Jerusalem, an d therehun g them. So vast an execution filled the population ofJudea with dismay

,and awakened profoundest grief, and

an unconquerable sympathy. People gave their t erriblekin g the nickname of Alexander the Piercer, ‘ piercingwi th the piercings of a sword.

’

(Prov. xii. D esperat ely abandoning himself to the t empest of revenge , hewent beyond all bounds . Only one Rabbi escaped, andthat was his wife ’s brother, Simon ben She takh, whomthe queen saved by contrivin g his flight into Egypt.Aft er he had been some t ime in Alexandria, an d therewas not known to be a livin g Rabbi left in the land, thequeen his sister succeeded in getting permission for himto return, with a promise that his life Should be Spared .

He did return, and after his return made great boast ofthe Oral Law, Often repeating the words of the Psalmist,It Is time for thee

,O Lord , to work . for they have made

void thy law.

’

(PS. cxix . 1 26 . For hatred of theroyal Sadducee, he was ten times more a Pharisee thanever.Meanwhile Alexander began to quail under the con

sciousn e ss t hat all men hat ed him. He was tormentedwith the dread of some sudden retribution from hi s enemies, and writhed under the pangs of a guilty conscience .Simon ben She takh, on the other hand, grew very famous,and went to greater lengths in exalt ing his own dignitythan any Rabbi before him had ever dared to go. F earingno contradict ion, he taught such things as the Rabbiswhom Hyrcanus and Alexander massacred might haveconfessed faintly, but never ventured to t each . He declared hi s determination to restore the Law of Mosesaccording to the sense in which, he said, the Fathers had


received it. He it was, if this witness is correct, whofirst deluded men with the fable that the traditional superst it ion s were received originally from the lips of Moses on

~Mount Sinai, and perpetuated by a succession ofteachers.It was then

,Rabbi Caleb says, that the Jews were di

v ided into two sects, called Rabban it e s and Karaites .There is every reason t o doubt the introduct ion of thelatter name at that time, but there can be n o doubt thatthe Jews of Palestine were then divided into two parties,very nearly corresponding with Rabbanite and Karaite .Rabbi Caleb thinks that if the Wise Men themselves ,whom the kingsmassacred, had been alive, they would haverefused to suffer the heavy impositions of Ben She takh .

That is very likely ; but a Chief Rabbi who could dealgently with opponents, and bear with contradiction, wasnot the man want ed for the desperate service ofc ontending single-handed with such a despot as Alexander. Theysay that

,under his fostering influence, the order of Wise

Men revived,and took the name of I

h lhuari sees, or'

Separat ed

persons-L a title at such a time far more significant of a

political schism than of separation from sinners or retirement from the world ; . a tit le which represented, if thisaccount be true, a revolt of the ecclesiastics from thetyranny of kings, at least of kings like the two whosememory is infamous, and who hated the whole communityof the Jewish clergy.

Ben She t akh, however, was a man of strong religiousfeeling

,as well as impetuous temper. When in Alex

andria, he fiercely Opposed all who rej ected the OralLaw,and, aft er his recall to Jerusalem, maintained the same uncompromising hostility to what his own sect regarded asinnovat ion, although in reality they were themselves theinnovators. Lat er still

,when his colleague Rabbi Judah

ben Tabbai differed from him on this crucial question oftradition, he altered not, but persisted in his Opinions.



wilful or accidental, is not enough to reflect any doubton the clear statement that ‘ in the days of Judah benTabbai and Simon ben She takh began the sec t ofKara ism,

“n ap” npj n‘y nnn, on account Of something that happened

between the Wise Men and King Janna'

i ,’ &c . The affair

of Sadok and Bai thos, and rise of the sect of Sadducees,is related in the same chapter ; but with regard to th eKaraites

,who here make their earliest appearance in the

Book ofCoz ri, R. Judah is careful to observe that whilethe Sadducees, or Sadoki t e s , are heretics against whom heprays, ‘ the Karaites are scrupulously exact, and showthemselves very wise in the first principles of conductthroughout life . ’ 1 To set aside so explicit a testimonyfrom such a witness as this, in deference to an adversetradition, unsupported by any sufficient reason, would beto throw away wilfully a link in the continuity of thishistorical sketch which connects Karaism with the narrat ive s of the four Evangelists, and establishes the fact oftheir existence in principle, if not in name, eight hundredand fifty years earlier than many persons are willing toallow.

Sepker Coe ri , pars i ii . cap . 65 .

CHAPTER IV.

THE HOUSES or HILLEL AND SHAMMA I .

HILLEL AND SHAMMAI are as closely associated inJewish history as the mythological names of Cast or andPollux . They were, like Ben She takh and Ben Tabbai,president and vice-president of the Sanhedrim, the predent s being zealous supporters of the so-called Oral Law,and their colleagues not so much opponents in form, asindependent men who would accept a tradition if it wasfairly to be reconciled with the sense and spirit of theLaw of Moses and the teaching of the Prophets . Hencethey were n ot regarded as antagonists, although theygenerally disagreed, and sometimes their disciples carriedthe controversy from words to blows .Hillel the Babylonian, being descended on his father

’s

side from the t ribe of Benjamin, and on his mother’s fromthe tribe of Judah , represent ed in his own person themajor part of the Hebrew populat ion of Judea. Whenforty years of age, he came over t o Jerusalemand applied himself closely to the study of the Law,enlarged and darkened as it already was by the excessivediligence of mast ers of tradition . In the eightieth yearof his age, and about the hundredth before the destructionof the second Temple, after enthusiastic devotion to studyand administration , he was elected president of that highcourt, not yet deprived of i t s judicial authority , even incases of life and death . Notwithstanding his royal


descent, he was a very poor man when he came fromBabylonia, sharing with his fellows in the privations ofcaptivity, but rich in a humble and contented spirit.Although not previously of the student-class—a D iscipleof the Wise— he had learned enough t o thirst for moreknowledge , and his proficiency soon brought him intonotice . Attired in the garb of a labouri ng man (for heearned his livelihood by daily labour), he neither wastedtime n or lavished words, but revolving the subj ects ofstudy in his busy mind, acquired justness of sentiment, aclear judgment, and a refinement of language that at

tracted the lovers of wisdom,and drew forth the applause

of those whose praise was better that gold .

1 He became amember of the Sanhedrim

,and had risen above poverty,

when Shemaiah andAbt alion , president and vice—presidentof the Sanhedrim, perished in the slaughter by Herod ofall the members of t hat great assembly, except himselfand Shammai . While the Sanhedrim was extinct, andthere was no court n or council to receive appeals on anydoubtful matter, there arose a practical difficulty forwhich no

'

decision was on record . The Passover fell onthe Sabbath . The Observances of the festival and of theSabbath were incongruous, and therefore one must giveway to the other but which There were three brothersin Jerusalem, sons of Be thira,

’ reputed to excel allo thers in extent of knowledge

,to whom recourse was

iusually had for guidance where some authoritative decision was needed, and an assembly of citizens besoughtt hem to determine what should be done, but the brotherscould not agree . Impatient t o know how the Holy Cityshould be spared from confusion on the nearly-approachingday, the inquirers turned to Hillel, who instant ly settled

There are some amusing tale s in tended to i llus trat e his pat i en ce and

ingenuity when out ofwork ; but they are doubtful, and, even if true , are

trifling.

THE HOUSES OF HILLEL AND SHAMMAI . 33

the hard quest ion by pronouncing that the Sabbath mustgive way to the Passover, for so, he said, he had re ce ived

from hi s departed masters, the presidents Shemaiah and

Abt alion . The opportune decision was most welcome .It was delivered, too, on the strength of trad i t ion . To

have t reasured in memory and heart the oral decisions ofwise men of depart ed generat ions was deemed equivalentwith possessing wisdom and authority also, originallyderived from the mount ain where Moses was face t o facewith God. The Passover was kept joyfully. All eyeswere turned to the venerable Babylonian, and as soonas the vacated seats of the Great Council could be supplied

,Hillel was created pres ident in the year 32 B . C .

Like another Moses, he entered on and completed a thi rdperi od offorty years of life, and at the advanced age of sixscore, departed full of honour in the year 8 of our era.With his colleague, he presided over the schools of Jerusalem wi th unexampled success . Their scholars werenumbered by thousands, and many of them rose to aneminence that is to this day related with pride in theHebrew colleges. To Hillel, a prince among traditionists,is attributed the merit of first reducing t radition to ascience. His classification of the Mishnah into six ordersprepared the basis on whi ch his successors laboured witha zeal that may engage admirat ion, and with a result thatcompels both admirat ion and regret.Shammai

,his colleague, maintained a position ofnearly

equal emin ence . His biography is not so splendid, buthe exerted a count eract ive influence which tended tosave the Hebrew n ation from sacrificing, in an excess ofman -worship, some distinctive characteristics which theChristian world should be thankful to acknowledge on

their behalf. In the above sketch of Hillel we followfamiliar guides, but in describing Shammai I thankfullytake informat ion from a Karait e who perpetuates a frag

D


ment of history which the Rabbanite majority wouldrather leave to be forgotten in silence.R . Moses Be shit z i was an enterprising Karaite Jew who

se t out in the strength of early manhood on a pilgrimagein countries where his brethren of the R eading werereputed to be scattered. In that labour he seems t o have

prematurely exhausted his energies, and having written abook under the title of Staff of Grod,

’ l ended his life.The Karaites, he assures us, unanimously rely upon R .

Shammai, and are supported by him and by his house ofjudgment,

’ accepting from him both instruction in theLaw

,and an example t o be followed. R. Shammai re

ceived instruction from R. Shemaiah, as did Shemaiahfrom R . Judah ben Tabbai, the dissentient colleague ofBen She takh, in whose time Israel was divided into twogreat factions . The line of succession was no doubtinterrupted during the intervals that followed whenPompey conquered Palestine and broke up the Sanhedrim,

an d again when Herod, as we have noted, put its membersnearly all to death, and for some years (probably five)prevented its reassemblage but, allowin g for these intervals of suspension, the statement of Be shit z i, and otherswho have writ ten on the subj ect, is perfectly intelligible .The Rabban it es, he says, derive their doctrine fromHillel,and hi s house of judgment. Hillel from Abtalion ,

andAbtalion from Ben She takh, whom he also describes as a

man who always took his own way, and both studied andtaught independently of his brethren .

‘ He made adivorce

,and separated from the rule of the Wise Men of

Israel , acting on his own pleasure, l eaning to his ownunderstanding ; an d, out of his own heart, presuming toaffirm Thus saith the Lord God,

” when the Lord had notspoken .

’ This account of the origin of the exaggerated

The t itle i s D 'nbxman ; i t is quot ed freely by Trigland in the

seven th chapt er ofhis in valuable Diatribe .


form of traditionism adopted by the Rabban i t es, but notyet shaped into a system, and appearing only the charact erist ic of a school, is to my own mind more satisfactorythan any of the speculat ions which are thrown into theway

,and obst ruct the path ofhistory. Even Ben She takh

would n ot have been so enthusiast ic and ext reme a tradit ioni st if it had not been for horror in the recollection of

the fatal banquet of Hyrcanus, and the execrable mas

sacres of Jannai, and a profoundly human sympathy withmyriads of Jews persecuted to death or driven to apostasyfrom the first principle of truth by a savage relative of hisown . Jerome

l reports that the two schools of the Housesof Shammai and Hillel were regarded with litt le favourby the Jews in general, who called the former Scatterer,

’

and the latter Profane,’ because they deteriorat ed and

corrupted the Law with their inventions. It is also saidthat Shammai was leader of the scribes, and Hillel of thePharisees, which is very lik e the truth. On account of afatal conflict between the two houses, which took place onthe ninth of Adar, that day was aft erwards kept as a fastin memory of the slain . Aft er a struggle of three yearsfor ascendancy, they were persuaded t o a reconciliation,but not, as the tale goes, by a voice from heaven, pron oun cing the words (nun um

‘mr m trams i5m 15s)B oth these

a nd these sp eak the words of the L iving God .

2 Whoeverframed t he absurd sentence, it passed for law, and theircont radictory sayings are perpetuat ed in the Talmud tot his day. Their words are just what St . Paul says hiswere not, yea and nay unlike what the Lord said thoseof his servants ought to be ; their yea, yea, or their nay ,nay ; never contradicting on e another.The first step towards the entire separation of the two

Hieron . Commen t . in Esaiam,v iii . 1 1 4 .

2 The authority for thi s stat emen t i s in Bartoloci i Biblio th. Mag . Rab

binmca , s. v. n.


houses ’ or schools of interpretat ion of the Law,and the

conversion of each school into a sect —unless, indeed, thebetter of the two be exempted from that ignominious distinction : the first step, I say, towards the great schismwas irrevocably taken by those who proposed what theTalmudists afterwards made a standing rule— that if theHouse ofHille l takes on e s ide , a nd the House of Shamma itakes the other, the de c is ion is a ccord ing to the House ofHille l.

’ On this canon of interpretation by majority ofvotes the Karaites very reasonably observe that as theHouse of Hillel is now the more numerous of the two , thedecision in most places is merely that of a majority. Theycomplain that as the House of Hillel derives its strengthfrom number

,and the House of Shammai from skill

,the

wisdom as well as the justice of the decision must bealways quest ionable, except in those very few placeswhere it happens that the majority of Jewish residents isKaraite . This takes place, as they plead, in open cont empt of the sentence of Solomon of glorious memory

,

that ‘ bett er is a poor and wise child than an old andfoolish king .

’

(Eccles . iv. They might also say ,

what doubtless both parties must perceive, that the decisions arrived at by skill, not those voted by majorities,will stand the test of common sense when reconsidered,and that the decisions of the skilful, being placed on

record,and proved sound in the experience of the few

,

will be accepted in future times, provided only that theskilful have based their reasonings on a sure foundation.

In tha t case the testimony of the Lord standeth sure. ’

The Karaites further say that the foreclosing of judgment in obedience t o the vote of a multitude that doesn ot reflect, much less judges, must be in most casesext remely inconvenient. On marriage questions, forexample, whereon the two houses utterly difl

fer in many

cases. The House of Shammai says that a man shall



Having heard, he also asked question s. Gamaliel, son andsuccessor of Simeon, would scarcely be absent , and so thefuture master of Saul ofTarsus and his future Lord wereside by side. The wisdom ofJesus was n ot lost on either.Doubtless He appealed to God’s Law, whatever was thesubj ect of that morning’s lecture, what ever doubt or

contradict ion moved the questioners ; and they were allastonished at his underst anding and answers . No doubtthere was a special reason for his going thither, and whenhis mother and Joseph remonstrated with the child for

quitting their company without making known the reasonof his absence , ‘ He said unto them, How is it that yesought me ? Wist ye n ot that I must be about my F ather

’sbusiness (Luke ii. Now may we n ot reverentlysurmise that tha t business could scarcely have been anything less than to give a word in season t o the men whoruled the public mind of Jewry at such a juncture in thehistory of the nation as never was before, n or has beensinceIn that very year, whether before or after the Passover

I do not pause to invest igate, Hillel departed this life,l eaving behind him the first ordered sketch of the systemof traditions that grew into such a formidable bulk, andassumed so hurtful a character. Just then the sceptre departed from Judah on the banishment of the last king,Archelaus, and Judah was reduced to a Roman province.Just then the sectarian schisms grew more bit ter thanever

,and still the sects were all political . N0 longer held

in check by the personal unity and united influence oft heir leaders, who kept peace during their theological con

t roversie s, the two schools were breaking out into san

guin ary conflict, which lasted for three years, to the lossofmany lives . The child Jesus when about his F ather’sbusiness)could n ot be unmindful of the exigencies of thatcrisis : then was his first personal appeal to the men who,


so to speak, held in their hands the peace of Jerusalem,

t o be saved by their reconciliation, or t o be sacrificed t otheir obstinacy, and then were sown the sorrows that madeJesus weep, when He exclaimed, ‘ O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest themwhich are sent unto thee, how often would I have gatheredthy children together, even as a hen gathereth herchickens under her wings, and ye would not ! Behold,your house is left unto you desolate .

’

(Matt. xxiii. 37 ,Those tradit ions that lurked in the incipient Mishnah,

those disputes that were to rage in a perpetual schism,

might have been all ended if the D octors had heeded thewisdom of the Child.

But all were not guilty, nor was everything lost. Stillthere were many good men who waited for the consolation of Israel ; and while the wise men and the disputerswrangled, there were faithful matrons who, although n ot

admitted to the B e th-Midra sh, prayed at home andbrought up their children in the nurture and admonitionof the Lord. Under their smiles and blessings Timothyand Titus were t o learn the Scriptures from their earlyyouth . Gamaliel and Nicodemus, even already, caughtthe Spirit of the Holy Child, whose unders tanding andanswers they admired.


CHAPTER V.

THE NEW TE STAMENT AND CHR I ST IAN INF LUENCE .

HISTORICALLY considered, the New Te stam’gfi i s a docu

ments essentially necessary to the completeness 0 our

survey. We may n ot yet find Karaites by name, butshall at l east be able to trace the principles of Karaism inthe Jewish mind, and t o mark the d eterring influence of

our Lord’s personal ministrations beyond the circle ofChristianity . We shall se e how He laid hold of the element of honestly obedient faith which yet remainedhow He associated with Himself, for the future benefit ofthe children of Israel, a multitude who, although st e ppingshort of conversion to Himself, had the mark upon theirforeheads ofmen who sighed and cried for all the abominations that were done in the midst of the city . (Ezek. ix .

He found amon g such a faithful remnant wherewith t olay the foundat ion of hi s future church . The dividedhouse

,indeed, could not stand, but even from the frag

ments of its ruin materials were gathered for building upa more glorious temple t o the God ofAbraham.

All our Lord’s ministry was an active and continuousantagon ism to human traditions . The voice from heavenproclaimed Him the beloved Son ofGod, and commandedthe mult itudes assembled on the Jordan to hear, that is,to obey Him, not following the blind leaders of theblind.

’

F rom his first address to the people to his last,

He set Hirn self against the tradi t ions that had been

THE NEW TESTAMENT AND CHRISTIAN INFLUENCE. 4 1

rapidly gaining strength through not less, probably morethan

,eighteen years since his conversation with the

doctors, and with most pointed and solemn reiteration Heenforced his own instructions, which were all in agreement with the Old Test ament Scriptures, in plain contradiction to the sayings of the An c ien ts, oi d a Zm, as theywere also called by the Pharisees and other Jews ; the

Pump or ene ma nsgpr. By these were not meant themembers of the Great Synagogue, but they who followedSimon the Just , the authors of the sentences collected forthe Mishnah in their own times, and there honoured withthe title ofmax, F a thers, of whom Antigonus of Socoh,successor of Simeon, was the first. This opposit ion neverslackened. N0 one can recall what he remembers ofthose divine discourses w ithout feeling that the Speakermade it his constant business to denoun ce a prevaili ngsystem of false teaching, and t o pour condemnation on aset of men whom He denounces as hypocrites and blind.The denunciations

,indeed , are not indiscriminate, and He

cautiously refrains from lowering the office they professt o fill . Speaking of them as ‘ they who sit in Moses’

seat,’ he bids his hearers keep (mpaZv)what Moses de

livered to be kept, warning them, at the same time, thatthey must not imitate their practices. To prevent misapprehension , He spe cifies many of those practices, whichare all novelties, vain, trifling, superstit ious . He den oun ce s their decisions, which are casuist ic and demoral

ising. A religious rite fairly intended to act out a principle of the Mosaic Law He readily sanctioned. Such wasbaptism, identical in spirit and meaning with Leviticalablutions, and He even said that it became Himself tosubmit to it as a Sma lwna , or righteous observance ; butsuch was n ot the ostentat ious washing of hands aftertouching a Gentile in the market-place, or washing cupsand pe ts from defilemen t supposed to b e contracted from

'

42 HISTORY or THE KARAITE JEWS .

a Gentile touch . Phylacteries He did not forbid,but

He found great fault with the manner then prevalent ofmaking and wearing them. The paying of tithes He didn ot undervalue, but He did speak very contemptuously oftithing potherbs, and at the same time neglecting thedemands of justice, mercy, and truth, and the weightierobligat ion s of the Law . He spared not those who werepunctual in ceremonious obedience, and left their parentst o st arve while they fed the priests. He summoned themt o respect the sent ence recorded by a Pr0phe t : I willhave mercy

,and not sacrifice, saith the Lord.

’

During the more than thirty years that elapsed fromthe census made by order of Caesar Augustus to the ap

p earan ce of the Baptist and his own miracle at Cana, agreat change took place i n all Palestine— nay

,wherever

Jews were to be found throughout the empire . Societywas well-nigh revolutionised, ancient ties relaxed orbroken, and people in general thinking of religion lessand less . Hypocrisy and bigotry contended angrilyagainst insolent unbelief. In all this the spirit of thosegodly persons who lived just long enough to hear of theangel-song at Bethlehem, and to witness the adoration ofthe infant Jesus by the Magi, had passed away, and thegood men of the living generation were less eminent, andin number fewer, than the compeers of Z acharias, Simeon,and Anna. The ministry of the Lord Jesus opened anew era in the religious history of this nation ; and wewill n ow inquire whether there were any manifestationsofdisaffection towards the traditionists in authority, or anyinfluential advocates of the simple t eaching of the ancientScriptures, or any traces of public sentiment, that wouldgive hope of a favourable response to the appeals of theSaviour.This is all we could expect to find in the New Testa

ment, for professed Karaites were not yet. Learned men

THE NEW TESTAMENT AND CHRISTIAN INFLUENCE . 43

have laboured to make it appear that scribes and lawyerswere the same as those whom Jewish writers call Mastersof the Reading,

’

as dist inguished from Masters of theMishnah and Masters of the Talmud but every steptaken in examination of those verbal speculat ions removesus farther and farther from hope of confirmat ion . Passagesfrom Athanasius

,Epiphan ius, and Origen have been ad

duc ed to show that scribe and doctor of the Law areequivalent terms, and then it is t aken for granted that adoctor of the Law must have been a faithful expositor ofthe Law of Moses . But the conjectures are venturedwithout a due regard t o the laws of evidence . Time,place, language, religion, are all different, sometimesremotely distant and various except

,perhaps, in the

single case of Epiphan ius, who, as Bishop of Cyprus andhistorian of heresies, made it hi s duty t o obtain as muchinformation as possible from Palest inian Jews, and says,on their testimony

,that Scribe , f

ypa /t ua'

rsfis, and doc tor

of the Law, vonobtdafoxa kos, mean the same person . SO

they may , and so they sometimes do ; but the indifferentuse of two titles for one person, as p resby ter and bishop ,

for example, is a confusion of language in free and familiar use that cannot avail much for the solution of a doubtin history ; and havin g pondered again and again the passages referred to by Triglan d and others, and examin ingthe New Testament for myself, I so frequently find theuse ofthe same word, f

ypa/t ua'

rsfis or vouucés, for very difforent persons, that I fai l t o derive any conclusive information on the point from the narra tives themselves, exceptit be that the lawyers are as often and severely censuredas the scribes, and that both lawyers and scribes are foundamong the Phar1 se e s. But being in search of evidence

,

time shall n ot be wasted in quot ing passages merely toshow that they shed no light on the present inquiry . Agleam of light , however, may be caught from the word


vouobtbda'

xahos , literally meaning a tea cher of the Law,

and so translated in the simple Syriac version, whichwas made in Pales tine itself, and made early enough forthe translator to know the customary meaning of thewords in common use a generation or two before his owntime . Now it is fairly argued in favour of understandin gthis word as indicating loyalty to the supreme authorityof the writ ten Law ofGod , that it is peculiar to the NewTestament, being used there aft er the rise of Jewish tradit ion s, and that it is translated literally in the Syriacversion, the same translation n ot being given to the morefamiliar word vouuco

’

s, lawger. It is not, I repeat, foundin the Septuagint, nor, ifI am sufficiently informed, in theother Greek versions of the Old Testament. It occurs inLuke v. 1 7 , together with Pharisee and the Phariseesan d doctors ofthe Law who then came together with theirquestions were unusually candid, and easily convinced. Itis also said that Gamaliel was a and of

his honesty there can be n o doubt. But then Gamaliel,we know from the testimony of his most illustrious pupil,was a rigid Pharisee ; he taught accordingly, and therefore was probably 1 a traditionist. There is only one

I am careful to say n o more than p robably , because a man might be of

that strict est se ct of the Jews’ religion , and y et ut t erly opposed to Kab

bala . Saul of Tarsus was, as t ouching the Law,

’

not the tradi t ion s, a

Pharise e’

(Phil. iii . Even aft er his conversion , St . Paul did not

hesi tat e to cry out in the coun cil,Men and bre thren , I am a Pharisee,the

son of a Pharisee’

(Act s xxi ii . Even whe n the Talmud was acknow

ledged by all except Karai t e s , lit eral in t erpre tat ion was not absolut ely rej ect ed , and the most emin en t Rabbin ical commen tators have excelled inexact lit eral and historical in t erpretat ion of the sacred t ext . The Karai t es

un iformly con t ended for [n n j flfl ,the s imp le me thod , but the follow mg

words occur in a not e of Aben Ez ra , on Lamen tat ion s i and the

simple me thod This is the substance , in words most carefullychosen ; and t hus they spoke according to the plain sen se , and the tran s

lat ed or copied words (mpvnp D’WJ ‘

ITI'D The same commen tator con

t ra sts, in a passage elsewhere occurring, but which I cann ot turn to at this

momen t , the WT IDHTn , me thod ofMidrash, which was that of the highest



complement for the use of a teacher of the people . Thisis said to Timothy twenty-five years aft er Christ, Timothybeing then ordained Bishop of Ephesus, and the Apost lealso ca lls to mind the time when Timothy was a child,and reminds him from whom he learned the Scriptures.He was taught by his mother, who had in herself unfeigned faith, and was for this indebted to his grandmother Lois. His grandmother, evidently, taught hismother in her childhood, who aft erwards taught Timothyin his, all which would require more than twenty-eightyears to be accomplished, counting from the time whenLois was herself instructed ; and therefore Lois musthave been a student of the Old Testament Scriptures,without the taint of tradition, before she could have beeninduced t o cast ofi

’

tradition by any influence from Christian teaching.

St. Paul was in Thessalonica and Berea in the year 5 2 .

(Acts xvii.) At Thessalonica the unbelieving Jewsraised a tumult, which drove him from the city, andthence he proceeded to Berea, where he went into asynagogue and taught. His teaching in that synagoguewas derived from the Bible, to which he referred thecongregation for confirmation of his doctrine. ‘ Thesewere more noble t han those in Thessalonica, in that theyreceived the word with all readiness of mind, andsearched the scriptures daily, whether those things wereso . ’ Here, then, were two synagogues, in on e of whichthe Jews were furiously hostile, but in the other more

n oble , and their nobility arose from an established reverence for the Word of God. Traditionist casuistry wouldprevent any such readiness of mind as they displayed,and

,if nothing more, would produce hesitation, scrn

pulosity , and strife among themselves . But nothing ofthe kind took place . Such a temper in persons totallystrangers t o Christian preaching, and living in a country

Where Christianity had now to be publi shed for the first

THE NEW TESTAMENT AND CHRISTIAN INFLUENCE . 47

time, shows that they must have been comparatively free,t o say the least, from the influence of tradi tion regardedas a necessary supplement t o the Word of God, or theywould have maint ained, with their less noble brethren inThessalonica, that the Scripture cannot be understoodwithout illust ration from proficien t s in an oral law.

Perhaps there were other Jews like them among themultitude t o whom the Lord Jesus said, ‘ S earch theScriptures, for in them, as g e thinh, ye have eternal life,and they are they which testify of me .

’

As we advance, we have occasion to observe the stateof feeling among the Greek-speaking Jews in Egypt onthe matter ofBible-reading, and therefore we notice herethat there were in the Berean synagogue many honourable women whi ch were Greeks, who believed the Christian preacher aft er searching the Scriptures to see whetherwhat he said was true . Perhaps, again, the Greeks whocame to Jerusalem and desired to see Jesus were Biblereading Jews . But we have now seen enough t o beassured that in the time of Christ the Jews were not allfollowers of the traditions of the elders.Before leaving the New Testament, there is yet anothernote to be t aken.

The more anyone has studied the entire contents of thesacred volume, so much the more distinctly he perceivesthe agreement of the language of each of the inspiredwriters with that of his age and country. This is n ot

mere adap ta tion . It was n ot necessary that they shouldadapt their style by changing it. It.was just that ofthosearound. To us at a distance, who compare it with otherportions of the same volume, the difference strikes us asremarkable but they could not themselves perceive localpeculiarities of idi om as we perceive them now. Theynot only used familiar words and phrases at the timecurrent, but in discoursin g on familiar subjects they re

p eat ed, consciously or unconsciously, allusions that were


then in every person’s mouth. There was a fashion inthe market-place, and there was a fashion in the synagogue. One might speak about Jannes and Jambreswithout caring to think of the authenticity of the tale

,

any more than an accomplished scholar of this day wouldbe above speaking of ‘ Gog and Magog,

’ if wishi ng tonote the place where those grotesque obj ects are t o befound. A Jew of the Apostolic age would not hesitatet o pronounce a technical word to express a date

,any

more than at this day, one of his descendants wouldhesitate t o direct you to page Kav (up) if he wished youto find the 1 06 th page in a Hebrew book, and you wouldnot think of troubling him with a disquisition on thepossible meaning of the sound.

In like manner, the later books of the New Testamentbear obvious traces of an advanced Rabbinism in the common Speech of Jews. The Second Epistle of St. Peter,the Epist le of Jude, and the Apocalypse are stronglymarked with this peculiarity an d it is clear beyond theshadow of a doubt that this indicates a correspondingchange in the language of those who spoke and wrote onreligious subj ects. It might have been avoided. The

Holy Spirit might have always kept his servants alooffrom the shift ing varieties of human language, but thatHe never di d. As the antiquarian architect can confi

den tly assign a proximate date to any building suffi cient lypreserved for even slight examination, so can the lit erarycritic estimate the period when the manuscript Copy orthe original work was written . And so the notes of t imewrought into the last few leaves of Christian Scriptureafford us at this moment some instruction. Within thirtyyears aft er St . Paul, Rabbinical studies revived in Palest ine , through the zeal of earnest men who escaped fromJerusalem in the earlier part of the Roman siege, andestablished themselves in the towns which soon becamefamous as chief seats of Hebrewlearning .

CHAPTER VI.

T IBERIAS AND PALE ST INE .

LONG beforefthe last lines of -the New Testamen t werewrit ten, Jerusalem was rased t o the ground . Amidstall the calamities that overwhelmed the J ews, the forceof party-spirit was n ot broken, and Rabbinic zeal grewmore intense, even as the flood gains depth and rapidityin proportion as the channel narrows. The relativeposition of parties was also changed, the part ies themselves being different and more numerous. If the question was barely one of lit eral interpretation , the housesof Hillel and Shammai w ere ready for battle at any

moment ; while the multitude, neutral for the time, asJerome heard his Hebrew friends describe the matter,stood aloof, content to call on e party des truc t ive , and theother p rofa n e . If Jewry was moved on a question of

doctrine, the subject of dispute would det ermine thedistribution of the belligerent force

,which might be

Pharisees on one side, and Sadducees on the otherthose who contended for the hope

,of the resurrection of

the dead, and these more coldly infidel than Sadoc himself

,ready to assail them with derision. But n ow there

is another party, the Christ ian, and this is very st rong.

The D ivine Founder, far more emphatically than anyof his servants, condemned the traditions of the elders asbeing the great occasion of disobedience and infidelitya system of delusion, offensive to God and injurious to

E


mankind. His servants were not empowered to employlanguage of equal authority, and therefore they couldnot so denounce the evil ; neither might their energiesbe largely spent in assailing the strongholds of tradition ,while their one all-absorbing care was to discharge thepeculiar duties of their vocation by publishing theGospel, surrounded as they were with witnesses of i tspower unto the salvation of every believer. They ceasednot t o preach Jesus and the Re surrection, and so keptthe public mind alive to the recollection of the day ofCrucifixion, when the sun was darkened, and the vail ofthe Temple rent,— the morning of the Resurrection , whenthe graves were Opened, with their account of the

glorious Ascension, and of the Pent ecostal awakeningand conversi on of the thousands . This doing, the Christian preachers raised another conflict, and wherevertheir voice was heard, the Jews were divided on theclaims of Jesus of Nazareth . Seldom were they alluni ted against the Evangelists, for it was almost certainthat a few at least, whether Hebrews or Hellenists, men

or women, would receive the truth . Sometimes a mult itude , many even of the priests, would profess themselvesobedient t o the faith. The more thoughtful would go to

the fountain of knowledge, and search the Scriptures oftheir own accord ; therein to seek either denial or confirmat ion of the discourses they had heard. While so

engaged, some sense of the incomparable maj esty ofGod’

s

Word would surely rest upon them. In such sacredmoments they heeded n ot the clamour of the sects, butgazed with undistracted steadfastness into the sanctuaryof heavenly wisdom.

Large secessions from Judaism proved that on thatside the cont est had been unequal . The tradit ionistswere opposed by a power they had neither force n or

weapons to resist. They had not yet agreed upon a

TIBERIAS AND PALESTINE . 5 1

at they might quote against the Christian preachthe Mishnah was but rudely drafted, and evenof the first draft was not sett led, much less exin the synagogues. The traditions themselves

e not from any fountain universally acknowledged.h sentence could only be traced to a human speaker

,

and it is observable that when our Lord enumeratedcertain traditional customs of the Pharisees, He treatedthem with significant indifference as mere voluntary ritesMany other such like things ye do.’

On the con trary, the Christ ians made vigorous andconstant use of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms,which all part ies acknowledged to be writ ten by inspiration , confirmed by indubitable evidence, and the lat est ofthem accepted by ancient s who lived in the world generat ions before the Mishnaic sentences were utt ered. Thesame hand that opened the sacred roll, t o be read in thecongregat ion, was often laid upon the sick with power toheal, or t ouched the dead, to raise him up in the name of

Jesus, while Jewish exorcists, essaying to do the like,were confounded. So it was when the man with theunclean Spirit fell on them, exclaimin g, ‘ Jesus I know,and Paul I know,

but who are ye ? ’

It was n ot n ow Hillel or Shammai, Ant igonus or

Sadoc disput ing for possession . F rom ‘ that F east of

Pentecost , when thousands of Jews were incorporat edinto the Church, the precinct s of the synagogue wereevery day narrowed. Myriads of God’s ancient peopleexperienced new convict ions, and although the leadingtraditionist s worked harder than ever t o frame a complet ecode of rules for the government of their congregat ions ,there was a widespread outgrow th of dissat isfactionwith the whole scheme of oral law . The proj ect of re

peat ing, or amplifying, or substitut ing a modern contrivance for the ceremonial law of Moses, which could

a 2


neither be observed in Jerusalem nor transplanted toany other place

,was regarded with mistrust by many,

while o thers laboured for its accomplishment with all themore desperate enthusiasm.

If Christians, in those days of miracle and awakening,had n ot Judaized at all ; if the orthodox had n ot re

t aliat ed evil for evil on the Jews ; if Gent ile proselyt esto the Christian name had not brought in with them idolatries which the Jews abhorred ; if all prominent advocates of Christianity had been adequately charitable andwell informed, refraining from .v ituperation and watchingagainst untruth in controversy with the Jewish brethren,Christendom would n ot have degenerat ed as i t did, bothpart ies would have had God’s pure Word in supremehonour, and the world might never have seen a Talmudor a Koran .

But matters took a very different course, and we haven ow to glance at the Hebrew schools in Palestine, fromthe Apostolic age t o their dispersion and decay.

Jerusalem was made a desolate heap, and the youth ofI srael were left destitute of schools, if not of teachers .

St ill the exiles were permitted to revisit the Holy Land,although n ot the Holy City ; the silence of despair wasquickly broken , and the Israelite, whose indomitableSpirit refuses t o bow under any discouragement , rose upagain

,more vigorous than ever. The old men , schooled

in sorrows, rallied around themselves the manhood thatremained, and the infancy that multiplied, resolving thatt hey would t ransmit a knowledge of their religion t ofuture generat ions . They knew that they possessed,word for word, the covenant that God made with theirancestors, containing promise of a King that Should si t

upon the throne of D avid, —a King whose maj esty wouldoutshine the glories of Solomon, and whose goodnesswould equal or surpass the graces of their lord Moses.



as yet, were only to be sought in the Books of Moses, withsuch t raditions as he knew for help to understand thelaws. As for civil precautions, he very laudably did hisbest ; as to sacred Observances, his position was extremelydifficult, and his error, as a traditionist, was not peculiarto himself alone . Like others dependent on private resources, he se t hedges (mro nan)round Moses

’ Law, to keepit safe . He tried to fen ce a dismantled fortress w ithbulwarks made out of the ruins. He had, however,abundant material of the kind, for his master wasGamaliel the Younger, son of Gamaliel the Aged, thereverend master at whose feet St. Paul had profitedabove all his equals in that factitious learning which

,

after all, he counted as dross, and rej ected as rudimentsof the world,

’—elements of a system decayed, corrupt,abandoned.Z EPHOR IAH and CE SAREA also attained a temporaryhonour as possessing colleges, but their history is oflesser importance.TIBERIAS became eventually the one centre in theHoly Land of that learning which Rabban John cultiv at ed so diligently at Jabn eh . Tiberias was supposed tobe the an cien t

'

Rakkath (Josh . xix . but that isdoubted. There is n o doubt, however, as to its identitywith the present Tabariah. The city, as yet but recent,was eminent, and beautiful indeed for situation. To usthe name is familiar as being borrowed for the Lake ofGalilee

,called also the Sea of Tiberias, and mentioned

under both descriptions in the Gospels. The Romanemperor Tiberius chose the site for a new city, in admiration of the scenery around, and, as customary withemperors, gave it his own name with the slight syllabicvariation. Sacred

,indeed, are the memories of the lake,

and they could not have been quit e unknown to theJewish fugit ives who then found refuge on its borders,but they did n ot acknowledge the divinity of Him who

TIBERIAS AND PALESTINE . 5 5

had walked upon those waters , who stilled the tempestthat rushed down from the gorges of those mount ains

,

and made the lake and its shores the scene of manyother mighty miracles. It is for travellers to describethe beauties of Tiberias, seated as it is in one of themost delicious valleys of the world. A note of de scription from one of them will not be out of place . 1

The ruins of the ancient city, the numerous tombs inthe vicinity, one of which contains the remains of thegreat Maimonides, and the Jewish population, whosepeculiar manners and features at once attract the trav eller

’s attention as he passes through the streets of the

modern town, attest the reverence in whi ch it has beenheld by the distant sett lements, whence Jews have forcenturies come to lay their bones in the neighbourhood. ’

In short, for three centuries Tiberias was in the stead'

of Jerusalem to the Jews of Weste rn Asia.The first rector of the college was R. Simon , son ofGamaliel II. , and the successor of Simon was R . Judahthe Holy, called Rabbi only, by way of di stinction, whenhis sentences are quoted. His countrymen were agreedin the persuasion that in his day there was not a man inthe world fi t to be compared with him ; and wild as aresome of the legends ofRabbi Judah the Holy, they contain a reality of sober truth which tells that he was dist inguished by excellent wisdom and extraordinary sanctity .

There he sat, surrounded with seventy judges, in BethShearim, in Tiberias , and in Z ephoriah. Tiberias laydee

’

pest. ’ 2 It lay embosomed in a broad valley, west ofthe lake

,cut through by perpetual streams that water

ever-flourishing forests, as t hey flow down from the everlasting hills above an d around, rushing to the Sea ofGalilee. Tiberias lay deepest of all the cities,

’ mostsheltered

,therefore, and most peacefully retired, and

Sin ai and Palestin e . By Arthur Penrhyn Stanley,M.A., chap . x .

2 Buxtorfs Tiberias, chap. iv.


there the Sanhedrim was captive in the tenth captivity ;for so many times had theyme t hurriedly in places wheretroubles would not suffer them to rest ; and residence inany place other than Jerusalem,

however pleasant, hos

pitable , or even secure, is always called a captivity bythe loyal Hebrew.

This illustrious Rabbi and his successors not only enj oyed the obedient recogni tion of the Jews in mattersrelating t o religion, butwere allowed by the Romans toexercise a certain civil jurisdiction, within the Imperialboundaries, over the Jews of the dispersion . They sayt hat the Emperor An ton inus l conferred many honours onhim, treating him with much favour, and, when at Tiberias, admitting him to familiar conversation. The Jewsthen enjoyed special privileges in the city, and whenAntoninus died, Rabbi Judah lamented that a bond ofstrength was broken.

By permission ofAntoninus, it is affirmed, he publishedhis great work , the Mishnah, which by that Imperial sanct ion had the force of what we should call canon law, for

general observance by the Jews. It was so called tosignify that it should serve as a second Law, be adaptedto the circumstances of a scattered people

,and facilit ate

the application ofthe first to all the business of life. AS

to the alleged sanction, it is quite probable that so prudent a Chief Rabbi would enj oy the favourable regard ofall Roman authorities, but the part icular stat ement nowquoted lacks the confirmation requisite for i ts acceptanceas an historic truth . Whatever Antoninus might have permi t t ed, experience taught his Christian successors the in ex

p edien cy ofextendin g to human laws the recognition whichis due to the laws of God, and, so instructed, Justinianprohibited the Mishnah from bein g read in synagogues.

Whe ther An ton inus Pius or Philosophus, is uncerta in perhaps both.

CHAPTER VII.

THE M I SHNAH .

IF the Saviour had not come into the world if the legaltypes and historic Shadows of four or five thousand yearshad not been superseded by the substantial benefits of ahigher dispensation, and if the one great prediction of theProphets had n ot been fulfilled, any judicious effort tofacilitate the due application of a law not yet repealedwould

.have deserved the highest commendation . R .

Judah,however, was not the author of thi s secondary

code, for its materials, orally recited like Arabian legends,had been in vogue long before , being those very traditionswhich the Messiah condemned, and which the learnedRabbi, n ot considering or not pondering the reason ofthat condemnation , spent the best years ofh is life in corre ct ing and arranging. He probably revised the graduallycollect ed text, and, in some inferior way, did for theMishn ah what Ezra had done for the Old TestamentScriptures. To speak in Hebrew style , he sea led the book.

The titles of the six ORDER S of the Mishnah, with thoseof the Tra c ta tes of each Order, are given at the end ofthis chapter,‘ and, thus exhibited, may convey the firstidea of the framework of the Talmud— that immense col

lection which has been made equally the subject of my st erious admiration and of idle ridicul e. The Mishnah

,

as the original text of the Talmud, and as a faithful picture of Jewish theology and ecclesiology in the apostolic

See Note A, at the end of this chapter.


an d post-apostolic ages, should be known to every Christian student, —at least in its general outlines,— and a

n earer acquain tance with it s con tents is indispensablyrequired for successful invest igation of the Hebrew element in primitive Christianity, as found in the NewTestament, and in the New Testament alone . AS an

ancient document, it possesses great interest, an d weshould be thankful to God for the preservation of so largea mass of materials for explaining the phrase ology, andtherefore the teaching, of our Lord and his Apostlesmaterials which are not n ow suffi ciently employed inapplication to their proper use . One thought only dashesour satisfaction, and it i s that all the evidences of Christ ian ity were ignored by the laborious compiler during itsproducti on. On the very scene of our Saviour’s mightyworks, and within sound of the tradit ions of his presence,the chief of the wise men of Israe l spent years of toil, andproduced with his own hand a literary key to his discourses.Let my part be with them that go to the synagogue

on the Sabbath in Tiberias ,’ says one of the Rabbis in

the Talmud, and with them that go out of the synagogueon the Sabbath in Z ephoriah.

" Z ephoriah was built upona hill, and the sun disappeared there half an hour laterthan at Tiberias , which lay low on the eastern side of ahigh mountain which hid it so much sooner. The devoutRabbi, could his wish be realised, would have added halfan hour to the Sabbath time. But the traditional nameof the mountain behind Tiberias is Mountain of theBeatitudes,

’ for there, it is believed, our Lord deliveredthe sermon to the great multitude, as related by St. Matthew . Under the shadow, then, of the very mountai nwhere that sermon was delivered, was prepared the collection of traditions which were alluded to by the D ivine

Q uot ed by Buxtorf, ut sup ra .

THE MISHNAH. 5 9

Preacher, and it must be acknowledged that without theMishnah it would be vain to attempt a full textua l exposit ion of the sermon. Such a key Rabbi Judah un con

sciously prepared. We regret his unbelief, yet musthonestly acknowledge that, in this unbelief, there was noapparent malignity. Al though shielded by the protectionof the Pagan , - and perhaps incited by the Z eal of inferiorbrethren, he did not, as I think, set down , a word in dis

paragemen t of the person or ministration of our LordJesus. With self-imposed reserve , he laboured in the

forlorn work of reciting rules for the due observance offestivals that had not been celebrated for three or fourgenerations past, and never could be kept again ;— formarking the boundaries of a land that never could be occupied by his people, at least so long as they remained inunbelief, —for defining the domestic relations of tribesthat were utterly scatt ered an d denat ionalised , —for preparing oblations that could not be presented, and forsacrifices that could n ot be slain, because the altars wereoverthrown and the priesthood was extinct.

’

Yet again. The Mishnah must be read with interest,for it has contributed, more than any other visible in strument, to the perpetuation of a system of tradi tionaryprinciples, precept s, and customs that keeps alive thepeculiar spirit of Judaism, as distinct from all the worldof Gentiles, that feeds an enthusiasm and rivets an attachment strong beyond the conception of any stranger, thu skeeping this ancient people in an isolated existence for thefulfilment of their appointed service in the world, unt ilthe fulness of the Gentiles Shall be gathered in, and thedispersed of Judah shall return w ith a ransomed world tocrown the triumph of their Messiah—theirs and ours.While it serves these great purposes, Christian scholars dowell to acknowledge its existence, examine its variouscont ents, and refrain from indulging in expressions of,


contempt or censure until their criticism can be discrimin at ive as t o the demerits and merits of the work.

Two events quickly followed after its completion . Onewas the publication ofwhat is called the Jerusalem Talmud , which is little more than four of the six Ordersof the Mishnah, with notes.

1 Led away by the starvingSpirit which ever wanders in search of something betterthan has been y e t found by the beings it possesses, othermembers ofthe Sanhedrim and college of Tiberias had nodoubt been working busily to produce a commentary onthe sentences of the Wise Men from Antigonus of Sochoonward, as they were n ow arranged by R. Judah theHoly . They say that in closing the collection he wasguided by the alleged decision of an oracle, which pron oun ced the contrary sayings of the houses .of Hillel andShammai t o be both of them the wordsofGod. By virtue of that absurd figment

,the two great parties which

sat face to face in the colleges and synagogues of Israelwere clothed in the same livery of sect , as one mightalmost say, that they might be authorised to keep up thehabit ofcontradiction and spread casuistry instead of promulgat in g truth . This

'

was Talmudism properly so called .

The fathers ofTiberias were the first ofJews to undertake that work. They wrote the first Ta lmud, publishedat Tiberias in the year 230, and c alled the JerusalemTalmud, as distinguished from the Babylonian : not thatit was written in Jerusalem, which would n ot be possible ,but because Jerusalem was claimed by the authors astheir metropolis.The other event was the migration eastward of severalof the most learned Jews from the college of Tiberias .In consequence of their departure from Tiberias, andsett lement in Babylonia among the descendants ofthose who remained there after the first captivity, there

See Not e B, at the end of this chapt er.



baptism, and after partaking of the holy myst erie s.

’ l Thebishop, it seems , was a physician , or acted as such, as didRabbis and priests commonly, and after desiring Hillel

’

s

chamber to be cleared ofvisitors, he remained wi th himalone, and baptised him secretly. A secret baptism israther a thing to be ashamed of than published abroad

,

but if the Prince of the Jews in Palest ine quitted thesynagogue on his death-bed, that was a fact which , to saythe least, indicates a decline of zeal in the very head ofthe capt ivity. A conversion to thefa i th of Christ wouldhave been openly confessed ; and a more satisfactory instance of friendly communica t ion with Christians is thenotorious fact that Jerome, without any concealmentor disguise, obtained the assistance of a learned J ewfrom Tiberias to assist him in translat ing the Old Testament from Hebrew int o Lat in . This learned Hebrewcould n ot have rendered such a service to a Christiantheologian unless he had been sustained by the favouring Opinion of his own people ; such as

,t o borrow a

lat er example by way of illust ration , was afforded to R .

Moses Harragel, a learned Jew of Maqueda, in Spain ,when he went to Toledo, early in the fift eenth century ,and sat down daily with a high dignitary of the RomanChurch, t o translate the Hebrew Bible into ‘ good C astilian .

’ 2 It would be easy t o demonstrate the happy influence which rested on the Hebrew population of Spain atthat part icular time, and gave a powerful impulse to theearly acceptance of the Gospel by multitudes of theSpanish people, especially those of Hebrew birth, and, if

Ep iphan i i adv. Ha res . lib . i . t om. i i . Haere s . 30. Adversus Ebionaeos .

2 This commendat ion of the version of Ben Ragel for good Cast i li an

must pass on i t s own merits . I fe ar there is no good vernacular in any

of the old Jew1 sh version s. They are so extremely close to the le t t er,

esclavas a la le tra , as the Span iard would say , that there can hardly be a

sen t en ce of good Cast ilian possible , and sense i tself is often lost in super

st it ious scrupulosity wi thout in telligence .

THE MISHNAH. 63

mistake not , of Karaite principles, if n ot Karaites prossed. A similar influence was now prevalent in Pales

Babylonian Jews were, in the days of Hillel thePrince

,rather the successful rivals than the cordial friends

of t heir brethren in Tiberias,— certainlymore zealous tradit ion ist s ; and although people say, with or withou t proof,that a love of Hebrew learning lingered in Tiberias formany ages, the three Buxt orfs, who made this passage ofJewish history a Special study, and whom I n ow chieflyfollow, could not discover any t races ofscholarship in theplace on record, after the remarkable death-bed baptismof Hillel the Secon d .

1

The desert ion of the Palest inian schools in the fourthcentury can be easily accoun ted for. During the lat teryears ofHillel’s life, Christ ianity— already much debased ,we know—rapidly gained polit ical influence as the religionof the empire, but lost religious influen ce in converse proportion. The most cursory perusal of the Imperial lawsconcerning Samaritans and Jews suggests what a carefulexamination of the hi story of those laws confirms, disclosing to view a legal oppression that crushed the Jews t o thedust

,and a disgust ing system ofbribery and int imidation

which induced myriads to desert the synagogue, and luredor forced them int o what was miscalled ‘

the Church,’ yet

made them n ot Christians, but confirmed hypocrit es .

Every honest Christian is bound t o make this acknowledgment, but it concedes nothing t o weaken the p ersuasion that earlier int ercourse with Christians led the Jewsof Palestine to study the Old Testament Scriptures morepractically in order t o meet the Christian advocat es,examining the facts of sacred history, and searching out

the literal meaning of the prophecies. But let i t be re

membered that the persecut ions ofConstantine the Great ,

Tiberias,sive Commen tarius Masorethieus, cap . v.


the first Christian who made a law again st the Jews, didnot begin until Hillel had nearly finished his career, andthe school of Tiberias had already fallen into a state ofirremediabl e decay.

The three centuries of Hebrew study in Palestine werenot lost, and the character ofMishn aical literature, ascompared with the later Talmudic literature of Babylonia,is very strongly marked. The Mishnah was originallydevised to be the hedge of the Law and although thetendency of the work, as already marked, was to supersede the Law, the pre-eminence of the Law it self wasalways acknowledged

,if n ot always felt. At first , while

B . Judah the Holy was prosecuting his labour in collecting the tradit ions, and Juven al was writ ing his Satires

(for the two were contemporary), Moses was reputed thesupreme authority of Judaism. The Roman poet discovered in Judaism n o other obj ects on which t o spend hisridicule than the Sabba ths, the God of Heaven , the clouds

of Mount Sinai and the sanctuary, abs t inen ce from uh

clea n mea ts, c ircumcision , sep a ra t ion from the Gen t iles , a nd

the hidden volume ofMose s. The words of the satirist, sooften quot ed (we have given the sense), should be re

p e at ed now, for the satisfaction of the reader that theabsurdities of tradit ion had n ot attracted his attention.

Q uidam, sort it i metuen t em sabbata patrem,

Nil prae t er nubes , e t caeli numen adoran t

Nec d i stare put an t humana carn e suillam,

Q ua pat er abst inui t ; mcx e t praeput ia ponun t

Romanas aut em soli t i con t emn ere lege s ,

Judaicum ediscun t , e t servan t , ac metuun t jus,Trad idi t arcano quodcumque volumin e Moses .

Non mon strare vias , e adem n is i sacra colen t i

Q uaesi tum ad fon t em solos deducere verpos .

Sed pat er in causa, cui sep t ima quaeque fui t lux

Ignava e t part em vitae non at t igi t ullam.

l

Juvenah s Sat ira xiv. 9 6-4 06 .

THE MISHNAH. 6 5

Tacitus is far more unjust than Juv en al, but his feeblet ravesty of the Mosaic history, and misrepresentat ion ofthe Jewish religion , is equally free from allusion to theabsurdit ies of Talmudical tradit ion .

Secessions from the dominant party, or from the prevailing faith, had oft en hitherto been political and factious,but in the year ofour Lord 360, the signal was given fora secession for conscience ’ sake . At t hat t ime Hillel II.made a revision of the Jewish method ofdet ermining thelength of the year, and appointing the F east of the Passover. In hi s calculat ion and i t s result he followed theChristians, who had learned this more correct system fromthe Greeks. Hillel, being president of the Sanhedrim,

engaged that venerable council to join him in giving theadopt ion of the new system the highest sanction thatcould be found in all Jewry, and the majority of syna

gogues received their decision without the slightestdifli culty .

But there was a multitude of Jews so accordant inprinciple as to need n o organisation for unit ed resistance .They did not acknowledge the right of the Sanhedrim to

supersede the explicit directions given in the Law fornew moons and fest ivals. They would not depart fromthe letter of that Law. They were numerous enough t okeep the feasts, and observe the beginning of the year,

’

and the beginning of the month t oo, without regardin gthe novel proceedings of ano thermultitude, which in someneighbourhoods there would be . They act ed accordingly,an d so they cont inue to act at this day.

In the year 360, then, the Paschal controversy of

Judaism and the first movement t owards a Karait esecession simultaneously took place, although Karaism,

insubstance, was t oo ancient t o dat e later than Ezra .


NOTE A, page 5 7 .

THE ORDERS AND TRAC TATE S or THE MISHNA .

I I .

I. D’y‘

n. SEEDS.

1133173 . Ben edictions. Prayers and thanksgivings . C h. ix.

sec . 5 7 .

7135 . Corner ofthe field left for the poor. Ch . viii . se c. 69 .

mm. Things doubtful. \Vhe ther t o be t ithed or n ot . Ch .

vu . se c . 63.

0315 53. D ivers kinds. Not to be mixed. Ch . ix . sec . 7 7 .

n iyine‘. The se ven th year, when the land should rest . Ch . x .

se c . 88 .

Oferings to prie sts. Ch . xi . sec. 1 00.

I‘ fl‘fwyp . Tithes to Le vi te s . Ch . v . se c . 40.

”gw

i

‘

iwyp . The second tithe from Le vit e s to prie st s. Ch . v .

se c . 5 7 .

n‘gu. The ablat ion -cake from women to priests . C h . iv . sec. 37 .

The p i ofan e. Young t 1 e es not ye t yielding f1 uit t o bee at en . Oh . i ii . sec . 35 .

$7 133 . The fi rst-fi uits to be offered in the Temple . Ch . i ii .

se c . 34.

II.

“W173 FEASTS.

Sabbath. Things lawful and un lawful. Ch . xxiv. sec .

1 39 .

pgfiin. Confusions of bounds be twe en things sabbat ic and

common . Ch . x . sec . 89 .

131 11 133 . Passovers . How obse rved. Ch . x . sec. 88 .

new Shekels t o be paid . Ch . vi ii . se c. 5 2 .

NDi 1 . D ay ofExpiat ion . Ch . v iii . sec . 6 1 .

FIND. F east of Tabern acles. Ch . v . sec . 5 3.

was The Egg (or am ni t F east day). Concern ing Feasts .

Ch . v . se c . 41 .

mw’

n Wt fi The New Civil Year“ Ch . iv. sec . 35 .

may}; Fast ing. Ch . iv . se c . 44 .

nSsJD The Roll ofEsther. Ch . iv . sec. 33.

mp 1 pm. The lesser F east . Days be twe en Passover and

Tabe 1 n .acle s Ch . i ii . se c . 23.

ngigrj . The Solen zn ity . When every male person must appear,or be e xempt ed. Ch. iii . sec. 23.

THE MISHNAH. 6 7

III. D’L’fJ WOMEN .

ND} . Brothers’wives to be married or n ot . Ch . xvi . sec. 1 23.

IW13 1IW3 .

'

ri tings ofcon tract . Ch . xiii . se c. 1 1 1 .

D1WWJ. Vows obligatory or not . Ch . xi . se c . 9 0.

W1 1; . Naz arite . Hi s obligat ion s. Ch . ix. sec. 60.

nnic . Unfaithful woman . How to be tried . Ch . ix. se c.

11 19 13. D ivorces . How performed. Ch . ix. sec . 7 5 .

rid-WW. E sp ousals . How made . Ch . iv . se c. 47 .

V. l’

P’n ‘ INJURIES.

NDPNDE F irst gate . Damages . Ch . x . sec. 7 9 .

SV’SD ND3 Jlfiddle gate. Things found . Gain s . Ch .

se c . 1 01

NWDB N33 Last gate . Agre emen ts . Ch . x . sec. 86 .

11WWWJD. Sanhedrin . Court s. Ch . xi . sec. 7 1 .

JW1BD. S tripes. Rules for inflict ing. Ch . ii i . se c. 34 .

mmnw. Oaths. Rules for admin ist eri ng. Ch . vi ii . se c . 62 .

m’

i . Witne sses. Ch . v iii . sec. 74.

WW? WW1332. Strange worship Ch. v . se c . 5 0.

11 13 15 Chap ters of the F athers. Sen t en ces ofWise Me n .

Ch. vi: sec . 1 06 .

Instructions for judges. C h. ii i . sec . 20.

V . WWW]? SACRED THINGS.

Ch . xiv. sec. 1 01 .

mmn Oblations. Ch . xi ii . se c . 9 3.

115111 . Things p rofan e or uncle an . Ch . xi i . sec. 74 .

IW1W133 F irstlings . Ch . ix. se c . 73.

313112 . R eckon ings for redempt ion . Ch . ix. se c . 5 0.

njmza. Exchange ofvic t ims. Ch . vii . se c . 35 .

n'

mn . Cutt ing of Oh . vi . se c . 43.

nstyD. Error in sacrificing. Ch . vi . sec . 38 .

mph . Perp etual sacri ce . Ch . vi l . se c. 33.

mm} . Measuremen ts of Temple . Ch. v . se c. 33.

0 ”31-3, Young birds offered by the poor. Ch . i ii . sec.

F 2


VI. n j‘mgg. PURIFICATIONS.

D15 3. Vessels. How t o be clean sed . Ch . xxx . sec. 25 4.

nibak. Ten ts or house s to be clean sed . Ch . xviii . sec. 1 34.

D379). Plagues ofleprosy . Ch . xiv . sec . 1 1 5 .

nag. The red heifer. Ch . xi i . se c . 9 6 .

11 i 19 . Purifications . Ch . x . sec . 9 2 .

nlxjpp . Baths . Ch . x . se c . 7 1 .

nj g. Sep aration ofmen struous woman . Ch . x. sec . 79 .

pjfiD‘DD. L iquids that p ollute vegetable s. Ch . vi . se c. 5 4.

D931 . Pollutions at n ight . Ch . v . se c . 32 .

D1” 513 11 Da ilg washing Ch . iv . sec. 26 .

D1 1 1 . Hands to be washed . Ch . iv . sec. 22.

D’SQ’

W Fruit-stems. Ch . i ii . se c. 28 .

NOTE B, page 60.

The Jerusalem Talmud i s a small book in comparison wi th the

Babylon ian . It has passed through very few prin t ed edi t ions,and is

con tained in one volume . A learn ed and laborious Rabbin ical scholar,

Z e chariah Frankel, ofBreslau, has just give n the Hebrew world an

elaborate volume ,1 in which he endeavours t o throw n ew light on

the t e xt, and prepare the way for an enlarged an d corre cte d e di t ion .

He con siders t hat the work of the Pale st in ian doctors has be en

n egle cted,and hope s that it w ill h enceforth rece ive more at t en t ion .

For the sake ofhistory, both Jewish and Chri st ian , I hope i t will.

The brief syn opsis of th e Mishnah given in the pre ceding not e

should be followed by a n ot ice of the con t en t s of the first Talmud,

the Babylon ian be ing t oo lat e and too miscellan e ous t o be ofmuclivalue ln relat ion t o the Karait es . Dr. F1 ankel says that

‘ the Jerusalem Talmud at this day in our hands is only on th e four Orde rs

Z era im,Moéd, Nashim,

Nez ikim, and the first three chapt ers of the

Ti tle Niddah (in the sixth Order). On the Ti tle Shabbat ( in the

second Order) is wan t ing the Jerusalem Gemara (or explanatorycomplemen t)from chapt e r xxi . t o the en d of the Title . Gemara is

also wan t ing to chapter i ii . of the Tit le Makhat (in the fourth Order).

1 Sp xWD 11 1 t hND man . Einlei tung in den Jerusalem

i schen Talmud . Von Dr. Z . Frankel. Bre slau, 1 870.



CHAPTER VIII .

BABYLONIA .—THE TALMUD .

FROM the time of the captivity under Nebuchadn‘

ezzar,

full 600 years before Christ, Babylonia was rather a homefor the Hebrew people than a land of cruel bondage, likeEgypt. They were still free to teach their children the '

rudiment s ofdoct rin e and forms of worship, and althoughthe doctrine was deteriorated, and the worship exceedingly imperfect, they paid great regard to the instructionof their children . There were numerous schools for boysofall classes, but some of them rose high above the rest.The Jewish population was constantly replenished, if i twas not almost entirely sustained, by Jews from Palestine ,—for the remnants of the ten tribes which had notreturned to the land of their fathers in the reigns ofCyrus and D arius were nearly or entirely melted awayin the East. Eminent masters raised the Babylonian colleges into high repute, continually attracted scholars fromall parts of the world, an d flouri shed long enough toleave names to history . The chief schools were those ofNaha rdea , Sara , and Pumbedi tha .

Naha rdea was once a strong city on the banks of then ahar, or canal, that united the Tigris and the Euphrates,north of Babylon, and had possessed a school from timeimmemorial, but the city an d the school were greatlyraised when a Babylonian J ew, named Samuel, who hadbeen sent to Tiberias, and there studied under R . Judah

BABYLONIA .

— THE TALMUD. 7 1

the Holy, returned to his native country, rich in learning,being a clever astronomer, and conversant with his

mast er ’s favourit e study, the laws of the Mishnah. Hewas chosen rector of the school, which he governed withgreat success, was followed by others who upheld andeven advanced it s reputat ion, until Naharde a was sackedby an enemy, the school broken up , and the student sdispersed over Babylonia, in the year of our Lord 2 5 8 .

The school of Sara , on the Euphrate s , also an old est ablishmen t , received its renovat ing impulse from one of themost successful scholars ofRabbi Judah at Tiberias, AbbaArekka. This Rabbi gave a great impulse to the studyof the Mishnah, n ow losing i t s secondary charac ter, andtreated as if it were a primary authority,— itself the Law.

Arekka undertook to revise it fin ally, and published i tin the stat e t o which it was advanced when made thebasis of the Babylonian Talmud. This school, pleasantlysituated on the Euphrates, sometimes had a thousandor even twelve hundred student s, with twenty Amo

’

ra s ,

or Mishnaic doctors, who gave t heir instruct ions orally,after the East ern manner . This rector, being ambit ioust o advance the school to be first of all the Jewish acade

mies, by impetuous energy, and great talent, commandedreverential acquiescence. Like Rabbi Judah of Tiberias,he enjoyed the friendship of the king, . an d was so belovedof the people, that after his death the Jews of both Palest in e and Babylonia refrained from the usual display ofmyrtles and garlands , and had n o music at their fes tivit ies.No man could follow him in that rect orate with any com

parable success ; the glory of Sora languished, and earlyin the fourth century it ut terly expired.

The school ofPumbed itha , a t own situate at the mouthof the canal which once gave a name to Naharde a, was

founded a few years before the dispersion of that popa lation

,under the guidance of R. Judah, the son of Ezekiel


both father and son being zealots for the Oral Law,and

the whole family imbued with the same Spirit of tradition .

A thorough ecclesiast ic , he was as much a pope in thesynagogue as ever was an Innocent or a Benedict in thepapal chair. He sternly enforced, not the statutes ofLevit icus , but those of the fourth Order of the Mishnahon man , Inj uri es . In language he was a Hebrew purist

,

and rej ected the barbarous innovations which had reducedthe Speech ofMoses and the Prophets t o a coarse j argon ,made worse and worse as the Jew-boys flocked intoPumbeditha from the t owns of Syria and Central Asia.As he advanced in life he plunged more deeply into thedark myst eries of the work ofGenesis,

’ a book of Kabbalist ic craft , which taught how t o make a magical charmout of the letters of certain words in the first Book ofMoses . So he pretended to unfold the mysteries of nature to hundreds of youths, who listened t o the un in t e lligible utterances with wonder in proport ion to theirabsurdity. Six devoted brothers squandered their energies in the same wild and objectless pursuit, and one ofthem is counted first cont ribut or t o the collection calledMidra sh Robbe th. They wrought hard in raking togetherext remely miscellaneous mat erials to swell the Talmud

,

and in endeavouring to reduce them into order aft er theseveral t reatises.

The rector of Pumbeditha was n ow a much great erpersonage than the R e sh Glutha , or Head of the Captivity

,

’

n ow but a helpless patriarch, without means ofenforcing submission on twelve or thirteen thousandy ouths who crowded the schools, while masters wereheaping up mountains of incomprehensible subtilty t o bethe future thesaurus of law, philosophy, and legend forall Judaism. While the masters were absorbed in thisfruitless labour, the disciples spent their leisure in bragging insubordination to the one person who would fain be

BABYLONIA .—THE TALMUD . 7 3

obeyed as sovereign of the Jews, and their scant hoursof study were lost in acquiring a Spurious dialect ic whichmade people of the world stare, and gave rise to the proverb

,Such an on e comes from Pumbeditha, where

they can drive a camel through the eye of a needle . ’

One would need t o graduate in such a school , if hewere expect ed so to an alvse and describe the Talmud ofBabylon as to convey a clear account of it to the mind ofthe reader ; but that is notmy present obj ect , and I doubtwhether two Rabban i t e s have yet been heard of who

could do it to the ent ire satisfaction of each other . Per

plexity increases on the student as he pursues his invest i

gat ion . He wishes to understand the Mishnah fully, butt hey t ell him that t o do so he must not rest there . If heturns back t o the Law t o which the

~

Mishnah constantlyrefers, he may often succeed, but on points of Jewishcasuistry or superstit ion that Law sheds no light, exceptt o demonstrate their nullity . Therefore

,he is referred

back again to the Mishnah which has already failed him,

and therefore the Mishnah has to be expounded by theGemara, which ough t to be appended to every chapter ofeach t reatise , for the sake of explanation . But a multitude of chapters, even ent ire treatises, have no Gemara.Oft en, when the Gemara is full, it is likely t o be contradictory , and where scanty, it disappoints. In that casehe is referred to voluminous comment aries, where thehard quest ions are hammered harder and harder

,unt il ,

aft er all, he is hidden to wait unt il Elij ah the Tishbitecomes to set t le everything.

It is not t o be imagined that the Jews of the presenttime, in part s of the world where common intelligence haspenet rated, receive the entire contents of the Talmud ashaving any religious authority, or that, even in the Six thcentury, i t would have long survived i ts birth, if the landsof the Tigris and Euphrates had n ot been sunk in bar


barism, and if the Hebrew people themselves had notpartaken of the same barbarism, and borrowed largely theheathen follies of ast rology, angel-worship, necromancy,and witchcraft

,all which were freely reproduced amongst

themselves. However, for inst ruct ion here and there ;for speculation without end, where men are idle or weakenough to suffer i t ; for amusement, also , i t may serve afew choice Rabbinic Hebrew scholars of t aste congenial

,

and power of their own t o break through the spell of

Kabbala and enigma. But if the Talmud were taken tofeed the soul and regulate the life, it would be worse thanuseless.

Suffice it now t o note that about 31 1 years after thecomplet ion of the Mishnah by R . Judah at Tiberias, therectors and their friends at Sora and Pumbeditha,and againat Nahardea, sealed up the vast labour under the hand ofRabbi Jose at Pumbeditha. This event t ook place in t heyear 4 9 8 , but the publication, according to Elij ah theLevite , was n ot unt il 5 06 , by which time Talmud,

’ asthey speak, became the subj ect of a special science . Thiscalled fort h the act ive opposition of a mult itude of soberminded and conscientious Jews, who eventually assumedor accepted a new name , but never acknowledged themselves to be a new sect, and never ought to have been soregarded.The external form of the Talmud can be soon described.

On the opening of a folio volume the page presents in themiddle a mass of larger Hebrew type, more or less, asmayhappen

,just as we see in the old edit ions ofLyn dewode

’

s

Provincial,’ in the Codes of Justinian and Theodosius, or

any such collec t ions, when the original text is thus exh ibit ed , and surrounded in much larger proportion withsmaller type

,consisting of comments and explanat ions .

In this case the central text consist s (usually) of theMishnah as it was revised by Rab, first rector of the

BABYLONIA .-THE TALMUD. 75

school a t Sora , after the death of his former master, Rabbiat Tiberi as . The Gemara, which follows in continuat ion,is the original commentary on the Mishnah, or rather, enlargement of it by the sayings of other doctors . Thesurrounding mass

,as has been observed, is very miscella

neons, made up ofdisputes, explanations, questions set t ledand quest ion s unanswerable, with legends, fables, anddisquisit ions to a vast ext ent. There are many, verymany edit ions of the Talmud, but a sufficiently exact ideaof the size is given

,if we say that it fills twelve or thirteen

thick and closely-printed folio volumes. There are earlyedit ions print ed at Venice by German printers, and representing

,I believe

,the Talmud as originally written .

Then there are subsequent edi t ions, expurgat ed, by orderof the Inquisit ion, of every thing offensive to Christians.

Then, again, there are edit ions of the Talmud restored toi t s former state. Parts of the great work have also beenprinted, either because some port ions are more used bythe Rabbis than others, or because impressions have beenbegun an d n ot finished.

I Should suppose that the student who wishes to becomelearned in the Talmud, or knowing in it s bibliology,needs n ot go any farther than the British Museum,

where the Hebrew Catalogue will direct him to abundantmat erial .


CHAPTER IX .

THE KARAITE S AF TER THE TALMUD .

No sooner was the Talmud published, and made use ofas an authority for teachers and rulers in the synagogues,t han great opposition was manifested. We may supposethat when Rabbi Judah the Holy, as if imitating Simonthe Just, yet advancing far beyond him,

and divergin gvery widely, applied himself to codify the decisions andsayings of the Elders, and publish them,

even as Simonhad published the Hagiographa, but did no more, theconscience of the more enlightened Jews was n ot violentlyshocked. They were erring in the same di rection, andwould n ot hastily mistrust so good a man ; nor does itappear that even they foresaw the evils t o which hisexcessive indust ry would lead future generations . Theeditor ofthe Mishnah had professed, and perhaps heartilyintended, to pay homage to the Law of Moses, n ot to

supersede it. But the Gemara, afterwards attacked,consisted of a larger collection of sentences

,less judicial,

and far more trifling. The confused mass of writingst hat were n ow added to the central text ofMishnah

,and

Gemara made that text, n ot the Mosaic Law, the realbasis of comment, and the ideal stan dard of faith andpractice .The entire complication was presented to the Jews asat once a code of law an d a thesaurus of wisdom. Theycalled it "

1 1 135 11 , Ta lmud, Learning,’ and declared it com


t s HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

congregations, rather amused than troubled, were carried away with the charm of empty sounds. But theSsv '

répwo'

w, as it is called among them,

’ —which meantthe Mishnah, the secondary Law, as explained by Talmn dist s , we ut terly prohibit, as it neither agrees withthe Holy Scripture, n or was it handed down by the

Prophets from above, but is the invention of men whospeak from the earth only, and have n ot .on e thing thatis divine in them. Therefore let them read only thewords that are sacred, opening the sacred books themselves, and n ot concealing what is said in them,

norbringing in vain words that were written elsewhere ,

’

writt en in Babylonian manuscripts, contrived for thepurpose of setting aside the plainer words which they ’

( the sacred books)‘ cont ain .

’F arther on , Justinian or

dains capital punishment for any among the Jews whoshall deny the Resurrect ion or the Last Judgment

, or

teach that angels are n ot ofGod ’s creation ; and he doesthis in order that the Hebrew nation may be kept clearof the error of those blasphemous atheists.

‘ And webeseech those who hear the Holy Scriptures read in thislanguage (Greek) or in that (Hebrew), to be on theirguard against the wickedness of those interpreters

,and

let them n ot confine themselves t o the mere letters ,’— the

Kabbalistic follies of Pumbeditha, but rather get at aste of the thin gs themselves, and gain a percept ion ofthe inner me an ing.

’ l

They who suppose the Karaites to have been Sadduce es might seem to find some confirmat ion of theirOpinion in the lat t er part of this decree . But there area few suggestions which they should accept before comingt o a precipitat e conclusion . Just inian , it must be re

membered, does not speak in the language of a friend,

’Iovo~rw1au08 Neapaf, Sw

i'ragcs py s

'

.

THE KARAITES AFTER THE TALMUD . 7 9

neither can it be presumed that he possessed any accurateknowledge of the faith of any party among the Jews,Samaritans and Heretics,

’ whose demeri ts were probablyequal in his sigh t . The language of the decree can onlyexpress his persuasion on the st rength of reports concerning them ; and as the incredulity of the Karaite passedfor unbelief, the decree was, no doubt, framed accordingly .

The other suggestion is that , even if there were Karaiteswho, under the injurious influence of passionat e react ion ,had cast Off all faith, which woul d n ot have been at allsingular, that circumstance , however much to be re

gre t t ed, would n ot suffice t o gainsay the mass of contraryevidence which is accumulated in these pages , with thee xpress declarations of their creed , and the whole tenorof their history. But aft er all, Sadducees properly so

called, not Karaites, may be the persons intended in thecondemnatory port ion of the first part, which is mostdistin ctly levelled against the teachers of tradit ion, anda fair in terpretation of the edict would effectually protectthe sons of the Reading from any official molestation .

So far as I can ascertain , the name of Karait e does notyet occur in history, but first comes t o view about themiddle of the eighth century, in connect ion with theChozars, a rude but powerful n at ion north of theCaucasus, among whom the Karait e Jews must havebeen for a long time previously well known . Chozarwas in the land ofTogarmah

,

’ l Where dwelt the a ko

mans . R . Joseph Ben Gorion enumerates Chozar andPat z in ak among the sons - of Togarmah , whose namesdescended to tribes that were spread over the se re

gions . Both names are produced from the Russianchron icles by the historian Karamsin . In his history of

Russia,the Chozars are described as having possessions

Gen . x . 3 ; 1 Chron . i . 6 Ez ek . xxvii . 1 4 .


on the Sea of Azof, and they also appear with thePe t chn igan s, or tribe of Pat z in ak, on the west ern side of

the Black Sea. They dwelt also along the Volga, whichriver they called Atel, and extended their conquests t ot he North Sea. They were a numerous people, victoriousin war, prosperous in commerce, and famous in all theEast. Their government was mild, and under it person sof every religion enjoyed perfect freedom. Their chiefset t lement lay north-west of the Caspian Sea

,which was

called the Sea of Chozar. It is t herefore eviden t thatthe boundaries of the kingdom ( if we may for a momentso speak of the country occupied by an ancient pastoralpeople, living for the most part in tents and waggons)must have extended over a wide region north of theD anube, the Euxine and Caspian Seas, and the C ancasian mountains: They were conquered in the year9 4 5 by King Sviatoslaf, and their name, otherwise almos tforgotten , was preserved in the archives of the MuscoVite .The S epher Choz r i, or Book of the Choz ari t e , first pub

lished in Hebrew, with a Lat in version by J ohn Buxtorfthe Younger, 1 contains a stat ement of the Karaite con

Basileae , 1 660. So much depends on a clear apprehen sion of the

authorship of this Book ofChoz ri, that the following abs tract of Buxtorf’

s

accoun t of i t i s pre sen t ed to the reader. No on e has y e t expre ssed any

doubt con cern ing t he first editor and publisher of this book in Arabic . It

was Judah the Levit e , who flouri shed about A.M. 4 9 00,according to the

Jewish computa t ion , or, as we coun t it , A.D . 1 1 40. He was a con t emporaryof R . Abraham Abe n Ez ra, who became eminen t a lit tle lat er than he ,

and made hon ourable men t ion of h im aft er h i s decease . R . Judahh imself s tat e s that he is not author of the book , but that it was the work

of a certain Rabbi who lived 400 years before him, whom he doe s not

name , but calls himWBTTWU, the comp an ion (or Rabbi), in a passage which

occurs in the commencemen t of the work. He there says that a fri end

of the Ki ng Alchoz ri , whose name was Rabbi I saac of Sangar, had ,

many years before the original compos i t ion of the book , by hi s wi sdom

convert ed the King of Choz ar to the Jewish faith In the land of Togarmah,as was made known by certain wri t ings that were extan t in the Arabic

THE KARAITES AFTER THE TALMUD. 8 1

t roversy in the form ofconversations between the heathenking of the Chozars, named Bulan, and one Rabbi Isaac,of Sangar , probably a Bithynian . The subj ect of thesupposed conversations was the respective claims of theJewi sh and Christ ian religions, in view of the king’schoosing one of them for himself. Aft er discussing thedoctrine of the Karaites and that of the Rabban it e s, kingBulan

,as it is said, was persuaded by R. Isaac to

become a proselyte to the Jewish religion under theRabbanit e form.

This Jew must have been in Chozar about A . D . 740,

or from that to 760 . Now some will still contend that theKaraites were a sect founded by Ahnan, in Babylonia,at some time from the year 740 to 7 63. Jost , who takesfor granted that it was so, gives Karaism that date forit s commencement. Here two events, the mission of

the Sangarit e to Chozar, and the secession of Ahnanand the Karait es in Babylonia, are assigned by Rabbaniteconjectures to the same period ; or, if the distance betaken between the earliest an d the latest dates

,the

secession of Ahnan may be set down at 740, and themission of the Sangarite to Chozar at 763, twenty-threeyears later. But I leave it with the reader to judgewhether even so, a sect founded at Pumbedi tha on theEuphrates could, wi thin twenty-three years, have been

language , and were not ed for the excellen t and learn ed an swers of that

wi se man con cern ing the law, the Kabbalah, and other subj ect s . R. Judahthe Levit e , be ing a Span iard and a poet , finding these wri t ings, translat edthem in t oHebrew. R . JudahMuscat at tribut es t he praise of composit ion toJndah the Levi t e , but the original accoun t to R. Isaac of Sangar himself, ofwhom it i s said that th e foun dat ion was, and that it was he who hallowed

the name of God by his argume n t . Coun t ing back, therefore , 400 yearsbefore Judah the Levit e , who flour ished about the year 1 1 40

, the friend of

the king of Choz ar wrot e about the year 740. But ifthe conversion of the

king took place D’JWno: some years before that , it is eviden t that I have

not founded my argumen t of the dat e of R. Isaac’s mission on any hastycalculat ion . (Praefatio ad Lectorem.)

G


founded,organised, and sent forth a colony of emigrants

to the banks of the Volga, that could also become est ablished, well known, and its habits even be long remembered there . Could its propagators, in so short a time,change their habit ations and their language and not onlyestablish themselves among the migratory and in dependent Chozars

, but by the influence of a new religion , sochange their morals, habits, and character, while scatteredover the dominions of the inquiring sovereign, as tobecome the successful guides of a converted race of

people, that people being no inconsiderable portion ofhis subj ects, who, for numbers and respectability, becameworthy candidates for the honour of receiving the kingas a fellow-member of the ir community ? But what wefind in the Book of Cho z ri demonst rat es that such atransformation had actually taken place

,as could n ot

have been effected in on e or two generations and therefore it is clear that Ahnan could n ot be the father of theKaraites whom R. Isaac found in Chozar.There can be no doubt that they had been settled inthose northern regions long enough t o be known andcompared with other Jews . They were not immigrantsand strangers, but a distinct class of persons of establishedreputation ; and this is quite consistent wi th what theKarait es in the Crimea tell of a grant , or Priv ileg ium,

as KOhl the German traveller in South Russia calls it,given them by Mohammed . Now Mohammed died inthe year 632 , and this alleged grant would have beenmore than a century later than the edict ofJustinianagainst the Talmud, which is so worded that a Karaitemight have dictated it, yet without the n ame .

The ancient residence ofJews in that part of the worldis at t es ted by existing monuments. Since the last warwith Russia, several of the most ancient gravestones inthe burial-ground of Djufut Kale, in the Crimea, have

THE KARAITES AFTER THE TALMUD. 83

been examin ed the tracings are preserved, and some ofthem were early published in St . Petersburg.

1 If theHebrew ant iquarians are not mistaken, one of them bearsdat e ofa death in the 702nd year of the Captivity,

’ andothers also are dated in the same style all such in script ions having been out before the era of the Creation wasadopted by the Jews. Now if the Captivity be , as isbelieved, that of Sennacherib, the year 702 answers tothe s ixth of the Christ ian era, according to the commoncomput at ion . The gravestone so dated, and others afterit, may or may n ot have been those of persons holdingthe Karait e doctrine, nor does the mere fact of a corpsebeing buried in that ground at any time prove that thedeceased was a Karait e, for even R . Isaac Sangari, whoargued against them, was buried with their dead in theCrimea. But there is n ot the same uncertainty at laterdates, and the inscriptions which may , with very rareexceptions, be pronounced Karaite, date so early as A . M .

409 0, answering t o A .D . 330 .

The int erlocutors in the Book of the Choz arit e are theking Bulan and Isaac the Jew. The Jew has justdelivered a long parable, intended to se t forth the Specialfavour shown t o Israel, who was taken int o the friendshipof the Kin g of Heaven . At the close ofthe parable, heextols the Priests and Levit es— as if the Priests andLevites were still able t o discharge their peculiar functions Living on the bread of the Lord, standing in theLord’s house from their childhood, like Samuel, andhaving n o need t o seek their livelihood, but left at

leisure for Divine Worshi p all their days . ’ Then heasks

,What think you of the works ofmen like these

the purity of their souls the perfection of their actions ? ’

Choz ri answers

Me’langes asiatigues, tom. v. livraison s 2 et 3.

G 2


Certainly this is the highest degree of perfection ;nothing can surpass it, except it be the excellence of

angels, and they who are so well prepared to receive itmay reasonably expect the gift of prophecy, especiallynow that the D ivine Presence is already with them. Andsince they thus worship, it is n ot necessary for them toseparate themselves from the world, and betake themselves t o solitude . But pray let me know what you havet o tell me about the Karaites, for I see them very d iligentin their worship, more so than the Rabban it e s, and Ihear that their reasons are more convincing, and more inagreement with the simple meaning of their law.

’

The Jew is then represented as meet ing this commendation of the cogency of their reasons, and the Simplicityof their interpretation ofthe Law, by descanting a t greatlength on the evils that result from the exercise of privat ejudgment. He heaps up all the instances of error andabsurdity he can think of, to exemplify the mischief of aman’s having any ‘ wisdom or judgment of his own concerning the Law,

’ which cannot be understood without adirect gift from God. Therefore,

’ the Rabbi insists ,we must not presume to tread in the steps of our fathers,and pretend to be wise in the Law.

’ After some furtherdiscussion on the subj ect, the C hoz arit e concedes that asuperior authority on earth is necessary for the rightinterpretation of God ’s Law. On this c oncession theJew proceeds to argueIf oral tradition be such an authority, then we and

the Karaites are alike bound by it, and even every onewho confesses that the Law, which was found in thisform — that is to say , written without points and ac cent-Sis called the Law of Moses.’ 1

The Choz arit e replies

This allusion to poin ts and accen ts will be considered further on .



then ish impartiality is but indifference, and all that canbe gathered from the account is that Karaism was a verysuitable name given to the good old principle of adhering,as Isaiah said, t o the Law and t o the testimony .

’ Wesee nothing sectarian in their origin nor in their position,but perceive that those Jews in the land of Togarmahwere called Kara im, or Scripturist s, and accepted thehonourable designation not as a note of reproach, but asa mark of distinction which effectually saved them frombeing confounded with Tradi t ioni st s.

l

We must bear in mind that the Chozars were at thistime one of the most numerous and formidable peoples ofthe northern regions of Europe and Asia, and impartialwitnesses to the t rue character of the Karait es, who hadbeen long dwellin g amongst them, and openly professingt heir Simple doctrine . The testimony, although givenby an adversary, is explicit and in their favour . Otherfacts mentioned in the present chapter concur in bringingus to the conclusion that soon after the publication of theTalmud, in what we n ow call Turkey and Russia, partlywithin and part ly beyond what were then the bounds ofthe Roman empire on the north and east, Jews of thepersuasion ei ther then or later called Karaite

,were

troubled by the innovations of Mishnaic or Talmudicteachers , and sought prot ection in their ancient mannerof worship from a Christ ian emperor .For the present we leave Ahnan, the earnest witnessagainst the Talmud, and contemporary of Isaac of Sangar

, to be chief subj ect of a separate chapt er, and proceedto offer a few observations on various names given to thepeople whose history n ew Opens in full view before us .

How they were formerly designated, and how theyreceived their present name, is worth inquiring. They

”W1 13 WED, The Book of Choz rz , part in.

THE KARAITES AFTER THE TALMUD. 8 7

say that they were first called J erusa lemi tes, because,aft er the destruction of the holy city by Titus , they, morethan any of their brethren

,gathered round i t s ruins.

This they did,’ says one of their own writers, through

desire for their sanctuary, which was the excellency oftheir strength, the delight of their heart, and the consolat ion of their soul . ’ For a Similar reason, when Ahnanand his followers betook themselves to the open count ryin consequence of dissension with the other Jews, theywere called Dwelle rs in the D e sert . When they wereopenly cursed for rej ec ting the Kabbala, they werebranded as Excommun i ca tes. Slanderously, and withoutany foundat ion in t ruth, they were cried down as S ado

kites, or Sadducees, as if they were followers of Sadoc,who denied the doctrine of future rewards and punishments ; and B a i thos it es , from hi s companion Ba ithos .

Maimonides, Abraham ben D ior, and other antagon ists,called them Cuthites and S amarita n s, common epithetst o express contemptuous hatred, one of which, it will beremembered, the Pharisees, blaspheming, applied to our

Lord. The men who cast them out most falsely den oun ced them as Ep ihrus im,

Epicureans, and M'

n im,

heretics. Aben Ezra, with less vulgarity, somet imescalls them D ividers aga ins t our F a thers, and then again,with greater bitterness, those lia rs. R. Azariah, withothers, making some Show of discrimination , says thatthere are two kinds of sects, some consisting of those whomerely slight the Oral Law, whereas others altogetherdeny it, and these latter deserve to be burnt in the placeof ashes.

’

fl ? Ka ra im— Karaites, as we say— or Readers, is theirancient and proper name . Some observe that they areproud of i t , as well they may be, and certainly they so

call themselves, always regarding it as their most honour


able title. Their Liturgy l bears it uniformly, as I believe. There are various edit ions of the Karaite Liturgyin the British Museum. One, printed in Venice A .D .

1 5 2 9 , in four volumes, quarto, is a fine copy, well printed,the first two volumes being rather broader than the thirdand fourth . It appears by notes written in It alian on thefly

-leaves, and by various other marks, that these twowere sent to Venice, or l eft there, for the purpose of oh

taining a reprint. The writing appears to have been of

the eighteenth century, before the entrance of the F renchinto Italy at the time of the French Revolution. One ofthe notes at the end of the fourth volume runs thusA ricordo for those who have to print these twoHebrew books. These are two Hebrew books of thesect of Hebrews called C arait e s

,who are different and

schismatics from the belief of the other Hebrews whomthey call Rabban it es, on which account these C arait es,who are to pay the cost of printing the said two books,wish the printers ( s ignori s tamp a tori) to be careful n otto trust them to the Hebrews who usually take charge ofthe offices , correct the press, and amend the errors ; for,being enemies of the said C arait e s, they will corrupt thetexts

,and, through enmity, commit frauds of such a sort

that the said books, aft er coming to light, will be of noservice . Therefore, every time that the printers wish tofl fin e thing and be well paid, they must make use of

Christian persons who are to be found in Venice or inPadova, skilled and learned in the Hebrew tongue, whowill take the work in hand and get these books print ed .

’

Or they call themselves mpu in , Sons of the Reading ,

or, as we should say, the S crip ture . According to the

authorit ies quoted by Triglan d, whom I follow in thisenumeration of names, others called them so because they

ampa Supmm: m$ann WWD



the question of their origin, nor weaken the evidencewhich proves their existence before the time of Ahnan.

Sharastan i, if I well remember, so calls them and professes to give a brief account of their history, but betraysutter ignorance of the matter which he pretends t o treat.Somet imes, however, he is quoted, and therefore the reader should be informed that he is utterly unworthy ofcredit in anything he says about the Jews, of whom,

as on

perusal inst ant ly appears, he knew little and gives no coherent information. His tales are often as irrational asan Indian cosmogony. But there is an ext ract in theOriental Library of Asseman which may be consideredt rustworthy as to the name alone. In a note of eventsduring the episcopate of Philoxenus of Nisibis, thelearned Maronite collects that at that time the Jews alsohad a quarrel concerning their primacy. For some of

those in Tiberias elected one David, but they in Babylonia chose Daniel, of the sect of the Ahn an it e s, who se taside the Sabbath, and observe the fourth day of theweek instead of the seventh. The case,

’ he says, ‘ was

brought before the Caliph, who decided that when ten

men of any religion of Christians,or Jews, or Magians,

agreed together on any arrangement for ordering worshipin their own manner, it should be lawful for them.

’ 1 Butthe Karaites, as we well know, did not so set aside theSabbath-day, and therefore the persons called Ahn an it e scould not be of the same persuasion as the Ahnan ofwhom we speak, or they might have been a degenerateoffshoot from a better stock.

2

1 Bibliothe ca Orien talis, tom. 1 1 . p . 346 .

2 While thIS chapt er is passing through the press , I find strong confirma

t ion of this view ofAhnan and the Ahnan it es . The reader shall fi nd it in

my Preface .

CHAPTER X .

VOWEL-PO INTS AND AC CENTS .

A subjec tfor li tera ry research.

THE subject of this chapter should be interesting togeneral readers, but Hebrew scholars will only findenough to stimulate inquiry. I trust the facts are correctly noted, but I do n ot press the conclusions to which,for the present, I think I can arrive. F or the correct ionof an v error I shall b e sincerely thankful, but I cannotpersuade myself to keep silence on a subj ect of so greatinterest, because I am n ot yet able to treat it in the confiden ce of historic certainty. I hope to obtain on e facsimile

,at least, with some typographi cal illustrat ion, which

may serve a student in prosecuting more thorough in ve st igat ion .

In justice to our subj ect we must notice the part takenby Karaites, or alleged to have been taken by them,

inthe formation of the system of vowel-pointing in thewritten Hebrew of the Old Testament. There is a passage to the purpose in the Book of Cho z ri . That book,it will be remembered, contains the narrative of a discussion that dates in the middle of the eighth century of theChristian era. F or a clearer apprehension of the part icular passage, the context also shall be quoted, observingonly that the colloquial form of the book is purely art ificial, and that every statement therein rests on the credi t


of the author, Rabbi Judah the Levite, who makes hisinterlocutors speak as follows . 1

J ew. What would you (King of Chozar)say if youfound a variety of reading in one, two, or three books ?

Choz r i (the King). I would say that we ought t o re

spect the reading found in the majority of books, becausean error could not so easily find its way int o many as intofew and that we might rej ect the readings which occuronly in Single copies, just as we rej ect the judgment ofinterpreters

, when the minority has to yield to the ma

jority .

J ew. But what would you say when the variation isonly in a letter, as for example, in the Lamentations ofJeremiah (iv. 1 8) ms they hun t our s tep s , where itseems the first word should be with R e sh,me ? And inthe passage of Psalm xxiv. 4 :

”L9 5 3 Ne; S5 W25 8 ], and

who ha th n ot lift ed up mg soul to va n i ty , when the lastword should beW512 his soul — and the like in many otherplaces.

Choz ri . If it is left for reason to decide in all suchcases, reason will make no end of changes in all the books,changes in letters

,words

,and whole sentences ; then in

pun ctuation and accents, so that the sense of a multitudeof passages will be changed

, for if one be altered, whynot all (if reason Should see fit so to determine)

J ew. Then how do you suppose that Moses left hislaw to the Children of Israel ?

Choz ri . There can be no doubt that it was a simplebook, or writing, without points and without accents, a”min i “up: mmmm who, as at this day we see the Book ofthe Law ( in the synagogues), for otherwise, i t would beimpossible for all to agree, as for example, concerning theunleavened bread, &c . &c.

Sepher Choz ri, pars i ii . capp . 25—34.



J ew. If the tradition be such, then we and theKaraites are alike bound to abide by it, and so is everyone who acknowledges the Law ofMoses.

Choz ri . E ven so sag the Ka ra i tes , but s in ce they have

found the Law p erfe ct, they have no need of any Kabba la

begoud i t .’ 1

The least that this can mean is that the Karaites havetested the vowel-and-accent system, and found it sat isfactory . But if the framers of the system had been alsocompilers of the Talmud, or even Talmudist s in opi ni onand principle, a perfect agreement between the two part ies,at any date, would have been impossible . The controversy , therefore, which had divided them within the syna

gogues even before the Open schism took place, could not

have subsisted between fellow-labourers on this greatwork . Yet it is difli cn lt to understand how the subjectcould have found its way int o the discussion of the merit sof Karaism between Sangari and the King of Chozar,unless the Karait es had been in some way concerned withthe first introduction of vowelo poin t s and accents . If theSeven Kings, as vowels are called, originated with Ezra,or if the three, a , i , 0 , were invented by him, and aft erwards increased to five, and yet again t o seven, during thetime of the great synagogue, that would presuppose aprolonged and united literal study of the Hebrew textbefore the Mishnaic and Talmudic times, and thereforewhile learned men n ot yet so widely differing, could unitewith calm deliberation in a critical examination of thetext , and pursue it with even greater advantage than if,on every matter of interpretation, they were perfectlyunanimous.

in t erpolat ion , e ither by the tran slator from the original Arabic in to

Hebrew, or by lat er copyist s of the Hebrew“

aim s Hrs un ite ; mmn mime; ans 5ns niswpn D’WD1N in

u‘pnpu 5s

VOWEL-POINTS AND ACCENTS . 9 5

This kind ofstudy could be cont inued unt il every wordwas point ed and accented, and nothing remained t o engagethe industry , or quicken the invent ion of the studious ,beyond the compilation of traditionary sentences for theexposition of the t ext, and the minute labour of theMasoretes for protecting the text against alteration int ime t o come . These lines of study were perhaps prosecut ed later ; but there must have been, in every province or district of Jewry, a t ime when the Karait eswould refrain from advancing any further. They woulddeclare that they found the Law perfect as it was writ t enaccurat ely and in full. Being therewith content , andfeeling n o need of any oral tradit ion , they would thenceforth understan d the word of God as, by common consent,i t had been writ ten, and would rej ect any change or ad

dit ion, by whomsoever change or addit ion might beat tempted.

More than ever, then, they deserved to be called the

mpnn an d ifthere was any on e conjuncture more thananother

,when they could boast of being p ossessors of the

reading , it was when they held fast by the establishedtext , and left others t o seek out their own inventions .

That this was their wise det erminat ion was attested totheir honour when, perhaps, Ahnan was n o more than achild . The infancy of the Chozar Karaites, at least , waspast, for they had no inconspicuous place in Jewish historymany ages before h im.

Full two hundred years aft er the visit of Sangari toChozar

,a learned Rabbi was t ravelling in the East in

search of rolls of the Law, the oldest and best thatcould be foun d, for use in the Chozar Synagogues . Oneof his manuscripts in the Virkowitsch Collect ion bears thefollowing note, written by his own han d : I

,Abraham

ben Simchah, from the city of Sepharad, in the kingdomof our converted brethren the Chozars, in the year 1 682


of our exile ( in Assyria), that is to say, in the 4746th ofthe Creation, and as our brethren in Matarka ( the Christians)count, 9 86 , when the messengers sent by the Prin ceof Muscovy came from Kioff t o our Prince David, tomake inquiries concerning their faith in Persia and Media,I was myself in Persia purchasin g ancient rolls of theLaw, and books of the Prophets and Sacred Writings

( 1313 1 11 3)for the Chozar synagogues. In Elam I heardthat there were some very old rolls to be found in Shushan. Thither I went without delay our brethren showedt hem to me , and among them I observed the Book ofTravels o Rabbi Judah, the Corrector, wherein he tellsus that his father Moses the Poin ter was the firstwho found out the vowels and accents in order to assistlearners in reading. I begged them to sell me the roll,which they would not do, and therefore I copied, word byword, the very important statement of the Corrector, andso have obt ained much that wi ll make the verbal meaningclearer. May God help me soon to return in safety tomy home Amen .

’

The Prince D avid mentioned by Ben Simchah doesnot answer exactly t o either of the two Davids in thesecond list which I have transcribed into the next chapter,whose accession to their dignity is respectively set downat the years 880 and 1 070 . But these dates are veryloosely conjectural . There is a David in the first list

,

Oopied from the Cairo manuscript, but without date.Yet it would appear that about the time of Ben Simchah’sjourney into Persia there was, or lately had been, a Nasiof this name, David. Be that as it may, it is highly int ere sting to hear that in the last quarter of the tenthcentury there was found a very old manuscript of theItinerary of a Karai te Rabbi bearing the title of Cor

Neubauer. An s de r Pe t ersburger Bibliothek Be itrage und Documen te

z ur Geschicht e de s Karaerthums . Leip z ig, 1 866, st . 34.



therefore, preserves a faithful record, which reads thatthey had found ( 18 313)the vowel-pointing with all it s ad

vantages, and were therewith content, insomuch as i tperpetuated the reading of the once unpointed text, justas it was understood by the ancient s. But this does notby any means imply that the Karaites could ever claim,

or even attempted t o claim, the honour of having beenthe only labourers in that field .

The alleged discovery of Ben Simchah, unless it shallbe found spurious, or misunderstood, is clear enough todetermine an historical fact of great importance in relation to the actual influence of Karaism in the subsequentstudy of Old Testament Scripture . But it is not undisput ed .

A Russian Jew, Rabbi Simchah Pinsker, is author ofa Hebrew book of extreme literary in terest

,being nothin g

less than ‘ An Introduction t o the Babylonish-HebrewPunctuation System,

’ and editor of a grammar of theHebrew Number, written by Aben Ezra. l On the history of vowel-pointing it sheds much light, but lit tle ornone on the subject n ow before us. Pinsker denies thatthis p unctuation is Karaitic . He says that he livedamong Karaites thirty-three years, read their manuscript s, both old and n ew, an d found no peculiar pun c tuat ion in them. He further says that this peculiar systemis somet imes found in Rabban ite books, as , for examplein the Yad Khaa z alt ah of Maimonides, and in Hap thta

w

roth of the Rabbanite rite . All this may be true, and

there seems to be no reason to dispute its truth, but there

i i i i t: me an "armhas N13D The book has a German

t i tle z— Ein le i tung in das Babylon isch-Hebraische Pnn ctat ion ssyst em nacli

d en im Ode ssaerMuseum der Gesellschaft fur Geschichte und Alt erthiimer

befindlichen Handschrift en (un ici s) bearbe it et (mit Vokaltafel und e in e i i

Facsimile) n ebst e in er Grammat ik der Hebraischen Z ahl rter (Je sodMispar) von Abraham ben Erse ans Handschrift en herausgegeben un rl

comrr en t irt von S . Pin sker. Wi en , 1 863.

VOWEL-POINTS AND ACCENTS. 9 9

is no reason to imagine that the Karaites had ever a p eculiar

’

syst em of pointing, or, if they had, it would certain lyhave been retained. All that is affirmed is that the Ka

rait e s were the first, or certain ly were among the first,who introduced vowel-points and accent-signs into Hebrewwriting, and that, some years later than their beginning inBabylonia, an improved syst em,

or one that it s inventorsconsidered such, was introduced at Tiberias, in Palestine,an d in course of timmnot all at once , superseded the first .The change was n ot simultaneous, neither was it extremelyrapid. The oldest of the Karaite liturgies noticed onthese pages retains some features of the Assyrian orBabylonian pointing , yet only enough t o give the typography a slightly peculiar character. A single vest ige ,however, imports much in this inquiry.

Rabban it es and Karaites may well have agreed in aocept ing the aid of their fathers

’ industry . There is noquestion of exegesis that I am now aware of that i s inany way affected by either one system or the other, butthe promptness with which the Old Karaites devotedthemselves t o this Nikkud, and their determination t o

abide by it while their less careful brethren read the textby the light of Ta lmud

,shows their greater care for

every j ot and t it tle of the Law, and may well persuadethe Biblical student that he is in debted t o the Karaites,as agents of a watchful providence , for leading the wayin that care of the inspired books which was further t akenby the Masoretes at a later period, and for which the Jewsin general deserve our gratitude . This section ofKaraitehistory will no doubt be -enlarged hereafter by help ofthe manuscripts deposited in the Museum of Odessa andthe Library of St. Petersburg, collated w ith other mat erial that has hi therto attracted less att ention than it willprobably be found worthy to receive .

H 2


The recovery of manuscripts so singularly pointedawakens the most lively interest in learned Jews to whomi t becomes known, and the Biblical scholars of Europewill surely bestir themselves in the careful collation ofrolls containing the Old Testament.Among the Karaite manuscripts deposited by Rabbi

Abraham Firkovvit sch in the Museum of Antiquities inOdessa, there are some pointed according to the earlier,or Babylonian system. Among them is a volume of thelatter Prophets, written on 22 5 leaves of very goodparchment in small folio, the points being written over

the consonants, not under them as is now usual . Thesecond column appears to contain a Targum. Betweenthe two columns are some lesser Masoretic notes. Thesecond column closes with the scribe ’s date and goodwishes . He dates in the year (of contracts) 1 228, an d

month of Tishri . It was therefore written in the time

of Rabbi Saadiah, A.D . 9 1 6 or 9 1 7 . Rabbi SimchahPinsker publishes the fac simile of the last page of themanuscript, or a part of it , which shall be reproducedhere

,referring Hebrew readers to the work itself, 1 which

for the present purpose is invaluable . By comparison

with the t ext as n ow printed in the Hebrew Bibles, andwith the assistance of the few examples extracted from avery complete table in R . Pin skér

’

s volume,the curious

inquirer into the long-forgotten vowel-system of Babylonia possesses a sufficient key. Yet this Introductiondi scloses enough to show that no small difficulty hasbeen experienced in deciphering the faded codices, andalso that the t ext of this and others of the collec tions haveundergone considerable change, at least in regard to theorthography, and that the literary treasure n ow accumu

l ated in Odessa and St. Petersburg has promised rich

1 153m i n me an “11pm 5s sun . Wi en , 1 863.



Perfe c t a nd Imp erfe c t Vowels, and Sheva Subst itutes .

Habac . i . 8 . P103D=P1QWD

0

i qo .

Shurek Habac . i i . 2. mnbg=nmt>rt Habac . i i . 4 . “75 5 ”

Hos . vii . 4 . fingp n= 1figfifi

Kame ts , Habac . i . 1 . nirj =fiifi Ez ek . xl. 42 . n ~35=£1 555 . Mal.

£ 1 4. nnwn=f1 néi ii

s.

$ 2

Pdthahh Mi c . i v . 1 0. QQD=HTWD ~ Habac. 1 . l . xgvp n

=RWD 1W~

Habac i . 4 . wiggg=wini ry

Habac. i . 6 . DjpD=DlPD Hos . x . 1 0. DWD§ 1=DWDS1

Hos . xi . 8 .

Khir ih Habac . i . 1 5 . Habac. i i . 1 2 .

Habac. i i . 1 . znjw = inWDwDSegOl is doubtful. It appears on ce in the fe e

-simile , but seems out ofplace

th ere .

Sheva is a lin e over the con sonan t fl.



matt ers of ceremony and ritual, innovating always forthe worse ; but these held fast by the very letter of theLaw,

just as they found it written, and regarded withundivided reverence the foundation-truths of the religionwhich was made known to Israel by Moses and theProphet s .

It was n ot to be imagined that the good would be unmixed with evil . There were men of ability

,but, as in

all times of religious excitement, there were also men of

doubtful principles, t o say the least of them. In Syriaone Serini mainta ined that men should cast off utterlythe yoke of the Talmud, and render entire obedience t oall that is required in the written text of the inspiredHebrew scriptures. So far this was very good ; but hepret ended t o be the deliverer of the people, and, as if h ewere the very Messiah whom the Prophets foretold, promised to gather them all home to the land oft heir fathers ,and subdue the Arabs to their dominion . He hoisted a

banner in the name of Liberty, and many thousands followed it . Not a few, induced to quit the lands of theirdispersion, left their property behind them, and hastenedaway t o Palestine after the Syrian Saviour ! SomeSephardim left Spain, where they had lived in fair pros

p e rity , vainly expecting to find boundless riches in a newJerusalem. Serini died in 720. There have been manyfalse Christs, but the circumstance of his advocating theliteral interpretati on of the Law serves to Show that thiscry was expected to be popular— that while the sufficiencyof God’s own word was acknowledged by learned men ,

their persuasion had become a doctrine— that it hadgained on the mind of the commonalty, and was n ot firstopenly promulgated by Ahnan .

Rabbi Genai , son of Baruch, is said to have beenmast er of Ahnan about the year 730 . He wrote a

directory for synagogue services on sabbaths, fest ivals

AHNAN AND THE REVIVAL OF KARAISM. 1 05

and fast-days, w ith appointment of lessons from theF ive Books ’ and the Prophet s, and the order of otherpart s of the service, all so skilfully arranged that he wascalled the second Ezra. ’ By the publication of thiswork Gena

'

i sett led many long-agitated quest ions, and i tis said that Ahnan aft erwards adopted it for the use of

Karaite congregations . But before his name was knownin public, others had attracted sufli cien t notice t o beremembered in later t imes, and counted with the Karaitefathers . l Such were Ephraim, Elisha, Enoch, Obadi ahofBaz ra on the Tigris, called the Tea cher, who flourishedin 7 5 0, and Judah the Persian about 7Ahnan, son of D avid, is said by the Karaites to havebeen born in Beth-tsur, a t own near Jerusalem, and wasreputed to be of the lin eage of King D avi d. Some, notKaraites, speculate on this point, and endeavour t o givethe colour of probability t o a conjecture of their ownthat would change Beth-tsur in Palestine into Bazra onthe Tigris ; and if this were proved, modern writerscould more successfully represent his teaching as derivedfrom a sect of Arabian or Persian dissenters from theIslam of Mohammid, called Mutaz ilit e s, and extremelylike some sects or ‘ schools ’ of our own day . I couldwish t o be sure Of Ahn an ’

s birth-place, and cannot atpresent se e reason to depart from the original statemen tof the Karaites themselves . According to that stat ement

,he t ravelled from the neighbourhood of Jerusalem

into Babylonia about the middle of the eighth century,spent several years there,2 and became famous for explaining the Law of Moses, nimpn nSnpmm511, a ccord ingto the doctrin e of the tradi t ion of the Ka ra i tes . This wasthe tradi tion al doctrine of the sufli cien cy of the D ivine

Prof. Dr. Julius Furst , Geschichte des Karaerthums , abschn it t i .

26—30.

2 About 740, or from that to 743.


Law,without human t radi tions, which came down from

Ben Tabbai to Shammai , and from Shammai to their ownday. The se elder Karaites even professed t o have intheir possession an exact and att ested tra nscrip t of thesacred code . l

There is a story that his uncle was Exilarch,or head

of the Captivity in Babylonia, but died childless ; andthat the dignity would have fallen upon him,

if theJewish Elders had n ot refused to confirm that presumedright by an election, on account of his opposition to theTalmud, in accordance with which they wished the government to be conducted. It may have been so, but whilethe Karaites do not affirm it we must suspend belief. Ifhis zeal in maintaining the sufficiency of Holy Scripturewas prompt ed by disappointment, that circumstancemight diminish our confidence in his sincerity, but wouldnot impair the force of a single good argument, evenfrom his lips . A good cause may have an interestedadvocate, and be a good cause after all .But it does not appear that Ahnan was in any respectan unworthy advocate of his own established principles.

The author of the book pibn, S chism, defends his memoryagainst many charges which he declares to have beenfalse . R . Japhe t , the Karaite , maintains that he was adiligent and faithful instructor of the people, to whom heexplained difficult passages of Holy Scripture, but me twith great opposition— opposition so fierce, that his lifewas often in peril , in the time of the Mohammedan Abi

’

i

Z aafar, which is supposed to be the same as the KhalifAl Mansur. R . Japhe t mentions the report that hewas entitled to the exilarchate, but does not confirm it

1 Perhaps Aben Ez ra refers to the Karai tes in his n ot e on Den t . xxv. 5 ,

under the t itle of D‘P’IWVD, teachers of the npnp TRANSCRIPT, where he

quot e s a sen t en ce of the irs in support ofa li teral in t erpre tat ion ofthe word

bre thren in that place .


O8 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

doct rines were n ow required to be believed as lawswithout any proof, and t o comprehend, to explain, tohave light let in upon the mind, became absolutelyhopeless, when no man might dare to contradict or doubt.The law petrified by its excessive burden the very soulof Judaism, which seemed to lose itself in a sort ofscholasticism ; and in the high schools the writt en lawwas by this time almost abandoned. The opposition andrevolt against such a quenching of the life ofJudaismthat from time t o time was manifest, from the rise ofSadduceeism down to the days ofAhnan, the combinedhostility of the Sadducees, the overwhelming influence ofMasoretes, grammarians, poets, and physicians, and thewild reformers Serini and Abu Isa, were now the united

p ercursors of the contradiction which had been accumu

lating for a thousand years, but as yet had n ot had sufficient power t o work out a thorough schism, and therebyforce Judaism, bounden by faith in its traditions, into asecond birth, and a refreshing reformat ion . In the timeof Ahnan and his numerous companions such a schismwas first possible and Ahnan, as head of Karaism andliving expression of the spirit of his time, is the nextobj ect of our statement. ’

Thus speaks F ii rst . l He represen t s Karaism as arevival of Sadduceeism, a mere intellectual revolt againstthe burden of a contrary system, an irrepressible andnatural disgust at the compulsory admission of a sup erst ition, or a priestly despotism, which forbade inquiry, andpunished contradi ction or even doubt. Certainly such arevolt at any time could easily be accounted for, andforgiven, perhaps just ified ; but to say that Masoretesand grammarians were in accord with Sadducees is toaffirm more than is proveable by fact, as the facts noted

Gesckf'

d z te, 1 1 . 1 .

AHNAN AND THE REVIVAL OF KARAISM. 1 09

in the last chapter fully show. Even more remarkableis the aberration from his toric truth whi ch represents thesystem ofKaraism as suggested to Ahnan by an Arabiansect ofunbelievers in the resurrection, and by Sadduceandeniers of the existence of angels and spirits. That isroun dly stated by F ii rst in th e next chapt er. 1 But theywho have held fast for ages by the confession of faithstill contained in their Liturgies, and which the readerwill find in a succeeding chapter, —they who believe ‘ thatGod, blessed be His Name, will raise the sons of men to

life in the day of judgment and that the blessed Godgiveth to man according to his ways, and according tothe fruit of his doings,

’—those confessors could not havederived their faith from such a fountain, n or would theyset at the head and beginning of their memorial-prayersthe name of a man who taught their fathers the veryopposite

, as the Rabbanite antagonists of their faith wouldhave us to believe . In truth, Rabbanite and Karaiteequally agree with the old Pharisees, and with that eminent Pharisee especially who once appealed to a Jewishking in such words as these Why should it be thoughta thing incredible with you, that God should raise thedead 2

The hypothesis which reduces Karaism to the level ofa local sect

,and then seeks to account for the sudden

Spread of so great an innovation from so remote a centre

AlsWaz il z u allerest um 740 das Syst em derMutaz ila , d . h . , der he t ero

doxen Religion sphilosophie , z u Baz ra begrundet e , ohn e dass damals die

Griechischen Phi losophen uberset z t vorhanden waren und uberhaupt fremdeEinflusse mitgewirkt haben konn t en , mag An an e in igen An the il darangehabt haben , da die ses System aus dem Sadukaerthume ihm bekann t

gewe sen se ln muss . Jedenfalls hat er mit den judischen Genossen z u Baz ra ,

das auch Geburt sort der Karaischen Vat er Obadia und Noach war, die sesmuta z ili t ische System auf di e Dogmat ik de s Juden thums angewandt , wie

wir we i t erhin sehe n werden . Ut sup ra, 2 .

2 Act s xxvi . 8 .

1 1 0 HISTORY OF TIIE KARAITE JEWS .

and such obscure parentage, is irreconcilable with hi story, and plunges those who adopt it into a depth ofdifficulty. We take a plainer course by endeavouring tot race back the subj ect of our investigation to it s naturalsource, irrespective of all theories, and preferring theconcurrent testimonies of Karaite writers to the conj eetures ofstrangers and the accusations of enemies .

The description given of Ahnan by those who musthave known him best is n ot that of a man who labouredmerely to cast off a galling yoke . He not only taughtthe truth

,as it is opposed to manifest error

,but it is said

of him that he led his converts in the fear ofGod, and thelast quoted statement of R . Japhe t , that Karaites were tobe found wherever there were Jews and Rabban it e s, conveys the idea that the Jews in general were not theiropponents, and that the Rabban i t es were but a sect ofJ ews , probably successors of the proud Pharisees who,seven hundred years before, thought themselves so muchbet ter than other men . It also indicates that Rabban it es

and Karaites were found in cities in smaller or largernumbers, but that the mass of persons who frequent edsynagogues were content to pass as plain Jews, and wereeverywhere the most numerous . The Karaites honouredthe man who had been the chief promoter of such a greatrevival of their ancient faith .

A sentence attributed to him has been oft en quot ed byChristian writers , and ought to be repeated here . Thelovers of the truth should know that Jesus the Nazarenewas a great teacher, a just and good man , one who fearedGod, and who taught nothing as a statute or judgmentexcept the written Law of God, setting aside all thatshall be proved diverse or contrary to whatsoever Moses—ou whom he peace—wrote in the Law.

’ 1 This does

“ram pm; m mi n 5m can mun w» nns n urns mm‘pi


1 1 2 HISTORY or THE KARAITE JEWS.

preachers who proclaimed every where the supreme au

thority of the Law, and the worthlessness of all that, inthe Talmud or any other writings, was contrary to theLaw of Moses.

1

Ahnan died, they say, in the year 7 6 5 , in Jerusalem.

It is not possible to estimate the extent ofhis influence,or the number of Karaites in the world either before orafter the revival ofwhich he took the lead . The strengthof the Bible-reading section of the Jewish population hasbeen undervalued, but, as the author ofthe S ep herHz

'

llzik

well observes, a good cause is not t o be despised on ao

count of the small number ofit s adherents , or their lackofwealth and power. It would be strange if their enemiesdid not taunt them for their comparative poverty in latertimes, when they were brought low by persecution, andboast oftheir own superior wealth and greater number of

disciples . To such boastings they were accustomed t oreply that the soundness or unsoundness of a principle, orthe truth or falseness ofdoctrine, cannot be ascertained bythe application of a money-test. They quoted the divineinjunction : Thou shalt not follow a mult itude t o do evil,neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline aft er many

t o arrest judgment. ’ 2 They comforted on e another withthe assurance given by Moses to their Fathers The Lorddid not se t his love upon you, nor choose you, because yewere more in number than any people, but because theLord loved you,

and because he would keep the oathwhich he had sworn unto your fathers .

’ 3

No doubt they were diminished, numerically, in thelater times, but that decrease, as I venture to believe, hasbeen more than compensated by the growth of their princ iple among the best classes of Jews, even those whomake no profession of adherence to their communion .

Pi nsker, nwmgj p "mph, appendix 33 and 9 0.

2 Exod . xxii . 7 .

3 Deut . vi i . 7, 8.

AHNAN, AND THE REVIVAL OF KARAISM. 1 1 3

But that princi ple of severe conformity to law is neverpopular, certainly not among the majority of those who‘ profess and call themselves Christians .

’ Their simplemethod of in t erpre ting the Law does not admit of t he

latitude allowed by traditionary casuists . Those me n n o

longer sat in Moses ’ seat. They were n ow installed inthe chairs of their later fathers,

’ and in self-assumed authori ty laid a heavy burden upon others, but would notsubmit to carry any part ofit. The Karaites, on the cont rary , were noted for self-denial, ofwhich they gave signalevidence in many ways, and especially by their superiorstrictness in respect to the marriage law, which theyalways received in the severer sense. The East ern Jewswere polygamis ts, aft er the manner of their Gentile neighbours, and as their fathers had been , but the Karaitehusbands more happily submit ted t o the restraint of

monogamy, as indeed all husbands did submit at the beginning.

’ Ahnan, by following the older Karait es in anextremely rigid in terpretation of Levit icus xviii. 6 , andthe Karaites of his day, by agreeing ln the same int erpre t at ion , made it oft en difficult for a man t o find awoman t o whom he might propose marriage, there beingnone that was n ot in some way n ea r of kin . The Karait es ,t oo , had to endure a double persecution,—first , from theouter world, and then from their brethren of the host ilesyn agogue, which was far more grievous, and made theircondition more than doubly hard.

But after all, it turned out that the computations werefalse . One of themselves, R . Beshit z i, a devout youngman ,

set out on a wide pilgrimage t o ascertain the condition of his brethren for, in the middle ages, trustworthyintelligence could hardly be obtained without direct personal inquiry. However, the Children of Jacob, like theirwandering ancestor, have always delighted in travel, andBe shit z i, like a true Hebrew, spent the vigour of his early

1 1 4 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS.

manhood in exploring the Holy Land, Assyria, Chaldaea,Arabia, and Turkey. On return, he reported that hisbrethren in the Scriptural faith were multiplied like thesands of the sea and the stars of heaven . Allowing forthe latitude of poetic metaphor, and for the lovely language ofenthusiasm, which colder natures are unable tocomprehend, we find his report confirmed by informationfrom other sources . We also learn that they used vern acular languages for the promotion of learning, and hadmany books of their own in Arabic, written by their ownscribes , and very ancient. When Mohammed took Mecca ,he foun d

'

it inhabit ed by Sabians and Karaites, who livedapart in the same city . They were not separated byhatred, but according to the custom prevailing in theEast, and most carefully observed by all Jews, they werebound to live in absolute separation from strangers andworshippers of strange gods .Beshit z i mentions a note of Aben Ezra on Danielxi. 31 , where the commentator attributes to the wi semen of the Sadokim ( Sadducees, n ot Karaites)a fancifulint erpretation of the passage, to the effect that there wasa sanctuary in Mecca where the Israelit es kept theirfeast. I find such a note in that place from the pen of

Aben Ezra,and there can be n o doubt that when he

wr ites of the Israelites in Mecca, he thinks of the Ka

rait e s, although he does n ot men t ion them, for in thesame note , quoting with disapproval an Opinion of R .

Saadiah, the eminent Rector of Sora, much indebted t oKaraism for manuduction into the method of explainingScripture for which he became so eminent, yet an opponent of the system, he observes ironically,

‘ this is verynearly ww,

’

( the way of the Rabban it e s); certainly it isn ot uwg ,

’

( the simple method of the Karaites). This allusion might be suggested, n ot by the quotation he eriticises . but by the fact of history he has just

‘

quoted—the


1 1 6 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

and it does n ot seem that he cared much to se e them anywhere. He barely men tions them, at best , just as hedoes the Samaritans, uniformly passing by the Heads of

their Synagogues and other important persons, whom heleaves in blank silence, as if none such existed. We ohserve what he is pleased to mention, and feel the whilethat, as respects Karaites, there is more of concealmentthan discovery. It is remarkable that although he visitedEgypt, where we know there were multitudes, he doesnot mention them at all . We also know that they werevery numerous in Jerusalem, their old metropolis, but hedoes not notice them ; and, perhaps on that very account,lest he should divulge the comparative weakness of hisown party, he makes no allusion to synagogue n or sect,and passes over names and numbers as if his attentionhad been chiefly occupied in a topographical survey ofthe cityWith regard to the succession of Chief Rabbis or‘ Patriarchs, a correct list has yet t o be compiled, unless on e ofthese two may be accepted as such, so far as it goes . Thefirst is said by Be shi t z i to have been found at Cairo, inan ancient manuscript written on fish-skin

AHNAN,son ofDavid .

Saul, son ofAhn an the Prince .Josiah (Joshua ?)son ofSaul the Prince .

Benjamin On di .Samue l Komt si .

Isaac Botseri .David Mekamat z

,a Proselyte ofRighteousne ss .

Noah .

Solomon,son ofYerukhim.

Joseph, son ofNoah,wi th Jacob Yi t z haki Kirkasan i the

son ; Khase r, son ofMashiakh,an d Abraham

,son of Isaac

Saboscri .

o

wmfl

mmN

l—l

H

The other list, compiled by Furst from his documents,

AHNAN, AND THE REVIVAL OF KARAISM. 1 1 7

differs widely, and the dates are palpably conjectural .cont ains twelve names, the former six being thoseJerusalem patriarchs, and the latter six of Cairo .st ands thus, to challenge criticism

1 . AHNAN

2 . Saul3. JoshuaJehoshaphatBoazDavi dSaadiah

SolomonHe z eki ah

1 0 . ChasdaiCai ro .

1 1 . David

1 2 . Solomon

Jerusalem.

woo

u

cz

m

There are other attempt s t o frame lists, but n o authentic list is yet forthcoming, and it becomes eviden t ,after a moment ’s reflect ion, that n o on e man could everhave superinten ded the affairs of the whole Karait e dis

p ersion . If there were no duties of administrat ion belonging t o the office, and if i t were only honorary, thecommon agreement necessary as t o the person most eli

gible to the dignity could n ot be possible when no man

knew where all the Karait es were to be found, and com

mun icat ion between them all was impossible. The lists ,therefore

,may safely be di smissed as fabulous

,or laid

aside unt il more information i s obtained .

Whatever might have been the nature of their office,

and the extent of t heir spiritual jurisdiction, it is certainthat the Patriarchs were n ot regarded with any servileveneration . The Karait es do n ot acknowledge any man

as their founder, for founder they had none . They don ot swear by any master, n ot even by the most famous of

them,Ahn an himself. They do indeed make honourable


ment ion ofmany of them in the Z ikronoth or memorialprayers which are read in their synagoguesevery Sabbathday, and the name of Ahn an they place first, sevencompanies of eminent personages following aft er . His

memorial is in the words following May our God , andthe God of our fathers , have compassion on our dead, andon your dead , and on the whol e dead of all his people ,the House of Israel, chiefly and before all, on our RabbiAhnan the Prince, a man of God, head of the capt ivity ,who opened the way of the Law, and enlightened theeyes of the Sons of the Reading, and converted manyfrom iniquity and from transgression, and guided us inthe right way. May the God of Israel make him tolodge in a good rest ing-place in a pleasant resting-placemay he have his dwelling with the seven companies of

righ teous men who are wait ing i n the Garden of Eden ,and may there be fulfilled on him the Scripture that iswritt en And in that day there shall be a root ofJessethat shall st and for an ensign t o the nations, t o him shall theGent iles seek

,and his rest shall be glorious .

”

(Is . xi .The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces

out of Heaven shall He thunder upon them ; the Lordshall judge the ends of the earth, and He shall givestrength unto His King, and exalt the horn of His

anointed.

”

( 1 Sam. ii. His enemies will I clothewith shame, but upon himself shall his crown flourish .

”

(Ps . cxxxii. And yet may God fulfil on him the

Scripture that is written And thou, go thy way tillthe end be, for t hou shalt rest , and stand in thy lot at

the end of the days .

”

(D an . xii. l

I reserve to the next chapter some observations on thisextraordinary prayer.Whatever may have been imagined t o the con t rary, I

The mmmm nwm p‘pn

—n~mon 11 155 11 “

no. Wien ,1 85 4 .



CHAPTER XII.

D IST INCT IVE D OC TR INE .

TRIGLAND thought that the Rabban it e s, being alwaysby far the stronger party, exaggerated the differenceswhich the Karaites, as the weaker, were always disposedt o make less of, and were anxious to magnify the pointsof agreement between themselves and their dear brethrenon the upper hand .

’

So it may have been . Rabbi Caleb ,in the preface to his T en Ar t icles, [1 11 7n nwwy, says thatthere was n ot in his day the same difference as thereonce had been ‘ between them and their brethren theRabban it e s concerning the const itutions, cautions, limitations, and tradit ions which they had received from theirholy fathers, except with respect to those things aboutwhich there is no direction in the written Law .

’ In otherwords

,the Karait es did n ot so absolutely refuse to have

any regard to the tradit ionary interpret at ions of the Law,

as did their fathers in the days of Ahnan, but availedthemselves of the labours of those Talmudists who byfair investigat ion had thrown any clearer light on difficultpassages of th e sacred text . But this did n ot imply anyconcession of the principle . The sternest Puritan may

avail himself of the erudi te labours of a Benedict inescholar without surrendering a particle of his horror of

priest and prelate . When a master of Kabbala faithfully studies the inspired Scripture, a son of the Readin gwill accept the produce of his labour, and register thehomage he has rendered.

DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINE. 1 2 1

Perhaps other two men could n ot have been foundmore competent to represent their respective part ies thanRabbi Saadiah, the Gaon or chief master of the HighSchool of Sora, and Rabbi Solomon ben Ye rukhim, the

most eminent Karaite of his day . Saadi ah was born inF ay i

’

im, in Egypt, in the year 8 9 2 , an d was thence calledF ayumi . He was an early s tudent, and rapidly attainedproficiency in varied studies—Hebrew, Arabic, Talmudi c,and philos0phic . Besides these general pursuit s, he gaveattention t o the Karait e controversy ; and if, as is said,he was at on e time under the instruction of Ben Yerukhim, he could hardly have done otherwise ; but , as theKarait e was only seven years older than himself, thet radition may seem rather doubtful . They might, howev er

,have sust ained the relat ion of senior and junior

fellow-student . Saadiah is reput ed t o have been the firsteminent Rabbanite who made the Holy Scriptures of theOld Test ament the subj ect of earnest t extual study

,

t ranslating the Hebrew into Arabic, and writ ing thereupon Arabic Scholia and an Arabic Commentary ;whereas hitherto the whole body of tradit ion-lovingRabbis had quit e abandoned that fruitful field of studyt o the Karait es . He so far profit ed by his Karaitereadings as to addict himself t o a lit eral and historicalmethod of exposit ion. But it is said that he went farast ray from pure Karaism in explaining away, rat ion alist ically, all that relates t o the D ivine attribut es, angels, andmiracles. l S t ill he professed himself a Talmudist , andcordially agreed with t he Talmudist s in deny ing the

I have n ot rece ived this unfavourable impre ssion of R . Saad iah . But

as I have n ot made very frequen t referen ce to his commen tarie s , and therefore may n ot have happen ed on passage s that would jus t ify the cen sure ofexplain ing away the mean ing of importan t port ion s of the t ext , I can on lyat pre sen t absta in from fur the r observat ion on the subj e ct . Be that as i t

may , I have be en some t imes indebt ed to this Gaon for very valuable informat ion and suggest ion s.


suffi ciency of the canonical scriptures, if studied withoutthe keys which he believed tradition had supplied.

Rabbi Solomon ben Yerukhim, also an Egypt ian , wasborn in Fastat , or old Misr, in 88 5 , and early instruct edin the Karaite faith, the Hebrew and Arabic languages,and both Talmuds . The writings of Ahnan were hischief authority in Karaism. He completed his thirt eenthyear exactly on the sabbath Yi tl‘i ro l in the year 8 9 8 ,when he brought a Gopy of the D ecalogue into the sv n a

gogue ofFastat , and was called up t o read. In the year9 05

,when he had scarcely reached manhood, he went t o

Jerusalem, where he dwelt all the rest of his life, exceptwhen on journeys to Egypt or t o the East for the sake ofv isiting Karaite synagogues, holding di sput ations withRabban it es, and otherwise labouring in the same cause .He said that in Jerusalem all the pious men were congregated from east and west, and all wisdom and knowledgeof the Scriptures had it s home . There he lived amongstthe learned of his own brotherhood, ever teaching othersand increasing his own knowledge . There he heard of

the rising influence of Saadiah, read his controversialt racts as they were issued, and in the year 9 23 hastenedto Egypt, where Saadiah was judge in the synagogue of

his native city F ayum, being then in the flower of man

hood . and rejoicing in high reput e for ext ensive learningand eloquence . It was probably then that those twoemin ent men conferred on the quest ions which dividedthemselves and their brethren , and laid down, with allpossible distinctness, the terms of the great cont roversy.

The conference was reported,in summary, by Ben

Yerukhim or on e of his friends.

Saadiah gave seven reasons why he should n ot re

iect the Talmud, and Ben Ye rukhim replied to each

When the Le sson fi n i 1mm), Exod . xvi ii . 1 was read .



xxix . with the examples of prayer that you will find—with such prayers

,for instance, as are recorded in the

Book of Daniel— and you will learn all you wish toknow.

VI . Sa ad iah. We need tradition to tell us how manyyears ago the second Temple was destroyed .

6 . Ben Ye rukhim. I wish you would tell me in whatsacred book I may learn that it is my duty to know thi s,or what good the knowing it would do me .

VII. Sa ad iah. We ought to know this that we may

glory in the knowledge of the end of our captivity, andof the resurrection of the dead, when that shall be ac

complished .

7 . B en Yerukhim. In the songs of the Prophets, andof all the seers , in all these are they recorded ; by thesethe knowledge of them i s preserved, and we have no needof thy words, nor of thy wisdom.

In perfect accordance with this last an swer are thewords of our Lord : These are the words which I spakeunto you while I was yet with you, that all things mustbe fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses, andin the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me .

’

(Luke xxiv . So is the concluding sentence of St.Peter ’s proclamation of the Gospel t o the Gent iles : ToHim give all the Prophets witness, that through Hisname whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remissionof sins. ’ (Acts x .

Now Shalmon ben Yerukhim presses his cause .1 . He insists on the truth of the Holy Scriptures of

the Old Test ament, as acknowledged by all Jews,wherever dispersed throughout the world. He appealsfor confirmation t o the mighty miracles, whereby thewrit ings ofMoses and the Prophets are commended touniversal belief. He unites with his own plea for the

DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINE . 1 25

supreme authority of the written Word, the confession ofthose that are without ; Mussulmans, to wit, and especiallyChristians. The Oral Law, as it is called, has no suchevidences ; but , before accepting the tradi tions of thispretended law, the Jew has to ask who the men werewhose names are supposed to give authority to the tradit ion s. Whoever they may be, the authority of theTalmud can only be human at the best, and the thus

sa i th the Lord cannot be prefixed to any portion of thatponderous miscellany which, in thi s essential respect,differs from the Law and the Prophets. All that can bepretended in it s behalf is that thus said this Rabbi

,or

thus said that, or that other doctor thus delivereth. Butall these Rabbis and Doctors are later than Ezra, andlat er than Malachi, ‘ the seal of prophecy.

’ They wereall men like ourselves, and nothing more ; all belongingt o the time when the Holy Spirit said the Jew is nolonger wi th us.

’

2 . He contends that the style of the Talmud is on alevel with its authorship. He asks what it is but thetalk of novices . Of these novices , he says, there are sixorders— alluding to the six S eda rim of the Mishnah— themembers of each order incessantly contradicting oneanother, utterly unlike Moses and the Prophets whonever disagree. These make it their business ever t odispute . What on e affirms the other formally denies.

What on e permits the other peremptorily prohibits. Oneblesses what the other curses, and curses most solemnly,swearing by hi s head. But all this is utterly differentfrom the modesty and maj esty ofGod’s truth .

And we might also add that it is ut terly different fromthe simplicity and meekness of Him, con ce 1 n ing whom aProphet said, ‘ He shall n ot cry, nor lift up, n or causeHis voice to b e heard in the street. A bruised reed shall


He n ot break , and the smoking flax shall He n ot quench ,unt il he bring forth judgment with truth.

’

(Isaiahxlii . 3,3. Ben Ye rukhim proceeds to show that the contentsof the Talmud are n o better than the style and spirit.This he demonstrates by examples, so far, at least, as

some parts of the Talmud are concerned. Some of thepassages quoted are absurd, some are obscene, some areblasphemous. They need not be transcribed into thispage.The time , we may believe, is n ow past when any one

will venture t o affirm, with F ather Simon ofthe Oratory,that while the Sadducees and Samaritans rej ected thetradit ions, the Karaites thought very highly of them.

This was a great mistake, and can only have arisen froma misapprehension of what has been already observed ,that these advocates of the sol e authority of D ivineRevelation were not so blinded by their zeal as t o rej ectthe fruit of any man’s honest labour, and if a Talmudi stcould offer any real aid for investigating the sense of theHoly Scripture of the Old Testament, they gladlyaccepted it . Nor was there any reason why they shouldnot. Great as was the difference, so great as to rendthe Jews into two hostile sects, i t did n ot imply that

,

antecedently t o Christianity, or irrespective of it, therewas any schism between them on a single fundamentaltruth . Samaritans, of course, are not to be in cludedunder this statement, for they were n ot Jews, n or hadthey any dealing with them. With regard to Christianity,a few di scriminative observations may be offered furtheron , but we must first examine the Articles of F aith professed , respectively, by the Jews in general, an d by theKaraites in part icular , setting down first the Thirte enArt icle s of the Common Creed, and then the Ten of the

Scripturist. The Thirteen . as I find them in an edition



8 . God will n ot change , n or wi ll He alter His de cree i s forall age s

,for Himselfalon e .

9 . He Spie th out an d knowe th our secre ts : He fore sawthe mat ter t o th e en d in His e t ern i ty.

1 0 . He re compe n se th t he good man accordin g to his work sGivi n g t o the wicke d evi l accordin g to his wicke dn e ss .

II . He will sen d our Me ssiah at the e n d of days : To re

de em them that e xpe ct the en d ofHi s salvat ion .

1 2 . God will revi ve the de ad in the abundan ce ofHis goodn e ss Ble ssed for e ve r an d ev e r be the n ame ofHis praise .

1 3. The se thirt e en are t o be as root s : The de cre e of God

an d His Law .

The Ten fundamental Articles of the Karaites, I findin their own Liturgy,‘ and translate as follows

I . That all this bodily (or mat erial) e xi ste n c e , that i s to say ,

the sph ere s an d all that i s in them,are cre ated .

2 . That they hav e a Cre ator, an d the Creator has His own

soul (or sp irit).

3. That He has n o simi litude,an d He i s on e

,separate from

4 . That He sen t Mose s,our Mast er

,upon whom be pe ace .

5 . That He sen t wi th Moses, our Mast e r, Hi s Law ,whi ch i s

p e rfe ct .

6 . For the in struct ion of the fai thful,the lan guage of our

Law,an d the in t erp re tat ion ,

that i s t o say , the Readin g (orTe xt), an d the di v ision (or vowe l-poin t in g).

1 11-13 1 an: w as 5 3 1 1315 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 13mmmwsnn m 5st» 1: 1

1119 5 1 111 1 35 1 111 1 1 : 0 115 my :1

'

1 1: 5313 “1 11 1: mmmm 15 11W 1

z’n

’

v 1 1 13-1 near: 11 5 1» mm '

1

z nnmnn 1 11-11 11 1 1 13 1 W 1 11 131: 1155 11m 1 : n

z rm1an1 wpm nwrm 1 1mm 11225 nub sm 11 11-15 1

z nwnnn n ew 11 3 1'

n 1 new 1

: 11'

1r1 131 1 : ms 1 1 : 1 11 1’

n 1 ne w 11

M1551”: 1 1 5 3 1 1 1311

1 : 141 1 115 111 1 :’

n 1 ne w D

own 1 1 1 131 11 11 11 on mm: 11 15 1 1 1wns5 11 5’

n 1 new 1

: 1 11 13 mm 1 1 1 51: 1 11 111119 1 533 M5 1 1 11 1 1

DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINE 1

7 . That the Ble ssed God sen t forth the othe r prophe t s .

8 . That Ge d ,— ble ssed be His n ame

,—will raise the son s of

men to life in the Day ofJudgme n t.9 . That the Ble ssed God giv e th t o man accordin g t o hisways

,an d accordin g t o th e fruit ofhi s doin gs .

1 0. That th e Ble ssed God has n ot reprobat ed the men of

the cap t ivi ty, but they are un de r the chast isemen t s of God,

an d i t i s e ve ry day right that they should obtain His salvat ionby the han ds ofMe ssiah

,the Son ofDavid .

We may now compare these two confessions . Theformer is full and clear ; t here is much verbal diversityin its form in the various editions , but i t will be acknowledged that the one n ow before the reader is very beaut iful as a piece of Hebrew composit ion . The latter isn ot t o be regarded as a perfect creed, but a confession ofKaraism. While the former, as a summary of Jewishfaith, has the merit of completeness, it is unquestionablycomposed with the view of conveying, in every syna ~

gogue , a direct protest against Christ ianity, which theeighth Art icle is intended t o condemn , as if God werecha nged in the Incarnation, or a ltered in the Gospel .The sixth and eleventh Art icles, if true, would an n ihi

late the New Testament.The lat ter document does not contain any such Antichrist ian pro t est, and the tenth Article, read hastily,might even seem t o have been framed for the purposeof leaving a way open at any t ime for an express acceptance of the Saviour. But in reality, the Karaite creedharmonises with the other, and differing only in so far as

was thought necessary for the profession of the di s t inctiveprinciples ofKaraism.

Rabbi Japh e t the Levite, master of R . Abraham benEzra

,quoted by Trigland, collects notes ofKarait e com

men tators on the Ten Artic les . They call the OldTestament the Read ing , supra, an d n ot only the Law

K


mm, because it is to be read clearly for the informationof all that will hear. As a proof that they differ fundament ally from the Samaritans, who allow absolute divineauthority to the Pentateuch , but not t o the other books,they describe the whole collect ion indifferent ly as

‘the

twen ty-four books,’ or ‘ the holy books . ’ They make n o

ment ion of Apocrypha. They have translated the OldTestament into vernacular languages, especially Arabicand Greek, and in later times into Tartar. There is aTartar version in possession of the Karaites in theCrimea, where it has been carefully kept in the syna

gogue s. This does not indicate that they undervalue theoriginal Hebrew, but rather shows how much they valuei t , and desire its contents to be more fully understood .

They uniformly insist that every Jew should understandthe sacred language, and they speak as strongly as an y

of us could wish t o speak of the insufficiency of versions .They w ere used to teach their children from the fifth or

sixth year of their age to read Hebrew, and it is to behoped that they do so still.On the important matt er ofbiblical interpretation they

have very correct views, and say that they carry in theirhands two lamps— the lamp of the Law and the lamp of

intellect . They believe that God will impart the spirit ofprophecy to enable them to use the lamps aright, and toexplain that which is beyond the reach ofhuman intellectunaided. They use the word p rophesy , nx13 1 , in their creedand elsewhere , to signify div ine teaching, precisely as i t sequivalent, n pocbmsia , is used in the New Testament.It has been alleged by some Christian crit ics that theybetray the prevailing Jewish ignorance in what relates tosuch phrases as Law,

’ ‘

just ificat ion ,

’ and natural ability but i t would be incredible that any honest Jew orChrist ian either could put off his proper character, andinterchange himself with his opposit e in sent iment, with



agree with the Talmudists, who believe that Israeli t eswho die unforgiven will indeed be cast into hell, but willbe delivered soon by Abraham himself, who will comedown from Paradise t o claim his own children and rescuethem from torment. That superst ition, however, is agesolder than the Talmud. It is well known that in thetime of the Maccabees i t was prevalent, or at l east n otunfrequent, —a custom allowed, though n ot commandedin the Law, and, as an old cust om,

n ot chargeable on thelater Rabbis, as they called the Rabbanite Teachers, theKaraites have retained it without question.

If the tenth and last article were interpreted as it mightnot unfairly be , it would be made to express a somewhatbetter h0pe than that of the Talmudic creed, which supposes them who hold it to have put offall expectation ofthe Messiah’s coming until ‘ the end of days,

’ for thisarticle declares that He may be expected an y day. Ye t ,in efi

'

e c t , the Karaite way of denying that He has come,and naming him rather as a t emporal deliverer than aheavenly Saviour, is quit e as obstructive as the otherto everything like Christian faith. Any Jew

,whether

Karait e or Talmudist, would agree t o the followingdoctrine of R. Japhe t , which must be read attentivelyby any person who is just n ow speculating on the nearness of Karaites to Christians in faith, which is altogetheran unreality .

It i s necessary,’ says this Rabbi, that you should

rightly understand that the King Messiah will come ofthe seed ofD avid of blessed memory, who will neitheradd anything t o the Scripture, n or t ake anythin g from it,who will neither abrogat e anything that is accustomed inthe present age ,

’— which is in direct contradict ion t o theScripture which the Messiah came to fulfil, n or will hemake any innovat ion on the natural course of things .

The working of miracles will not be necessary to prove

DIST INCTIVE DOCTRINE . 1 33

the excellence of the Messiah, n or yet the raising of thedead . But he will gather home the banished ones of

Israel ; he will carry on the wars of the Lord, and subjugat e all the people round about ; he will build up the

Sanctuary in its place ; he will be careful to fulfi l theLord’s commandments, as was David his father ; and hewill compel all Israel to walk in the way of the preceptsand inst itut ions of the Law. But if he (who pretends tobe the Messiah)does none of these things, know that heis n ot the King Messiah, but merely like on e of thoserulers of the people who came after D avid.

’Now t his

view of the Messiah does n ot only fail to explain thet enth Karaite article, but in reality contradicts it, andtherefore i t affords a momentary pleasure t o rememberthat this R . Japhe t whom we have n ow quoted, was n ot

the Karaite of that name, but one of their bit t erestenemies among the Talmudists .But the truth is, that the Karaites are n ot themselvesagreed . The ambiguity of the art icle i s fully reflect edin the hesitancy of their ut terances, whichmay eventuallyimprove, but cann ot yet be other than doubtful . At present there is n ot much to be said of them. Like the Jewsof old, they expect Elij ah to come with the Messiah .

They do n ot calculate the time of his expect ed advent,but discourage all such calculations. They say that Hemay be expect ed any moment , because it is writ t en thatHe will come suddenly t o his temple . Some of them, seeingthat no new Messiah does come , assign a strange reasonfor his n on -appearance . He lingers,

’

on e of them has

said, ‘ because Saturn, the Sabbath—Star, i s the s t ar ofIsrael

,and the astronomers tell us that that star moves

slowly in its orbit. Therefore , when the end arrives, butn ot before, by the will ofGod he will come. ’ But againthey say ,

—speaking in a better spirit indeed, but coming

no nearer to the truth, —that the fault of this delay is in the


banished Jews themselves, whose sins are the only oh

stacle ; and then again they reason themselves into thesemblance of a hope, for as this obstacle would cease ifthe guilty would repen t, it is every day right, they think ,that they should obtain the salvation of the Lord. Thesentence of the creed is indeed at first sight obscure

,for

D1 1 533 may mean a ny day as well as every day, but thelast words are quite inconsistent with the idea that theMessiah whom they expect will save an y day anyone whorepents. The salvation they think is n ot spiritual, or

moral, but temporal . The Saviour whom they hope foris n ot on e that would deliver them by his humiliation andsacrificial death. Messiah, Son of D avid, as they understand the lineage, i s not that Being whom Christians aoknowledge t o be the Lord. His kingdomwould be of thisworld, built up by dint of battle and conquest . If

,then ,

the language is Talmudic after all,and Son of D avid ’

is but the antithesis of Son ofJoseph,

’ we must give upthe notion of discovering a leaning to the Gospel in theircreed. This is the old stumbling-block .



themselves in controversial writings in reply to the alle

gat ion s of their adversaries, and, not content with adefensive posit ion, sent out missionaries t o convert thefollowers of tradition t o their own side . Controversywas hat efully chaunted in the hymns and mingled in theprayers of the traditionists, but the so-called hereticsbetook themselves t o prayer without any sacred song

,

worshipping with modest gravity, and committing theirargument s to writing. Then they sen t forth missionariest o circulate t ract s, an d by conversations and discoursesinvit e their adversaries to candid consideration , and induce them, if that might be, to imitate the simplicity oft heir doctrine and manners, and unit e themselves to theircongregations .New synagogue-rolls and revised Liturgies were n ow

urgent ly required. Their numbers mult iplied with greatrapidity

,and a Karaite Arab named Abu Soleiman Da

w 1’

i d ben Hassan wrote (A .D . 9 60) an Order of Prayerfor the Sons of the Text . ’ This became the basis of succ e ssive editions, until their separate congregations beingpermanently established, Karaism had grown into a separate Rite . The proper designat ions , custom mm, andchurch 5np, were imprinted on the Li turgies, and afterpaying most scrupulous regard to every dist inctive markof Karai te teaching and ceremonial, each church, or geographical division , t akes it s own dist inctive mark of rubricand arrangement. ‘

An original description of the liturgical services of theKaraism,

t ranslat ed by Blasius Ugolinus, contains generalinformat ion t o the following effectIt is ordained that the Law be read consecutively, as

is writ t en in the Book of Ezra (n ow called Nehemiah),v iii . 1 8 .

‘Also from day t o day, from the first day to

Furst , Ge schicht e iv p assim.

RITUAL AND CUSTOM. 1 37

the last day , be read in the book of the Law ofGod,’

n ot

from Sabbath to Sabbath only. The custom in the othersynagogues is to repeat the same sect ion daily, the weekthrough, so that there i s a sevenfold readi ng of the Pent at euch in the year. The Karaite method of consecutivereading is certainly the more useful, and therefore themore rational .The sect ions of the Prophets are selected on festivals

and at special services according t o the day or the occasion .

‘And if they will, they who read the Ten C omman dmen t s may read them each in his own Targum (orversion), either in his own vernacular, or in any lan guagewhat ev er, it bein g that of the people ; and they shallread the Scripture verse by verse , as i t is writt en in theOrder of Prayers .

’ This permission t o read the D ecaloguein the language of the people partly accounts for whatsome report of a custom of reading prayers in the vulgart ongue, which is n ot sustained by any authent ic anddirect account, so far as I can ascert ain . It is right

,

they say, to address the Most High in the sacred language, but the Decalogue is n ot prayer, being addressedt o men , not God, and should t herefore be spoken in suchlanguage as men can understand.

1

The n ew Test ament rul e goes further, and thereforeis more perfect : it instruct s us to p ray in a languageunderstood by the unlearned, that they may know howto say amen t o the prayer. The in telligence early inthe present century, that there were Bibles in a Tartarversion in the synagogue of Djufut Kalé, in the Crimea,apparent ly for use by the congregat ion, added t o previ ousknowledge of Arabic and Persian versions by Karaitet ranslators

,led t o the conclusion that lessons of the

Pent at euch or of the Prophets might be read in the

lD’N

‘WPH 11pmInsti tut io Karceorum nun c primum aBlasio Ugolino ex

Hebraico Lat i ne redi tum. Ugolmi Thes . An t iqq . Sacrr. tom. xxii .


synagogue in the vernacular of the country, although itis rather probable that such books are intended to assistthe people t o understand what the officiating minister isreading in Hebrew ; but I am n ot aware that prayers areany where translated for this purpose, except that in aLiturgy for use in Russian synagogues there is a prayerfor the Emperor with a version in Russ ; but that standsalone, and from the style it appears to be introduced int othe volume from another work, or, at least, literallyreprinted, and inserted there in such a manner that the

prayer offered in the Karaite synagogues of Russia mightnot appear to be different in any respect from the prayeroffered elsewhere, and that the imperial hand, also, mightnot be less visibly controlling the worshippers.

The synagogues for which the D irectory , 11pm, justquoted was prepared, were those of Egypt, Palestine,Syria,Mesopotamia, and Turkey. The date is A.M. 5 1 7 1 ,

which answers to A .D . 1 4 1 1 .

Nothing could be more strongly marked than thehorror of the old Jews , and of those in the present dayt hat are not modernised or enlightened—be it observedthat these two words may here be of Opposite sign ifica

tion— a t the pronunciation of the name of four letters,’

or by any attempt to pronounce it. The name is mm,

and its true pronunciation is not known, but variously

conjectured. All Jews, except the Karaites, substitutefor it the word ”17 15 LORD . They believe that, aft er the

giving of the Law , it was n ot pronounced by any but theHigh Priest, and by him only in the temple. They sayt hat it was uttered there on the Day of Atonement only,and then only when the priest was pronouncing thethreefold benediction, THE LORD bless thee and keepthee ; THE LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be

gracious unto thee ; THE LORD lift up his coun tenanceupon thee, and give thee peace .

’

(Num. vi. 24 In



Karaite Liturgies I find the name writ ten in an abbre

v iat ed form, yet with a vocalisation so peculiar as to

suggest that it is meant to determine the pronunciationwhich others have given up for lost . It is printedthus

1115 1 1 1m.Give p ra ise to Yahva z , ca ll up on his name .

The same form ”I”, or ”i”, is always used so far as I haveobserved .

F rom Ritual we pass to Cus tom ; reserving it for afuture chapter to illustrate the applicat ion of thesegeneral direct ions by on e or two examples of synagogueworship as i t n ow exist s . The same scrupulosity dist inguishe s the Karait e in all the habits

’

of his life, and isonly mit igated by the independent Spirit in which it i sexercised, and thus considerably redeemed from the

feebleness of a mere servile superstit ion .

The intelligent and conscientious Karaite is liable t omany doubts, but i t i s already decided that he will notdelegat e t o an y human authority the responsibility whichevery man ought t o bear for himself. He will not go t othe old Rabbis t o ask for a decision, but he will thankfully t ake counsel with the wise . But even the wise hewill n ot consult until he is driven t o them by necessity.

F or the direction he desires he searches in the plain t extof Scripture . He compare s

‘spiri tual things with spiritual ,

’

text with text . Perhaps there is a doubt whether, aocording t o the Law of Moses , fires may be li t on the

Sabbath-day. He acknowledges the doubt ; but theLaw is silent. No prophet, speaking by inspiration ,has furn ished a solution of the doubt , and as he cannotsubmit t o any un i nspired master, he determines for himself t o be gu ided by the Obvious considerations of season'

and climate, or the exigencies of infancy, old age and

RITUAL AND CUSTOM. 1 4 1

infirmity, or sickness . If such indications are n ot strongenough to sett le the question, he keeps his own conscienceclear by accepting the more stric t interpretation of theLaw for himself, and leaving the larger Share of libertyto those who choose to take i t ; each one stands or fallsto his own master.When the letter of the Law is indistinct, a quick per

cept ion of the Spirit may possibly prevent grave mist ake .Yet two persons may n ot agree in their interpretat ion ,although each thinks he can perceive the spirit

, an d inthat case reliance on a faculty ofpercept ion which neitherof the two possesses can only serve to aggravate contention .

Therefore, all should seek t o ascertain the re a son of theLaw

,— the intent of the Lawgiver, not the mind of the

interpreter. Not the House ofHillel with its tradit ions ,nor the House of Shammai with i t s literalism.

There is a question whether a child may or may not becircumcised on the Sabbath-day . The Karait e determines that i t may , because, he says, the circumcision-lawis older than the Sabbath-law, and here he agrees withHillel and the traditionists. They both arrive

,as it

happens, at a right conclusion, but hardly by the rightway, for the premiss is faulty. The circumcision-law isas old as Abraham, and therefore older than Moses but

the Sabbath-law is old as the Creat ion, as we find in thesecond chapter of the Book ofGenesis . The mere priority of a law is n ot always a sufficient reason for it sobservance, for, if it were, the ceremonial law of Mosescould n ot be repealed, not even by the supreme authorityof Him who gave it, which i t would be absurd to say .

The Karaites went further than Hillel, and this they didin con sistence wi th the seventh an d eighth articles oftheir own creed ; and perhaps it will b e found, on furtherinquiry, that they believed the Sabbath to have beenmade for man , n ot for the J ew exclusively,—but for the


st ranger also, whe ther he was wi thin the J ew’s ga tes or not .

On this subject, as on some others , t here is found a re

markable agreement between Karaism and some portionsof the New Testament.Jesus answered and said unto them,

’ the traditionists,

I have done one work, and ye all marvel. Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision ; (n ot because it is of

Moses , but the fathers and ye on the Sabbath-day circumcise a man . If a man on the Sabbath-day receivecircumcision, that the Law of Moses should not bebroken, are ye angry at me , because I have made a manevery whit whole on the Sabbath-day ? Judge n ot ao

cording to the appearance , but judge righteous judgment. ’ (John vii . 2 1 The appearance

,as the

traditionists regarded the Law, was the doing a work of

healing which, not being ofimmediately urgent necessity,should have been deferred until another day. C ircumci

sion, however, was not to be deferred, because the eighthday, come when it might, was the day appointed by theGod of Abraham, who also gave the Law to Moses onMount Sinai, and made no change in this respect. Thatthere was nothin g in the letter of the fourth commandment inconsistent with the conclusion arrived at by allparties, will appear yet more clearly, perhaps, after aperusal of the note below.

1 That way the Karaites

We may safely accept the prin ciple laid down by Hillel, and the

subjec t in it self, apart from our pre sen t h istory, demands the studious

con s iderat ion of every Christ ian theologian . Although the Sabbat ic inst i

tut ion i s as old as the Creat ion ,i t remain s e ssen t ially un changed , an d the

law of the De calogue , although it was not required to strengthen the obli

gat i on , served admirably to define it . The pre cep t as there given was n ot

altoge ther n egat ive , but , as to the san ct ificat ion Of the day , it was quit eposit ive . The n egat ive part was absolut e as to on e thing ,

men’

s ordinarybusin ess . There i s a posit ive command : ‘ S ix days shalt thou work and

do all thy busi n ess 1 11713 1 6135 1 D’l l"

15 1113 D1 72}: nWW. Then follows

the n egat ive command, n ece ssary to the fulfilmen t of the other : not a



their domestic relations , we ought n ot to take shelterunder the silence, or dubious allowance of the letter inone place, but to observe the spiri t OfGod’s law as it iselsewhere clearly expressed ; and that , in order to int erpret with safety, we should reason from similitude andanalogy. He so reasons and explains .As Rabbi Mordecai boasts, in his reply to Triglan d

’

s

inquiries , his brethren blamed the Rabban i t es for n ot

having had recourse, directly, to the writt en word,’ in all

doubtful cases , instead of uselessly resorting to the conflic t in g speculations which abound in the pages of theTalmud, the debat es ofmen who never could agree amongthemselves, much less satisfy an intelligent inquirer

, but

who disput e uselessly, as if they were incapable ofarguingotherwise than by contention

,and are sufficient ly satisfi ed

if they can amuse themselve s with a war ofwords, havingbut the impotent conclusion of a Te ehu.

l

Among other external peculiarities adopted for the sakeof distinct ion,

l

the Karait e has his phylact eries maderound instead of square , and wears them differen t ly . Onthis matter there is a Talmudic sent ence . The Mishnahreads thus He who makes his phylactery round makesit dangerous ; and the commandment i s n ot in it. Hewho puts it low on his forehead, or in the palm of his

hand ; behold, this is the way of the heret ics .

’2 TheMishnah has ‘ heretics,

’n ot Karaites ; for although the

name may have been heard of as early as the time ofSimon ben She t akh, both in Egypt and Palest ine, that ofKaraite could scarcely have come into general use unt il '

aft er the publication of the Mishnah or even the Talmud.

Maimonides and Bart e nora, in their commentaries on the

This t echn ical word "

1pmi s formed by the in it ial le t ters of the follow

ing sen t e nce—n1 1 1m1 n1 1w1PW11 5? 13wj

-1—The Ti shbi te will explain

things hard and trouble some .

2 ORDO FESTORUM,Megillah iv. 8 .

RITUAL AND CUSTOM. 1 4 5

place, say that the heretics here referred to followed theletter of the Law, and their own Opinion ; but there is agloss which says that the Karaites despised the traditionof the wise men , and followed the letter of the Mosaictext, on thy hand a nd be twe en thin e ey es.

’ This they st illdo, and I am told by a learned Hebrew friend, a nativeofBarbary, that if a Jew were seen to follow this customin that coun t r — and I presume it would b e the sameelsewhere,—he would not he suffered to read in anysynagogue, except it were one of his own, and that hewould be treated by all, except the Karaites, as an excommunicated person.

l

Here the Rabban it e pleads the more exten sive me an in g of 1 1 , which is

applied to sign ify the en t ire limb as well as the hand. The que st ion of

lit eral mean ing is n ot such as to separat e the part i es , but the real d iffi cultyarises in the fact that both synagogue s prefer t o have each i ts own forms

and i t s own badge s .


CHAPTER XIV.

K AR A I T E S IN S P A I N .

I AM sati sfied that the word S ep harad"

1 1 2123, which isfound but once in the Old Testament

,is the name of

Spain. Whether it was the name of the entire peninsulaat an earlier period, or became such lat er, it was inuse in the sixth century before Christ, in preference tothe more ancient Ta rshish, properly belonging to the

southern region, nearly answering the Andaluz (or Andalusia)of the Arabs . In this persuasion I follow the

Spanish Jews, who do n ot appear to have known Spainby any other name, except the Roman Hispania in latert imes , and are proud t o be dist inguished as D

‘WWDD, or

Sp an ia rds . The passage in the prophecy of Obadiah

( v . The captivity ofJerusalem which is in Sepharad shall possess the cities of the south,

’ they uniformlyso explain . It is n o disproof to allege that the SeptuagintGreek translator did not so understand the word, forhe did n ot understand it at all, but left it untranslated.

The Chaldee Targumist (Jonathan) and the JudaeoSpanish translators so render i t , and so it was understoodby writers of Rabbinical Hebrew a thousand years ago.

Darius Hystaspis , near years ago, appears also tohave known Spain by this name , for when enumeratingcountries on the Medit erranean, he places this amongthem. It is graven in the rock ofBehistun, if I mistakenot the published t ranslation of that inscription , where it



ing hosts of Egypt and Assyria, or Syria and Egypt, orPersia and the nations of the West. Then came theRoman conquest, the flight of such Jews as could escape ,the deport ations of prisoners and slaves . Fugitives whocould not, as in former times, find their way by the RedSea or the Nile to the dominions of the friendly sovereignofAfrican Ethiopia

,took the voyage attempted by Jonah

,

and embarked at Joppa for Tarshish. These all j oinedthe Captivity of Jerusalem that was in Sepharad. Capt ivity,

’ they said, because every community of Israelitesaway from the Holy Land was called a captivity, andevery settler in a. foreign country accounted himself anexile . But when lashed by the scourges of domestictyranny, or civil war, or the invasion of strangers, theweary sufferers were glad to escape to the fine climate,fertile soil, safe harbours, groves and gardens of thatWestern paradise, where every man

’s industry foundquick reward . Such was the course of events, agesbefore a Talmudist had breathed, or a degenerate Christian had brought dishonour ' on his Master’s Name bywreaking vengeance on a son of Abraham ; before a‘ later Rabbi ’ had presumed t o Speak a syllable in dero

gat ion of the supreme authority of God’s own written

Word. These were the orig in es of Hebrew society inSpain

,perhaps the only region in the world to which

they had betaken themselves in voluntary and peacefulemigration

,and

, on arriving there, found prosperoushomes.

No doubt the Hebrews of the dispersion in all lands,n ot t o speak of their apostate brethren in Samaria andJndasa, had in various degrees neglected Moses ’ Law,but the old Sephardim of Spain had n o faithless kings t omake them worship idols for the satisfaction of a cowardpolicy

,neither did they live within sound of the debates

of Hillclite s and Shammai te s, forthose parties were not

KARAITES IN SPAIN . 49

formed until ages aft er t heir own faith and customs weresettled in the Iberian penin sula, and, perhaps also, northward of the Pyrenean Mountains.

Whil e the sages of Tiberias, Sora, Pumbeditha , andall the East were toiling to con struct a second law totheir own taste, the Hebrews ofElvira, Cordova, Toledo,Maqueda

,and many other towns founded and peopled by

their fathers, went on in their accustomed way, caringnothing for such occupations, but reading the Law intheir well-frequented synagogues, n one forbidding. Theycultivated the land, taught the Celt and the Goth to dothe like, and solemnly blessed the fruit s that God gavein reward of their united labour. So did those naturalised Hebrew Spaniards earn the goodwill of their neighbours, those neighbours being far inferior in moralculture to themselves, who, in ancestry and intelligence,were far superior to all others in the world.

We must lament that those Bible-Jews were not converted to Christianity : We may reasonably say thatthey were blamable, or guilty for n ot accepting theeviden ces of historic fact ; and that they were the moreguilty forthat the vail of tradi tion was not upon the i rheart s, when the Law of Moses was read, as it was uponthe hearts of other Jews . Yet there was the tradition ofunbelief, a blindness inherit ed from their fathers , a fatalmisconception of the character of the Messiah. This,however, was not all peculiar to the Jews, and it servest o confirm the Apostolic saying that the natural man

receiveth n ot the things of the Spirit ofGod. But theguilt was not all theirs . The Christ ians in Spain, whenthe Apostoli c times were past, did n ot show the Jewsthe things of the Spirit of God, but exhibited a bit terand cont emptuous enmity which forbade them to believethat there was anything divine in Christ ianity . Eventhe early Councils assailed them with threatenings


and curses, and so made faith impossible, if they were thepreachers .Until the dispersion of the Eastern colleges in theeleventh century

,n o great Rabbis came into Spain with

pret ension of authority to enforce Talmudical t raditions.When zealots of the sort did come they found a com~

munity ofHebrews far superior to the Jews of Palest ine .No Assyrian had bribed them to worship the gods of

Nineveh . Their neighbours, the Carthaginians, so longas Carthage stood, had persisted in worshipping the Baaland Ashtaroth that recreant J ews in Samaria and inJerusalem worshipped for ages ; but while those godshad alt ars in Sidon and in Carthage, we do n ot hear of

any altars being raised to them by the Jews of Sepharad.

Neither do we hear that these Jews betrayed any ambi!

tion t o make a hedge to protect God’s Law,instead of

taking care to keep it.While the Prophet of Nazareth was pronouncing con

demn at ion on the Pharisees of Jerusalem for their selfrighteous cont empt of the simplicity of the Old TestamentScriptures , that caste was n ot spread much beyond theHoly City, and it is n ot probable that there was a singlecompany of those devotees to be found in Spain . As wehave just now observed, it was a thousand y ears laterwhen the propagators of Talmudism se t up their schoolsin Spain . Then Spanish Jewry rapidly fell under theirinfluence, and n o doubt the converts were numerous andenthusiastic ; but still the old Hebrews had precedence .They had their long family genealogies and patrioticmemories . They had firm nerve and self-collected pride .They would turn away wi th disdain from the puerilitiesof Pharisaism, uphold their own simpler time-honouredcustoms, and refuse to bow before the Rabban it es.

Dr. Julius Furst, t o whose diligent labour on theKaraite manuscripts we are deeply indebted, steadily



The Spanish congregat ion s were divided, and the cont roversy lasted long. It is said that the Karaitesgained great power, especially at Burgos, and that,everywhere, they threatened t o overthrow the customsthat had been established for ages . A formal secessionthreat ened, if i t was not indeed consummated by theformat ion of new synagogues. The traditionist s lavishedv ituperation on Faradg, and the other heretic, Taras ;and, if the whole story may be struck off at a stroke ofthe pen, King Alphonso IX. stilled the tempest by commanding the reformer to keep silence, and forbidding theKaraites to worship God in synagogues of their own .

According t o this account, the Rabban it e s exulted,and

on e zealot , Abraham Z uccut , seein g the heresy utterlycrushed, boasted for himself that he had ground thebones of Al F aradg in hell ! At once, they say, theKaraites disappeared, and their heresy was never knownagain in Spain . Now nothing can be more untrue .The s truggle continued in Castile for more than half acentury, during the reign of three kings that is t o say,from 1 1 1 0 t o 1 1 6 1 inclusive , and their case can be plainlytold . They were compelled by the force of persecut ion,as well as by force of conscience, t o have synagogues forseparate worship, but that worship, which probably beganin the time of Alphonso VII . , was interrupted by themandate of Alphonso IX . There were two heavy perse cution s at the instigation of violent Rabban i t e s, on e in1 1 30, and the other, in 1 1 5 0, continued until 1 1 6 1 , whichwas conducted with great severity, unless nothing shouldbe thought severe in Spain, that wa s n ot as murderousas the Act s of Faith celebrated by inquisitors. In thatcase the vexat ious persecutions of the Hebrew dissent ients

or t he Run 05 11) T ID, but I fin d there n oth ing more than a. hard word

or two be stowed on Al Faradg and another here t ic,’with a stat emen t of

Ben Dior that he had writ t en a book again s t them.

KARAITES IN SPAIN. 5 3

would be called gen tle . It was, however, quite sharpenough to test the sincerity of those more primit ive Jews,and to exalt and confirm their zeal . Castile , however,was but a part of Spain , and a prohibit ion which mightsilence them in that kingdom could not be extended t oLeon and Aragon . In Zthe Mohammedan territories, t oo,the Karait es could live at ease. In Catalonia they wereon good terms with the other Jews, reciprocatin g tokensof friendship and interchanging studies. This, in brief,is what we gather from the Karaite manuscripts describedby F ii rst .

l

We have conclusive evidence of the continuance ofKaraites in Spain, not in forced communion with unwilling brethren, n or yet in open hostility, but side by sidein friendly correspondence, without any violent concessionrequired on either side. How the happy equilibriumwaspreserved we can only conj ecture, but there was probablysome latitudinarian relaxation on both sides, unless theSheikh Hanoch Z aporta was an extreme exampl e of conciliation. This learned Karaite flourished in Cataloniain the fifteenth century. Elij ah Misrakhi, a Rabbanitein Constant inople, reporting the state of the Karait es inthe year 1 5 00, refers t o him in these words Mordechai Komt in o tells me that his master, the Sheikh HanochZ aporta, who had been on e of the great men and noblesof Catalonia, eminen tly learned in all the Talmud , anda famous Rabbi among the Rabban it e s, was a pious man ,

and a distinguished t eacher ofthe sons of the Karait es inall the instruction that they sought of him,

whether outof the Talmud, or out of the Casuists (D e c iders, Dfipmg),or out of Rashi, or out of the simple exposit ion of theLaw (mmmmm), or out of the sciences (of the

3

This brings us down t o the time of the expulsion of the

Ge sch icht e iv. 5 8—60,v . 2 .

2 Geschichte v . 5 , Anmerkungen .


Jews by F erdinand and Isabella, and, if i t were the onlyevidence on the subject, would suffice to disprove thestat ement hitherto current and undisputed that Karaismwas suppressed in Spain . It rather suggest s , what ismore likely to be true, that the edict of Alphonso IX .

had n omore than a partial and temporary effect in Castileonly, litt le or none in other provinces, and none at all inCatalonia.After this brief review of some historic facts, someothers can be better understood. We can perceive howthe Jews in Spain, in spite of every inducement t o repela religious innovation, so promptly and cheerfully welcomed the writings of Al F aradg, the Ahnan of Spain,when he came to revive and advance Karaism, certainlynot to proclaim it as a revolutionary innovation.

Hence we can understand an otherwise unintelligiblestatement of M . Kohl, a traveller in South Russia, thatthe Sephardim in Barbary ,l descendant s of the Jewsfinally banished from Spain in 1 4 9 2 , wrote or printednearly all the Karait e books that he had seen in Russia.Hence we can appreciate some peculiar features in thereligious character of Spain long before the sixteenthcentury. We can admire, for example, the good sense ofthe first Bishop ofGranada, aft er the conquest by F erdinand and Isabella, who advised his superiors in Churchand State t o let him try to convert the Mohammedan citizens to Christianityby help of the Bible translated into

Either this confirms my posit ion that the Sephardim do n ot t ake the ir

name from a place in Tartary , orM. Kohl is misinformed when at tribut ingto Barbary what is due to the Crimea . I am n ot in sen sible of the d ifi‘i cultycreat ed t o myself by a mistake here , for ifM. Kohl erron e ously supposesthat books prin t ed in Kertsch,— but I do not find that there was ever a

Karai te pre ss them—were prin t ed , or rather writt en ,in Barbary, I lose

the support of an importan t lit erary fact . Ye t I wan t to hear of a

Karait e prin t ing-press in Barbary, which I have not yet heard of. I can

understand that the Karait e s would wri te in Barbary, but I should like toknow that they would p rin t books there .



in sisting on this innovation . They both employ the samearguments as the Karaites on various subj ect s . They

speak in the same style, and, in describing their an t agon ists, apply t o them the same epithets ; modern Rabbis ,

’

in particular. Any Spanish Scholar who is familiar withthe religious history of Spain in the fift eenth and six

t e en th centuries may satisfy himself by reference to thelast-quoted volume of the original edition of Valera’sSpanish Bible, printed in Amsterdam in the year 1 602 .

The manners ofthe Spanish Karaites commended themto general esteem. They were very temperate, an d scrn

pulously observed the distinction between clean and unclean meats, considering that it was established by theD ivine Lawgiver for the sake of health

,as well as for

moral reasons . They punished drunkards and profligat epersons with infamy, and called them s inn e rs, cus tom.

They rendered great honour to their parents , and, evenmore than the Rabban i t es, reverenced the Rabbis . Inall their customs they avoided conformity to the Gentiles.

Their aged men were grave and were all careful to oh

s erve the Levitical prohibition by not marring the cornersof their beards, as the heathen did, but letting them growfreely in their natural form.

The plan of the present work does n ot allow digression,but n o ecclesiastical historian should fail t o invest igatethe history of the Spanish Karaites in relation to theLutheran Reformation. But they were n ot influenced byit in any appreciable degree . He will find their sympathics t o be with Z uinglius rather than Luther, and thestron g tincture of Judaism in the theological language ofthe Republican nations of the Reformation is probably duet o their early influence in the south ofEurope . A Z uinglian congregation and a Karaite synagogue were as

nearly alike as two things could be that were otherwiseso essentially different from their separate relations to theLaw and to the Gospel.

CHAPTER XV.

DE CLINE OF KARAISM .

THIS chapter is inevitably incomplete, and must be t e

garded as no more than a slight contribution towards anessential part of Karaite hi story— the first hint t owards afuture sketch of the condition of that people in theirdarkest times, when scat tered in remote regions of thethree divisions of the Old World .

So long as the congregat ions were too large or too

numerous to be di spersed at bidding, or for their membersto be trodden under footwith impunity, where a minorityof dissentient Israelites was important enough to obtainthe protectionof a Gentile Government from the oppre ssion of their stronger brethren, such a minority mightlift up i t s head and prosper for a time . In such favouringcircumstances it might even gather new strength by theoccasional accession of proselytes, but prosperity so ad

v en t it ious could not long continue . It vanished like agleam of sunshine obscured by the returnin g storm. So

did congregation after congregation dwindle away, untilfinally dispersed by persecut ion t oo stubborn to relent.There were also special causes of decay, which nothinghuman could resist. Such causes are detailed by RabbiMordecai in his answer to the inquiries of Trigland.

Acknowledging that his information is extremely imperfect, the Rabbi ventures to mark three epochs in thehistory ofhis people, which he advises future inquirers to


distinguish, if they would arrive at any certain conclusionon the subj ect.1 . His fi rst ep och begin s with the formation of sepa

rate congregations of seceders from the main body ofTradit ionists at the time when R. Simon ben Shétakh,having returned from Egypt to Jerusalem,

carriedthe notion of Rabbinical authority to a higher pitchthan any of his predecessors . Ben Shetakh, i t willbe remembered, was in sufi

’

erably arrogant, and his colleague Ben Tabba1 openly declared against him. Thisdivision , under the leading of the hostile chiefs, occurrednearly a century before Christ, but how far the adherentsof Ben Tabba1 formed n ew congregations, or otherwisetook a decidedly separate position,— how far they assumedor accept ed a distinctive name, such as Ka ra im, or atwhat time it may be considered they came t o be commonlyso called, are quest ions which R. Mordecai could notundertake t o answer.There is n o reason to believe that , at that time, the two

‘ houses ’ were so absolutely divided, or that either of

them had any other designation than that which wasusual, each takin g the name of it s master, and each re

cognised as a legitimate part of the House of Israel. Onreference to the New Testament, we cannot discover anyt race of such a separat ion, as regards Karaites, althoughthere are passages in the Gospel history where formaldivision on a point ofvital importance and distinctive namecould n ot have been concealed with due regard to integrityof narrative . And even where indicat ions that such abody as the Karaites was on the field might be expect edto appear, they are n ot t o be found, although earnestlysought for. The lawyers so oft en mentioned as devotedstudents of the Law of Moses might, from their name,be mistaken for Karait es . Our Lord’s question to a lawyer, How reades t thou ? ’ almost challenges the conclu ~



the synagogues worthy to be called Israelites indeed,and

in fact there were many such, bu t as yet they were interspersed in the mass— a leaven of life, striving to cast offthe prevalent corruption.

The minds of men were changing, and were about tochange yet much more, as the two antagonist principlesgained greater activity. The ministrations of the in carnat e Son of God were already working such effect thatreconciliation between the parties became thenceforthimpossible . But all this notwithstanding

,until the

Mishnah was finally compiled, published, and acceptedas a second edition of the Law, or, at least, an authori

t at ive exposition of it, there was no place made for aformal Opposition thereto. Nevertheless, we accept thisfirst epoch of R . Mordecai as belonging to the Karaitehistory. Properly speaking, it must be taken as prefa

tory, and necessary t o a'

, full understanding of the subj ect. ‘

We have so taken it.2 . His se cond ep och begins in the middle of the eighthcen tury, when Ahnan, a Karaite from Judea, made an

open stand agains t the East ern Talmudists . R . Mordecaidoes not recognise the influence of our Lord’s ministryand of early Christianity on the synagogue, although thatinfluence must have been very great, and it is certainthat

,long before Ahnan, an exceedingly numerous party,

in Palestine and far away, was known by the honourablename ofKaraim. We trace them from Babylonia to Tartary . When the eminent preacher came from Jerusalemand stirred the controversy anew among the East ern Jews,the time had fully come for a world-wide separation, n o tn ow an incipient movement. Two different laws had comeinto full force for the government of separate congregations— two forms of worship— two rules of conscience .

This part of th e subje ct is tre at ed above in Chapte r V. , on the New

Testamen t .

DECL INE OF KARAISM. 1 6 1

But it requires far more knowledge than R . Mordecaicould have possessed to di vide the Karaite history intoperiods, and the more we learn the more evident itbecomes that it could n ot be so written as to include theentire field under equal chronological divisions. Wemay , nevertheless, conj ecture that while society was forthe most part barbarous in all parts of their dispersion ,and Jews of all sor ts were scattered in countries rarelyvisited by persons capable of adequately reporting whatthey saw, there were Karaite companies livi ng far awayfrom their brethren in a state of perfect isolation

,enjoy

ing liberty of conscience indeed, but giving up for i t ssake all the comforts of civilised society, and missing atthe same time the advantages of intelligent associationand instruction in the form of religion they inherited fromt heir fathers . An instance of the kind occurs in theIt inerary of Rabbi Pe t akhi ah of Ratisbon, who travelledin Turcoman ia, Armenia, and Tartary in the eleventhcenturyIn Tartary this traveller found n ot any Jews , as he ispleased to say, but only heret i cs, wi th whom he remonst rat ed for their inobservance of the fait h delivered t o

hi s nat ion by the ancient t eachers. To his remonstrancethey replied that their fathers had n ot so taught them ;

but their conscientious observance of the religi on theyhad received evi dently conciliated his favourable regard .

He reports that they most rigidly observed the Sabbath,and even broke on the sixth day of the week the breadthey were to eat on the seventh . Rather than light afire on that holy day, or even prepare a light of any sort

,

they ate their food in darkness . Lest they should desecrate the Sabbath-day by travelling, they did not allowt hemselves the recreation of what other Jews would callthe Sabbath-day’s journey,

’ but sat st ill in one place .They had no book of prayers —perhaps through

M


inability to obtain copies—but made use of Psalms only,which they read instead of prayers . R. Pe t akhiah readto them prayers from his own liturgy, explained to themhow those prayers were recited in the synagogues, andrepeated the blessings which the Jews in Germany pronounce over their food ; and they, free from bigotry, expressed their approbation of them all . They had neverheard of Talmud, nor could they imagine what that mightbe t o whi ch the other Jews gave more especially sohon ourable a name. Whether their fathers had emi

grated from Babylonia or Palestine, Pe takhiah was notinformed, but he inferred that they could n ot havebrought any Talmudic writings with them. We mayalso in fer that they were either Jews of some old capt ivity , or descendants of the early Karaites known to theKing of Chozar. The latter supposition is the moreprobable

,because of the identity of their plain and self

denying customs wi th those of the Sons of'

the Reading.

They are not described as Essenes, and do n ot appear tohave had any other traditions than those of the Karaitesof an age long past. l We know, however, that at thisvery time the Karaites in general were flourishing.

3. The third ep och noted by R . Mordecai is notknown by any on e determining event, and the beginningswere imperceptible . He says that for ages the Karaiteswere in great prosperity, unt il about the close of

the fourteenth century or beginning of the fifteenth,

when indications of decay transpired here and there.R . Ghedalyah, Son of Don D avid Yakhyah, found thecongregations in Constantinople unable to maintain theirground against the encroachments of the Rabban it es. InConstantinople, the Crimea, and Russia, there were stillmany considerable relics of ancient wealth and even

R. Petachiae It in erarium, in Ugolin i Bibliothecé.An t iqq . Sacrr. Orientalium, tom. vi .



the possession of private persons in Constantinople andTurkey, Cairo and Egypt, Damascus, the Holy Land,Kalé in the Crimea, and where else none could tell. Onecannot read some prefatory observations in his twelvebooks— each book under the name of a tribe —withoutperceiving that he would have b een utterly destitute ofpecuniary means for undertaking such researches on hisown account. Trigland, who must never be forgotten, nodoubt assisted him.

The reader , however, will bear in mind that Karaiteswere not alone in suffering. Christians in the East andJews in the West suffered quite as much, and were probably martyred more extensively, and more fiercely

,too,

than any ofthe Karaite communities— at least, with veryrare exceptions .Several years before the correspondence of Triglandwith R . Mordecai, the state of the Karaites in Egypt inthe seventeenth century was feelingly described by on e

of their own communion . Rabbi Samuel the Holy, Sonof D avid Yahmsel, vi sited Egypt in the autumn of 1 64 1 .

Unlike some of their less gracious Rabbanit e brethren ,he calls them Jews. The Egyptian Jews,’ he saysassigning to them a certain pre-eminence— received himwell on his arrival at Cairo

,and conducted him t o the

house of the Karaite Nasi (Prince), whose name wasBaruch, a Rabbi, who gave him and his fellow-travellershonourable entertainment.He commends them highly for exemplary conduct,liberality, humility, benevolence towards all their neighbours, and piety t owards God. There is no reason tothink this high praise to b e exaggerated, for it fullyagrees with their excellent reputat ion in other countries .He relates how carefully they observed all that is comman ded in God’s most holy Law,

walking aright in theway of truth, and keeping the holy Sabbath, with obser

DECLINE OF KARAISM. 1 65

vance of sacred ri tual therein . He says that on theSabbath-day they lit no lamps, n or tasted any hot food,but fires and lights were burning on the eves of holydays, and the lamps in the synagogues kept burning fromnightfall until morning light . Like all good Jews, theywere very scrupulous in the preparation of their food,and beyond all others careful that the animal t o beslaughtered should be free from the slightest blemish .

They would not accept food of any kind from theMohammedans

,except only vegetables or fruits ; neither

would they take from Rabban it es bread, nor wine, normead, if they were to offer it. They would have nofellowship with them,

would n ot intermarry, nor eat ordrink together. This rigid separat ion, however, was themore easy, as the Karait es in Egypt were very numerousin Cairo, had butchers and bakers of t heir own, anddealers in every kind of food. As the Jews of sixteencenturies before their time would have no dealings withSamaritans, so neither would these Karaites deal in anyway with those Rabban it es. They did not regard themas t rue Israelites nor lawful Jews . So these, theKa ra im,

were by eminence the Egyptian JewsR . Samuel reports that they were poor indeed, but n otsecond to any people for honesty. Their fathers had notbeen so poor. Their chief synagogue was handsome ;it rested on fourt een marble pillars, and had fiv e a rks

(m‘py n) and fourteen rolls of the Law. The library

belonging t o the synagogue contained many Karaitebooks in Arabic manuscript. In the court of one Aaronthere was a lesser synagogue, with two rolls of the Law

and other books . There were also smaller houses, ororatories, set apart for prayer. In former times therehad been seventy oratories, but the number was thenreduced to fifty.

Most remarkable of all was a house devoted to pur


poses of religion , having a lofty tower, which the earlyKaraites used as an observat ory to watch for the newmoons . Rabbi Samuel, ascending the tower, count edninety steps above the house-roof. Every Sabbath andfeast-day they brought out the rolls of the Law with greatceremony, and read the appoint ed Parashah with profound solemnity. On other days it was their custom toread the same at home, but without limiting themselvesto the order of reading, and also the Haphtaroth . Thesame things

,as they heard, were done in Jerusalem an d

in D amascus by the Karaites of those cit ies . We learnedfrom R . Mordecai how tlw ‘

syn agogue s and libraries of

Egypt were pillaged, and his account, therefore, must beadded to that of his predecessor.R . Samuel and his party visited Old Cairo also, wherewas a synagogue originally belonging to the Karaites ,but then in possession of the Rabban it es, who would notnow suffer them so much as t o look upon the Book of

the Law. They longed t o se e it, and offered a handsome present t o the keeper of the place but n o moneywould bribe him t o allow, as he fancied, the desecrat ionof that sacred obj ect by even the sight of the eye ofthose brethren who would have laid down their livesrather than erase or change a letter of it. But they borethe denial patiently, sang plaintive Hebrew

,

hymns inthe synagogue which, centuries before, had resoundedwith their fathers ’ hallelujahs ; gave the man money tobuy oil for the lamps, offered prayer which no custodiancould hinder, and withdrew in sadness. The doors oftheir Talmudist brethren were closed, but an Arab entert ain ed them in the city . The Mussulman gave themfood which they did n ot then refuse, and a lodging whichthey gratefully enjoyed. Next morning their host tookthem out of the city of the Pharaohs into a deliciousEgyptian garden, where the sons of Ishmael accepted



people he transcribed,

‘ letter by letter, word by word .

’

Trigland profited by those researches, and much of whatI have repeated from his admirable D ia tribe was at firstcollected by this indefatigable Rabbi, and is thankfullyacknowledged by his learned Christian friend.

The Troca (Torok), so briefly named by Mordecai,was a station of great importance . It is a t own

o

in theRussian province of Wilna, situate on the border of alake, about 1 7 mile s west of that metropolis. WhenLithuania became a State under the government of its owngran d duke, and attached to the kingdom of Poland, it wasthe wise policy of the newly established ruler to en

courage the immigration of such persons as were likelyto enrich the country by their skilful industry as agriculturists and traders. Among the Karaite manuscriptslately collected, there is a passage which throws light onthis part of Karaite history. It occurs in the narrativeof a traveller in the year 1 78 5 , who states that ‘morethan five hundred years before, when the Karaites werein the land of Krim, in the city of Sulchat , a king of thecities , or provinces, of Poland desired them of the kingin whose dominions they were, loved them, and honouredthem exceedingly .

" The name of the Polish king isnot mentioned, but the date of his correspondence withthe Tartar and the immigration of the Karaites intoLithuania is determined more exactly by that of thecolonisation of Wilna under the first grand duke, whoeffectually recov ered his newly acquired territory from ast ate of savage wildness, and on his entry on that governmentmarried a daughter of the King of Poland, and ann exed the archduchy to that kin gdom. The choice ofKaraite Jews from Tartary to aid in the arduous labour ofearly civilisat ion implied a confidence in their skill and

l The original of the passage is given by Furst , Geschichte des Kemer

thams,Bd . i i i . Anmerkungen , St . 1 0, Num. 1 .

DECLINE OF KARAISM. 1 69

integrity which was not abused, but continues to this day,and to this day is justified by their superior character.Successive immigrations, besides the natural increase ofa prolific race, soon made the Karaite population verynumerous . Liberal grants invested them with valuableprivileges

,rare indeed in the history of the Israelitish

dispersion . Wealth, honestly earned, raised them to ahigh position, of which the only apparent evil was thatit provoked envy and invited spoliation in times ofwar.One religious feature of Karaism, as it was di sclosed inPoland in a lat er age, now forces itself on our attention,and demands a studio‘us consideration .

It will be remembered that in the earlier years of thereligious Reformation of the sixteenth century, the seept icism which had prevailed so generally in Rome and theItalian States, chiefly among the higher clergy, and perhaps most intensely in the highest, tainted the Italianmind, and imparted a peculiar stamp of heterodoxy tothe adherents of the Reformation in that count ry. TheCourt of Rome had sagaci ously put off the garb of paganlaxity whi ch it had worn so j auntily since the revival ofletters. The

,Council of Trent, while reviewing every

art icle of Roman theology, having stated in i t s canonsthe fundamental articles of Christian faith with a clearness that was indeed much needed, gave strict instructionsto all the licensed preachers of their Church, and so

enabled them to assume a new appearance of sound faith,at least in those particulars whi ch would contrast not onlywith their former heterodoxy, now to be concealed, butwith the open heterodoxy of certain fugi tive Italian Prot estan t s. Those persons found congenial society amongthe Jews in Poland, who, in spite of their heroic adherence to the letter of the Mosaic Law, had not acceptedthe more fully unfolded verity of Christ ian revelation .


Heretics they were in the eye of Rome,and the persecu

tion that haunted them drove them at once into the armsof the Polish Karaites ; for, like them,

and even morethan they, these protesters against Rome hated traditionand all human authority . Like the Karaites, they weresturdy Monotheists in the same narrow sense . Theyoutran Arius in the race of unbelief. Their own Scoinoleft his name t o a sect, just as Sadok had left his, andSocin o, with his principal followers , chose Poland to beat once their asylum and their cit adel . F rom that timeit became the centre of Socinianism in Europe . InPoland the Jew and the Christian both enjoyed religiousliberty, and for once the most orthodox of the Israelitesand the least orthodox of the Christians could fraterniseon on e point, and on only one .One of those Jews was Isaac, son ofAbraham ofTorok,

the Karaite . He was born in that town in 1 5 33, afterthe heat of controversy between the two divisions of

Judaism had cooled. He was brought up in the studyof Talmudism as a branch of Jewish learning, and in thefaith of the Karaite

,cold withal

,unt il quickened and

elevated under the impulse of persecution . Young Isaac,to whom Hebrew was vernacular, was also liberallyeducat ed in the Latin and Polish languages . In theselanguages he read the chief controversial writings, as theywere issued by their eminent authors, against the Churchof Rome . But n ot without bias, and perhaps partially, orwith selection . Judging from his own account of himself,we might venture to believe that hi s favourite readingswere Socinian . He tells us that he was in habits of freean d cordial intercourse with the nobility and clergy ofallsorts, but chiefly, if n ot entirely, with dissentient s fromRome . He was in sincerity a Karaite Jew, but thepeculiar controversy of which Lithuania was the veryfocus incessantly occupied his thoughts, and constant



offensive of any that Jews have writ ten against the Christian faith, especially in their sacred language,

’-not the

grand Hebrew of the Old Testament, but often in thehumblest Rabbinic

,abundant in words and phrases

adapted to the most indecent conversation . It is, perhaps,the masterpiece of Jewish controversy against Christ ;specious, when in the hands of uninstructed readers andto the apprehension of the common crowd it would seemunanswerable . I have read the tract

!

with sorrow, y e t ,

after all, on reflection, gladness . Glad am I to observethat, as such productions must come, in order that theinquiries of Jews may be answered, one that a Chri stiancould sit down to answer w ithout a sense of degradationproceeded from the pen of a Karaite . With this com

paratively modern incident, we close this brief chapter onthe decline of Karaism and I venture to congratulateevery candid Karaite

,in the conviction that this eminent

representative of theirs would not probably have attackedChrist ianity at all had he not been first instigated by men

calling themselves Christians,‘ yet denying the D ivinemaj esty of Christ.The book was made known t o Christians in Europe byWagenseil, who vi sit ed Ceuta, and found it there inmanuscript, brought from the interior of Barbary . Iknow that it is much read by Barbary Jews, who probablyhave it in that form. One of them, an earnest inquirerand friend of my own, used to spend hours at night inCopying passages from it at home, and hours again by dayin obtaining my assistance to confute them to his own

satisfaction . My friend was, unconsciously to himself, aKaraite in doctrine— and in sympathy, if not yet quite infaith, a Christian. I am reminded, in recollection ofthiscircumstance, of the statement of M. Kohl concerningKaraite books in Barbary.

Mnmmen Fid e i , Procem. ad Part . 1 1 . apud Tela Ign ea Sa tan ae

Wagen seli i .

CHAPTER XVI .

PRE SENT STATE OF SYNAGOGUE-WORSH IP IN RUSSIA .

THE trans-Caucasian region, where the simpler-mindedSons of the Reading found hospitable treatment amongthe pagan Chozars, long before the great Karaite rev ivalof the eighth century— this same region, now part of thevast Russian empire, has been ever since a land of refugeto t heir children . It is n ow chiefly in Russia that theirworship fl ourishe s, and the student who can commandmeans and find opportunity may now ascertain for himself their doctrine, their manner of worship, and theircustoms, by personal observation in Southern Russia.He may provide himself with a printed copy of theirPrayer-book , which a bookseller can procure for him fromVienna, and I believe he wil l find therein little or nothingto prevent him from being present in their congregationswit hout compromise on his part as a Christian .

1

Be side s the old edit ion of the Liturgy pri n t ed by Bomberg in Ven ice ,of whi ch I have made men t ion in a preceding chapt er, the 11 15 5 11 "

11 7 0

D’NWPT‘

I ” 1373; has be en frequen tly prin t ed , and the following edit ion s

are in the Brit ish Museum —On e prin t ed in Kale, in three quartovolume s , in the year 1 806 the typography is n ot clear, nor the

paper good . On e in Eupatoria , also of four quart o volume s , in 1 836 the

work is rough , but n e ither this nor the preceding edit ion bears any further

mark of carele ssn e ss . So lat e as 1 85 4 an edit ion for use in Russia was

pri n t ed in Vi enna ; the typography is excellen t , as becomes the Vienn ese

pre ss , and th e paper corresponds in goodn e ss . Here , again , are four

volumes in large octavo. On e page is occupied with prayers for the Emp eror of Russia and the empire , with the tran slat ion in to Russ in parallel


The Rev. Dr. Henderson, well known as an agent ofthe British and F oreign Bible Societ y, visited Lut z k, atown of Polish Russia, in the year 1 82 1 , and his reportof a service in the Karaite synagogue was un til veryrecently the only source of information on this point toEnglish readers .

The Doctor attended the service at Lu t z k on the Day

of Pentecost. He describes the synagogue as a squarewooden building situate in the ‘ back part of the town

,

capable of containing about two hundred persons, theslight material, small siz e, and meanness of the structureeither indicating poverty, or rude simplicity of taste, withindifference to architectural propriety. There must havebeen some special reasons to account for the meanness ofthe synagogue in this place . The entrance was at theeast side, where the door opened at once into the so-calledouter court, a small part of the scanty area appropriat edt o the women, and divided from the rest of the synagogueby a wooden partit ion. A chink,’ as he calls it, at sucha height from the floor that the women could peep through,allowed them some imperfect sight of what was going onwithin .

The interior, or court of the men , could be soon described. The first obj ect that me t the eye on entrancewas the Ark of the Covenant on the western wall, inthe centre, just Opposite the door. It is likened t o a cupboard behind a curtain— a long curtain hanging eightfeet from t op to bottom, and measuring about two feet

column s . That appears, however, to be a mere tran script of the prayersofl ered in th e Jewish synagogue s in gen eral, havi ng men t ion ofJud ah, and

also the name mmv, Wt h I am almost sure is not foun d elsewhere in the

Li turgi es in that form, and n ot the usual if». The se last are sumptuous

volume s, but not on e of the thre e impre ssion here men t ion ed is such as

would be prin ted for cheap sale . Ye t all the Karaite s are said to be able

to read, and i t would seem that in the synagogue they all use books .



The Rabbi wore a long robe, or cassock, of black silk,and an ample square veil, the usual grea t ta lith (5 11 ; who),covered his head, and fell nearly to his feet. Dr. Henderson observed that the prophecy of Joel quoted by St.Peter on the day of Pentecost was read in the Karaitecon gregation in that Pentecostal service, and asks if wemay not conclude, from the pertinacity w ith which thisancient sect adhered to their primitive institutions, thatthe same coincidence took place in the Apostolic age ;that, in the D ivine prescience, those who selected theHaphtarahs, or sect ions from the Prophets, to be read inthe synagogues, were directed to choose thi s passage fromJoel for the particular feast on which it was to receive it saccomplishment ; and that the Apostle Pet er, in quotingthe lesson for the day, had recourse to the most powerfulargument which he could possibly have used, in order toconvince a Jew of the D ivine nature of the transactionsexhibited on that stupendous occasion .

’

As this conjecture of Dr. Henderson has been sometimes quoted, and, at first sight, captivates one

’s under

standing,and might be hastily ventured in pleading with

a Jew,where every argument ought t o be well weighed

in justice to all parties, and in honour to Him whom wedesire to commend to the Jews as their Saviour and ours,I must say a word or two. On examining the Kale

referred to in Mat thew xxii i . 5 . But I would invit e the Jewi sh an t iquarianto con sider whe ther the older fashion is not that of the privat e members of

the Karait e Syn agogue . If the Jews had worn the talith as a ve il on the

head when at prayer, would St . Paul have said so absolut ely that ‘every

man , praying or prophe sying, hav ing his head covered , dishonoure th his

head .

’ ‘ A man ought not to cover his head .

’ ‘ Ifany

man se em to be con t en t ious, we have no such custom, n ei ther the churche s

of God’

? ( 1 Cor. xi . 4 , 7 , Certainly, the synagogue s in that day

were the congregat ion s , if any , that would be called e’

c na iou7 06 9 6 06,

in dist i nct ion from those Christ ian congregat ions, in which Gen t iles worsh ipped.

PRESENT STATE OF SYNAGOGUE—WORSHIP IN RUSSIA . 1 7 7

Liturgy, I find that it is n ot read as a Haphtarah in thatmorning service , although it is found there among severalother strictly appropriat e Scriptures, which make up oneof the most beautiful services that can be imagined apartfrom Christianity. The Haphtarahs were appointed inthe time ofAntiochus Epiphan e s, and it is not conceivablethat if this were appoint ed for the F east of Weeks itshould have been universally omitted without any obser

v ation from a strict Pharisee,from a scrupulous and di s

sentient Karait e , or from a wat chful Christ ian . Theomission certainly could not have been made in the dayof Justin Martyr, or he would have censured it in hisgreat controversy with Tryphon or, if it were still readin the synagogues on that day, he would almost as certa1 nly have mentioned such a circumstance, but he makesno allusion of the sort. 1 The Karaites would not havequoted the prophecy after St. Peter without also yieldingt o the Pentecostal evidence, and acceptin g the powerfulargument of the D ivine nature ofthose transactions whichwas really supplied when the promi se of the F ather wasfulfilled, and the wonders of that day convinced threethousand Jews, and all without any one hint from St.Luke that conviction had been in any degree aided bythe felicitous coincidence of a Haphtarah .

D r. Henderson, for a moment at least, thought that thesynagogue at Lut z k more nearly resembled a place ofprimitive Christian worship than the synagogues of any ofthe other principal sections of Judaism.

Nearly two hours were spent in repeating prayers andreading passages out ofthe Psalms and the Prophets, andi t is certain that the very special service for that morningcould n ot have been properly performed in any shortertime . It covers more than thirty full and compact quartopages .

1 Just . Mart ., Dial. Tryp h. cap . 87 .

N


At length they came to that part of the service whichis preparatory to the manifestation of the Law. This , infact, is an entirely distinct solemnity, and is appointed, inthe Liturgy before me , under a distinct direction that itmay be performed or not as shall be thought ri ght, and itis obvious that, to people in a country exposed to thevicissitudes of frequent war, and themselves liable to thedisturbance of persecution, such discretion was necessary .

It is called The Service of the Weeks.

’ It consisted,as he rightly say s , chiefly of prayers, offered with greatapparent earnestness, the whole congregation lifting uptheir hands, and raising their voices high, as they considerthe Law requires them to do .The Ark was then opened

,and the Roll of the Law

brought out with the utmost reverence, and placed endwi se on the Table of Testimony .

’ A crown of gold waslaid on the boss, or, as the Romans would say, the ambi

lie n s of the roll, and in the top of the crown sparkled aprecious stone of great brilliancy and exceeding p i i ce .

Small silver tablets were hung around the sacred obj ect.So did the worshippers in this humble tabernacle payhonour to THE LAW. Having for a moment regarded itwith apparently intense and fond admiration, they pressedforward to pay their homage through that visible pledgeof God ’s supreme authority

,as do the more favoured

subj ects of a king when they approach to signify theirloyal fealty and devotion by a kiss. This done, the costlyembroidered silks in which the roll was wrapped whenlaid wi thin the ark were permitted to be taken bythree boys, and carried on their extended arms in to

the court of the women ,’who also give their sign of

allegiance in a secondary sense by raising the costlywrappings to their eyes and kissing them,

as the men

had kissed the roll itself.

135: ‘rsummm i nc swim? 7 '

1 mm n i t/v5 pm as mum)



some more verses,concluding with Blessed be the Lord

God, and blessed be His holy Name for ever.’ The rest

of this lesson was read by members ofthe congregation,who were each in like manner summoned by the minist er ,with the words, ‘And thou, my brother, O Israelite, giveglory to the Law ; approach with reverence.

’

Having read to the commencement of Exodus xx ., thewhole congregation stood for some time in silence .Here the rubric di rects a peculiar observance . ‘And

then ,’ it says, ‘

thou sha lt say the whole Ten Command

men ts and the p eop le sha ll say the same , every on e ofthem, sen ten ce by sen ten ce , in the language of the coun try .

"

So instructed, the Rabbi recited the F irst Commandment, after whi ch the congregation repeat ed it in Tartar,word by word, and so t hey alternated, Rabbi and con

gregat ion , until the last word of the Tenth was solemnlypronounced. Then was read the concluding portion ofthe chapter.The minister n ow turned to a fine boy , about thirteen

y ears old, and addressed him thus : And thou, my son ,0 my map ht ir,

2 give glory to t he Law ; draw near toread the Haphtarah

,draw near wi th reverence The

whole congregation followed up the summons w ith onevoice Hear, my son, the instruction of thy father, andreceive my sayings, and the years of thy life shall bemany .

’ The boy then approached as he was bidden ,reverently, and, with amazing beauty and pathos, read inHebrew the pray er of Habakkuk the Prophet upon Shi

gion oth.

Then followed the recitation by the whole congregation of what Dr. Henderson understood to be a , long

7175 ne t: mommon 53: fl ew urmnun-mmay 5: i nsm '

Thi s word , as li t erally tran slat ed by Dr. He nderson , might be‘ d i s

misser,’

but t hat is not it s mean ing here .

"

19 135 73 is reader of the human,

the le sson from the Prophets.

PRESENT STATE OF SYNAGOGUE-WORSHIP IN RUSSIA . 1 8 1

metrical hymn . It was indeed long, and it was metrical— the six hundred and thirteen precept s

,positive and

negative, in verse . Short verses, it is true, but a longcomposition . A few moments followed in silence

, for

mental prayer.Meanwhile the Law was restored to it s place with greatsolemnity , and when the veil had fallen again beforet he Ark, the Rabbi raised his voice with inimitablesolemnity, and uttered the words of the great commandment : Hear, O Israel ; the LORD thy God is one LORD ;

’

or, as Dr. Henderson writes it, Jehovah thy Elohim i s

on e Jehovah .

’ Every breath was hushed. Every headwas bowed down, as if it were in holy fear, and prayeritself was lost in death-like sil ence .The service is evidently so ordered as to fill the day

for by this time , according to the rubric, The sun is

n ear to i ts going down . The congrega t ion ga ther them

se lves toge ther in the sy n agogue , a nd a re read ing in the

Book of Ruth, and this is the p refa ce to i t,— And thou

Bethlehem Ephratah , &c .

’

So they closed the day, reading in silence until thesun had sunk into the west, when the congregationslowly withdrew, the women having gone before . Themen and boys put on their shoes in the outer courtwhere they had left them, and proceeded homewardswith great decorum.

1 Aided by the same Liturgy thatserved the Doctor to refresh his memory, as a comparisonof the two books assures me he must have done . I have

presumed slightly to revise and t o enlarge considerably.

We will n ow proceed to gather some concurrent informat ion from the pen of a German, already quoted, who foll owed our countryman aft er an interval of twenty years .M . Kohl , who visited Kale in the Crimea in 1 84 1

Henderson’

s BiblicalResearches in Russia, chap . xiv.


attended the principal synagogue in the Karaite colonyand witnessed a service on on e of their great festivals .

Unlike his reverend predecessor at Lut z k, he watchedthe congregation rather than the worship, scanning everyobj ect with the eye of an educated and keenly observanttraveller. He describes the interior of this building as

very like that of a mosque, except that it has a galleryfor women, which a mosque has not. The area beyondthe gallery was

’

quite clear of seats, and well carpeted.

The congregation had a Tartar-like appearance in physiogn omy as well as in costume, so much so that hesuspected a mixture of Tartar blood and Tartar habits . 1

All entered barefoot. They kept the foot when theywent into the house of God .

Either M . Kohl was in a very genial mood, or theCrimean Karaites are a

’

very pleasant people, dwellinghappily in that favoured settlement. He says that they

,

like the Turks and Tartars, have an unbounded affectionfor their children, whom they are always kissing andcaressing, playing w ith them even in the synagogue .The merry little creatures semed to be amusing themselves right well on the pretty parti-coloured carpet, orthey lay with their heads in their fathers’ bosoms, coaxing them. Somet imes a father, laying aside his book,drew the little fellow closer to him with a smile, chidhim for n ot being so quiet as he should be, and thencomforted the young transgressor with many kisses.Little fondlings, having patiently fasted for eighteenhours, fell asleep with weariness and hunger in theirfathers’ bosoms, who went on reading perseveringly overtheir children ’s heads . As the sun declined towards the

Th is is n ot unlikely . It will be remembered howKarait e writers com

men t on the horror of the old Phar1 se es at marriages wi th Gen t ile women,

or women defiled by the socie ty of Gen t iles , and quot e again st them the

example ofMoses and others who married Gen t ile women .



great God muttered the poor old woman , then He willhave to give me much Then , I asked, will He givepeace and friendship to abide between you Jews and theKaraites ? ”

To this quest ion of mine they neither ofthem answered a word, ungracious beings that theyare I 1

This li ttl e tale is told so artistically that on e mightthin k it made for the occasion , but it is full of nature,and serves well t o convey to the reader the impressionreceived in the writer ’s mind after intercourse with bothclasses ofJews in Russia.The Karaites are comparatively wealthy, at least, andso cont ented in their prosperity as willingly t o remainwhere they are . They expect the Messiah . They expectHim daily. They think He may come any day. So welloffare they as almost to fancy that He is there already. TheTalmudists, on the contrary, are but poor, far unlike theirwealthy brethren in many other countries, and thereforethey would gladly h0pe if they cou ld, but they can hopen o longer. Some of them,

like the rest of the world, arecareless through prosperity, and others are stupefied andhardened through adversity . Nothing but the t rue advent of the Saviour, that advent which brings Him nearwith the demonstrat ion and power of the Holy Ghost,can possibly bring tenderness of conscience into theirbosoms

,and impart to any of them steadfast peace, un

failing hope, and faith t riumphant over all the ills of life .The F rench report s that were collected in 1 8 5 5 add alittle t o our stock of information . They tell us that theCrimean Karaites observe the thirteen rules of in t erpret at ion laid down by Rabbi Ishmael early in the secondcentury, and a comparison of these rules, which are easyt o be found, with the principles or canons of interpretation

Re isen i n Sudrussenland von J . C . Kohl. Dresden und Le ip z ig, 1 84 1 .

Z we iter The il. Nachtragliche s uber d ie Kara 1 ten .

PRESENT STATE OF SYNAGOGUE—WORSHIP IN RUSS IA . 1 85

laid down by Rabbi Aaron in his Crown of the Law,

’

which will be quoted in another chapter, confirms thestatement. But while the Karaites apply these rules —or

p rofess to apply them— to the whole code of Mosaic laws,without except ing any part of that code, do n ot otherJews acknowledge that they expound only the grea test

p art of the precepts of the Levitical Law by means of

these rules These Karaites also agree with theRabban it e s in practising the way of killing mea t, manner, sothat n o blood remains in it, and even t each it to theirchildren . The women are held exempt from observingsuch portions of the Law as only mention men or son s.

They do not compel married women to shave their heads,whi ch they think it would be wrong to do, agreeing withSt. Paul that ‘ it is a shame for a woman to be shorn orshaven ,

’ and that ‘ lon g hair is a glory t o her,’ and also

agreeing with the Law of Moses. Their sermons are inTartar. Their prayers are lon g, but they do n ot sing.

The minister begins the service if there are three personspresent, n ot waiting for ten, as do the Rabban ites ; an d

here, again, they agree with a gracious saying of our

Lord Himself,who promised His presence and blessing

even t o two or three gathered together in His name .They pray in the synagogue twice a day, n ot three times,like the others. It is said— but this does not agree withD r. Henderson ’s account, nor is it likely t o be true— thatthey do not wear the fringes in the synagogue, but havea strip of cloth hung up there, on which they look whenrecit ing the words of the Shema. It is also said thatthey name their children at birth, whether sons ordaughters, and do not wait for circumcision , which theyperform on their boy s when eight days old. In this part icular they have deteriorated. The Jewish practice

,

See David Levi’s Notes and Illustrat ions on the Sp an ish and Portuguese

Form ofPrayers . London , A.M. 5 5 49 , page 4.


which we follow in respect to baptism, was to associatethe naming with a sacred rite.They have a society, say the reporters, called ‘ theHoly Society,

’ which has care of all burials, and sees thatthey do not take place until eighteen or twenty daysafter death, a delay which appears incredible . They saythat when the time for burial arrives the corpse is laidon a bier, and so carried to the cemetery, men only following. The procession moves on slowly, in profoundsilence, except when silence is broken by the chanting orintoning a psalm of prayer. On reaching the cemeterythey lay the corpse in the grave on its back, with thehead towards the north, and feet to the south . A littledust, brought from the Holy Land by some pilgrim, islaid on the closed eyelids. The grave is fi lled with earth,and the followers disperse . For a week friends pay dailyvisits of condolence to the family, with whom they offerprayer. As in the time of the Maccabees, they pray forthe soul s of the departed ; and here they are n ot unfairlyt aunt ed with retaining a superstition which has no sanctionwhatever in the Law of Moses .



by the strict rules of their religion from intimate relationwith even other Jews, theymust have congregated everywhere in sufficient numbers t o carry on a kind of domesticcommerce among themselves, and t o have their ownsynagogues .Behind the town, in a beautiful valley or depressedplain, sheltered by surrounding hills, is the resting-placeof their dead ; an ancien t cemetery, with tombstoneshaving inscriptions legible after exposure t o the weatherof that fitful and tempestuous climate during, as theysaid

,five hundred years ; but lat er information proves

that that date was altogether underrated, and that inscript ion s were to be found, whether above ground or

buried, dated years or more before the Doctor’svisit. They called that cemetery the Valley of Jehoshaphat . Kale still enjoyed privileges granted by the Khanof the Crimea, Hadji Selim Ghere i , about the middle of

the eighteent h century, in consequence of the cure of hissister, who was recovered from a dangerous illness by thesuccessful treatment of on e of their physician s . Byvirtue of this grant, the gates of the city and fort wereclosed on the Sabbath-days, that is t o say ,

'

from sunseton Friday to sunset on Saturday

,in strict conformity

with the ordinance ofNehemiah (xiii . In all respect sthey obeyed the D ivine injunction , conveyed in the wordsof Isaiah ( lviii. 1 3, and were rewarded with a literalfulfilment of the promise , if no more : If thou turnaway thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasureon My holy day ; then shalt thou delight thyself inthe Lord ; and I will cause thee t o ride upon the highplaces of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of

Jacob thy father.’ In their practical recognition of the

sanct ity of the Sabbatic institution,they were described

by this visitor as very superior to the Russian Jews ingeneral, who convert the day into a season of mere

PRESENT STATE OF SOME KARAITE SETTLEMENTS,ETC . 1 89

sensuous delight, with feasting and conviviality. Thefavourable impression Dr. Henderson received of themduring his tour in Russia cannot be so well communicatedto the reader in any other words than his own, which Icopy wi thout the slightest alterationThe Karait es are free from many of the superstitions

to be found among the Jews in general, such as thetransmigration of souls, the power of tali smans, &c . and

,

as might naturally be expected from their principles, thestandard and tone of morals which their general deportment exhibit s i s qui te of a different stamp from that ofthe Rabban ists. In their persons they are tidy ; theirdomest ic di scipline and arrangements are correct and exemplary , and their dealings with others are characterisedby probity and integrity. It i s one of their favouritemaxims that those things which a man is n ot willing toreceive himself, it is not right for him to do to his brethren— a maxim strictly corresponding with Matt. vii. 1 2 .

How far the Karait es act up t o this principle may beascertained by the fact that they are universally respectedby all who know them and I never yet heard any personspeak ill of them, except he was a bigoted adherent of

the Talmud . In the south of Russia, where they arebest known, their conduct is proverbial, and I cannotplace it in a st ronger light than by recording the tes t imony borne t o i t by a Polish gentleman in Dubno, whoinformed me that, while the other Jews resident in Lut z kare constantly embroiled in suit s at law, and require theutmost vigilance on the part of the police, there is not asingle inst ance of prosecut ion recorded against the Karaitesfor th e space of several hundred years, during which theyhave been set tled in that place .

In the time of R. Benj amin there existed betweenthem and the Rabban ist s in Constantinople a lit eral wallof separation (me nu), and I was struck, when visiting


them at Lut z k, to find that they lived in a separatequarter of the town, altogether distinct from the otherJews

,who never spoke Of them without contumely and

they even declared that, if they saw a Christian in dangerof being drowned, it would be their duty to make abridge of the Karaite in order to rescue him. In short

,

they carry their enmity to such a pitch that they will notreceive a Karaite into their communion until he has prev iously made a profession of the Mohammedan or Christian faith. The Karaites, on the contrary, though theyexecrate the traditions of the Rabban ist s, never speak oftheir persons with contempt, but commonly give them thefraternal appellation mum 1mm, our brothers the Rab

ba n im.

’ 1

During the last war with Russia,when the combined

forces of Turkey, England, and F rance were in the

Crimea, and some Jews in Paris obtained the friendlyassistance of the F rench military authorit ies for instituting inquiries con cerning the state of their Karaitebrethren in that peninsula, their chief attention wasdirected to the ancient city of Djufut -Kale, then suf

fe ring much in consequence of the war. The 2 5 0 familieswere reduced to 1 00, if, indeed, the 300 Old men ,

widows,

and children that remained after the able-bodied menand younger women had fled could be clustered into the

shape of families . There were only two principal personsremaining. One was Benjamin Aga, Prince of theKaraites

,who had his residence there, and had formerly

received the Emperor Joseph ofAustria and the EmperorAlexander I . of Russia. The o ther was Rabbi Beym,

who sust ained the twofold dignity of civil governor andChief Rabbi, being about forty-five years of age , andwell educated, speaking Hebrew and German besides his

Henderson’

s Biblical Researches in Russia, &c., chap . xiv.


HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS.

matters to the Cap z ta in e d’eta t maj or, P errot in , which

was'

forwarded to M. Cahen, editor of the Archives

Isra eli tes, and inserted in a number of that periodical ofthe year 1 8 5 6 , says that the date on this tomb is A.M. 5 76 1 ,

or A.D . 766 . If this inscription can be examined,and

with its date be verified, it will lend an invaluable confi rmat ion to the statements contained in the Book of

Cho z ri concerning the Karaites then dwelling in Chozar.Beneath the ark in the synagog ue, which is a building

of high antiquity, there had been found a parchment.roll of the Prophets, supposed to be at least a thousandyears old ; but it was sent to the Antiquarian Society ofOdessa, and deposited in their library, where we musthope that it will be guarded wi th sacred care . 1 In agespast there were other synagogues in the Crimean hills .and others in the plains, respectively called the highsynagogues and the low. One in Kalé itself was knownas the Chozar synagogue, n o doubt because it belongedt o those very Karaites of whom honourable mention ismade in the book already quoted in these pages. Themembers of that con gregation were benefactors to theancient synagogue now visited, as appears by the sub

scription to a manuscript of the Pentateuch : ‘ This Law

is comp le te a nd j us t .2 It has been se t ap art for the sy na

gogue by the sons of the Soc ie ty of Solcha t, by the son s ofthe Soc ie ty of Choz a r, and by the sons of the Low Soc ie ty ,

’

85 0 . &c .

Close by the synagogue is another building , called theHoly House, used as a house Of prayer. It serves toreceive the surplus congregation when the synagogue isoverfilled, and it is also used for meetings t o deliberate

I t i s inde ed so to be hoped . But a facsimile of the R0 11 , taken

skilfully, would be an imperial gift to the learn ed ofthe whole world, of

in e st imable value .

2 That is to say , accurat ely writ t en .

PRESENT STATE OF SOME KARAITE SETTLEMENTS, ETC. 1 9 3

on questions relating to administration of the Law of

Moses,or on other matters of religion. In any place

where there is no such Holy House, the peristyle, orcourt of the synagogue , is used for this purpose .This leads to the mention of Eupatoria. A description

of a Karait e synagogue in that city, said to have beenfounded in the eleventh century by a lineal descendant ofAhnan, is quoted from the Mon iteur of Jan . 28 , 1 85 5 .

It has a spacious Open court, surrounded with a coveredgallery of stone, garnished with inscriptions and paintingsby Byzantine artists, and in the centre is a monument ofwhite marble, erected by the Emperor Nicholas of Russiato the memory ofhis brother Alexander. At the furtherend of this gallery is a small court, of which t he wall sare faced with stone covered with inscriptions andpaintings. Into one side of this court opens the men ’ssynagogue , and into th e other the women

’s, both beingrich . The relic which , above everything else, formerlydistinguished this building was a Bible therein deposited.

By Bible we are probably t o understand a copy of theF ive Books Of Moses. They say that it is a manuscriptof the eighth century, and belon ged to Ahnan himself.It is an obj ect of veneration to the Israelites. Most ofthe wealthy Jewish families had left the city on the comd

men cemen t of hostilities with Turkey but some Jewsin the F rench army, who visited the synagogue , regardedit as an evidence of the importance of the Karaite port ionof the population, while the choice of i t s stately galleryfor the erection of an Imperialmonument proves that theyhave been favoured, not only by the native Khans of theCrimea, but by the Czars and Court of Russia .When the armies of the Empress Katharine first cameinto that part of the Russian dominions, all the wealth andcommerce of the country was in the hands of the Karaites,who declared for the Russians, and found them great

0


resources. F rom that t ime their prosperity has con

stan tly augmented.

After the synagogue, the Mon iteur correspondentmentions the Karaite cemetery of Eupatoria, and calls itthe finest Israelite cemetery in the whole world. It contains

,he says, a countless multitude of monolith tombs

of marble, granite, or other hard stone, of monumentalform,

and covered with very curious inscriptions. Amongthe epitaphs is one that records the death of a skilful andpatient scribe, who departed this life at the age of nearlya hundred years, towards the close of the sixteenthcentury. A parchment roll, in length about one kilometre, covered w ith the Holy Scripture of the entire O ldTestament, written with exquisite accuracy and beauty,was the work of his life, and remains here to testify hislove of the one Book which the Karaites deem sufficientfor a right understanding of the Law of God.The time for such laborious caligraphy must now bepast ; for, except synagogue-rolls, and perhaps not evenexcepting them, the press can supply Jew or Gentile withanything he wishes to read. But for nearly 400 yearsafter the introduction of printing into Europe, the Karaiteshad no means

'

ofprinting a religious book, or next to none.Partly from Oriental prejudice , and partly from poverty,they depended on scribes for the very little reading thatwas known among them. Or, when urged by necessity,they employed a Chr ist ian printer, fearing to entrust theJewish compositors who laboured at the Hebrew pressesto set up type for them, lest in ignorance or ill-will theyshould spoil the work . At length, however, there weresome symptoms of intellectual awakening, and thenprinting was sure to follow.

Early in the present century some of them added theirnames t o the list of authors . Such were Isaac, son ofSolomon, physician, mathematician, and Rabbi in Kale ;Joseph Solomon, son of Moses in Jerusalem, a Rabbi in



Abraham F irkowi tsch, then in the vigour of his earliermanhood, being resident there, was the mainspring ofthe new movement. He undert ook to carry out theplan of printing some works of established name andliterary value, such as the ‘Addere th of ElijahBat schiat ski,

and the Mibkhar’ of Aaron, son of Joseph.

‘vVe althy

Karaites, seeing that the work would be in good hands,contributed large sums of money to the erection of asuitable building, with what our tradesmen would calla sufficient plant.’ They proved that, amidst the rudeness and apparent poverty of that region, there wasmuch latent intelligence, and that the enterprise, hithertoexercised in commerce , could also be engaged in art.They were moreover persuaded that, under suffi cientguarantees, the proj ected e stablishment would be sus

t ain ed with public confidence, and become remunerative to its conductors .

Pecuniary contributions flowed in freely from Eupa

toria and the neighbourhood, from Cherson, Kale, andother places in the Crimea . Help also came, but on asmaller scale, from Constant inople, Kafa, Lut z k , andJorok . The contributors, for the most part, subscribedtheir names as ‘ friends ’ or ‘ benefactors to the holywork .

’ It was not a mere feat of pride,but it became a

work of religion and patriotism too, for although thecontributors were members of a boundless dispersion, andof an obscure people who had but one little castle-cityon a hill-top in the wilderness that they could boast of

calling their own , they felt n ow as if they had discovereda unit ing link— had found almost a country for themselves.F rom the t ime that they first set about their work inEupatoria, the printers were n ever idle . The books firstprinted were chiefly religious, if not altogether so, andunless the subscriptions of benefa ctors and friends weremerely formal , which is not to be suspected, unless their

PRESENT STATE OF SOME KARAITE SETTLEMENTS,ETC. 1 9 1

professions were insincere, their bounty illusory, andtheir lavishment of gold reckless extravagance

,all which

i s incredible , there was a fresh awakening of religioussentiment, and right means were taken to diffuse widely,among their brethren of both ri tes, a more sound principleof sacred study. lHaving seen the press fairly established in the Crimea,under the protection of the Russian Government, F irkowitsch found that yet another great work remained forhim t o accomplish . He had been educated in Eupatoria,an d there enjoyed the use of the manuscript librarybelonging to the Karaite congregation ; but while heexperienced the de light and advantage of access to thebooks, he also became sensible of having but a scantsupply. He read of many works which his authorsmentioned, and which he, too, would fain have studied ;but they were far away beyond reach, most ofthem beyond knowledge . Impelled by

‘

his own thirstfor learning, and yet more powerfully moved by a nobledesire t o revive Hebrew literature for the benefit of hisbrethren

,he travelled into many distant countries, and

sought out the scat tered Karaite communities in Turkey,Egypt

,Syria an d Pale st in e , Persia and the Caucasus,

n ot shunning any danger or privation, but encouraged bygen eral sympathy, the sympathy n ot of Karaites only

,

but ofRabban i t es as well, as ofJews who, rememberingtheir common lineage, gave him fraternal welcome andungrudging help in the prosecution of his labours in afield hitherto untrodden .

Firkowitsch soon me t with success exceeding all hishopes. He penetrated into the very depths of Asiaticwildernesses, searching wherever he might hope to finda fragment of Karaite antiquity , even in the smallest

Furst, Gesclz . Kar. x. 1 0—1 3.


s ettlements of his long-neglected brethren ; and when hefound those brethren stup efi ed with hereditary, yet involuntary ignorance, he rested n ot until he had arousedthem to at least a consciousness of ignorance, if he couldnot altogether drag them out of the in t ellec tualt orpiditywhich is inseparable from the solitude and isolation of

the like small societies . He made them hear,if it was

but for once, something about the history and the ancientliterature of their own people . Hearing of him what hecame seeking after, many employed themselves as helpersin the search. F rom all corners of the far-distant Easthe gathered Rolls of the Law, and other manuscript sthat for ages were not imagined to exist, having ceasedto be legible even to their possessors . Entire books or

mutilated manuscripts were brought out of hiding-placespreviously unexplored ; some of high antiquity, and inexcellent preservation ; others faded, and rotting intattered fragments . All were greedily packed up t o

gether to be deciphered, if that were possible, at leisure .Some he bought, some were freely given to him inadmiration of his enthusiast ic devotedness to the welfareof the Karaite congregations, now to be informed of

their heaven-ennobled ancestry, and of the faith and thelearning which distinguished many of their fathers, andmight be now recovered for themselves, even as a richinheritance, secretly held for them by an unseen power,to be in reversion theirs .His keen eye discovered and deciphered inscriptions

in broken or abraded marbles, that the showers and frostsof ages had nearly obliterated. In Jerusalem, in acellar, under the old Karaite synagogue, he foundprecious manuscripts. At Gura, near D amascus, wherethe Karaites were dwelling

,as u sual, in a separate com

munity, but where also, not as usual, war and persecutionhad somewhat spared them, and a portion of their ancient



CHAPTER XVIII .

RABBI AARON, son or E L IJ AH .

‘

H is Exp os it ion ofKara ite Pr in cip les.

LET it not be thought that in borrowing an account ofthe great reverence paid to the Book of the Law in thesynagogue at Lut z k, I wish to convey the idea that theTalmudist Jews do not pay the like reverence to thesame sacred obj ect, for that they do, and perhaps itwould be difficult to discover any difference between thesolemnities of some Karaite and some Talmudist con

gregat ion s on occasion of the manifestation of the Law.

A Christian, however, who has not had the opportunityofmaking actual comparison, may be permitted to believethat while the Jew, in general , pays a more superstitioushonour to the parchment and the writing on it, theKaraite, in particular, dwells more devotedly on theholiness of the Law itself, as it is certain that, on otheroccasions, he insists on it more strenuously, and pursuesa method of rational exposition of the text which is quiteincompatible with superstitious veneration of anymaterialobj ect.The differences in faith, ritual, an d custom I have

marked in preceding chapters, and w ill endeavour tofinish my comparative survey by presenting an expositionof the principles of Karaite interpretation of the Law.

Aaron the son of Elij ah i s to be dist inguished from Aaron the son of

Joseph, also a Karai te Rabbi and an author, but the elder by a gen erat ion .

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJAH. 20 1

F or greater certainty, and unquestionably with greaterease, after a brief description of the author and his work,I will borrow the st atements of Rabbi Aaron himself,1 instead ofattempting to elaborate any statement ofmy own .

This Rabbi was regarded amongst the Jews as thegreat religious philosopher of his age . He was born inCairo about the year 1 300, and there educated near thethrone of the Karaite Patriarchate, and at the centre ofKaraite learning in Egypt. Wh en about thirty yearsold he went to Nicomedia, where he wrote many important works, and received the surname of Nicomedi an .

He is universally accepted as a first authority. Hewrote his Commentary on the Pentateuch about theyear 1 362 , and entitled it Crown of the Law.

’ ProfessorKosegart en , of the Un iversity of Jena, extracted someportions of it from a manuscript in the library of hisuniversity, collated with another copy, and published itw ith a Latin version and learned notes . Rabbi Aaron,although a Karaite of uncompromising sincerity, was nobigot

,and scrupled not to borrow his title from the

Talmud, or rather from the Mishna, where we read howRibbi Simeon said : There are three crowns— the crownof the Law, the crown of the priesthood, and the crownof the kingdom.

’ 2 The Gemara unfolds the idea beaut ifully by observing on this text that these three degree sof goodness were granted to the people of Israel in thebeginning— namely, the Priesthood, the Kingdom, andthe Law. The priesthood fell to Aaron, and the Kingdom to D avid, but the crown of the Law rests uponevery one who chooses to crown himself therewith .

’

F rom the pen of a Talmudist, the title of this book

I/ibri Corona; Legis ; id est Commen tarn i n Pen tateuclzum Karait ici ab

Aborano ben Elihu conscrip t i , aliquot part iculas edid it argue Lat ina verti t .

G . L . Kosegart en : Jenae , 1 824.

2 Cap i ta Patrum, iv. 1 3.


would probably be made to mean traditional theology,

but from that of a Scripturist it could only be themmm3, Crown of the Law,

’ which is a crown to himthat keeps God’s Law. Rabbi Aaron limits its application t o the Law itself, as written by Moses, and strenu

ously withholds it from even the most remote relation tothat body oftraditions which the Rabban it e s untruly saywas delivered by the Lord to Moses, by Moses to Aaronthe High Priest, by Moses and Aaron to Eliezer andIthamar, by these to the seventy elders, and from theelders conveyed down to us by an unbroken chain ofmasters continued even to this present day .

Rabbi Aaron was a close reasoner,profoundly versed

in the grammar of his own language as preserved in theOld Testament, and as written by the Rabbis of theEast, a master of Arabic, and conversant with thephilosophy of the Alexandrian schools . He was familiarwith Aristotle and Plato, often praising the latter, and, inspite of his rigid literalism, was conscious of the poeticspirit that breathes in the Oriental imagery. His C ommentary is gently controversial, and, although the pageat first glance threatens to be tediously minute in verbalcriticism, the reader falls under the influence of anearnestly sincere intention which pervades every line,and is translucent through the technicalities of grammar,and the severity of metaphysics . He writes for the instruction of his readers

, whom he ever sees before him.

Solicitous to impart clear information concerning hisown faith

,and the faith of his fathers, he declares in

plain terms against the errors of both Jew and pagan.

éfiaiii’

éis133;

F irst of all, he pronounces against an old andSadducees. widely prevalent notion that the world hasbeen from eternity, and professes his belief that God isthe Author of all existence . Thus he gives a formaltestimony to prove that, being a Karaite, he is not what



image of God. L et us now follow him as he definesthe ground of controversy between the advocates of Talmudism and the believers in the single and supremeauthority of Holy Scripture . The translat ion shall be asclose as our English idiom will allow.

It came to pass that the children of Israel did evil inthe sight of the Lord. Then did the wisdom of the wise

Beg in n in gsmen perish, and the understanding of the prudent

“m m" failed. They transgressed the Law ; theychan ged the statutes ; they made the ancient covenant ofnone effect ; they forgat the Rock, even God their Re

deemer. Therefore the Lord rooted them out of theirland, and cast them into lands that were not their own inany of the places of their captivity. There were theyforgetful of His Law , and no longer understood Hiscounsels ; but the people of Israel perished for lack ofkn owledge, and the commandments of His Law and themysteries thereof were hidden from them. Vision isC ouse now sealed . Prophet and judge are now out

qu

e

e

frfii-S

.

Of

off. Revelations are no more accust omed. Theeyes of the learned are dim when they try to search outthe meaning of the Law. Truth fails, and dissensionstrengthens more and more until a multitude of doubtfuland conflicting interpretations are heaped up on a singleword. So do they separate into many ways , one sayingthis thing and another that, wandering far from the pathof truth, and forsaking them that follow it.

At first they divided into two parties, each one fardistant from the other.Thefi rst party consists of those who delight in all the

words that are written in the Law, just as they hear them ;

Th e simplebut to the princes of the people this appears a

W 5 “ great sin , and a confirmed rebellion . Some ofthose who thus follow the literal sense as their own judgment mav determine, seem to be in the right at first, but

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJAH. 205

when the proof has to be established for them by one whomaintains the literal sense strictly, then they are found t obe of a different spirit.The se cond party consists of those who speak accord

ing t o their own tradition . As for them, we perceivethat God is pre sent in their mouths, indeed, but Th e way of

far distant from their thought s . Even while “ad‘twn '

they take the words altogether in their literal meaning, without parable or figure, they learn their religiononly from the commandments ofmen . Hence it comes t opass that in their discordant interpretat ions they all missthe mark, go far astray from the faith and from the in t ention of the Scriptures. Setting at n ought the art of inter

pre tat ion and the rules of grammar, they tread in thebypaths of t heir own private interpretation of the prec ept s of God

’s Law . Resting in their own particulartradi tions, they n ow add texts, and now take texts away,but their ears are never satisfied with hearing. Thenthere arises great contention concerning God’s commandments between the masters of tradition and the mastersof the text. The masters of the t ext follow the wordsaccording t o their grammatical form and their collectivemeaning. The others cling to their t radition, with thisvoice of delusion ever sounding in their ears “A dec is ion

of Moses from S ina i .”But that voice speaks a word

which the Lord has never spoken .

Some, when a passage has to be determined by theirjudgment, and the literal sense offends them, set it downat once as figurative . Some give their assent to theteaching of strangers, and affirm as art icle s of beliefopinions that are contrary to the Law, and these Opinionsthey hold stubbornly, until, at length, you may hear themendeavouring to enforce some heathen doctrine as if itwere a sacred truth, and doing so as if it were withthe sanction of the Law of God itself. But affliction


shall not rise up the second time. (Nahum i . Suchpersons shall b e punished at once, without any necessityfor a second stroke .Whatever passage they see in Scripture that contra

di cts their own decision, they at once assert that the Lawreally speaks in their own sense, and w ith but apparentadaptation to the understanding of the vulgar, who takeit in another sense . But I find it said concerning peopleofthi s kind, Behold, I will plead with thee, because thousayest, I have not sinned. (Jer. 1 1 . Thus do theleaders of these people cause them to err, and they whoare l ed by them perish, and of this poor self-sown sect,whose hearts are full of the vain thoughts that springup within themselves, every one goes out of the way ; ande ven when there is no need to go beyond the literal sense,they do go astray every one of them, just as his fancyleads him,

and they propagate their lies and spread theirinsolence by way Of parable and flourishing of words .Even so do the ploughers plough in vain, and make longthe furrows, speaking against the Lord in the very wordsthat were spoken by the mouth of the Almighty . SO do

they abuse the very commandments and writings of thatLaw which gives good understanding t o them that keep it.It was thus that the children of Israel did thin gs thatwere not right against the Lord their God, and their waywas evil

,and they darkened the honour of the Law, Ob

scured its glory, and quenched i t s light. Yet is itse xcellence n ow manifest, and the knowledge of true faiththerein is altogether lovely, for every sentence writ ten inthe book of the Law is immovably certain, and instructsu s in some of the established principles of our faith .

Every commandment is profitable to them that receive i t ,and gives them a good understanding. Pleasant words ‘

are as a honeycomb, to give them peace, with the rewardof eternal life, when their soul shall come into the hand of



Now to return . R . Aaron continues thus‘ I perceive that the intention of the Law is directedto two Objects : one is the benefi t of the body, and theother is the benefit of the soul , and these are closely relatedIn t en t ion of to each other. The Law of God benefits thethe Law ' soul because it comprehends all doctrines

,and

contains all that wisdom which imparts perfection to thesoul, and puts far away all doctrine that would promotefalsehood by concealing truth. It benefits the body bygiving it dignity through habits of sobri ety and selfcontrol, putting away all dishonesty . There is a virtuein every sentence of God’s written Law, in every precepttending to the fulfilment thereof, that also tends to theperfection both of soul and body. All contributes tothe same end

,to perfect instruction in the same truth,

and to fear of the same God ; and therefore, while thesethings are evidently reasonable, and profitable too,inasmuch as from them we have our hope and expectation, it is not fitting for us to turn aside out of the straightway, either to the right hand or to the left.Besides this, the examples of

’

history and the reasonsof the commandment are closely united and interwovenTm

‘

mand in the Law, with the principle of the D ivineFa1 °h un i t ed ° Unity and the foundations of the F aith . For

it is the Lord that gave it, and from His mouth proc e ed knowledge and understanding. In every place,therefore, where we have to teach by the testimony ofthe Holy' Scriptures, there let us abide firmly by thetruth of their united evidence, and there let us searchthe Scripture itself

,

’ —that is to say, all the writings ofthe Old Testament that follow the five Books of Moses,as that Scripture is sufficient to explain the Law accordingto its simple meaning, and let us beware of the mastersof riddles and parables

, so that we utter no impietyagainst the Lord .

’

This condemn ation of riddles and p arables entirely

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJAH. 209

harmonises with a sentence of our Lord : ‘ Unto you,

’

the disciples, ‘ it is given to know the mysteries of thekingdom of God , but to others in parables,

’ the intentionof their masters being that seeing they might not see ,and hearing they might not understand. ’ (Luke vii i. IO.)Q uite contrary t o a. common principle of Karaism andthe New Testament is the doctrine of the Rabban ites, asi t is given by Maimonides in his preface to the Mishnah

,

where he tells of a certain learned man who refused tote ach the sublime science of mysticism (madseh mercabah)to some person who had consented to teach him n aturalscience (madseh bereshith), because he thought himunworthy to ascend the chariot of such exalted wisdom.

He kept i t , sweet as it was to his own taste, like honeyand milk under his tongue (Song of Solomon iv.according to the teaching of the Rabbis, who insistthat this kind of wisdom is t oo precious to be taught inplain language, either in writing or by word of mouth .

Such mysteries, they say, are hidden in the Bible underwords too hard to be understood except by special revelation

,for which, say they, D avid prayed when he

besought the Lord t o open his eyes t hat he might seewondrous thin gs out of the Law.

‘And when the Lorddiscovers t o any one out of the Law that which it mayplease Him to reveal, the person so enlightened mustconceal his knowledge, or at the most, hint it only inobscure words to other person s of superior intellect. ’

F or this they quote a proverb of Solomon, and Maimon ides enforces the reserve because, as he insists, thecommon people can only be taught by riddles andparables, that so the teaching may be given in commonto women, chi ldren, and infants, who may possibly cometo discern the meaning at some future time, if they everget sense enough to understand parables . ’ How differentthe sentiment of our Lord’s thanksgiving : I thank thee,

P


0 F ather, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hasthidden these things from the wise and prudent

,and

revealed them unto babes . ’ So in those better times towhich Aaron the Karaite now refers .

‘And behold, our wise men—on whom b e peace !sought out the right way, abiding by that which is written

down in the Book '

of Truth, and wi th closeinvestigation and research they were drawn

after the words of prophecy, and, by means of faithfulinterpretation, they attained to wondrous knowledge .Whenever they found it necessary to quote Scripture inany other than its exact literal meaning, they did itplainly, and, being content with what they knew, theyrestored the Scripture t o its own place inviolate. Withpowerful arguments they overcame those who disputedwith them, and worsted them in every encounter, and ifever they found themselves wandering into wild opinionsthrough defect of knowledge, they quickly recoveredthe right path again . We must therefore judge of themwi th equity, as ofmen who never pretended to go beyondthe measure of their understanding. The Lord will rewardthem fully, and they shall be accounted worthy to enjoysalvation and rest. ’

They did not evade the charge of va ria t ions, which ,however

,their antagonists pressed on them with malig

n ant exaggeration, as do ours press on us, ridiculouslymultiplying tenfold the number of our sects, and wilfullyignoring the extent and sincerity of our agreement, inspite ofdifferences.But as regards the precepts contain ed in the Law,

which gladdens the heart and enlightens the eyes,— some ofthem are ra t iona l require reflec t ion (minwnn),some are lega l ( 11mm), and subj ect t o controversy .

The rational precepts have relation either t o reason or

Rat ion alto law. These declare at the same time what is

“mews prescribed and what is forbidden .

Simp licity .


'2 1 2 HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

t raditionary question s be settled by a word not written,

while one generation goeth and another generationc ometh, while knowledge passeth away, and things arealtered as chance may be, and the very words of traditionare likely to be all forgotten But that which is writtencannot possibly pass away.Now the questions debated between us and the Rab

ban i t es, on account of their traditions concerning the Law,

form the subj ect of three very distinct questions.They say that there were some commandments spoken

to Moses, besides what were written, that he might deFirs, ques ,

liver them orally again ; and that, after delivery“0m by the lips Of Moses, they were to be orallytransmitted from generation to generation

,until a time

should come when they would see fi t to write them intheir books. Now we must press one enquiry —How didHe who gave the Law see fit to deliver some of the commands in writing, and some by t radition, telling the writerof the first that the others must not be seen, while, thisnotwithstanding, they must be obeyed ? And yet Gods aid to Joshua, This book of the Law shall not departout of thymouth, but thou must meditate therein day andn ight, that thou mayest Observe to do all that is writtentherein .

” But if we may depend upon traditions Oncedelivered, what need have we of prophet or of seer ? Yetit is said, All that is written in the book of this Law.

”

Since , then, it is so said, we do not believe that there isany commandment to be delivered by tradition that is notalready written in the book of the Law.

1

They say that what is written in the Law requires tob e explained by help of oral tradition . But this will n ot

Se condhold good

,for the writing constantly agrees with

quest iom the word spoken by the writer, and therefore the

Care should be taken to ascertain how much is mean t by ,‘

fim(law),and how much by my }: (commandmen t).

RABBI AARON,SON OF ELIJAH. 2 1 3

word spoken must be in agreement with the mind of himwho speaks in the volume written . But if the word n owspoken does n o t express the min d

'

ofhim who then spoke,it will be vain in the estimation of every intelligent andsober-minded person . Now the purport of a sentence maybe ascertained in sixways , which are clearly stated by thelearned Rabbi Joshua, of blessed memory, in his book entitled Ariyoth Arubim.

” l

F irst .—That which is written follows the rules of pronun ciat ion (or ordinary use of language), and these, beingclear, will never lead astray. And as the mind of thespeaker is expressed in his own language When he speaksintelligently, even so is the mind of the writ er shown inhis book, if the book be correctly written, provided onlythat i t be so writ ten as to be adapted to the use of thosewhom it was designed to teach .

2

S econd—It is necessary to receive the writing as itsounds, that is to say, in i t s Obvious and natural sense,except where the first impression is found to have beenmanifestly false. The text must be so received when a

valid argument does not disprove that first impression ; orwhen there is not another passage disagreeing with it or

A book on Ince st s , writ t en by R. Joshua, son of Judah . Se e the

B iblwtlz eca Hebraz ca ofWolfius, sub nomin c.

2 Thi s is a can on of in t erpre tat ion of the utmost importance to the ex

positor of Holy Scripture , but it has be en ut t erly n egle ct ed by some of the

most popular preachers and writ ers . Without being restrain ed by this rule , .

on e may range at large in the wildern e ss of imaginat ion ,fi nd much to say , .

and , if he can select at all, select such as is most in accordance with his

precon ce ived op in ions, or his p eculiar creed , or the taste of the readers or

hearers on whom, p erhaps, he depends for food . But to observe this firstrule of Rabbi Joshua, he must have acquired for himself, by studying forthe love of i t , the original language of his t ext , and what ever else i s n eces

sary for a corre ct understanding of what his t ext and the con t ext con tain .

He must have studied the whole Bible in the same sp iri t , and learned , not

on ly the p eculiarit ie s ofthe sacred writ ing that engage s his pre sen t a t t en t ion ,

but also what is common to all,and what is p eculiar to each of as many

others, sacred and profan e, as lie wi thin the field offair comparison .


when there is not found another that resembles it, but departs from its literal meaning, so that you may study howto choose between them. But if there is nothing of thekind

,you must take the passage in its literal sense, and

not interpret it by any diverse methods . If, however,there is any verbal defect in the reading, or, for example,a servile letter that the student cannot possibly accountfor as the word stands, then it is impossible to avoid submitting the writing to the discernment of such as are competent to ascertain the meaning by help of some otherpassage or passages ofwhich the sense is n ot embarrassedby any like difficulty. Then, as he brings it out bv thesemeans, the sense of the Scripture is found, and necessarilyestablished.

Third —There are also passages free from any defectof word or servile letter, which may nevertheless bear varions interpretations, and any one of them correct. But

so any one may be questionable, and when regarded fromvarious points of view, may be made the subj ect of dispute . Careful research, however, will enable us t o cometo an agreement in a decision obtained by many concurrent evidences.

F ourth.~ -When a sentence can be equally understood

in two acceptations, both consistent with truth, it may beright to receive them both as he commands, there being nocontradiction between them. But when there is such acontradiction, it is not possible so to receive it, and thenyou must incline t o that interpretation which has thecommendation of analogy, that is to say, which leads yout o ascertain some analogy in confirmation . But whenthey who depend upon tradition in their interpretations ofthe Law apply their own tradition (or favourite doctrine)to the interpretation of God’s written Law, because thisinterpretation lacks confirmation, or because it presentsdoubtful aspects, our argumen t against them is that there



the Scripture by this method, turns out to be a piece of

trifling confusion ; but on they still go in the way of theirtradition, which is nothing better than a w ilful con tradi ction of Holy Writ. Grievously do they stumble overprophet and seer, until at length they do nothing morethan cont radict each other, as they all contradict theWord of God. Therefore, wise men w ith reason cast Offall study of tradition, and by relying upon the Scriptureonly pursue their course in safety.

They pretend to have authority from the Law itself toadd to that which is therein written for command or for

Thudprohibition, jus t as it may seem good to them

quest 1 °n ° from generation to generation, imagining this tobe justifiable by the following sentence If there shallarise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, or anythingabove thy knowledge—that is to say, Where the letter ofthe Law is insufficient, or Obscure to thy apprehension,for such a matter it is provided that thou shalt do ac

cording to the Law which they ” who study deeply inlegal subj ects, and search narrowly into the profoundestsubtilties, that they may bring every case to a right conelusion, without any carelessness in the judgment theydeliver, but by the help of God who is present with such

judges,—thou shalt do according to the law which theywill teach thee . Their word will be truly spoken. Theywill not add anything to that which is written in theLaw

,but only deliver what is thereby made known

through research and close investigation . For it iswritten, Ye shall not add unto the word which I com

mand you this day, n either shall ye diminish aught fromit. ” And again, Thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminishfrom it. ”

Now it is not the intention of these words that whatthe priest or the judge may determine shall be exceptedfrom the operation of this precept, for the Scripture speaks

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJAH. 2 1 7

to them all, and requires all alike to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in the book of

this Law. It may be pleaded that he who daily bendsall his powers to research must be constantly renewinghis knowledge, and be so advancing from one conj ectureto another that in proportion to the diversity of his knowledge will be the abundance of his conj ectures. But theanswer to such a plea is that, at this rate , t here would nolonger be one law, nor one judgment concerning the lawsexisting, nor any certain principle for our guidance inarriving at practical precepts and decisions, the admin is

t rat ion of which must depend on order and on time . Ifthey so plead, you must further reply that, as is wel lknown, the same thing will bear to be regarded variouslyunder different aspects w ithout being in the least degreechanged in itself, but that wavering conjectures betokenlack of knowledge, and that when conj ecture aft er con

j ecture has been long indulged, i t becomes impossible todistinguish truth from folly. But we must lay firm holdupon truth, for it is pure, and the words of prophecytestify to us what has come to pass in consequence offorsaking the truth. For it was said, The children ofIsrael shall abide many days without a teaching priest,and without a law.

” If tradition were anything at all wemight place some reliance on it, but , on the contrary, it ismistrusted by the very men that follow it, for the reasonswe have already pointed out. Then turn away your facefrom it. Let us all depend on enquiry and research intothe Law that is written, for this is the inheritance ofJaeob, as it is said, And they that understand among thepeople shall instruct many.

”

There was no controversy between Karaites andRabban it e s, aft er the going forth of Israel into hard andbitter captivity, until the time of the second Temple,’

1 The rebuilding of the t emple began B .C. 5 35 .


c lose upon the days of Ezra, l and that controversy couldnot possibly have arisen had it not been for the knowledgeon one side, and confession on the other, of a doubt conc erning this very tradition . IVhen vision and prophecywere sealed up, it was well known that the teachers ofthe Law who came after the prophets were well pleasedt o strike fear and terror into the hearts of the people, inorder to impose their words upon them. The se teacherswere used to say of every constitution and ordinancet hey made that it was received 2 by them from Moses,an d this corrupt habit continued in those who followedthem. At lengt h, if any one in his perplexity asked awise man the reason of a decision he had given, the sagewould think it a grand thing to reply by tracing it backto Moses , and say, It is a balakah, a decision of Mosesfrom Sinai . ” And their arrogance b ecame more andmore oppressive, until at length they condemned tod eath 3 every transgressor of their own commands, butas for a transgressor of the commands of God, him theywould merely sentence to be whipped wi th rods.Now, this defection from obedience to God’s Law

c ame from the perversion of this very sentence, Ac

cording to the Law which they shall teach thee. ” Thus,only to exalt themselves, they struck dread into thepeople, and declared war against every one that was note ntirely at their beck. They exacted from the peoplewhatsoever it pleased them to determine, and those deter

Ez ra wen t from Babylon to Jerusalem B .C . 4 5 7— that i s, 78 years after

t he commen cemen t of build ing of the second Temple . The con troversy, ashere supposed, would begin at some t ime in this in t erval.

2 Not e the force of S t . Paul’

s claim for acceptan ce Of his t eaching con

c ern ing the Sacramen t of the Eucharis t I have received of the Lord that

which also I have delivered un to you’

( 1 Cor. xi . To receive, in the

language of St . Paul, denot es Divin e in sp irat ion or gift, by which he re

ce ived knowledge or grace from the Lord, n ot Moses nor the fathers.

We have a law, and by this law he ought to die .

’



righteousness’ sake, the Law shall be magnified ; and asgreat and honourable men have gone before me and displayed admirable knowledge in their valuable writings, I ,too, will follow in the same work, to expound their words,and add something to them. I will in this way strengthenthe hands of them that seek after righteousness, buildingup that which is fallen , so far as i t shall please the Godof Israel to stand by me and assist my efforts.

’

In the name of common sense, and in the fear of God,I would commend this teaching of an en lightened Jew tothe candid consideration of those who plead for tradition,or human authority, or inner light, as if something werenecessary to supply the deficiency, or supplement the incompleteness

,as they presume to say, of Holy Scripture .

lHAPTER XIX.

RABBI AARON, SON OF ELIJ AH.

His Commen tary on the P en ta teuch.

THE Rabbi whose work is now before us represents aclass of earnest and learned men who were far above thelevel of their time, of whom Christians hear but little,although they made their influence felt through manygenerations. Persecuted by their brethren, and havinglittle sympathy with any Gentile people, they stoodalone . They did not spring up with a revival of letters,such as took place in Europe in the fifteenth century, n orwere they wakened into activity by the excitement of areligious reformation like that of the sixteenth . Theyflourished most conspicuously while Christendom layunder the deepest shades of mediaeval ignorance andsuperstition, and lost in pagan-like idolatry. By thetime that print ing was introduced into Europe fromChina, their light was nearly quenched, and before itcould serve them in the lands where their synagogues yetcontinued they had nearly dwindled away into extinetion . Very few of their works have yet been printed,but the authors of works now forgotten were precursorsof all the eminent Rabbinical Hebrew commentatorswhose writings have been perpetuated by the un ited careof Jew s and Christian s, and printed, with or withouttranslations and learned notes, again and again. TheSpirit of reverence for the God of truth alone which


distinguished their fathers, actuated also themost successfulChristian teachers . The principle of li teral interpretation

,

defined and guarded as it is by Rabbi Aaron and otherKaraites, is identical w ith that of the greatest scholarsand most successful critics of the present age .

We wonder, for a moment, that the Karaites did n ot

advance just another step, and cross the threshold of theChurch ; but our wonder ceases when we call to mindthat the Church of those times, with exception of a fewpersecuted followers of Christ— and even that exceptionwas very partial—was faulty in doctrine, un scriptural indiscipline

,idola trous in worship, utterly uncharitable in

spirit,and bitterly cruel to the Jews . Its ministers

were, with extremely few exceptions, incompetent to instruct an intelligent Jewish enquirer, or to defend theGospel from his obj ections, and seldom thought of silencingthe obj ector by any other method than violence. Thesincere conversion of a Jew was, therefore, a rare miracleof the grace of God , occurring but just often enough toafford proof of the Saviour ’s power to win souls in spiteof hindrances insuperable to human wisdom. Meanwhilethe Karaites had a mission to fulfi l among their brethrenthe Jews in general, and, if I mistake not, they effecteda signal change in the sacred literature of their nation ,which was preparatory to greater changes, and it is evident that such changes have already taken place and arenow in progress . One very brief specimen of Karaitecommentary will exhibit clearly what I mean .

Professor Kosegart en , in the work before us, givessome extracts from R . Aaron ’s commentary on the Pentat euch, contained in a manuscript in the library of theUniversity of Jena, with a Latin translation and historicaland critical notes . The first extract consists of theRabbi’s notes on the first verse of the Book of Genesis.Short as the text is, the notes cover at least five large



the earth . But to say that in the beginning of t ime Godcreated would so limit the act Of creation as to affirmthat it was n ot continued within the course of time

,

whereas Moses affirms the contrary,describing the suc

cessive acts of creation as continued in time, while sixdays were measured by morning dawn and nocturnalshadow.

R . Solomon Ya rhhi, a Rabbanite, also taking the wordin constructive, would render it thus : When God fi rs t

created the heavens and the earth .

’ But that would beabsurd ; for if the heavens and the earth were fi rs t

created, the creation of them must have been the workof the first day, whereas the inspired record reveals thatthe creation was not finished until the end of the sixthday .

R . Joshua , son of J udah, a Karaite, is very bold.

Supposing the text. to b e incomplete, he presumes theword ”0 ( living)to be understood, and taken into construetion with megs Having thus restored the text

,as he

conceives, he translates it easily, to this effect : ‘Whenfirst there existed any living thing,

’-that is to say, any

angel, God created the heavens and the earth .

’ But,

although it is t rue that angels did exist before the materialcreation

,as we learn from Holy Scripture, it is n ot per

mi t t ed to represent as a textual reading what is notwritten in the text, and ridiculous to comment on theinvention .

R . Moses, son of Ma imon , a Rabbanite of world-widecelebrity , understands the word to be written absolutely,and pronounces it to mean that God created the heavensan d the earth, with the ir fi rs t p rin cip les —that is to say,with the simple elements and spirits of the spheres, whichare to the universe what the heart is to an animated body.

He arrived at this novel conception by an ingenious process. F irst, he thought, necessarily implied last . F irst

RABBI AARON,SON OF ELIJAH. 225

and last presuppose t ime . Time is the effect of mot ion .

Motion cannot be unt il there are Spheres t o revolve ; thent ime begins. In-the-beginning,’ therefore, signifies theintellectual principle of the universe, and the particlebe th is equivalent with the adverb when . R . Aaron doesnot condescend t o argue against thi s vain philosophy .

R . Moses , son ofNahhman , a learned Rabbanite, readsthe word absolutely, and determines it t o mean that

‘first

ofall ’ God made the heavens and the earth . But thiswould imply a succession of creations, and we know ofnothing new-creat ed since God finished the heavens andthe earth, and all the host of them.

R . Judah of Toledo,a Rabbanite

,supposes that the

Creator ‘ at first ’ made an incorporeal or immaterialuniverse

, out of which the corporeal or material wasaft erwards brought into exist ence. R . Judah fancied hecould find a text of Solomon on which to impose ameanin g of the sort, but that was a mere Cabbalistictrifle

,and R . Aaron quickly di sposes of his fancy by oh

serving that Moses di stinctly describes the creation of amaterial world.

R . Aaron , son of J osep h, a Karaite, thinks the wordis used imp rop r ie, by a prophetic licence, things that arenot bein g sometimes called by name lik e things that are .Before the Creation, he says, t ime was not, but beginning ’ i s a relative term, only proper to be used whenthere also is an end. But as end came not until afterthe heavens and the earth were made, when God hadn ot yet done any more than set His hand to frame theuniverse, it was not truth to say that there was a begin ning.

Such were the vagaries in which Rabban it e s andKaraites alike disported, and if the latter took so greatlicence aft er the simple method of which they boasted

,

an d for which their fathers endured so great reproach,it

Q

HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

is for R . Aaron, the'

son of El ij ah, in the year 1 360 , torecall them to the way of truth and common sense. Thishe laboured to do, and after refuting their eight wisemen one by on e , he proceeds to record his own sense ofthe first important word, in the terms followingI will n ow explain theword as I understand it. The

Most High God is pleased so t o order and direct theaffairs of men that they may receive from the D ivinePerfection what they cannot find in any human perfect ion,unless it be under the influence of prophetic grace . Yetno prophecy was ever worthy t o be trusted, unless it wasattended with evidences of concurring providence, norcould a providence exist at all unless the world had aCreator. But in these days men have openly denied thatthe world was made, because, as they say, they see thingscome into being and pass away again in such an established course that they believe everything comes fromsomething else, and is turned into something else again .

They,therefore, maint ain that the world must necessarily

be just as it is ; tha t it cannot be changed, nor be anyother than it is. Therefore Moses, our master, began hisdi scourse with these words that we find written : In thebeginning God created.

”F or he desired to teach men

that the world is the workmanship of God, that it doesn ot wear the form in which it now appears, as if it hadreceived it from intermediate or secondary causes, butthat i t was, at first, brought into existence out of nothing,mere nothing, complete as a centre with its circle, sinceall things were created without the aid of any means orsecond causes . Whatever works the Most High finishedin the six days of the creat ion, they all arose from thepower of that first creative energy, and when they werefini shed, then was the world established and se t in orderso firmly that all things could be perpetuated by theagency of second causes . This He taught in the words,


HISTORY OF THE KARAITE JEWS .

is a fundamental article of faith that God is One, and theJew maintains that He can n ot be unit ed with any other,a proposition which may be true or false according to the

t erms in which it is stated. The plurality here signifiedhe will n ot acknowledge to be that of persons, but ofper

fect ie n s, his doctrine of the Godhead being in all poin tsthe same as that of other Jews . He makes n o allusion toChristianity, but notices the Persian dualism,

which heconsiders a corruption of the revealed doctrine of Satanas the enemy ofGod. He thinks that the D ivine Unity

i s expressed by the construction of a noun in the plural

form with a v erb in the singular.1

On the name of heaven he has nothing to say beyondunscientific etymological speculations, which have obtained

nmw’

n fixa certain currency and held undisturbed possession In quarters where studies are very super

ficial, for the reason, perhaps, that they serve for harmlessentertainment, an d are t oo trifling to be seriously refuted .

As to the ea rth, he makes but one observation of sufficient intere st to be noted, and that is t o the effect that,

although earth is mentioned after heaven, theheavens and the earth were created at the same

time, inasmuch as they are inseparably related, as are thecircle and the centre, —an entire whole, ofwhich the partsare essential and inevitably ce -existent, -the universe.The second specimen given by Ke segarten consists of

n ot e s on the forty-ninth chapter of the Book of Genesis,which might have been written by any orthodox J ew

ms; mu

The Christ ian doctrine—the reve aled veri ty—that there are ThreePerson s in On e Godhead , as this doctrin e is expounded by Athanasius, setforth in the Nicen e and Athanasian Cre eds, and confirmed more andmore tothe re ason and heart of the believer by s tudy of the Holy Scripture s, i s n otpromot ed by speculat ion s upon Hebrew neuns . The form of D’H

’PN is

plural, n o doubt , as is the form of several othe r noun s having n o pluralityin them

, and this acciden t is not p eculiar t o t he Hebrew language , but

occurs in others—in Gothic and Engli sh, for example .

RABBI AARON,SON OF ELIJAH. 229

without offence to his brethren . Like the chi ef Rabbanite expositors, and like the Christ ians, he int erpret sthe prediction of a Shiloh that should come t o signify theMessiah, and the interpretation is obviously just .A third specimen is Rabbi Aaron ’s comment on thethirty-third chapter of D euteronomy, cont aining Mose s

’

blessing on the children of Israel before his death. Some

observation on part of his n ot e on a sentence in the four thverse, Mose s commanded us a law,

’

may assist us in our

review of the doctrine and Spirit of Karaism. An attent ive perusal

,however, shows that while this diligent com

men tator bestowed great care on the exposition of the dist in ct ive characteristics of his own community, he was inother respects altogether a Jew. The Law, he believed,was bindi ng upon all mankind, but the Israelites only wereworthy t o receive it , and to be its custodians t o the end oftime . The merit began with Abraham, ofwhom the Lordsaid

,I know him,

that he will command his children andhis household after him.

’

(Gen. xviii . They gaveevidence that they were worthy of the trust when they

promised Moses that they would do all that the Lord hadsaid, and be obedient . (Exod. xxiv. Assurance wasgiven them repeat edly that the Law of God should betheir pe rpetual heritage, unchan geable and immovable .

(Levit. ii i . 1 7 D eut. xxix . 1 5 , xxxii i. But thissame man , whose perception is so keen and reasonin g so

conclusive when he applies himself to controversy withthe Rabban it es in defence of the supreme and sole autherity of God ’s written Law, and whose learning seems toraise him high above the level of his generation when heconfutes the speculations of friend and fe e alike on apoint that interests him as a Karaite, forgets his learnedj ealousy in defence of truth when he speaks only as aJew. He even forgets, what elsewhere he demonstrates,how utterly the members of Abraham’s household after


him fell away from the teaching Of their father ; howshamefully the whole people of Israel apostatised fromthe Law they swore to keep and to obey. He clingswith such a blind tenacity to the premi ses of perpetuityto his nat ion which attended the precious gift of theoracles of God, that he forgets the condit ions constantlycoupled with the promises, and makes quit e sure that theGent iles will never be admitted to a participation of thehonour, the eternal and unchangin g honour, ofbeing theLord’s peculiar people .When driven for self-defence to think deeply and t oclothe his thoughts in well-considered words, his intellectis wakeful and style vigorous ; but no sooner has hedone this and returned to the common field of Judaismthan his powers revert into the n ormal condition of indifference, the veil drOps upon his heart again, and,whatever we may infer from the opposing aspects of hiscase , this at least we learn, that no man can study God’sWord successfully who is not in earnest.I must n ow leave Aaron the Jew, and return to Aaronthe Karaite . The distinctive characteristics of the Ka

rait e commentator, and of other advocates of the samesystem, were no doubt communicated to the Rabban it es,

whose more enlightened labours have been welcomed byChristian scholars for ages past. The Rabbinical commente ries which bear the name of Kimkhi, Yarkhi ,

Aben Ezra, Saadiah, and a few others, would n ot have

been what they are if Karaite opposition had not putthose l earned Jews on their guard against the Rabban ist ic illusions of their dark times , and if some of themhad n ot actually sat at the feet of Karaite masters .

Aaron, as I have Observed, di d n ot shock his compeersby bet raying— se far as appears now— any liking forChrist ianity

,or any deficiency of purely Jewish zeal , or

at least any appearance of the kind ; He pursued,



readers in these last two chapters may be sufficient formy present purpose ; but for the Jews, especially thoseof them who apply themselves t e ~ Hebrew studies

,pre

cious material for the enlargement of this branch of theirliterature and history is accessible . By its aid, theJewish mind will certainly be turned in to new channels.By the discovery of commentaries like the on e which I .

have n ew so briefly quoted, they may perhaps turn afreshwith less bias to the study of the original text, and weshall be thankful to accept from their hands additionalmeans for doing the same thing with good effect.

LONDON ‘ PRINTED BY

SPOTTISWOODE AND C O NEW-STREET S Q UARE

Documents

History the Karaite Jews - Forgotten Books